The Unlawful THEFT of Ashley N. Miller’s dogs without Legal “DUE PROCESS” by Killeen, Texas
The Unlawful THEFT of Ashley N. Miller’s dogs without Legal “DUE PROCESS” by Killeen, Texas Authorities – SHAMEFUL!
By Dean A. Ayers
Director
Animals Club Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Nonprofit)
Article 1 of an ongoing series
29 Dec 11
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. 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 first 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.
The ultimate perversion of “petty” animal complaint’s truth at its deepest core in society.
Many of our fellow citizens, no longer have the tolerant souls and morals of free men and women towards animal ownership. They have the souls and morals of a now “perverted” mentality of busy-bodies and petty “tyrants” who want to ruin their neighbors’ lives, kill their dogs, cats, or other pets and end their neighbor’s pet ownership rights. All in the name of an animal’s right not to be owned by its master, but rather only be parented or controlled only by a ‘parent-guardian’ designation, which can be revoked by the “state” at any time with the “stroke” of a pen, called an animal law.
This is the ultimate perversion of truth at its deepest core in society, by not cherishing family values with pet ownership “intrinsic value” in private property freedom, as well as, having pets being accepted as a lawful and protected member of the ‘extended family’ with the human beings in that family. In simple terms, the acceptance of socialism in the dogma of a dog hating, animal destroying neighborhood and society has taken root in America. Maybe even next door to your dog, cat, or other pet animal.
Our dogs, cats, pets and animals are, in fact, an integral part of our loving family units, having purpose, attention, affection, interaction, respect, family interaction and happiness for both humans and the pet animals on an “intrinsic value’ level, not that of meager chattel. However, the “animal rights activists” and legislative body members (local city, state and federal), who follow the animal rights activist’s agenda to intentionally pervert the idea of a loving family with pet ownership interactions, has gone astray, from a logical and common sense way of thinking. These animal activist legal proposals are being implemented with intent of “malice” to the pet owners, as well as the pet animals themselves.
These animal rights intolerant people have become “tyrants” thru the use of our various legal systems and its “manipulated” proposal of animal care, animal license taxation, and controlling laws; destroying the very freedoms “We as People” seek and have a right to possess in a free society. This is a ‘realistic’ and ‘common sense’ brief documentary of the multitude of insanely ‘perverted’ proposal of violations of “pet ownership” rights and freedoms by none other than “nincompoops” wearing a badge or shoulder patch representing an animal control authority, implying they are a “Humane Society.”
Do Animal Control Services enforce animal control duties thru tyranny without “due process” or justice or even a nuisance complaint? Do Animal Control Authorities (dog catchers) have to be “nincompoops” to work for Animal Control Services (sometimes misnamed as a “Humane Society)” in their communities, or does just being a “nincompoop” in enforcing animal control duties just help tyranny without “due process” or justice prevail in animal care, control, and license laws?
Animals are traditional property, now legally having “Intrinsic Value:”
Animals are human-kind’s most ancient and traditional property. Before ever we settled down to a plot of land and threw seeds in the soil, we numbered animals as our most valuable possessions. Wealth has always been associated with the number of animals that a person owned, and kept.
Now animal ownership, use, and the ancient, honorable practice of animal husbandry are under global attack by dog laws, animal ID laws globally. It was initiated by the animal “rights” movement, and adapted by local, state, and federal governments throughout the world.
A Dog’s life has ‘intrinsic value,’ New York judge finds:
Finding that a dog “is somewhere between a person and personal property,” a New York trial court said a pet owner whose dog died following unauthorized surgery may seek damages beyond the purchase price of the animal. “[A dog] is not an inanimate thing that just receives affection; it also returns it,” the court wrote, citing Corso v. Crawford, 97 Misc. 2d 530 (N.Y., Queens County Civ. Ct. 1979).
Interview with Ashley N. 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
How Does Due Process Apply to Dog Seizure and Euthanasia Cases by Animal Control Authorities?
The following legal brief is a synopsis of the 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 Precedent 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.
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 2 in this article series published originally at http://NationalDogPress.us/
Published By: Animals Club Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Nonprofit)
Posted by Dogpressorg on 12/29/2011 at 02:01 AM in The Unlawful THEFT of Ashley N. Miller’s dogs without Legal “DUE PROCESS” by Killeen, Texas | Permalink
Posted by Dogpressorg on 12/30/2011 at 08:01 AM in IN A GALAXY... NOT SO FAR AWAY, CALLED TEXAS, Contact ALEX JONES | Permalink
