Quote:
I'm sorry, but after working Animal Control for years, nearly every "large volume seizure" we dealt with used that same excuse. "Of course they are in bad shape, we JUST GOT THEM." Uh huh.
This case is bizarre and hard to figure out at this point becuase none of us have all the info. But the picture show cages that are unacceptably dirty regardless of whether they are pet rabbits or livestock rabbits. Calling them livestock doesn't mean they can live in filth. They are still rabbits.
I'm curious to see how it all plays out during/after the trial. I'll reserve judgment for now
Having "worked animal control for years", then you are aware that zoning plays a huge part in probable cause, and are also probably aware, that getting the zoning so very wrong as their probable cause, can get the case thrown out of court, correct?
Also "having worked animal control for years", you are also aware that AC must prove it's case. Debe Bell is not required to prove anything. She doesn't have to prove the rabbits were dumped on her, she doesn't have to prove she owned them. She needs to prove nothing at all. That is our justice system in action.
9 pics out of 200 pics taken by AC simply proves nothing at all. It doesn't even prove those are Debe's rabbits, Debe's cages. Without the rest of the 200 pics NOT published by animal control, there is testimony as well required.
What is wrong with the media end of the Debe Bell case is every single person demands that Debe Bell prove something, and assumes animal control was correct in it's actions simply because animal control TOOK action. The same mindset that says if the police arrest someone obviously they are guilty, which of course, demands the question, why do people think we have trials in this country?
Fortunately, having the best justice system in the world, we know the burden of proof is on animal control and we are still waiting for animal control to justify it's behavior. What I see is probable cause based on a cash reward for anonymous tips, (always weak in court), probable cause based on ACs failure to determine what her actual zoning was, (really shows incompetence), and the publishing of nine inflammatory pictures out of two hundred they could have published and didn't, and the untimely arrival of a seizure warrant, (again always bad news), and the refusal to allow Bell to photograph the actions of the law enforcement, (again, bad form as it is a violation of her first amendment rights.)
In answer to these glaring errors on the part of AC, you have based your opinion on the nine pics and some unproven generalisation of "people always say that".
I believe you are correct. You probably should wait for the trial outcome before you make anymore judgements........
