I am holed up in the house, as usual, and sadly, trying to revive my computer. This is the second one, also an older laptop which I had repaired; the other one is still in pieces. Thanks to a mix-up at the repair shop, everything on the entire hard drive (which is new) was deleted. I mean everything. They ran a restore program all night but everything came back without the right labels - and no applications. So I have to fish around to find documents and images, and worse, essential software like Photoshop and Microsoft Office (Word) is gone. It's not able to take the newest versions and nobody has the older ones, and online - well it's a pain, in a word. A BIG HUGE pain, right when I need to finish preparing materials for Monday's court appointment.
The Supreme Court is located downtown, on the waterfront; it starts at 9:30 am and will go all day, just to
Many messages coming in on Facebook and email, from across Canada and the US - from North Carolina to Colorado, California, and Texas - as well as Holland, Peru, Italy, South Africa, England, Scotland, France, Brazil, New Zealand, and Australia - accompanying the letter below - plus more! Support also from Dr. Andrew Jones, an online veterinarian; Gerdy's Rescue in Montreal, D.A.I.S.Y. Foundation in Calgary, Teja's Animal Rescue in Ontario, and the Kinship Circle in St. Louis, Missouri. Presumably, as Heather Anderson reports, from the Animal Rescue Coalition here in Nova Scotia. Plus bloggers - TitanicBugle and Dogkisser (Joan Sinden) here on blogspot; Susan Ito on readingwritingliving at wordpress; For the Love of the Dog, and others.
So Mayor Kelly must have received quite a number of letters by now, from all over. With help from Linda Koekman (while I was computer-ess), all the city councilors and the mayor, as well as the board of directors at the SPCA, have been sent a copy of Silvia Jay's assessment, to the effect that Brindi's behavior does not justify an order to destroy. Anybody reading it ought to have trouble sleeping at night, realizing what has been done to her all these months, on top of two years in a shelter - not to mention what is supposed to be done to her, if I didn't fight it. More information to go along with the report is a chart showing by-law cases from July 2007 to July 2008 that involve similar or worse dog offenses, but were resolved with owner fines rather than killings. Quite a hefty number of these exist and all were ruled on by a judge. Objectively, they show that our case is a pretty major departure from the usual practice of animal control in Halifax.
So Mayor Kelly must have received quite a number of letters by now, from all over. With help from Linda Koekman (while I was computer-ess), all the city councilors and the mayor, as well as the board of directors at the SPCA, have been sent a copy of Silvia Jay's assessment, to the effect that Brindi's behavior does not justify an order to destroy. Anybody reading it ought to have trouble sleeping at night, realizing what has been done to her all these months, on top of two years in a shelter - not to mention what is supposed to be done to her, if I didn't fight it. More information to go along with the report is a chart showing by-law cases from July 2007 to July 2008 that involve similar or worse dog offenses, but were resolved with owner fines rather than killings. Quite a hefty number of these exist and all were ruled on by a judge. Objectively, they show that our case is a pretty major departure from the usual practice of animal control in Halifax.
It's clear that the councilors and the mayor have a lot to do to fix the by-law, especially now that we also know Halifax is the only major city in Canada to bestow powers to individual animal control officers possessed exclusively by judges elsewhere. The sooner that changes, the better, and quite frankly, there is absolutely no reason for it to take 14 years.
The SPCA has a rather more pressing dilemma, for three reasons. First, I have combed through the SPCA's oft-cited contract with HRM, and as far as I and my lawyer can tell, the $376,000 a year payment notwithstanding, as long as its shelter continues to fulfill the terms of the contract (which it most certainly is doing), SPCA officials are not in any way prohibited from speaking out - to the city, or, for that matter, a Supreme Court justice, in writing or in person - on behalf of an animal it is requested to impound. In fact, it must, according to contract, as a special clause requires the shelter to pass on information about an animal's "disposition" to Animal Services. This confirms that the SPCA is an integral part of HRM's animal control system and that it contributes to HRM decision-making on a regular basis, contrary to the disclaimer still posted on the SPCA web page. Contributing to a decision or policy (like not allowing visits) is not neutral. The SPCA has a clear conflict of interest, which it seems to me it can only resolve by making sure it carries out its other obligation, namely, to the citizens and animals of the province to protect animal welfare and intervene when needed - i.e., its primary reason for existing.
Second, the positive assessment, done by an expert, plus their five months of caring for Brindi, means SPCA staff must have a pretty good idea, if not at least a few nagging doubts, that "euthanization" ("euphemization", in fact) is not justified in her case. Should they have any suspicions of this kind, they must act on them in order to uphold their publicly declared mission to protect all animals in the province. That means ALL.
Third, I remain Brindi's lawful owner, and while it may not be a provincial or federal crime for an owner to put down a dog deemed healthy and trainable dog, it certainly is a crime if somebody else - singular or plural - kills it. That is exactly what would happen if the city goes through with its plans. The SPCA is a higher authority than HRM animal control when it comes to enforcing anti-cruelty laws in the province. So the SPCA's duty to lay charges against all animal abusers would compel it to charge the city and its officials if they succeed in putting down an animal without proper justification. The fact that the SPCA would be guilty of the very same crime if it carried out an HRM order whose validity is in doubt ought to really be of some concern, as otherwise, a successful case could be made to the province's lawmakers that the SPCA gravely failed its mission and should be replaced.
There's not much time left until January 5. How about it, SPCA board members?? Do any of you have the courage to show up in court to save Brindi's life -- and your mission??
Posts
