Basset Hounds Forum banner

1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,042 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Attached is an update on the Murder Hollow Pack situation and the need for additional donations ASAP. Any amount you can spare will help. Please feel free to send this on to any appropriate lists you may have.

*

If you have any questions, let me know. And thanks for your support.

*

Barbara Wicklund


$$ STILL NEEDED TO HELP
THE MURDER HOLLOW BASSET HOUND PACK

The end of this tragic episode, in which 11 Basset Hounds were seized by the Pennsylvania SPCA in July, 2009, is in sight, but funds are still needed to pay the attorney for the many hours he has spent seeking justice for Wendy Willard.

Under a recently-executed consent agreement, Wendy will undergo monthly inspections until September 30 to make sure her dogs and her property remain in good condition. The criminal charges against her then will be dismissed.

She is unlikely ever to see her dogs again. Ten have been adopted out; the 11th one died while being spayed by the PSPCA. Vet records provided by the PSPCA reveal that none of the dogs needed treatment for Lyme disease or any other ailment, other than the upper respiratory infections they developed at the shelter.

The dogs cannot be replaced but we can do everything possible to make sure other innocent owners of multiple dogs don’t endure this same harrowing experience.

PLEASE GIVE WHAT YOU CAN TODAY…EVERY DOLLAR WILL HELP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,558 Posts
The dogs cannot be replaced but we can do everything possible to make sure other innocent owners of multiple dogs don’t endure this same harrowing experience.

PLEASE GIVE WHAT YOU CAN TODAY…EVERY DOLLAR WILL HELP.
With all due respect:

Before folks run for their checkbooks I hope they take the time to research all the facts in this case.

While the BHCA and many sporting groups have portrayed Wendy Willard as the innocent victim of jack-booted law enforcement, that is hardly the case.

Her dogs were being housed in what sounds like atrocious conditions: standing in water and feces and covered in ticks. If my understanding of the case is correct, she also ignored the first note left for her by authorities asking for contact, and threw rocks at enforcement officers while they were on her property (never a good tactic in encounters with the law in my humble opinion).

And yes, I do believe the dogs developed upper respiratory infections at the shelter, and I think it's horrible that one of her dogs died while being spayed by the PSPCA. The PSPCA is not a 'knight in shining armour' in this story.

But Wendy is not an innocent victim either, and "innocent owners of multiple dogs" are not in danger of having their dogs arbitrarily seized.

The fact that this fear tactic is being used to raise money doesn't sit well with me.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,042 Posts
Discussion Starter #3 (Edited)
Surely if the dogs were in such horrible conditions they would have required SOME veterinary treatment? But NONE of them did, and they were all in good enough shape that they were adopted out pretty much immediately. In fact, if the conditions were so horrible why did they not seize ALL the dogs?

Frankly, the only photo they released to the public showed an old dog with NEW ticks all over her face - likely picked up within the last day or so. I'm assuming this was the worst they had, since they wanted to garner public sympathy.

Personally, I trust the judgement of Barbara Wicklund, and I do not believe that she would be supporting someone who neglects or mistreats their animals.

And if the PSPCA is in the right why have they been reluctant to provide their records? Why won't they show pictures of the other dogs, why wouldn't they let anyone see them?

I can't comment on the "rock throwing" (although if someone were taking my dogs I bet I'd be tempted), but as far as ignoring the message from bylaw, the only time I got a note from bylaw it was a card stuck in my screen door, which I didn't see until the next day due to getting home in the dark. What if it had fallen out of the door and blown away in the meantime? Does that mean I deserve to have my dogs taken away? Even assuming she did see the note and ignored it - her dogs are gone, she will never see them again, she will never know where they are or what is happening to them. Do you think that's a fair punishment for ignoring a note from bylaw?
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top