Zoo Wars~ It’s Beyond My Comprehension~WTF…!?! UPDATE-Stump Hill
Is it me or did I eat something very bad that just came back up…???
So a judge who had the authority to order the removal of animals is not allowed to order that they be returned?!? Then it seems to me that he didn’t have the authority to seize them in the first place…WHAT THE FUCK…!?! Yeah I just said it and you’re thinking it…
Ohio Supreme Court: Judge had no jurisdiction in Stump Hill case
- Ohio Supreme Court sides with state Agriculture Department in ruling Stark County Judge Frank Forchione had no authority to order animals returned to Stump Hill
By Amy L. Knapp
Independent staff writer
Posted May 18, 2016 at 2:47 PM
Updated at 6:10 PM
The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled a Stark County judge did not have the authority to order a state agency to return animals it had seized from Stump Hill Farm.
An opinion issued by the high court judges Wednesday, granted the state Department of Agriculture’s request to block Common Pleas Judge Frank Forchione from proceeding with a hearing that was scheduled for Thursday regarding the seizure of 10 animals from the Perry Township farm earlier this month. The ruling also orders Forchione to vacate his previous order for the state to return the animals.
State Department of Agriculture officials along with local police and the Ohio Highway Patrol removed five tigers, two pumas, two baboons and a chimpanzee from Stump Hill owner Cyndi Huntsman’s care after obtaining a search warrant signed by Forchione.
The state said Huntsman lacks permits required under the Ohio Dangerous Wildlife Act.
Huntsman and her attorney, John Juergensen, contend a permit previously issued by the state Department of Natural Resources provides an exemption that should allow Huntsman to keep her exotic animals.
At a hearing May 5, a day after the animals were removed, Forchione said that he signed the paperwork allowing the state access to Hunstman’s Klick Road SW property, not knowing that she was working with her attorney to try to resolve permit issues. An administrative hearing with the agriculture department had been scheduled for August. Huntsman is appealing the quarantine order issued by the agriculture director in March and the transfer order executed earlier this month.
Forchione ordered the return of the animals to Stump Hill by Thursday.
The state asked the Supreme Court to intervene, arguing Forchione does not have jurisdiction in the matter; that his only authority was over the search warrant.
“We are pleased that the court issued strong support for the department’s transfer of the animals into state custody,” Erica Hawkins, communication director for the agriculture department, wrote in an email. “(The animals) will be kept in secure enclosures and will receive high-quality care from the department and the wildlife sanctuaries we contract with while we continue through the process of Ms. Huntsman’s right to appeal.”
The Supreme Court’s 4-2 ruling (one justice did not participate) agrees with the state’s argument. Forchione “had no authority to allow or require the ODA to seize the animals,” the court document states. The judge “patently and unambiguously lacks jurisdiction to order the animals’ return.”
The ruling said the director of the agriculture department has exclusive authority to implement and enforce the Ohio law regulating such animals, including the exclusive authority to order the removal and quarantine of dangerous wild animals being held by an owner without a permit to do so.
One thing that is concerning is they (Supreme Court) are saying the state can go to the judge to get a search warrant and say whatever they want to get it,” Juergensen said. “They don’t have to tell the whole truth. It’s been one misleading misrepresentation after another. It’s not justice and it is not fair.”
Juergensen has maintained that the state had no reason to take the animals while his client was working to resolve her permit issue. One of the tigers gave birth to cubs while in the Reynoldsburg facility.
“Those animals are going to be scattered across the country away from home,” he said.
Seeing as how the state is taking control of privately owned PROPERTY (the animals) then they are required to get a USDA; acting as animal brokers which would subject the Reynoldsburg facility to inspections to see that no other animals are abused at this facility. A USDI is required to transfer endangered species across state lines which would require a special permit from the federal government per animal to be transferred!!! Especially since the ODA is concerned permits and following regulations!!! (Comment submitted and awaiting moderation-Imagine that…Smz…)
Compliant letter sent
USDA Inspector GeneralInspector General,USDA/APHIS/AC4700 River Road, Unit 84E-mail:firstname.lastname@example.orgPhone: (310) 851-3751FAX: (310) 734-4978Dr. Betty GoldentyerUSDA/APHIS/AC
920 Main Campus Drive Suite 200
Raleigh, NC 27606-5210
Phone: (919) 855-7100
Fax: (919) 855-7123Office of Freedom of InformationTonya Woods, FOIA Director
Legislative and Public Affairs
Freedom of Information Act
4700 River Road, Unit 50
Riverdale, MD 20737
Fax: 301-734 -5941
Email: email@example.comUSDI/CITESAs you know, the state of Ohio has built a holding facility for animals they seize within the state. There has been a steady influx of activity ofanimals being sent in, held there and then sent out of that facility out of the state. Animals have died in the process and is of extreme concern.This facility located in Reynoldsburg, Ohio, appears to be incapable of properly sustaining animals for any length of time and has also become an animal broker; sometimes transferring ownership to themselves, but always transferring animals out of the state of Ohio to other private owners-specifically, both verified and unverified GFAS facilities that may or may not have USDA permits.Facilities operating with commercial activity sending animals throughout the United States would require a USDA permit to operate. These are not rescued animals but instead surrendered or animals that have been seized by the state that may or may not have a court judgement and therefore breaking federal laws concerning seized property.USDI permit for transferring endangered animals out of the state would also be required to transfer endangered species across state lines per animal. The UDSI should be notified of the breech in moving endangered out of the state of Ohio.This facilities is Operated by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Director Erica Hawkins.Animals of immediate concern were recently seized from Stump Hill-five tigers, two pumas, two baboons and one chimpanzee.One of the tigers named Angel gave birth to four tiger cubs at the facility and is of immediate concern considering the conditionsof the animals that have been housed at the facility previously, including the death of a lion that was seized from Tiger Ridge.I have seen nothing exempting them from any of the above activities.Please assign necessary case number regarding this inquiry.This concern should be handled appropriately and quickly with an immediate inspection for the sake of the four tiger cubs and the female tiger.I look forward to hearing from you as this matter is extremely important to me.Sincerely,Barbara E. HoffmannLinks of Interest: https://topcatsroar.wordpress.com/2016/05/11/zoo-warsupdatestate-of-ohio-seeks-to-appeal-court-decision-to-return-animals-to-stump/https://topcatsroar.wordpress.com/2016/05/14/zoo-warsbreaking-news-the-real-reason-the-oda-had-to-rush-to-take-stump-hill-animals/Disclaimer connected to this blog…Things said are of my opinion and the opinions of others…Stay tuned ad follow this blog -B