Seizure v Coercion or is it More?

“Only 2 weeks ago, I would have scoffed at someone making that statement above. I would have blown it off as paranoia. Then a respected breeder in my area had all her rabbits forcibly taken from her.”   http://www.raising-rabbits.com/responsible-animal-owners-defense-trust.html

“The groups and individuals involved in “rescuing” these rabbits broke at least five state laws, and have had absolutely no regard for the rights of the breeder. How is it that these groups were allowed to be the judge, jury, and executioner before ever stepping into a courtroom? It appears from the actions of these groups that as an animal owner, they believe you have NO rights.”

  • They would not allow the breeder to take her own pictures to document what was happeningHappy boy with bunny
  • They have refused to allow either her attorney or her own veterinarian access to the rabbits
  • They extorted her into signing over her rabbits to them by charging her over $800 per day for a minimum of 30 days to care for the rabbits
  • She was informed that she had 10 days to rescind the decision to sign the rabbits over, but 7 days later when she changed her mind they denied her the right
  • Without even being convicted of anything, she has lost all her rabbits to the HRS.
  • The rabbits are already being spayed and neutered. The goal of the HRS is to ensure that none of the rabbits goes to a breeder.
  • Some of the rabbits taken belonged to local 4-H members. It appears that these kids may get their rabbits back after they are spayed/neutered.

“Which one of us is next? While I have never personally seen this breeder’s barn, I have talked to several individuals who have. I am convinced that if they can take her rabbits, they can take anyone’s rabbits they target.Remember, the agenda of the HR$ is to eliminate the rabbit breeder completely, and it appears they will do anything to accomplish their goal.”

“I know that while we all want to lock our barns and hide our rabbits, it is time we stand together and let our voices be heard over the roar of the propaganda and actions of the people and organizations that want to see rabbits as only house pets and not the amazingly versatile animal that they truly are.”

“This breeder is standing up against these people and fighting not only for herself, but for us.”

————————————————————————–PD:

DAMN STRAIGHT FOLKS—

THIS IS WHAT WE MEAN… We don’t fight back, we LOSE.

And this is from a RABBIT group site!!

—————————————————————–

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJUiSjSw0Gc&feature=related  (H$U$ truth video)

If any humane group, AC or other such AR group tells you they are seizing your animals, you should either already have a prepaid legal plan like Legal Shield (formerly Prepaid Legal) or similar plan, which you can pay a small amt. per month, OR have 24hr access to call an attorney you know. This is imperative because once you utter anything they can use against you, once you make a deal and they don’t follow through, once you let them inside your house, your barn, etc, it’s over.

In California, which has preseizure forfeiture, it is near impossible to avoid paying storage fees. So the key is NOT to get caught where they can seize your animals, and if they try, they usually need a warrant. We have seen seizures where they don’t follow the code, which actually is better because then the entire seizure might fall out, but that often depends how they saw the animals in the first place.  Usually they haven’t seen them but get complaints from neighbors, ARs, or people that don’t like you.  For example, the Open Fields Doctrine may allow seizure if they can see your animals, even if they are trespassing outside from the neighbors yard. However it would depend on the expectation of privacy (and take too much space to discuss here.)

While we don’t know the whole story, we would just comment as if this happened in CA…if we assume this person was not required to register with APHIS, that’s fine.  We then look at excessive charges, oral promise to rescind, no criminal charges, altering all animals, and animals belonging to “others.”

In CA, the storage fees are high, and if you are actually cited and had the animals seized, retaining ownership will cost a fortune. If you received the mandatory notice/hearing as per the code, fine. Still high. If you didn’t receive the mandated hearing, call an attorney immediately.  Usually an oral promise to rescind may create some detrimental reliance which is an affirmative defense. Can’t tell if that happened here. Cannot tell if the promise was made with actual authority. No criminal charges were made because apparently it looks like they agreed not to do so, because the person worked a deal by giving away the animals.  Alteration of the animals is a property interest/due process question that would arise, and cannot tell if there was notice (that altering would occur if animals surrendered.)  Seizure of the property belonging to others brings up an intervenor question. The other owners (if in CA) could file a motion to intervene since they likely did not give permission to give away their animals.  IF the person was supposed to register with APHIS and didn’t, as we know the fines can be high, as shown by the H$U$ attorney now working for APHIS.

All other groups with animals that have not stood up against California SB 917 should be ashamed of themselves. NO guts–NO glory.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Seizure v Coercion or is it More?

  1. Just having access to an attorney at a time of crisis can prevent you from making critical errors that assure you conviction on extra charges. It will help you be calm, and allow you to protect your rights. The attorney may wish to talk to the raiding officers, to challenge their legality or just to get their names for future reference. The attorney’s being there (or there on the phone) may halt everything. How many people can get a lawyer on the phone immediately??? If you have Legal Shield, you CAN!. That is why I have it.

  2. We agree! We have it ourselves. However it usually takes those who work directly on animal related issues
    all the time to really mount the best defense. In high profile cases you will need some seasoned
    investigators and those familiar with charges, usually in CA under Penal code 597 and 597.1…which can
    become very convoluted. Very expensive. Storage is very costly as is retaining title to one’s own animals.
    In fact one of our clients did not have the prepaid service and called when they had the sheriffs seize
    his child!

  3. There are over 6,000 rabbits available for adoption from our shelters. What kind of people take these bunnies to the shelter, if they are not dumped in a field somewhere, left to fend for themselves, wait a couple of weeks,they are parents who purchased one from a breeder or a pet store or Craigslist.
    Please get with it. Rabbits are not good pets for children. 4h is a cold organization, perhaps teaching pet responsibility, but what about the comittment that is necessary and love? Are the animals exempt from that? Do you really think anyone should be stuck in a cage for the many years of it’s life so it can entertain you or your children when the whim arises? Don’t you think there is enough euthanasia going on to warrant a stop to breeders who prey on the feelings and minds of our children who really do not know about the full responsibility of owning a rabbit? Our shelters in California are the result of irresponsible breeders. Please stop this madness! All of my house rabbit’s are from people who either dumped their friend in a field or from a shelter, or x easterbunnies. There has to be a limit on how many animals we breed.

    Freedom? As with anything good , there are responsibilities, we know what happens to most animals that go to a shelter. Oh, you got your profit, now comes the end for the creature. All life is sacred, take responsibility for your actions, 4h included and perhaps people like the woman in CA who lost her bunnies won’t need these laws implemented. Every law that is created because of ignorance, defiance, misuse or irresponsible people, that new law takes a little bit more of our freedoms from us.

  4. “rabbits are not good pets”… well that may be your opinion. anyone could say the same for horses, dogs, cats,and possibly children which are not always taken care of. The fact that “some” are not taken care of perfectly does not mean ANYONE should never have one. should we eliminate cars because people drive drunk or speed? If we follow your logic the answer is yes.

  5. petdefense~ Repeat: “Rabbits are not good pets for children.” I will clarify that by saying “Most Children.” And what does a car have to do with a living feeling creature? Cars don’t have feelings, but all people and animals do. Your reply makes no sense whatsoever, Buying a rabbit to appease a child’s whim for occasions such as Easter or any other holiday is ridiculous. Most of those rabbits do not live beyond a year that are purchased in this manner, or they end up at the local shelter or fieldm where they can’t survive like their wild cousins. Most are left forgotten in a backyard cage with no touch, often without greens and food and even water. I’ve seen it all. Better for the rabbit or dog or horse to be at the humane society. And, if you treat your children the same way some people treat their rabbits, you would be accused of abuse and you shouldn’t have children either.

    Regarding the car comparison, your comprehension is absolutely off topic. Of course cars should not be made illegal, but if you get caught drinking and driving or breaking the law, you will pay for it and if you don’t change the way you drive, you will simply lose your license and 3 strike, you’ll never get the chance again to drive. Please try to comprehend what you are reading and kindly stop adding your own definition to others comments.

  6. Because you are not logical, but only emotional and fixated on the rabbit and not people. Simply because a few people give up some animals is not the end of the world and it surely does not mean kids can’t have pets. What it means is that parents may not want to take care of animals and if so then we are really talking about parents.
    From viewing your lack of understanding re the drunk driving and cars, you are not able to put forth a logical argument because it is not based on logic but only on emotion. You really should go to another site and vent your AR beliefs elsewhere. They won’t work here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s