Rabid ARs Get Pony Rides Nixed- Allegedly Accused Owner of “Abuse”

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-California/2014/11/11/Small-Business-Owner-Sues-Animal-Rights-Activists-to-Save-Pony-Rides

Tawni Angel Stands And Fights. “Then, They Came For The Ponies.”

Click to access 5764afc0-3cf7-4ae1-a4ac-d2e5b67fbf91Press_Release.pdf

SANTA MONICA, California — A small business owner who operates pony rides and a petting zoo is fighting back against the animal rights activists who convinced the city council to cancel her annual contract next May.

Tawni Angel, the owner of Tawni’s Ponies, and her husband filed a lawsuit Monday in Los Angeles County Superior Court against Marcy Winograd and Danielle Charney, plus twenty other defendants, claiming defamation, intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

The lawsuit alleges that Winograd and fellow animal rights’ activists claimed falsely that Tawni’s Ponies was committing “animal abuse,” and that they continued to make that false claim even after being informed that the Santa Monica Police Department’s Animal Control Unit had investigated and found no evidence to support it.

A separate police report from Sgt. Mike Graham, cited by the plaintiffs in their complaint, stated:

I examined the ride set-up. The horses appeared in to be in good condition – their body weight appeared normal, their fur was clean and brushed, their manes and tails were brushed and healthy, the ground around them was clean and evenly flat, they walked on sawdust shavings, and there was no visible urine or feces. The equipment – saddles, bridles, and (thick) pads were in good condition. The horses were “quiet” and well behaved. I saw nothing to make me believe the horses were ill-treated, unhealthy, malnourished, injured, or in discomfort. The horses did not appear hot, were not sweating, and were on a timed (30 minute alarm,) water-break schedule.

I saw that as the horses walked in circles, their speed and disposition was constant and calm. Their path took them in and out of shade from the sun.

“Despite receiving written notice that there was no evidence of animal abuse, Winograd and the other defendants continued to wrongly accuse Angel and Nester of abusing their animals,” the plaintiff’s complaint states, citing several examples, including accusationsrepeated on YouTube in August, long after the police investigations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWszx6jP3Fw

On occasion, the complaint alleges, the animal rights activists even cited the California Penal Code, accusing Tawni of committing a crime–a claim that, if false, is libelous on its face.

The complaint also alleges that Winograd took personal photographs of Angel and her husband from his Facebook page drinking alcohol on vacation, and sent the photographs to city officials in her effort to convince them to terminate the Tawni’s Ponies contract.

Those emails had an apparent effect, according to documents obtained by Angel under California’s public records law. City council member Ted Winterer, for example, allegedly responded to Winograd via email and agreed with her about “the character of the owners.” In addition, the complaint notes, Facebook posts by Charney called Angel and her husband ““racist – bigoted – anti- women RW [right-wing] alcoholic gun toters.”

As a result, the plaintiffs allege, the Santa Monica City Council decided not to renew its contract with Tawni’s Ponies to provide pony rides and a petting zoo to the Sunday farmers’ market on Main Street. The contract had been renewed since 2003. The decision was made at 1:30 a.m. in a council meeting in September from which several members were absent or had gone home. Unless the decision is reconsidered, the contract will expire in May 2015.

Angel’s attorney, Donald E. Chomiak, told Breitbart News on Tuesday: “I’m very confident in our position in this lawsuit. The record speaks for itself.”

He cited the police report from May 2014 that exonerated Angel–and that referred to the animal rights activists as “very rude” and “argumentative” in describing their protest at the market.

Winograd knew Angel had been cleared, Chomiak said, yet “the entire time this woman kept spewing.”

Reached by telephone on Tuesday, Winograd struck back.

“I think it’s a coercive lawsuit designed to bully and intimidate people who exercise their constitutionally-protected free speech rights. I think it’s meant to silence me and the over 1,400 others who signed a petition calling for the closure of the animal exhibits at the Main Street Farmers Market,” Winograd told Breitbart News.

Winograd said she will file a motion under California’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) laws, which protect First Amendment rights against legal intimidation.

Update: Chomiak responded to Breitbart News regarding Winograd’s intent to file an anti-SLAPP motion:

Animal abuse is not a matter of opinion.  It is a crime under California’s Penal Code and has specific elements that must be met.  The police told Winograd on multiple occasions there was no evidence of animal abuse (i.e., that these elements had not been met).

Thus, I think my clients are very likely to defeat an anti-SLAPP motion.

He noted that damages could potentially exceed several hundreds of thousands of dollars, given the annual value of the contract to Tawni’s Ponies.  Image: Facebook  Senior Editor-at-Large Joel B. Pollak edits Breitbart California

————————————————-

 Well at least this puts the story where it should be….where mainstream people can understand what is wrong with animal rights (“ARs”) and how they think.  Apparently a pony ride is illegal to ARs because in their opinion, it’s breaking the law such as the Penal Code for either negligence or abuse. But there is no negligence or abuse. What there is, is the AR’s overwhelming, overarching, overzealous, and completely biased opinion, that ARs can CONTROL anything to do with animals, period.

Citing the Penal Code for abuse does not make anything abuse. Defamation generally means something which is not true and in this case (depending on how it was said or written–) implicating someone of animal abuse means implicating criminal conduct. Claiming criminal conduct where there is none, in order to take down one’s business–should be wrong. However, nearly all AR groups and AR people love to use the word animal abuse for EVERYTHING. Like your animals needs a haircut=abuse. Your animal didn’t have a leash=abuse. Your animal was not licensed=abuse. Your crate was too big=abuse. Your crate was too small=abuse.  Tail was docked=abuse. Ears cropped=abuse. Animal performed in a movie=abuse. Animal ate wrong food=abuse. In other words, nearly everything that ARs say is “abuse”– becomes abuse.

It doesn’t matter these days how the law is even written as it’s pretty easy to convince 12 dummies that abuse is whatever someone tells them it is, even if it ISN’T the case.

CA Penal Code 597 and 597.1 is poorly written and that being the case, nearly EVERYTHING can be translated as ABUSE as long as you get PEOPLE TO TESTIFY AND SAY IN THEIR OPINION IT IS ABUSE, PERIOD.

Proving such conduct beyond a reasonable doubt is not that hard when you have ONE picture that may look bad, or just somewhat bad.  Even with NO pictures, abuse is often found because of keeping too many animals, despite good care.  and if you don’t know what animal abuse is, go look it up on this site that you are on.

Test for Animal Abuse..Can YOU pass it????……..https://petdefense.wordpress.com/can-you-pass-the-ar-abuse-test/

And then they came for the ponies is right.

They now seize children whose parents grow medical marijuana. Children are thrown in the foster system. We think perhaps it might be better to round up the ARs and ship them to somewhere where they cannot see or handle animals at all. Ever.