Charges Dropped re WA Farm Family- Humane Soc Being Investigated

Follow up re Kitsap Humane Society Being Investigated:–141124483.html

One of the attorneys in the trial court notified us, we are not sure yet if the family will move for a 42 U.S.C. 1983 claim on the seizure without proper due process. Also the animals were allegedly either given away, adopted, sold, or sterilized, not in that order.

What is important about the case is:

(1) do the seizing parties, agencies or workers, actually know animal husbandry at all, and do they even know the law themselves? Did they have a warrant and did they need one?

(2) are the people who do the seizing certified workers, police, third party rescue, or who?  Do they have a ccontract or are they employees of the city, state, county?

(3) Does that specific state law require a warrant upon seizure? Most people think it is required but if you look at CA law under animal “abuse”, do you see anything about warrants? Of course not.  Do you think a warrant is needed to seize your dog from your car? Your house? Your business?  Does your state have pre seizure forfeiture?  What if  it looked like the dog, horse, cat, etc needed immediate medical care?  What if the foreclosure attorney for the property claimed the animals needed immediate medical care?  What if the attorney lied? (Not saying this case involved foreclosure–just an example)

What if you had 100, 250, 300, 450, 700 animals…….then the “seizing” parties CLAIM you are alleged to have committed “abuse” on 1 or 2 animals? Then they SEIZE ALL of your animals–maybe 700?
“In addition to the birds — hens, roosters, turkeys, guinea hens, quail, doves, and pigeons — a cat, two dogs, and an alpaca were also taken…”
“oupal — who is a retiree from UCSB’s study abroad program — sees the crackdown as retaliation after she, with the help of an attorney, successfully thwarted the county’s attempt three years ago to confiscate her animals…”

Folks—- this is why we believe that pre seizure forfeiture should NOT involve “seizure” of ALL animals that are NOT affected. This is simply an AR law that has been remarkably used in CA, Idaho and Colorado.  The only 3 states stupid and liberal enough for ARs to gain such laws that we are aware.
These seizure laws are patterned after Federal seizure laws which are normally focused on drugs, money laundering, illegal items, etc. When drugs/guns/contraband is seized, they take ALL of it BECAUSE it is illegal, NOT because ONE item is illegal.  For that matter, even if 50% was illegal, they will still seize everything. Federal forfeiture law has been something that many Federal defense attorneys have questioned, see  — and with little results.

For example, in Louisiana HSUS made up their seizure law for “fighting dogs” and when Floyd Boudreau’s dogs were  (1) seized and (2) killed immediately, they were able to do it because their LAW states that fighting dogs are considered as “contraband” and therefore subject to being killed immediately.  That has the same impact as Denver killing banned dogs, or Toledo Ohio rounding up and killing anything that resembles a possible generic “pitbull.”

Any law that resembles this type of seizure was likely drafted and put into place by HSUS and friends. Also when CPS seizes children, they usually take ALL of the kids, not just one. HOWEVER animals are NOT children.  Seizing 400 or 700 animals with one alleged “abuse” charge is specious at best and the seizure law NEEDS TO BE CHANGED.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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