The Impact of Animal Rights, Fanatics, Rescues, and Shelters on Animal Law and how this affects ASHLEY NICOLE MILLER’s dogs in Killeen, Texas!

The Impact of Animal Rights, Fanatics, Rescues, and Shelters on Animal Law and how this affects ASHLEY NICOLE MILLER’s dogs in Killeen, Texas

Where is the “over-population” when dogs and cats are transported across state lines and imported from foreign countries to fill up animal shelters and rescues?

When people have their dogs, their love, their life, their freedom, their extended family of dogs, pets, and animals "STOLEN" from them, what else would you expect to happen. This is not a justification, this is "reality!"

By Dean A. Ayers

Lead Investigative Reporter

NationalDogPress.us ©

31 December 2011

Article 2 of an ongoing series

Ashley N. Miller’s dogs were surrendered to Killeen, TX Animal Control by someone who did not own them.

The saga begins In Killeen, Texas this year (2011). Animal Control Authorities never notified Ashley N. Miller of the impoundment of her pets. They knew that the person who surrendered her pets to animal control authorities was not the owner and they also knew who the dogs belonged to.

In turn, Killeen, TX Animal Control told Ashley N. Miller that she could not get her pets back without paying $2,400 and Animal Control Authorities in Killeen, TX also increased the rate on her dogs daily and did not offer a payment plan. They did this without a hearing, and without legally obtaining custody through a judge for Ashley N. Miller’s dogs. No form of constitutional "Due Process" was given in regards to Ashley N. Miller’s dogs which are considered property under the law.

Killeen, TX Animal Control Authorities then sent Ashley's dogs to four known rescue organizations that are refusing to return them to her. Ashley N. Miller is working on filing a petition against the city of Killeen; TX as well as suing the four rescues involved who have allegedly STOLEN her dogs without legal “Due Process.”. Ashley N. Miller has stated that the demand letters for the rescues to return her dogs have been sent from her attorney's office and received by the four separate rescues. Ashley sincerely wants to help pass "Apollo's Law" through Congress to help prosecute those who wrongfully steal another person's property. Ashley N. Miller states, “Every person who is arrested is entitled to "due process" and a protection of life, liberty and property as listed in the U.S. Constitution.” “If anything, the rights to what we are entitled to federally need to be defended freely and at no charge.”

These governmental entities and rescue organizations need to be held accountable for their illegal, illicit, and immoral dog and animal seizure actions without proper and legal “Due Process” just as anyone else would expect in law. Yet, Ashley N. Miller still continues to fight for her dogs STOLEN by Animal Control Authorities and various Animal (So-Called) Rescues.

This is the second article in the ongoing series of articles by this Lead Investigative Reporter in following the plight of Ashley N. Miller, from Killeen, TX in her desperate struggle to be re-united with her beloved dogs, pets and animals, STOLEN from her by government Animal Control Authorities, and subsequently RAVISHED in THEFT by several Texas Rescue Facilities.

Dog and animal "over-population stigma” is used as a marketing ploy for rescue and adoption industry to sell their agenda

If your job has already been axed by the bad economy or is about to disappear, people can often do desperate things in an attempt to compensate.

Why should animal shelters or animal rescues be any different; especially when a person considers what is happing inside these organizations, many of which are run by animal rights “fanatical” activists and major big dollar supported nonprofit groups? Some are so “fanatical” and “back-stabbing passionate” that they'd do nearly anything to keep their "rescue or humane society imperative" of their animal shelter/rescue agenda going. This information can assist in explaining why pet and animal "over-population stigma” is used as a marketing ploy for the animal rescue and adoption (for a fee) industry to sell their agenda about dogs and cats (rescued for a fee) as being their alleged heroic duty of serving rescued and adopted out dogs and cats.

Tell a family that the dog they're interested in is about to be destroyed by euthanasia due to "lack of space", and the deal to adopt is closed. Another dog is then shipped in to take its place as the needed “chattel product” of this high dollar big animal “shelter rescue and adoption (for a fee) industry and nonprofit business” nationwide.

After mulling over the phenomenally successful statistics of voluntary spay/neuter by the general public, the question needs to be asked; where are all the animal shelters/rescues getting their dogs? Regardless of the facts that most shelter dogs are adult dogs, sadly displaced for many reasons, like due to people moving to covenant-controlled homeowner associations and counties or cities with extreme “pet limit” laws, the numbers in shelters do not add up.

Obviously, shelters should be going “out of business” left and right since voluntary spay/neuter nationwide is so successful. After a cursory review of nationwide available statistics it appears that animal euthanasia numbers have been increasing for 20 years, especially to eradicate the “bully breeds” yet, "over-population" is the “mantra” still used by animal shelters and animal rescues favoring their animal rights agendas for furthering their fund-raising, donations, and adopting for a fee (selling) dogs industry to an ill-informed public.

Even the numbers of irresponsible breeding “puppy mills” are nothing like people think it is. The animal rights groups nationwide have succumbed to now including “responsible” dog kennels with more than 3 dogs in perfect care and control conditions as being labeled as “puppy mills” now in their propaganda, and additionally falsely labeling these pet owners also as HOARDERS. Considering the successful voluntary rate of spay/neuter nationwide, it is highly unlikely that accidental pet owner breeding and true defined “puppy mill” irresponsible breeding are filling up animal shelters/rescues to the extent that animal rights groups and animal shelters/rescues claim they are. However, a nationwide dog “chattel” product “for a fee” rescue industry (dog and cat rescues/adoptions) must come from somewhere.

Rescue/Adoption For a Fee – Animal Shelters and Rescues both Make a $$$ Profit threatening animals to be killed by euthanasia

The general public and all pet and animal owners need to be aware that Animal Rightists lobby with local Animal Shelters and Animal Rescues as “cover.”

The illegal, immoral and illicit care, cruelty and unethical practices in the shelter/rescue industry are shocking. And make no mistake, it is a BIG DOLLAR ($$$) rescue/adoption for a fee industry. Many animal rescues and shelters have become some of the most profitable pet shops around that kill anything that does not bring top dollar; or is too much work to place in adoption programs for an adoption or rescue fee. To “give away” a dog or cat, is politically incorrect and unacceptable in their animal rights agenda “chattel” industry. The only Animal Rescue/Shelter agenda acceptable for an “unadoptable” (for a fee) dog or cat is euthanasia, heralded as being so humane.

Single Breed and Pure Bred Rescue organizations have a dreadful time getting pure bred dogs and cats out of the shelter for a fee industry system, simply because shelters/rescues exploit these pure breeds to increase sales and profits (in the hundreds of dollars for a single pure bred dog or cat). Sadly, the “lame stream” news media and general public have been willing to look the other way, always promoting the animal rights agenda “cause and effect” of these shelter and rescue illicit industry dog product “chattel” practices.

Why do some humane society shelters and rescues operate in this manner?

The answer is that many animal shelters and humane society agencies have become havens for Animal Rightists; shelters and rescues are exploited to spread propaganda, dog and cat "over-population" myths, and faulty statistics for marketing and donation receiving purposes. Shelters and Rescues naturally become a breeding ground for recruiting new uninformed members and animal rights activists. It's a natural, albeit unhealthy; fit to the animal rights adoption (for a fee)industry animal “chattel” agenda.

It is no wonder alleged dubious shelter/rescue operations are becoming an ever-increasing problem, importing dogs and cats to “over-populate” their agencies from out of state and foreign country animal sources. Thankfully, not all shelters/rescues are this way, but the public should be aware of what is going on. Both Animal Control Authorities and Law enforcement who enforce animal laws and many animal shelters/rescues “have had” their ethics compromised, if not downright corrupted. The end-result is that generally, shelter/rescue workers and animal control authorities and their animal law enforcement agencies assisting them are no longer a credible source for accurate animal care and control information or about proper and constitutional animal behavior and breeding of quality pets, especially when it comes to crafting pet and animal laws. (see “due process” case president law paragraphs below).

Animal Rightist propaganda would have us believe that animal abuses and cruelty are at “epidemic” levels in the general public of pet owner’s homes and small hobby or one time family animal breeders, or people who save or rescue a minimal but effective amount of dogs, cats, or other pets in their homes, not to mention that dog attacks most certainly receive sensational press coverage.

The lame stream media is only too happy to oblige any political opportunism by “animal rights lobbied” politicians, pro-animal control authorities, shelter/rescue agencies, and county or municipal law enforcement or government employees actively pursuing their own “Animal Rightist” agendas. Animal Rights designed animal laws and ordinances have become a means to an end, exploited at the expense of the loving pet owners, and independent animal rescue people in their homes; being made into criminals without “proper” and legal “due process” in animal law in our society and in the general public nationwide.

A major percentage of the nation’s animal population, dog attacks, dog fighting, and even animal cruelty and animal care and control or nuisance behavior complaints are rare when all the facts are allegedly disclosed nationwide. As disturbing as these animal care, cruelty, and animal attack incidents are, they are not even close to being the rule... they are by far the exception. Thereby the Animal Rightists are utilizing the “exception to the rule” as an aggressive and nationwide opportunity to enact unconstitutional, intrusive, unethical, vague or illicit and immoral animal laws and animal ordinances in a horrendously distasteful and extremely dishonest manner of current and proposed animal law.

When Animal Rightists write ordinances that “Sic” Animal Control Authorities, Animal Rightist Groups allegedly posing as Law enforcement (CA. PROP 2 laws enacting private nonprofit groups to act as law enforcement on private property) on animal owners and breeders via animal crating, care, control, licensing, pet-limits, and registration schemes in animal law, the very future of healthy well-tempered pets and animals is compromised. No breeding. No pure-bred animals. No healthy genetic stock. Hence, no more pets. No cats. No dogs. No nothing! Forever more! Except for the industry of rescue/shelter adoptions (for a fee).

The only way to prevent these unconstitutional, illegal, immoral, and illicit pet owner “confiscation and seizure” horrors from taking root in your own county and community is not to go there in the first place, in allowing these “perverted” animal laws and ordinances. Again, only an open and active pet-friendly county and community create a fun and safe place to live with our pets and neighbors. Animal Rightists, thru their BIG $$$ animal adoption and rescue industry (for a fee) are destroying our current animal laws in having any “common sense” or traditional, constitutional and “intrinsic value” for our dogs, cats, pets and animals in the law governing our private property.

A disconcerting trend is sweeping America in a lack of “due process” in Animal Laws

The Disconcerting TREND…Costly and destructive animal laws and ordinances being constructed solely by the Animal Rightists with their “lobbied” legislators at all levels of government. The reason stems from an all-out effort by Animal Rightist organizations, shelters, and rescues to lobby every single law maker or enforcer, to include the judicial judges and attorneys in every locale, township, county, city, and state in the U.S.A., Canada and even worldwide. These Animal Rights Activists are searching out lawmakers and animal law enforcers to exploit and further their twisted and “perverted” agenda to destroy any authority or ability for a private property owner to legally retain and defend their pets and animals as their extended family.

It's hard to comprehend, but the leadership of the largest and most profitable "non-profit" lobbying Animal Rights organizations worldwide has an ambitious goal in mind: Destroying all usage and ownership of domestic animals. That includes, but is not limited to, abolishing pet ownership in every aspect of our society worldwide.

How Does Due Process Apply to Dog Confiscation, Seizure and Euthanasia Cases by Animal Control Authorities?

The following legal brief is a synopsis of the evidence of alleged illegal, illicit and immoral actions taken by Killeen, TX Animal Control Authorities and possibly their Law Enforcement Authorities Assisting, in Killeen, TX governmental “WRONGFUL TAKING AND THEFT” of Ashley N. Miller’s dogs, pets, and animals WITHOUT LEGAL “DUE PROCESS” as established by Case Prescedent in the Law (detailed below).

Ashley N. Miller’s dogs are still considered property in all legal jurisdictions today, due process, whether rooted in the federal or state constitutions, extends to life, liberty, or property. The more complicated issue, however, is how much process is due Ashley N. Miller?

The Supreme Court has promulgated a four prong test to determine this. In each situation, a court must weigh

A. the private interest affected by the official action

B. the risk of an erroneous deprivation of that interest through the procedures used,

C. the probable value of additional procedural safeguards, and

D. the government interest involved.

Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 (1976).

Due process requires the opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.

Rabon v. City of Seattle (Rabon II), 107 Wash.App. 734, 743 (2001) (citing Mathews, 424 U.S. at 333). Thus, when individuals can show they will suffer irreparable harm from a post-deprivation hearing, courts has recognized that a pre-deprivation hearing is necessary. In the case of orders to euthanize pets, many courts have considered the loss to the pet owner as irreparable.

Before the Hearing: Filing a Petition for a Preliminary Injunction

Dog owners should file a petition for an injunction to delay the killing of the dog until they have had the chance to be heard in court (For an actual example, see Petition for Preliminary and Permanent Injunction in the case of Wilson v. City of St. Louis (1990), which involved a Pit Bull named “Max” who was impounded and classified as dangerous because he allegedly killed the neighbor’s dog. The Circuit Court found that the plaintiff would suffer irreparable harm if the preliminary injunction was not granted and enjoined the city from killing or otherwise harming Max. The court ordered the city to release Max and change his dangerous designation to potentially dangerous.)

Overriding the Decision - Petition for a Writ of Mandamus

Due process includes more than just going through the motions of a hearing. In fact, even after hearings have been granted, decisions can be challenged as a prejudicial abuse of discretion that is not based on findings of fact or law. (This is what the owners of Boo, a bull mastiff who allegedly bit a child, argued in Williams v. Orange County Animal Control (1996)). In this case, owners should file a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus, a judicial remedy issued by a superior court to compel a government officer to do or forbear from doing a specific act, to delay the euthanasia order until the appeal can be heard. This writ of mandamus applies in any situation in which the euthanasia should be stayed, including scenarios in which an original hearing was never given.

Minimum Standards of Due Process for the Hearing

It is now also clear that hearings must meet certain minimum standards. Informal reviews that animal control agencies frequently provide upon the dog owners request often do not fulfill these requirements, because the decision-maker may not be qualified to render the judgment or may not be impartial if he also made the original decision to euthanize the dog. For example, in Phillips v San Luis Obispo County Dept., 228 Cal.Rptr. 101 Cal.App. (2 Dist., 1986), the owners of Missy, a black lab known to have a bad habit of biting children, contested the city’s decision to euthanize her. The amicus brief filed by Joyce Tischler of the Animal Legal Defense Fund pointed out the Municipal Codes at issue did not provide for the Animal Regulation Directors orders to be reviewed by the Chief Sanitarian of the County Health Department or the supervising environmental health officer, the two individuals who presided over the first and second hearings.

Challenges to the Ordinance Itself

In fact, many city ordinances are flawed in that they fail to specify that owners are entitled to hearings before their pets are euthanized. These municipal codes can be challenged as unconstitutional and, even if the city already granted hearings that met minimum due process standards, the decision to euthanize the pet would still have to be overturned. Otherwise, whether dog owners generally would receive due process would be at the whim of the animal control agency, and the city could avoid having to correct its municipal codes simply by voluntarily giving all dog owners a hearing. The court of appeals in Missy’s case agreed, concluding that the ordinances here are unconstitutional for failure to provide for notice and a hearing either before or after the seizure of an uncontrollable biting or vicious dog.

Most recently, in a landmark case, the court of appeals in Mansour v. King County, 128 P.3d 1241 (Wash.App. Div. 1, 2006) held that due process required even more than offering owners a hearing, ordering that an agency seeking to enforce a removal order must prove both the violation and the remedy it has imposed by a preponderance of the evidence. This is the same standard of proof imposed on the government when it attempts to temporarily remove a child from the custody of his parents. By instituting a burden of proof on the city, the court was essentially finding that the dog must be presumed innocent until the city can prove otherwise. Previously, there had been no standard of proof, and reviewing courts would only look to see if Animal Control had acted arbitrarily or capriciously. Thus, even the most minimal evidence that a dog should be removed would suffice, and owners would bear the burden of proving their pets innocent. Moreover, the court found that due process attached not only for orders to euthanize an animal, but also for orders of removal outside the county (Peter Mansour had been ordered to remove his dog from the county or turn his dog over to the city to be euthanized after his dog was accused of killing a cat).

Finally, the court held that due process required Mansour to have the ability to subpoena records and witnesses in his defense, and that the Notice and Order of Violation had to specify exactly what code provisions had been violated. Merely issuing a brief and concise description of the conditions for finding the violation is insufficient. Mansour was entitled to know ahead of time exactly what the County needed to prove at the Board hearing. If in fact it could not prove that Maxine violated a code provision that supported the removal order, he [Mansour] was entitled to know that in time to move for a dismissal at the Board level. Source Reference: Animal Legal and Historical Center.

Animal Rescue and Fanatics Scream, “ARRESTED MEANS YOU’RE GUILTY,” where is the noose to hang the ARRESTED. Answer: Hang the INNOCENT until proven guilty on Facebook.

Do I have evidence of this? YES! Let’s begin with a Facebook page, (Ashley Nicole Miller- Arrested for Cruelty to Animals Twice) allegedly created with the “Intent of Malice,” to create a “Defamation of Character” of ASHLEY NICOLE MILLER, based on one single issue.

ASHLEY was ARRESTED… there for, the Facebook creator(s) (who have COWARDLY hidden themselves behind a veil of secrecy) to this page, continue to falsely ATTACK the innocent of any conviction, as GUILTY, because the person was ARRESTED! How Ignorant and potentially criminally liable for Defamation of Character!

If that isn’t a vigilante hangman’s noose run by alleged Rescue or Animal Control fanatics, I don’t know what is! This public act of human hate and cruelty by COWARDS does an even more sinister trick to the people who legitimately RESCUE DOGS! It documents the hate of these fanatics and their ignorance of actual “due process” of animal law which will destroy the legitimate RESCUES, to their own ill-gotten gains, by ATTACKING people, INNOCENT until proven guilty, in a court of law.

In order to file criminal complaints against vigilante hangmen or hangwomen and any other assault of the innocent on the Internet. You can file your valid complaints of assault or attack, with the FBI's official online citizen complaint filing website for ANY Internet crime committed. You can file a HATE CRIME, Internet Libel, Defamation of Character, Computer Website False Information Report, etc. I suggest each person who has a valid complaint use this site and FILE their criminal complaint ASAP. You will receive an official FBI complaint file number, and can add additional information as needed to the initial complaint you file, for ANY Internet crime against YOU. This is not a joke. It is serious, when fanatical and hateful people make false, or fraudulent postings on the Internet, web pages on Facebook, etc. or even post on group blogs based on only one fact; the person was merely ARRESTED. A person can be arrested for anything that does not mean they are guilty in any sense of the word of law. Have these ignorant vigilante cowards forgotten the law? A person is INNOCENT until proven guilty by a jury of their pears in a court of law. Period.

F.Y.I. FOR THE RECORD and How to Contact the FBI about Internet Crime Complaints

Dean A. Ayers is a prior United States Air Force Special Agent for the AFOSI. His duties included that of law enforcement specialist, criminal, fraud, and counter-intelligence. He was assigned to felony crimes in federal government, fraud, waste and abuse investigations of the military branches of service, and counter-intelligence in overseas locations. Dean was also a former Texas State Commissioned Alamo State Park Armed Ranger. Dean is currently Director, Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Nonprofit) and Dean is also a Lead Investigative Reporter for the NationalDogPress.us Headline News ©, and AnimalsClubFreedom.us news press services.

Please use the FBI website link below, as needed.

http://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx

Interview with Ashley Nicole Miller

Pursuant to a miscarriage of justice that began on May 25, 2011. Ashley N. Miller contacted many organizations in regards to her case attempting to obtain help in defending a violation of her right to “due process” as described in the Constitution of the United States. Ashley N. Miller’s reputation and character have been tarnished, by the very people who she was supposed to be able to trust to defend and protect her rights.

The information pertaining to the criminal accusations against Ashley N. Miller by both the City of Killeen, TX Police Department and Animal Control authorities have subjected Ashley N. Miller to death threats and physical harm. This has forced Ashley N. Miller to remove herself and her remaining animals from the City of Killeen, TX and even the State of Texas as a whole, to a safer area to protect them from any other harm. Ashley N. Miller fears for the safety of both herself as well as her animals.

Ashley N. Miller has requested assistance from several organizations to assist with getting her dogs home and have been unsuccessful thus far.

As an Investigative Reporter, It disturbs me that as Ashley N. Miller is a Veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom who served on various convoy missions and successfully protected our rights, freedoms and liberties as well as those of the citizens of Iraq that Ashley N. Miller is unable to find assistance in her case.

Ashley N. Miller described the background information leading up to the alleged illegal, illicit, and immoral THEFT of her dogs, by Killeen, TX. Animal Control Authorities.

Ashley N. Miller stated her plight with Killeen, TX animal control authorities and other rescues in Texas to this Investigative Reporter as follows:

QUOTE - Last year, my dog Apollo had been stolen from me and sold for money. After an extensive 2 ½ month search and over 2,500 miles of walking on foot I found him. The search did not end there. I was wrongfully arrested and my dog was left at the scene with the thieves who stole him. Upon my release, my dog was returned to me and the charges were dropped shortly thereafter. I chose to start a “search and rescue” to save dogs who were lost or stolen, neglected, abandoned, or abused based on the situation with Apollo. I did this all out of my own expense as I was still awaiting verification of my application to become a 501(c) 3 non-profit. I was referring to this network as KASR (Killeen Animal Search and Rescue). I have never hidden what I was doing in rescue from anyone. In fact, I made it very clear as to the mission of the rescue work I was doing through various forms of media networks as well as social networking. I have taken animals into my care and under my wing to help them recover from injuries as well as helping other organizations to rescue animals all over the world.

I was accused of committing Cruelty to Animals when I took in a puppy that had developed symptoms of “Parvo” shortly after his arrival in my home in January of 2011. I had performed C.P.R. on the dog to save his life as well as attempting to rehydrate him the night before his death. A person I had allowed to reside in my home accused me of killing the dog, when in fact I was doing the exact opposite. Despite the fact that other roommates also verified that I was trying to save the dog, I still received a nasty call from the head supervisor of Killeen Animal Control, known as Stacie Sherva. This resulted in the constant harassment of Animal Control coming to my home stating they had gotten complaints of dogs fighting in my backyard. Due to the harassment I received from Animal Control and a Detective in the Police Department, I made the choice to shut down my rescue and never continued the process of becoming an official non-profit.

On March 7, 2011, I adopted one of the cats I had rescued to someone for free provided they sign an adoption contract to ensure the cat was properly cared for due to the situation I had acquired him from. I had taken this cat into my home along with many others from someone who supposedly passed away. All of the cats in this woman’s home were sick and malnourished. I along with the volunteers who assisted in the rescue of these cats did everything we could do to help each and every animal. On March 21, 2011, I was interrogated for over half an hour by the Detective and Animal Control Officers assigned to a complaint over the cat that I had given away on March 7, 2011. I denied them access to my home because I was on my way to work and did not have time to show them all of my animals, and to call my attorney. However, I had never denied them access to my home prior to that, and they had been coming to my house since mid-January. They persisted in speaking with me at which time I hit the record button on my phone. I explained to them several times that I had to be at work and that I would allow them in my home the next day because I had to go to work.

I did allow the Animal Control Officers to come to my home the next day on March 22, 2011. I personally had called and invited them to my home. A fight broke out between two of my dogs (Apollo and Koda) and I needed them to fill out a “bite report” as well as physically examine them to ensure they were ok. I also allowed them to go throughout my entire home and look at all the animals, of which I had done before. The cats in the home had their own room and the dogs were indoors and outdoors with my supervision of course. Several other visits were done on my home. The last visit I remember was on April 10, 2011 which was only 2 days prior to an illegal search warrant that was done on my residence April 12, 2011.

I complained to the Chief of Police in regards to this and he agreed that if I had allowed them access a warrant was unnecessary as I had always given them permission to enter my home. With the exception of the one time I was on my way to work. The reasons for granting the warrant was because the Judge was told that I had not allowed them access to my home. A warrant was issued for my arrest in the beginning of May in 2011 for the cat I had rescued from the home of the woman who died. I was released on bail and told that I had to pay a fee to get my animals out. I was told that they had been surrendered by the person I left in charge to take care of them; however that person denies that claim. I paid for the animals I was able to pull and the others I was forced into surrendering. The estimated cost to reclaim my animals was approximately $850. According to Killeen Animal Control, the only thing that kept me from having my animals was money. It has never been stated that endangerment was their concern for returning any of my animals to me. I also received 27 tickets in the mail for city violations of which I am fighting in court as well; most tickets contain more than one charge.

I was forced into moving out of my home by my landlord (Steven Naser) because he told me that I wasn’t going to be allowed to bring my animals back home. He also authorized and told my roommates to throw my stuff out of the room I lived in and into the garage which resulted in the theft of some of my property as well as the destruction of most of my property. My landlord had agreed upon allowing me to move in to have animals and had never had an issue prior to my arrest. The landlord is also apparently friends with the Detective assigned to my case (Detective Parr). I was also informed by my landlord that Detective Parr had released information pertaining to my case to him.

I contacted someone (Tammy Duncan) who had asked me for help in assisting her to find her stolen dog last year and asked her if she would help me by giving myself and my pets a place to stay. I made the mistake of speaking about my case to her in detail. Although I was not aware of this at the time of moving in with her, she apparently has been medically diagnosed as having psychological disorders and is under several variations of medication that has been prescribed to her.

While living with her, Killeen Animal Control had received an anonymous call on May 25, 2011. The caller told the Killeen Animal Control that I had tried to neuter my dogs. Killeen Animal Control came to the home and I had to get permission for the owner to let them enter. Upon their entry, we looked at every dog and sure enough two of the 5 dogs that I own had their testicles tied with rubber bands. I explained to the Animal Control Officers at the scene that I had not done that to my dogs, and even called the Animal Trustees of Austin to schedule an appointment to take my dogs to Austin the next day for surgery. Shortly after the phone call, Detective Parr arrived at the home and took me to jail.

My cats and dogs were surrendered at the time of my arrest by the woman I was living with (Tammy Duncan), and I was never notified as to their whereabouts by the Animal Control Authorities upon their surrender. After several days of calling from jail to my roommate and several attempts from my family to get ahold of my roommate, she finally returned a call to my dad stating that Animal Control took the animals and that she was told she had to turn them over or they were going to take her to jail. My dad said that Animal Control told him that all of the animals were surrendered to them by Tammy who refused to watch them and that they were being held as evidence. They told him no amount of money could be paid to get them back.

When I got out of jail, I went onto the City of Killeen’s website for Animal Control and saw my cats posted online for adoption. I immediately called Killeen Animal Control and asked them why they were posted for adoption when I have never gone to trial and that my dad had stated they were being held as evidence. Stacie Sherva is the Shelter Manager and she had stated that they were initially told that they were being held as evidence, and that the City of Killeen had given them custody of my animals and authorized them to be released to rescue groups only. She also stated that I could get them back provided I pay them $2,400 and that the fee increases daily and there was no payment plan. I was only able to come up with $660 to pull my cats, and the rest of my animals were sent off to rescue groups throughout Texas.

*I have never been convicted in a court of law and my rights to “procedural due process” as stated under the 5th and 14th Amendments of the Federal Constitution of the United States in regards to my dogs was violated.*

There was also the issue of the fact that no form of justification took place in regards to legal ownership in establishment of the rights to my dogs; precedent to them removing my dogs from the property, and sending them off to rescues.

I contacted Animal Control and asked them for information as to where my dogs were sent to and was told they did not have to tell me. I also informed them that upon my release from jail the second time that I had witnessed Tammy Duncan “tazing” her dogs and that I feared she would injure my dog Zeus (who she never surrendered). Stacie Sherva had stated she did not know if it was considered animal abuse because they do it to people. I also found out that Tammy had stolen the other stuff I had when I was in jail and lied to me stating that Animal Control had given her my dog. It took the work of Detective Dinwiddie of the Killeen Police Department to get Tammy to return my dog to me. Detective Dinwiddie was involved in the case with Apollo last year. Animal Control stated that they had not given her custody of my dog, that Tammy had agreed to watch Zeus and turned everyone else over to the pound.

I submitted an open records request to obtain the information as to what rescues my dogs were sent to as well as any and all information pertaining to all animals that I was forced into surrendering. Many of the ones I was forced to surrender were put to sleep and the others were sent to rescue groups. I also discovered within the report that they had come to pick some of my dogs up the day after I was arrested. The only dogs who were taken at the time of my arrest were the two that needed medical care. I found out from the report that another one of my dogs had been injured while I was still in jail and was transported to a vet clinic that same day. That is when I made the presumption that I believe my roommate was the one who injured my dogs as their injuries were similar to the dogs that were taken to the vet the day I was arrested. I tried reasoning with animal control on getting my dogs home and was unable to do so.

Meanwhile, I contacted and called every single rescue, shelter and foster home listed on the websites “petfinder.com” and “adoptapet.com” that were located in Texas by phone, and through email as well as “facebook.com”. Initially, two of the rescues I had contacted (Texas Husky Rescue and Heart of Texas Lab Rescue) told me they did not have my dogs and that they hadn’t pulled from Killeen Animal Control. After obtaining the open records request, I found out that the rescues had in fact lied to me and told me that they hadn’t received my dogs when they had. The other 2 dogs at the time were still in the shelter at Killeen.

I have tried contacting those rescues and begged them to give my dogs back to me, because if I would have had $2,400 I could have gotten all of my pets back, but I just didn’t have it. I was told that Heart of Texas Lab Rescue (HOTLABS or HOTLR) was going to start a smear campaign against me, that they had spoken with Killeen Animal Control (KAC) about my case, and that they weren’t giving my dog back to me. Texas Husky Rescue (TXHR) has refused to talk to me and threatened to sue me for libel for exposing the fact that they will not return my dogs and that they had lied to me about getting them in the first place. Texas Tails of Hope Pet Rescue and Forever Homes Rescue are also refusing to give my dogs back to me.

I am being treated as guilty, and have been stripped of my property without ever being convicted in a court of law. I can assure you I am not guilty. I would never cause harm or neglect any animal under my care. It goes against my nature and my beliefs. I have contacted The Humane Society of The United States, The Animal Legal Defense Fund, the national and local ASPCA and SPCA groups, and many other rescue organizations and Animal Rights groups. I have called the newspaper that ran the story in Killeen, the offices of both the Senator and Congressman of Texas, Attorney General’s office of Texas, and even gone so far as to write celebrities such as “Ellen” and “Oprah” in hearing my story as well as over 200 law firms.

I have been unsuccessful in getting anyone to hear my case. None of my pets are under the care of Killeen Animal Control, and have been sent to rescues throughout Texas. Every rescue has been talked to by the City of Killeen, and each rescue is refusing to return my dogs and some have placed them up for adoption. Several of my dogs are still being hidden and my greatest fear is that I will never get them home. I have come to find out that in rescue many people who feel like they are doing the right thing when in truth they are not. I fear that is why these rescues are hiding and transporting my dogs to hidden areas as well as lying about the dogs. I also fear that they will make up something and state that they died or got lost or many other numerous lies to keep them from being returned.

I am trying to get back the 5 dogs that were wrongfully taken from me. The dogs were sent to the following rescues:

Apollo – Heart of Texas Lab Rescue (Austin, Texas)

Koda – Texas Husky Rescue (Carrollton, Texas)

Phantom – Texas Husky Rescue (Carrollton, Texas)

Cowboy – Tails of Hope Pet Rescue (Waxahachie, Texas)

Scooby – Forever Homes Rescue (Kempner, Texas)

I feel that if I do not do something I will never see my dogs again and I have suffered severe emotional trauma from this. To include depression and stress that has affected my daily life. This has affected my reputation, my ability to obtain work, my income, and cost me my home. I would be greatly appreciative of any assistance you can provide to me in getting this matter resolved. I do not care about money, or publicity in regards to this case. In fact, no amount of money can replace my dogs that were taken from me as I would give my life for any of them just as I would any other member of my family. My animals are everything to me and I will do everything possible to get them home. I appreciate you are extremely busy, but please take me serious as this is very important to me. If nothing else, please just do this for my dogs and other dogs which are facing a similar fate. I am working on figuring out how to file a criminal complaint on each affiliation involved.

I have gone to great lengths and personal sacrifice to ensure the safety and safe return of my animals. As I am facing the gravity of false accusations and punitive actions I don't deserve. Your consideration of this matter and expedient resolution would be greatly appreciated.

Most importantly, I am a veteran of the Iraq War. I have fought for the right to protect the freedoms and liberties as defined in the United States Constitution, and I would hope that I can receive assistance in this matter to uphold those rights that I swore to defend. - UNQUOTE

Animal Rights Fanatical History Recalled

Hitler and the Nazi Party used animal rights propaganda and veganism to turn neighbor against neighbor and to vilify the Jewish people and their traditions and culture.

Dr. Martin Hulsey once a research scientist in the Department of Foods and Nutrition, University of Georgia, noted "In Nazi Germany, practices such as vivisection were characterized as Jewish (by relating them to the ritual of kosher slaughter) and thereby vilified. Subsequently, reverence for the "rights" of animals was used to justify the oppression of Jewish people." The laws and accusation of vivisection were often used as a pretext to prosecute Jewish scientists. In 1940, a discussion was started within the administration about prohibiting pets, in order to conserve foodstuffs for human consumption. But personal interference by Hitler stopped this proposal. Ultimately a decree was published by the administration against pets, but it referred only to the pets in the possession of non-Aryan citizens.

On February 15, 1942, a decree was published prohibiting Jews from keeping pets, which the Jews found humiliating, writes Boria Sax in his book, Animals in the Third Reich: Pets, Scapegoats, and the Holocaust.

Merritt Clifton from Animal People News notes that Sax details the 32 'animal protection laws' adopted by Nazi Germany in only 10 years, demonstrating that many and perhaps most were really just thinly disguised cover for oppression of Jews, gypsies, and other minorities. The first two banned kosher slaughter; the last one barred Jews from keeping pets."

Animal Rightists know full-well that they are not conservative main-stream. However, they've been successful in influencing the American lexicon with politically correct words such as "over-population," “puppy mill,” and “dog attacks.” With major financial support from Hollywood Animal Rightists and an ill-informed public donating money, to include the pet owners themselves, these Animal Rightists and their pro-bono activists and “spoon fed” people spread their animal law propaganda, and inaccuracies about dog behavior. Their legislative proposal packets, slides, videos, etc. are allegedly filled with phony studies, quack testimony, faulty statistics, and other materials that are sent to county, city and state councils or legislators all over the country under the guise of being a reputable source. Once again, the “lame stream” news and main stream press have been all too happy to oblige, publishing sensationalized stories which trump up the credibility of such a nonsensical agenda.

What is missing from these news stories is that these groups do not care one whit about animals, or the welfare of animals, or the health and longevity of pets and animals. This is alleged by the fact of main stream press coverage to the effect that animal rights groups such as PETA, HSUS, or other groups alleged to be saving animals publicly claim to be helping dolphins, whales, polar bears, wolves, or elephants in Africa, etc. but these same groups are allegedly and simultaneously lobbying an all-out assault to destroy any ownership or breeding of dogs, cats, and the family pet at home. This is just plain “evil.”

Do you know the difference between Animal Welfare and Animal Rights?

“Animal Welfare” is concerned with health, safety, quality of life, and the future of our animals.

“Animal Rights” views domestic animal ownership as "slavery" and seeks to destroy the domestic animal by whatever means necessary. The fastest and most effective way to accomplish this agenda is by using lawmakers to pass prohibitive animal laws, such as mandatory spay/neuter, or breed specific ordinances (BSL) which includes any dog or animal that even “looks like” a BSL breed whether it is or not, in actuality.

The Ends Justify the Means. These abuses of “perverting” animal law are the sure result of the Animal Rightists campaign to wage death and destruction on our beloved dogs, pets and animals. Again, the "ends justify the means".

What exactly is the end result of these animal laws?

Power to Control We the People thru our dogs, pets, and animals. The ensuing corruption contained within the intent to “pervert” influence in the animal laws and animal ordinances aids Animal Rights Activists in the accumulation of wielding more power over the people and to establish a “war chest” of financial wealth thru the very destruction of dog, cat, and pet ownership in animal law thru fees, fines, confiscations, seizures and criminal citations. Using and exploiting lawmakers wherever they deem necessary, the Animal Rightist goal of achieving power and wealth at public animal owner expense is in full force.

Even when lawmakers pursue their own agendas, where animal ordinances are concerned, the lawmaker is still a pawn of these Animal Rightist lobbyists. Allegedly by means of having lawmakers being “bought and paid for” thru major financial contributions and donations or other “perks” to get the law makers to make animal laws, according to the agendas of the Animal Rightists.

Fighting Animal Rightist Ideology and helping County, City or State Councils to Properly Reform our “perverted” Animal Rightist Law Agendas, is The Moral of This Story: The lesson to be learned by We the People is that by the time Animal Rightists have taken our counties, municipalities and states hostage and “their” perverted animal laws and ordinances pass, no one knows what has hit them until it is way too late to react with any authority to act.

Animal law and ordinances quickly “compromise the ethics” of Animal Control Authorities and the Law Enforcement agencies enforcing Animal Law with vague and confusing statutes and wordage in the law. These ruthless and irresponsible “perverted” animal law policies are most certainly not something that should have been introduced into animal law; let alone, considered, passed, and enforced by lawmakers and enforced by Law Enforcement. A majority of all these laws “ARE” Unconstitutional. However, it takes a major financial investment and good animal law attorney to be retained at a premium cost, to fight these “unconstitutional” animal laws, that have no “due process” and that is not something the majority of the people can afford to do. These Animal Rightist and lawmakers “know this” and bank on it.

If Anyone Doubts how Serious Things Have Become, Please Read the Following:

The alleged quotes by the Leaders and Activists within the Animal Rightists Movement…

• "Anybody who shoots a pit bull running loose is justified,'' Kory Nelson, Assistant City Attorney of Denver, CO, San Francisco Chronicle, Monday, June 27, 2005 (Known all over as Denver's "Dr. Death of Dogs")

• "We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding. . . One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding." Wayne Pacelle, Senior VP of Humane Society of the US, formerly of Friends of Animals and Fund for Animals, Animal People, May, 1993

NOTE: (Wayne Pacelle's initial training was similar to that of other PETA activists. Today he heads HSUS under the guise of "legitimacy". It is the largest and most profitable of the Animal Rightist lobbying organizations.

• "Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation." Ingrid Newkirk, national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), Just Like Us? Harper's, August 1988, p. 50.

• "As John Bryant has written in his book Fettered Kingdoms, they [pets] are like slaves, even if well-kept slaves." PETA's Statement on Companion Animals.

• "We are not especially 'interested in' animals. Neither of us had ever been inordinately fond of dogs, cats, or horses in the way that many people are. We didn't 'love' animals." Peter Singer, Animal Liberation: A New Ethic for Our Treatment of Animals, 2nd ed. (New York Review of Books, 1990), Preface, p. ii.

• "Our goal: to convince people to rescue and adopt instead of buying or selling animals, to disavow the language and concept of animal ownership." Eliot Katz, President In Defense of Animals, In Defense of Animals website, 2001

• "It is time we demand an end to the misguided and abusive concept of animal ownership. The first step on this long, but just, road would be ending the concept of pet ownership." Elliot Katz, President "In Defense of Animals," Spring 1997

• "The cat, like the dog, must disappear... We should cut the domestic cat free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and more neutering, until our pathetic version of the cat ceases to exist." John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of A Changing Ethic (Washington, DC: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), 1982, p. 15.

• "My goal is the abolition of all animal agriculture." JP Goodwin, employed at the Humane Society of the US, formerly at Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade, as quoted on AR-Views, an animal rights Internet discussion group in 1996.

• "Man is the most dangerous, destructive, selfish, and unethical animal on earth." Michael W. Fox, Scientific Director and former Vice President, Humane Society of the United States, as quoted in Robert James Bidinotto"

• "We are not terrorists, but we are a threat. We are a threat both economically and philosophically. Our power is not in the right to vote but the power to stop production. We will break the law and destroy property until we win." Dr. Steven Best, speaking at International Animal Rights Gathering 2005. The Telegram (UK) July 17, 2005.

• "Arson, property destruction, burglary and theft are 'acceptable crimes' when used for the animal cause." Alex Pacheco, Director, PETA

• "Our nonviolent tactics are not as effective. We ask nicely for years and get nothing. Someone makes a threat, and it works." Ingrid Newkirk, PETA's founder and president, US News and World Report, April 8, 2002

• "I openly hope that it [hoof-and-mouth disease] comes here. It will bring economic harm only for those who profit from giving people heart attacks and giving animals a concentration camp-like existence. It would be good for animals, good for human health and good for the environment. Ingrid Newkirk, PETA founder and president, ABC News interview April 2, 2001

So how do “We the People” take back our Constitutional Rights in Animal Law?

I have one last issue to make here. I documented facts in my FIRST article on quoted Legal Proven Prescedent setting Case Law, establishing the FACT that a complete lack of DUE PROCESS required by Law is not only, not present in Animal Law, but is intentionally disregarded, and not upheld, in order to VIOLATE A PERSON'S LEGALLY established RIGHT to Fair treatment under the law. I have Proven with the Case law, which Cites the exact president cases by name, and summary proving Animal Control and subsequently the Rescues conduct involved, is illegal, illicit, and immoral at a minimum. Do you have Legal Case Law, you can Cite to prove differently? If so, quit hiding in COWARDLY actions such as postings in various Internet blogs, and Facebook pages, and write an article with your true name on it, and publish it. Otherwise you only prove you are truly the criminal and committing criminal acts to justify your failures in allowing legal president to be upheld. Do I make my position as a writer independent of this MALICE clear folks? That is a statement, not a question. Read my series on these issues, in my present and upcoming articles. If you had any spirit of good in you, at all, which I sincerely doubt, this vigilante conspiracy and false accusations ignorant of the law on your various pages of MALICE would be deleted ASAP. Are you of MALICE intent? Only time will tell the TRUTH!

Please read the FIRST article on ASHLEY NICOLE MILLER’s Plight to get her beloved dogs back from tyranny, titled: The Unlawful THEFT of Ashley N. Miller’s dogs without Legal “DUE PROCESS” by Killeen, Texas. A link to this article is provided below:

http://animalsclubfreedom.typepad.com/nationaldogpress/2011/12/the-unlawful-theft-of-ashley-n-millers-dogs-without-legal-due-process-by-killeen-texas.html

Have Courage to Defend Your Private Property, and Your Animals At All Costs

"Courage is not defined by a person's ability to speak their mind, yelling like a lion's bellow at authorities and lawmakers about proposed or enacted bad animal laws. Courage is an action of humility, putting one's cause of honor, before his/her life, to retain the freedom and liberty, which We as People, seek, from an honorable and just God to defend our pets and animals, from oppressive men and women in their secret combinations of Animal Rights law making agendas." ~ Quote Authored by Dean A. Ayers, NationalDogPress.us ©

TO BE CONTINUED – The Saga of alleged Animal Control "THEFT" and Rescue "UNLAWFUL TAKING" of dogs from Ashley N. Miller without “DUE PROCESS” of Law, in Killeen, Texas continues.

Ashley N. Miller is a war veteran whose dogs were wrongfully taken from her and “We the People” are fighting to get her dogs back home! Please follow the series of articles on Ashley N. Miller and feel free to share this article with everyone world-wide and on the Internet. Read Ashley's story and help these dogs come home. Thank you and God Bless to each of you who help get the word out.

STAY TUNED FOR PART 3 in this article series published originally at http://NationalDogPress.us/

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple." ~ Dean A. Ayers

###

Dean A. Ayers is a prior United States Air Force Special Agent for the AFOSI. His duties included that of law enforcement specialist, criminal, fraud, and counter-intelligence. He was assigned to felony crimes in federal government, fraud, waste and abuse investigations of the military branches of service, and counter-intelligence in overseas locations. Dean was also a former Texas State Commissioned Alamo State Park Armed Ranger.

Dean is currently Director, Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Nonprofit) and Dean is also a Lead Investigative Reporter for the NationalDogPress.us © andAnimalsClubFreedom.us news press services.

Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."

PLEASE DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK BELOW:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6721925

Fair Use Notice: Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Legal Disclaimer: The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues.

Copyright © 2006-2012, Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress.us News, All Rights Reserved. Copying and Re-posting is only approved if the entire article and its embedded links are kept intact.