|
Rabbit Advocacy Animal Matters
|
|
First Lawsuit Filed Against the NYPD for Not Enforcing Animal Cruelty Laws, Historical Original Argument as to Why Dogs and Cats Should Have Rights in a Court of Law and Why Animal Activists Have Standing to File March 9, 2015 Kateriviello.wordpress.com No Kill New York This petition was filed on Monday, March 9, 2015 at 60 Centre Street in New York, NY, by myself pro se, for “Jigs” AKA “Jake” the Rottweiler-breed-type dog harbored in an industrial lot in Staten Island, NY. I do think that my petition does ring of an original argument for dog and cat rights, as well as standing, and justice should prevail. There could have been a lot more bells and whistles such as additional expert testimony, additional photographs labeled properly, videotape from the scene of the cruelty, and scholarly works. I could have performed interviews with elected officials and other individuals that live in the area and work in those industrial lots. I have valid excuses but the most valid of all is lack of funding. When finances, food and gas for the car are issues, filing my first lawsuit for an animal was almost impossible. I attempted to explain to one of the donators some of the obstacles I face and all I was met with was repetitive threats to stop payment on the checks – but guess what? It was a slap in the face I needed to stop whining and file, which I did, and maybe enough was said? Maybe, just maybe, all of that extra information and testimony is unnecessary. There is substantial evidence that the dog was abused, the owner of the dog should be arrested and the NYPD should have arrested him. So maybe keeping it this simple was more efficient. So the lawsuit is filed with only two affidavits and one article describing that the NYPD took over jurisdiction in animal cruelty from the ASPCA in January 2014, as well as of course, my petition with my original argument for dog and cat rights that has never been argued in a court of law before. I am hoping that the judge in their great wisdom and common sense will compel the NYPD to make an arrest for the individual who kept this dog in these conditions in the winter of 2014-15 outside with no shelter or water, and with a postoperative open wound in deep snow and subzero conditions. For those not apprised, please allow me to cut-to-the-chase for you and assuage your concern that the dog Jake is miraculously alive, thank goodness. Please allow me to now tell the story of Jake (as some of us called him but would later come to know that his owner might have been calling him Jigs). It is a story that animal rescuers know all too well these past couple years. I was one of the first individuals to proclaim from the mountaintop in NY state several years ago on Facebook that these conditions were illegal and I received requests from rescuers to outline the legalities to which I replied,
Jake was/is kept in between two truck containers with jimmied-up fencing. The site of the living conditions will make you cry. For us in animal rescue and animal rights activists in general it is akin to an infant in a garbage dump. We hold animals in the regard of the expression of the divine therefore the conditions of the dog Jake were unholy and demonic. For those that would replace the word divine for universe, the conditions are simply unhealthy and life-threatening to a helpless innocent defenseless animal. Sometime at the end of last summer 2014, an activist was feeding her cat colony and the dog Jake was discovered. Several more activists would become aware of the dog and they would feed and water the dog. They were unable to get into the enclosure to pick of feces and used paper plates of the little food that was provided. The dog was always desperate for attention, dying of thirst, thin and hungry. Months would go by and the winter was setting in. I would first come to know about Jake on a night that it would become zero degrees. I asked a few people who we could find to get to that location that night and a car of young ladies sped out to the location. The location of 79 Storer Avenue in Staten Island, NY, was pitch black. The young ladies arrived but were scared and left as soon as they arrived. One young lady returned and the first video was produced. She could see nothing but only hear the dog barking. We spoke on the phone in the video, the helplessness and devastation was palpable in our voices. We called “the police.” The police precinct that would be called is #123. The video was posted and our 10,000 member group jammed up the phone lines for days and days starting at about the end of December 2014 for the next month until January 24, 2015. We suffered nightmares every night. The police dispatcher and sergeants were frustrated. I informed them that I was the one who released the action alert to our 10,000 member group to call and write emails and beg and plead that the dog Jake be removed and that the owner be arrested. Of course our efforts would be to no avail. Day after day we called in utter confusion and day after day we were met with an even more confused law enforcement agency. I received photos of the dog Jake in a cone in a postoperative state. Apparently the dog was in some sort of “anti cruelty program” with the ASPCA. Talk about double-speak! It would become known that the dog had been operated upon for a mass in possibly a limb and placed outside in subzero conditions with a cone on his head that he could not even reach water even if it were not frozen! The NYPD Precinct #123 looked to the ASPCA like their mommy. “Well if mommy says it is okay, then I guess it is okay” was the bizarre mind-numbing message. In the action alert I issued, I informed everyone to remind the #123 of the Ag and Markets law regarding animal cruelty and doghouses. So the precinct could not say that they were not familiar with the law. Surely it is written plainly. And as I state in my argument in this petition, if it looks like cruelty, it smells like cruelty, it feels like cruelty, its cruelty. At the end of the day for pete’s sake, common sense should have prevailed for this dog. Sure the dog has a “double-coat” but does that not amount to a human wearing a sweater and coat? Doesn’t that add up to a dog that is still freezing to death with no water? Does this not add up to possible frostbite and consequent possible gangrene? Does this not amount to severe dehydration and hypothermia? Does this not amount to a dog lonely, thirsty, hungry and freezing to death? This is pure common sense and at the end of the day, law reflects common sense or should. But let us review what gets in the way of common sense with regard to cruelty to animals:
And could any of this apply to Jake and Precinct #123 in NY? Maybe some of it but not all of it is applicable. There were no shelter insiders involved and Big Pharmaceutical was nowhere in sight. Just Jake freezing out in the cold with a big bad “oweee” and no blanket, no treats, no stuffed animal to rest his head – just a police department shrugging their shoulders and the ASPCA with business as usual not enforcing or advocating for animal cruelty laws in NYC. What tends to happen with hypothermia is unconsciousness. How many times have we seen dogs and cats out and about in freezing conditions with the look of utter confusion and vacancy? Delirium sets in. Just like the biggest danger in swimming across a mighty river is not the current or exhaustion, it’s the freezing water that will render your body halted in its tracks. If one can imagine the dog freezing and imagine being in his mind, one could imagine that as he fell asleep in a hypothermic state that not waking up would be welcome. We can imagine that opening our eyes to the pain of thirst and hunger with consequent joint pain and headaches would be unwelcome. In this type of suffering delirium, humans have described a light that they reach for with earnest. How many times have we seen that suffering animal let go? How many times have we stood over that cat or dog and whispered into their ear as they left this earth that we loved them but Jake and sooooooo many others would not have that except for the activists that stood at his fence and told him how beautiful he is and how much he is loved. Can we imagine a political prisoner with someone sneaking in a highly coveted extra slice of bread? That would be the glimmer of hope that keeps a sentient being alive, that all living creatures instinctively beg for from the universe, to keep living and breathing and experiencing love from family and community. All living animals seek community from other animals but dogs in particular are pack animals. Their lives are other-centered. To leave a dog in desperately lonely conditions was cruel enough but the law does not reflect that socialization is imperative for their psychological well-being. Knowing that dogs thrive on that connection with other dogs and people is to know how paramount it was that our activist community was there for him. We can go beyond the physical and hope and pray that psychically perhaps that Jake knew somehow that are lives were centered around his well-being and waited for the people to return to him and waited and kept himself alive in those below-zero conditions with no water for days and nights on end. At one point, I was informed that the owner of the dog Jake removed Jake from that location. There was some scuffle in the early days as to who owned the dog and who owned the industrial yard. Originally we set about a protest that would be both at the industrial yard where Jake was harbored and then we would continue the protest at Precinct #123. I was informed that if I continued the protest to occur at the industrial yard, the dog would not be returned and I was informed that the owner stated that the dog was in even more cruel conditions than the industrial yard. I cancelled the protest at the industrial yard and the agreement would be that the dog would be returned to the industrial yard. The dog was returned to that location when I posted out that the protest would only be at the Precinct. So I made a date for a protest at the #123 Precinct in Staten Island. My three-prong strategy for animal rights in our lifetime is massive protest (such as has never been seen in this country before), legal action and political advocacy. We at New York Animal Rights Alliance America have been protesting against the killing of cats and dogs in the pound system across the country for several years now. Finally our 501(c)3 was set up. Our fourth national/international protest is pending on September 19, 2015 with the main protest at 110th Street at New York Animal Care & Control. Our protest at City Hall in 2014 was the biggest protest for animal rights in recent NYC history with upwards of 300 activists. We were as a group still calling #123 every day. Another couple activists went to the location and took another video which I also released on our nonprofit page, No Kill New York, Inc. on Facebook. We released the photos that were provided on our page. I made a graphic poster calling for donations toward the filing fees for a lawsuit and we were set for Saturday, January 24, 2015 to protest at the precinct. About twenty amazing activists showed up on an incredibly cold and blustery day. We were mentioned and shown to be chanting at Precinct #123 on a Staten Island news agency. Now it was time to collect donations for the lawsuit to be filed and get the petition finalized. Unfortunately for Jake, the days that followed January 24, 2015 continued to be subzero conditions. We continued to call #123 and request that they check in on the dog. The doghouse was adequate and apparently had a heat source that needed to be plugged in. But could we trust a perpetrator of animal abuse such as we have seen to plug in a heat source every day and night in these freezing cold temperatures and deep snow? The police arrived at that location but in the pitch black of night the dog could not be seen. A new fencing now obstructed the back of the industrial area so that activists could no longer provide the dog with water or even see or touch the dog to pet his head and let him lick their hands. And if the dog jumped over the fence to greet the police which Jake was able to do, he would then be loose in the yard and then unable to return to his doghouse. We hoped for the best and prepared for the worst. With all the high profile attention to the dog we stated to #123 that the dog could still perish if not checked upon. The last visit to the industrial yard on about February 24, 2015 with our activists brought an elected official by request to be briefed on the matter. My contention is that none of this will be resolved in New York City or anywhere unless it reaches a court of law. Hence the lawsuit filed. We wish for nothing less than the owner of Jake to be arrested for his crimes against an innocent defenseless dog, causing that dog to suffer immeasurably in freezing cold conditions over a long protracted period of time this past winter. He must answer for this crime perpetrated upon this dog in a court of law to a jury of his peers. What could be the excuse? The owner has explained that he purchased the dog for thousands of dollars. In my experience it is exactly the owner who purchases a dog or cat that is more likely to abuse that animal than an adopter. The dog is obviously not protecting the industrial yard. The dog is not dangerous and has no history of bite and is friendly and sweet. Surely an alarm and camera system with infrared would be more effective in safeguarding the yard than a tortured and health-compromised sweet dog. And when criminals are cognizant of the fact that only a dog guards a property, they will disable the dog (innumerable cases on record). After the judge compels Precinct #123 to arrest this abuser and Commissioner Bratton assures the animal-loving community that animal abuse laws will be enforced, what next? My suggestion is that it be completely illegal to harbor animals in outside conditions without supervision. If the animal is accessible to the public in any manner including throwing poison over a fence or through a fence to kill or hurt a dog or cat, then the animal is unsupervised. The law currently does proscribe a viable doghouse such as is described herein but the law does not address the psychological damage to an animal left unsocialized for hours, days, weeks and months at a time (although the anti-tethering law does address this concern and cruelty). When an animal is unsupervised outside, the possibility of neglect of sustenance (food, water, shelter, vetting) then exists. If an individual is unable to supervise their animal in an outside condition, then they should not be harboring that animal. We are now up against the NYPD/city attorney who will ostensibly fight this petition from resulting in compelling Precinct #123 to make an arrest. Other such rare cases outside of New York City have resulted in judges stating that enforcement of the law is at the discretion of the law enforcement agency. In my heart, I do not believe that that could be pulled off in New York City. Imagine telling a New Yorker in our city that the cops will do as they please even if it means that a dog dies in illegal conditions? I think not. I have to have faith in the justice system that common sense will prevail as I (if I may say) historically and originally argue that a dog and cat fall somewhere between a stereo and a child according to the law. Therefore any citizen will have standing in a court of law to petition the court to act on their behalf. Therefore a dog or cat when killed is not just broken like a stereo but dead and no longer living such a child’s condition would be if they were killed. That unlike “property” such as a stereo, a dog and cat have eyes, ears, nose, throat, organs, and bodily functions with lives that are protected by law with a felony or a misdemeanor if violated. Therefore we have standing to report abuse of dogs and cats in a court of law just as we would for a child. Let the judicial system and the enforcement agency reflect what our elected officials have codified – that to hurt a dog or cat is against the law, whether it be in the shelter system, in a veterinarian’s office, in a laboratory, in a breeding facility, in a house, in a backyard, in a shed, or an industrial yard, whether it be filed and/or reported by an attorney or any taxpayer or any struggling activist/rescuer with their last dime and last drop of blood, sweat and tears. So let the new animal rights movement begin! No other organization has sought to revolutionize the rights of animals through the rights of cats and dogs in a court of law. This was not a strategy methodically employed on my part. It was a natural course of events. We believe that the movement for all animals in a court of law will be invigorated if the rights of cats and dogs can be magnified to a level never seen before, nothing less than to the level of children. The lawsuit: https://kateriviello.wordpress.com/2015/03/11/first-lawsuit-filed-against-the-nypd-for-not-enforcing-animal-cruelty-laws-historical-original-argument-as-to-why-dogs-and-cats-should-have-rights-in-a-court-of-law-and-why-animal-activists-have-stan/Comment: In 1994, the Animal Advocates Society of BC consulted a lawyer with the intention to have the BC SPCA charged with not enforcing the PCA Act. We were told that Crown would never accept the charge. We also discussed the SPCA’s “care” of animals and were again advised there was no chance of proceeding with action, despite well-documented proof of the organization not following its mandate and killing unwanted animals at its facilities as a means of population control.Necessity: A defense asserted by a criminal or civil defendant that he or she had no choice but to break the law. The necessity defense has long been recognized as Common Law and has also been made part of most states' statutory law. Although no federal statute acknowledges the defense, the Supreme Court has recognized it as part of the common law. The rationale behind the necessity defense is that sometimes, in a particular situation, a technical breach of the law is more advantageous to society than the consequence of strict adherence to the law. The defense is often used successfully in cases that involve a Trespass on property to save a person's life or property. It also has been used, with varying degrees of success, in cases involving more complex questions. Jan Olson, who rescued, or stole (depending on one’s viewpoint) neglected and/or mistreated dogs for several years was eventually charged with theft, but argued in court that “ animal cruelty laws in Canada encompass one paragraph, and even those laws are not enforced. So my defence is I'm not intentionally breaking the law, I'm intentionally enforcing it." So, does one have a moral duty to act in situation where there’s suffering and neglect? I believe so, regardless of the law. And throughout history, many others refused to stand by and do nothing. “I became convinced that noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good.” Martin Luther King, Jr. There is a higher court than courts of justice and that is the court of conscience. It supercedes all other courts. Mahatma Gandhi |