Monday, June 28, 2010
Seems that Barnette resigned her seat on the commission when this lawsuit was filed. Keep in mind the timing here too. Just a few days before learning she would come to LA, the announcement was made that Barnette and the Seattle Humane Society would not be using taxpayers money to expand their shelter. Wonder if she would be here if the decision was made otherwise.
Friday, December 11, 2009
ACOG Files PDR Complaint in Snohomish County
NOTICE OF PRESS CONFERENCE TODAY, 10:30 AM
KING COUNTY COURTHOUSE STEPS, 4TH AVENUE ENTRANCE
ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER’S GUILD FILES LAWSUIT AGAINST KING COUNTY, KING COUNTY EXECUTIVE
LAWSUIT DEMANDS RELEASE OF PUBLIC RECORDS
"(SEATTLE) – Officers of the Animal Control Officer’s Guild want justice – and they want emails that could prove improper maneuvering between the newly elected King County Executive and some former members of an animal-control citizen’s advisory committee. The email demand was filed as a lawsuit late this morning in Snohomish County Superior Court.
According to plaintiffs, recommendations made by advisory committee members will likely result in closure of the current animal shelter, and transfer the responsibility to the Seattle Humane Society that could benefit financially from the decision, costing King County’s taxpayers millions.
According to Michael Brannan, attorney for the Animal Control Officers Guild, “It is time for the truth to come out, and the truth is those who pushed most strongly for the services to be handled by non-county run shelters appear to have the most to gain.”
One of the advisory committee members heads the Seattle Humane Society, and resigned after the emails were requested via a Public Records Request.
King County’s prosecuting attorney chose to ignore the issue thus far, and an attorney hired by five Citizen’s Advisory Committee members communicated that because the advisory group was comprised of non-government members, they were under no obligation to comply with the public records request.
The Attorney General’s Open Government Ombudsman, attorney Tim Ford, didn’t accept that argument. According to information contained in the legal complaint filed late yesterday afternoon, Ford sided squarely with the Animal Control Officers Guild, stating in a letter to all parties that “the (citizen’s advisory) committee and its members have a duty to comply,” and must “disclose the requested public records.” He stated the actions should be taken “immediately.” Thus far, the emails have not been relinquished. "
WHAT ARE IN THOSE EMAILS, BARNETTE, THAT YOU WOULD RESIGN FROM COMMITTEES/COMMISSION/ STAKEHOLDERS COUNCIL? WHAT ARE IN THOSE EMAILS THAT YOU WOULD DO THAT RATHER THAN RELINQUISH THOSE EMAILS, BARNETTE? ANYTHING INCRIMINATING??
Stay tuned, more on this.
Also, here is Brenda Barnette in all of her AKC glory, supporting the AKC whose income relies on the suffering of puppy mills. I bet her kennel club, the Seattle Kennel Club, sends money to the AKC, thus Barnette is part of the problem instead of being part of the solution. When push comes to shove, which side with Barnette chose? How will she defend ordinances already on the books that go against something she has done all of her life, bred and show AKC dogs? Wanna make bets? I know what I will bet on.
""SEATTLE -- State lawmakers are considering a crackdown on the ownership of dogs that haven’t been fixed – after nearly 500 dogs, many of them pregnant, were seized from a Skagit County puppy mill.
The proposal would regulate ownership of dogs that haven’t been spayed or neutered -- so that if someone owns ten or more such dogs, they would have to live in humane conditions.
It would also be illegal to own more than 25 dogs that haven't been spayed or neutered and animal control officers would have the right to inspect breeding facilities without a warrant.
The proposal is aimed at preventing the same scene in Skagit County several weeks ago.
But other licensed dog breeders testified Tuesday that the proposed law goes too far.
“Under this law I could be charged with misdemeanor merely for refusing a warrantless search. I think that this violates my civil rights,” said breeder Sylvie McGee.
Seattle Humane Society Director Brenda Barnette is as concerned as the breeders about the proposed new law.
“I think the whole thing is a jumble of words but it's not, it really doesn't get at the intent. And the intent is for anyone who has dogs whether they have a few or whether they have a lot to take care of them,” Barnette said.
The puppies seized from the Skagit County puppy mill are at animal shelters throughout the region. Most can’t be adopted out yet because they are still being held by the courts."
Saturday, June 26, 2010
He is the medical director under Barnette. So her group of low life friends continues to grow. Also see how he fits in with the ploy to undermine animal control in King County in this article. Imagine witholding medical services to the shelter animals, what does one gain with that? Ask yourself that question.
""A group of veterinarians that volunteered this year to treat sick animals at King County's two animal shelters has quit, citing a lack of accountability and a reluctance from shelter staff to fix a broken system.
In a searing letter to the county last month, one veterinarian stated that "pervasive negativity" and an unwillingness to change led the vets to stop offering their services at the Kent and Bellevue shelters.
"The general feeling was we were being used as an extension of the shelter while there were no significant changes being made to try and improve the problems plaguing the shelter," wrote Dr. Brad Crauer, medical director of the Redmond Animal Hospital. "I did not want to act as enablers to the proven failed procedures." ""
Act as enablers???? How evil is it to leave those animals without vet care? This is another fine example of the type of people Brenda Barnette surrounds herself with. I guess the saying is true "Birds of a feather leave shit in the woods together".
Here's a little more info on this situation. http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/09/twitstorm
posted by Erica C. Barnett on September 22 at 21:44 PM
Last week, the Seattle Times reported that a group of veterenarians were refusing to volunteer at King County animal shelters, “citing a lack of accountability and a reluctance from shelter staff to fix a broken system.” In the story, Times reporter Sonia Krishnan quoted vet Brad Crauer, medical director of the Redmond Animal Hospital, who said that he had stopped offering his services at the Kent and Bellevue animal shelters because “I did not want to act as enablers to the proven failed procedures.”
Crauer, the only named source to denounce King County’s shelter practices (the only other quoted anti-county sources are surveys filled out by anonymous veterinarians ), claims in the story that King County did nothing to improve problems at the shelters; isolated animals; and did nothing to help sick animals.
Last week, County Executive Ron Sims responded to the Times story—via Twitter, which he used recently to announce that King County’s budget deficit had increased from $85 million to $90 million. Sims’s understated post read simply, “Dear Seattle Times and KOMO - Here is a blog story regarding King County’s Animal Control that is worth reading.” A link went to a blog post at King County Animal Shelter Creatures, titled, “Pain and muscle relaxants prescribed by the vet for himself using name of his dead dog.”
The “vet,” in this case, would be Crauer—who, the post goes on to contend, also wrongly accused King County of falsifying euthanasia numbers and faking discrepancies in the logs documenting use of controlled drugs at the shelter, among other misdeeds. The clear implication: Why should the Times (and KOMO, which also reported on the vets’ defection) listen to Dr. Crauer, when he had falsified records and prescribed himself controlled substances under his dead dog’s name?
While I’m not sure if Sims’s criticisms are on point (Crauer certainly seems like a less than reliable source; on the other hand, do his alleged drug problems and supposed false cremation documents negate other vets’ claims that there were real problems at King County shelters?), his method (Twitter) and tone (combative) are noteworthy. And they certainly got the attention of the King County Council, which is planning to release a response later this week (a lengthy request for information about the shelters’ 2008 work, sent last Friday, has reportedly been in the works for some time) to Sims’s Twitter attack on Crauer. I’ll post their response as soon as I get it.""
Friday, June 25, 2010
In an odd way, that threw me in with the ADL-LA, a group that I absolutely despise because they are nothing more than pawns of the Whino. But now I can vindicate myself because me and the ADL-LA are definitely on opposite sides. I have been helping with the fight against Barnette in Seattle for the past three years.
For those living in a cave, Brenda Barnette was chosen to replace Boks in the City of Los Angeles. Barnette is a flash in the pan, just like her mentor, Nathan Winograd. She conspired to create instability of animal control in King County for her own gain, or rather gain for the Seattle Humane Society. There is an excellent article on all of this:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/villaraigosa-akc-rep-brenda-barnette-new-l-a-animal-services-top-dog Comments are welcome and encouraged.
There are coincidences that stand out. First of all, the announcement that Barnette was out of the picture as far as taking over animal control was just two days before her announcement of coming to LA. Wonder what would have happened if this hadn't happen, would she have stayed in Seattle? And three days before her announcement about LA, one of her partners in crime, Claire Davis, issued an email to the CEO in King County, which I have posted earlier, admitting the conspiracy to undermine animal control. http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2010/06/terrorist-or-idiots-you-decide.html Ask the question, who would gain the most from killing KCACC, animal control, and the answer is Seattle Humane/Brenda Barnette. You can see the earlier posting and look at the 6th paragraph.
Now the ADL-LA is campaigning by showing letters praising Barnette and one of those letters is from Claire Davis. Claire Davis was with Best Fiends which is enough to condemn her to hell. Be darn, Claire Davis swears that she doesn't even know Barnette on this blog. http://brucecordell.blogspot.com/2008/09/animal-propaganda-20.html
Bruce asked some direct questions of Claire in the comments and this was the response to the question of Barnette being in cahoots with her.
"4) The co-founders of KCACC Exposed are listed on the website and neither one of them is Brenda Barnette. As I don’t personally know Brenda or her thoughts on this organization, I am not going to speak for her. "
Yet on another blog in LA a letter is posted where Claire Davis speaks of how well she knows Barnette and how closely they have worked together. Can anyone say "Big Fat Liar"?
Claire Davis and Kim Sgro are KCACCExposed. Kim Sgro was the special projects director then for Pasdado's and she made the decision to dump these Hurricane Katrina pit bulls at EDNAH. http://www.komonews.com/news/archive/4167541.html
Of course, she went running and "rescued" dogs. Only problem was she placed them with a hoarder/rescuer, EDNAH. When EDNAH was finally busted, they determined that these poor dogs had endured months of living in the same carriers that they were delivered in by Sgro. This site has the story of these poor dogs. http://www.workingpitbull.com/New%20Site%202005/pasado.htm
So this is who Claire Davis falls in with, a bitch who didn't bother to check out where she sent the dogs. A bitch who used these dogs to solicit donations but from the looks of it, those donations never saw these poor dogs. Tells you a lot about the people that Claire Davis hangs with.
The ACO Guild in King County filed a lawsuit to get emails to show the conspiracy between all these players to undermine animal control. Barnette resigned her position on the commissions trying to avoid divulging this conspiracy. This week Barnette also removed from her facebook account the fact that she supports PETPAC, a notorious group that fights for breeders. Too late Barnette, copies were made of that association.
Barnette is the Whino's A+ student, she has learned all her sneaky shit from him, he is her mentor. Everyone knows that the ADL-LA has their nose stuck up the Whino's ass but they are really hurting themselves on this one. When all the shit hits the fan, the ADL-LA will look like the fools they are. I can't wait for Pam to get her comeuppance and it won't be long. Barnette is as evil as the Whino and worse than Boks. People in LA are organizing, the battle line is drawn, stay tuned.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
In the last 2 years, there has been significant media coverage concerning large-scale dog dealers (i.e., breeders and brokers)1 that failed to provide humane treatment for the animals under their care. The breeders, negatively referred to as “puppy mills,” have stirred the interest of the public, Congress, animal rights groups, and others. Accordingly, we conducted an audit of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service’s (APHIS) Animal Care (AC) unit, which is responsible for enforcing the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). The audit focused on AC’s inspections of problematic dealers. It is the latest in a series of audits related to AWA.2
In our last audit on animals in research facilities,3 we found that the agency was not aggressively pursuing enforcement actions against violators of AWA and that it assessed minimal monetary penalties against them.4 APHIS agreed to take corrective action by incorporating more specific guidance in its operating manual to address deficiencies in enforcement actions. It also agreed to revise its penalty worksheet to generate higher and more appropriate penalties.
In this audit, one objective was to review AC’s enforcement process against dealers that violated AWA. Accordingly, we focused on dealers with a history of violations in the past 3 years.5 Another objective was to review the impact of recent changes the agency made to the penalty assessment process. We identified the following major deficiencies with APHIS’ administration of AWA:
AC’s Enforcement Process Was Ineffective Against Problematic Dealers. AC’s enforcement process was ineffective in achieving dealer compliance with AWA and regulations, which are intended to ensure the humane care and treatment of animals. The agency believed that compliance achieved through education6 and cooperation would result in long-term dealer compliance and, accordingly, it chose to take little or no enforcement action against most violators.
However, the agency’s education efforts have not always been successful in deterring problematic dealers from violating AWA. During FYs 2006-2008, at the re-inspection of 4,250 violators, inspectors found that 2,416 repeatedly violated AWA, including some that ignored minimum care standards. Therefore, relying heavily on education for serious or repeat violators—without an appropriate level of enforcement—weakened the agency’s ability to protect the animals.
AC Inspectors Did Not Cite or Document Violations Properly To Support Enforcement Actions. Many inspectors were highly committed, conducting timely and thorough inspections and making significant efforts to improve the humane treatment of covered animals. However, we noted that 6 of 19 inspectors7 did not correctly report all repeat or direct violations (those that are generally more serious and affect the animals’ health). Consequently, some problematic dealers were inspected less frequently.
In addition, some inspectors did not always adequately describe violations in their inspection reports or support violations with photos. Between 2000 and 2009, this lack of documentary evidence weakened AC’s case in 7 of the 16 administrative hearings involving dealers.8 In discussing these problems with regional management, they explained that some inspectors appeared to need additional training in identifying violations and collecting evidence.
APHIS’ New Penalty Worksheet Calculated Minimal Penalties. Although APHIS previously agreed to revise its penalty worksheet to produce “significantly higher” penalties for violators of AWA, the agency continued to assess minimal penalties that did not deter violators. This occurred because the new worksheet allowed reductions up to 145 percent of the maximum penalty. While we are not advocating that APHIS assess the maximum penalty, we found that at a time when Congress tripled the authorized maximum penalty to “strengthen fines for violations,” the actual penalties were 20 percent less using the new worksheet as compared to the worksheet APHIS previously used.
APHIS Misused Guidelines to Lower Penalties for AWA Violators. In completing penalty worksheets, APHIS misused its guidelines in 32 of the 94 cases we reviewed to lower the penalties for AWA violators. Specifically, it (1) inconsistently counted violations; (2) applied “good faith” reductions without merit; (3) allowed a “no history of violations” reduction when the violators had a prior history; and (4) arbitrarily changed the gravity of some violations and the business size. AC told us that it assessed lower penalties as an incentive to encourage violators to pay a stipulated amount rather than exercise their right to a hearing.
Some Large Breeders Circumvented AWA by Selling Animals Over the Internet. Large breeders that sell AWA-covered animals over the Internet are exempt from AC’s inspection and licensing requirements due to a loophole in AWA. As a result, an increasing number of these unlicensed breeders are not monitored for their animals’ overall health and humane treatment.
Monday, June 21, 2010
The public thinks that all humane societies operate under a national one, and that would be HSUS. So in condemning HSUS, the Whino hurts the donations of these local humane societies. And many of them are practicing no kill. Of course, most of them are closed door, limited admission shelters but all the same they are trying to help animals.
Nathan Winograd is one dumb fuck for doing this, he is cutting his own throat. Those humane societies are now realizing the damage he is doing to them and turning against him. How dumb is that, Whino?
If you would like to see one of the Whino's biggest supporters and what kind of supporters he has, then here is a site for you to see. Berman pimps the Whino and the Whino reads Berman's lines about HSUS verbatim. So the Whino is basically a pimp for Berman, a puppet whose chain is being jerked by Berman.
And there are the cult followers of the Whino like KCDogPoop, Brent Toellner who are further down on that jerked chain, spreading the lies of the likes of Whino and Berman. One day that chain will be broken and then who will put words into their mouths, the spirit of Hitler?
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Thus the "Highway to Hell" program begins. Granted the far most New England states have such bad winter weather that the strays are killed off and they may need a few extra dogs but not otherwise. Plus the interview before hauling the poor dogs half way across the country, consists of a phone call. Some screening process. Here take this dog, doesn't make a shit to me whether you live in a home or a studio apartment, doesn't matter to me that you work 12 hours a day, doesn't matter to me if you have no idea of dog ownership, just take the fucking dogs so I can lie my head down at night and think what a good job I've done.
Bad enough that the Pimping for Pits channel selects their role models from a woman who sells other women to feed her addiction to pits or a midget who lies about being a rescue in order to get on television, but now to open up a country wide supermarket that causes other animals to die who might otherwise get a home is beyond immoral.
If these fucking no kill "Saviors" put as much effort into stopping the pet overpopulation as they do into their unethical practices, we wouldn't be in this shape. Pimping for Pits channel is a sucker, a fool, and is only condemning the animals, not helping them.
And now Oreo's law has been tabled for this year, pretty much sealing it's fate. Oreo's law was patterned after the Hayden, the worst piece of ill thought through legislation in the history of CA. The Hayden actually encouraged shelters to euthanized with it's mandate, which was repealed earlier this year. And under the Hayden, you only have to present yourself as a rescuer to secure animals from the shelters, you do not have to be a 501c3. Thus the rise in hoarding.
Guess the film of how the Hayden caused overcrowding of the shelters and the results was enough to convince them, huh? One little film, tightly protected, shows how the Hayden tried to destroy the California shelters.
The Whino has very little left on his plate now, hopefully he will have to get a real job and leave the saving of the animals to those of us who know what the hell is going on.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
P.O. Box 1007
Woodinville, WA 98072
June 14, 2010
Dear Executive Constantine:
We are writing this in the hopes that it will reach you personally, and capture your attention in a way that we were unable to do when we met a few weeks ago. When we asked you during your campaign how you would address animal services issues, you wrote of your “commitment to bring about long-overdue systemic change,” and promised that you would “hit the ground running and create real, rapid, and lasting change.”
We believe that you meant those promises, and still do. We believe that you share our
commitment to an animal care and control system where animals receive humane care,
where all adoptable and treatable animals find loving homes, and where animals in the
community are protected against cruelty and neglect.
However, something has gone tragically wrong in implementing your vision for a better
future for animals in King County – both in the actions that your administration has taken to date, and in the plan that you have presented to the King County Council. We have not seen meaningful signs of “real” and “rapid” change in KCACC in the past six months, and most importantly, your “Roadmap for Reform” does not plan for the kind of “long-overdue systemic change” that we agree is necessary to give county animal services any chance of being successful.
The time for this change is now, or never. If the long-overdue systemic change does not take place now, before the funding for the program is locked in for the next 2.5 years, then we believe that it never will. When we have spoken to Carrie Cihak over the past several months, we have always been told that real reform can wait – that real reform must wait – because “stability” needs to be brought to the system first in the form of guaranteed funding, and that there has been no time to simultaneously make fundamental changes that will help the animals.
But over the past three years, we have worked by your side to create instability in the system, for the very reason that a broken, failing system should not be stable. Until King County animal services can prove its ability to treat animals humanely, to get every healthy and treatable animal out of the shelter alive, to protect King County citizens and animals, and to spend taxpayer money wisely, its future should be in doubt. Like any non-profit organization that depends on donor funds, or any for-profit company that depends on customer satisfaction, county animal services should be required to demonstrate measurable success before it is guaranteed a future of taxpayer funding. It has not done so, and your “Roadmap for Reform” does not set forth the sort of fundamental reform that is required to fix this broken system. (You know, as well as anyone, that small fixes are not going to get the job done.) As a result, we are sending to the council today a 16-point position paper that outlines our reasons for opposing your Regional Plan for Animal Services. As described in detail in our position paper and the attached letter, we believe that your plan is bad for the animals and bad for the taxpayers, and perpetuates a dangerous situation for the citizens of King County.
We want to tell you how difficult the decision to publicly oppose your plan has been for us. We have supported you for years, because we believed that you were the county’s greatest champion for the animals. That is why we resisted taking an active public stance in opposition to your Regional Plan – even after it began to be clear that your plan was headed in the wrong direction, even after it was clear that your advisors were not open to differing opinions, and even after you walked out in the middle of our attempt to communicate these misgivings to you.
We are not naysayers by nature, and we have no desire to be at odds with another King
County executive. We want nothing more than to be able to conscientiously support you
and your vision for animal welfare in King County. We want nothing more than to
abandon our mission to “expose” KCACC, and instead use our time to help you to build a better future for King County’s animals. Our belief in this future has been our motivation to remain dedicated to this effort ever since we served on the KCACC Citizens’ Advisory Committee nearly three years ago. But now, we are not alone among your former supporters in feeling betrayed, disillusioned, and hopeless. At this point, many people who have been the strongest supporters of the animals have simply given up –after years of fighting and seeing so little progress at KCACC, they no longer believe progress is possible. They are tired of speaking out to expose neglect and cruelty at the hands of KCACC – of writing letters, of attending meetings, and of putting themselves and their reputations on the line. They
fought for years believing that they had your firm support, and that with your election, the animals would have a firm ally. Now, they do not know where to turn.
We looked to you for new solutions, and instead your administration is feeding us the
same old lines, supported by the same discredited statistics. We were confident that you would replace the old culture at KCACC (which you frequently described as “corrupt”)with a new culture based on compassion, expertise, and accountability. But instead, we have seen you entrust the future of animals in King County to advisors who have no background in animal sheltering or cruelty issues, and yet who are singularly unwilling to seek out expertise, or listen to ideas that differ from their own.
Now we find ourselves at an unfortunate impasse. Our principles demand that we stand
up for the animals and in opposition to your plan, even though we believe that you mean well, and have inadvertently allowed your policies to be taken in the wrong direction. And so this is our final plea: Please take a few minutes to actually read our position paper and consider it carefully. If we persuade you, please have the humility to admit that you (or your staff) may have made some mistakes, and be open to fresh perspectives. Please consider the possibility that these intractable problems at KCACC may call for a new way of doing things, rather than the “solution” that your advisors have found to bring “stability” to a broken system – by finding more money to fund more government.
We do not pretend that we have all the answers to the complex problems that you face in reforming KCACC. Please be open to the possibility that you, and your inexperienced advisors, do not have all the answers either, and seek to immediately hire and consult people who are proven experts in achieving the kinds of results that you envision for the animals of King County.1
No one is right all the time. With so many urgent problems for you to manage as King
County Executive, it is understandable that you might have allowed your staff to take the wrong path on this issue, with the best of intentions. But the mark of a great leader is his ability to admit mistakes, and make corrections before it is too late. Be bold. Be brave. Be the kind of leader we can follow with pride. And, please,
remember that the animals are counting on you.
Co-chairs, KCACC Exposed
It is worth noting here, for the record, that when we urge you to consult and hire “experts,” we do not mean ourselves. Neither of us has ever sought employment with King County, or compensation from the county of any kind. To the contrary, we have spent hundreds of hours volunteering our time to help the county – sometimes is an official capacity as with the advisory committee or strategic planning committee,
but often in a more unofficial capacity, as when we worked closely with you and your staff when you were a councilmember. And the main advice and assistance that we have attempted to offer to your staff in recent months has been to help them to find the appropriate experts to consult and hire, not by offering ourselves out as the people who have all the answers.
No worry, if the Mayor thinks that the Whinonettes were a handful, they are a minority, then wait until the majority of the humane community gets on his back for hiring a breeder who tried to undermine animal control in King County. I said all along there was a conspiracy and now here's the proof. This is an email to Executive Constantine saying that very thing, just released this morning by the ACO Guild.
But over the past three years, we have worked by your side to create instability in the system, for the very reason that a broken, failing system should not be stable.
The KCACC Exposed is comprised of three women, one of whom is Brenda Barnette. She is a legislative rep for the AKC for God's sake and die hard Whinonette. Who in their right mind would hire this woman to head a major animal control division? As always the Mayor is thinking with his short dick rather than his head.
Don't worry, we will fight. She will go down in flames when the truth starts coming out. The bitch wouldn't even help her own local shelter animals with importing dogs from other areas, taking homes away from the shelter animals there. Then she had the nerve to lie about it.
Boks was bad enough but this woman is the kiss of death just like all of the Whino's lackeys. At least when it happens, it will also mean the kiss of death to the "No Kill Equation" and that would be worth the trials and tribulations.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
The Reno area's only no-kill animal shelter broke ground today on a new facility that will more than triple its current size, leading hopefully to hundreds of more animal being saved from death.
Seems some fool left his money, $5 million to the SPCA, probably because of it being "no kill". Now the question is, why didn't this person leave that money to the Nevada Humane Society? With all the propaganda that is out there one would think that the money would have gone to NHS instead. Could it be that this fool knew the truth about NHS?
Anyway, it is a good thing that NHS didn't get that money, would just allow them to continue to fly under the radar and spread their lies about how great they are.
Friday, June 4, 2010
Spadaro has been order to let animal control know the whereabouts of all these animals within 48 hours of her taking them from where they are now. If she fails to do that, then all the animals go to animal control.
WHEN WILL HER FUCKING TRIAL START? WE WANT THIS BITCH BEHIND BARS!!!!!!!!!!!!
The law needs to be changed. No one should be allowed to continue to torment animals like this bitch has been allowed to do. Only the Whino can lay claim to tormenting more animals with his "No Kill Equation" bullshit. He and Charlotte Spadaro are two of a kind, comrades in arms, both claiming to help animals when actually they prey on animals. I wish the two of them could share a jail cell.