From: Francesca Rogier
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 15:24:55 -0300
To: "Salsman, Katherine"
Cc: "MacDonald, Andrea", "Scolaro, Lori", (the court clerk; Animal Services; David Hendsbee; the vet; the trainer; Mayor Kelly; legal consultant Kirthi Jayakumar)
Conversation: Awaiting response to July 23 email: HRM's plans for Brindi?
Subject: Re: Awaiting response to July 23 email: HRM's plans for Brindi?
Ms. Salsman,
Ms. Salsman,
Thank you for your reply.
Would you kindly explain what is meant by “usual practice”? Other than the evaluations of stray dogs by and at the city pound, I am not aware of any practice or policy by which HRM regularly assesses seized dogs. If such a practice exists, surely HRM would have had Brindi evaluated some time ago, but I never received any such documentation as part of disclosure.
Clearly we are not dealing with anything of a usual nature in this instance, at the very least. So I would still like an answer as to why the assessment results will not be made known.
Also, when do you expect a decision will be made?
Thank you,
Francesca Rogier
Francesca Rogier
From: "Salsman, Katherine"
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:59:55 +0000
To: Francesca Rogier
Cc: "MacDonald, Andrea" , "Scolaro, Lori"
Subject: RE: Awaiting response to July 23 email: HRM's plans for Brindi?
Ms. Rogier,
As previously stated, the assessment will not be released because it is an internal document. It is not our usual practice to release documents of that nature.
The assessment has not yet been completed and therefore no decisions have been made.
Katherine E. Salsman
Municipal Prosecutor
From: Francesca Rogier
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:28:25 -0300
To: "Salsman, Katherine"
Cc: (the court clerk; Animal Services; David Hendsbee; the vet; the trainer; Mayor Kelly; legal consultant Kirthi Jayakumar)
Conversation: Awaiting response to July 23 email: HRM's plans for Brindi?
Subject: Awaiting response to July 23 email: HRM's plans for Brindi?
Dear Ms. Salsman,
I look forward to your answer as to why the results of your assessment of Brindi will not be made public, and also respectfully ask that HRM clearly state its plans for Brindi, as it has had ample time to make its determination. Please confirm.
Francesca Rogier
From: Francesca Rogier
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 01:21:32 -0300
To: "Salsman, Katherine"
Cc: (the court clerk; Animal Services; David Hendsbee; the vet; the trainer; Mayor Kelly; legal consultant Kirthi Jayakumar)
Conversation: URGENT Still awaiting your confirmation re Aug. 1
Subject: Re: URGENT Still awaiting your confirmation re Aug. 1
Dear Ms. Salsman,
By now I assume you have heard the court recording and sent a correction to the media, as they are currently reporting the August 1 date.
Why won’t the results of your assessment of Brindi be made public? It would certainly seem proper, given that the assessment is quite obviously a matter of public interest. Presumably, the outcome of the assessment will be easily deduced once HRM makes a decision about whether to adopt Brindi. Not only does the public have every expectation of being informed about such matters, but they are also directly relevant to both the appeal and the lawsuit filed against HRM. Concealing them would reasonably be interpreted as vexatious and is therefore hardly advisable under the circumstances.
Furthermore, it must be remembered that I voluntarily shared the results of every assessment. This includes the June 20 assessment by Susan Jordan, which be available online in a few days, and the first assessment in December of 2008, already available online. At that time, HRM would not permit a trainer to access Brindi without a court order, forcing me to obtain one at great expense.
Of the four assessments by trainers/behavioral consultants, plus the vet’s own extensive observations (posted online and submitted to the Court), none resulted in an outcome remotely favoring the destruction of my dog – quite the contrary. It would be very unlikely, therefore, for any reasonable evaluation to yield a dramatically different result. Therefore, for HRM to withhold the information will only serve to arouse suspicion.
I strongly suggest that the municipality carefully review its decision.
Francesca Rogier
Subject: Re: URGENT Still awaiting your confirmation re Aug. 1
Dear Ms. Salsman,
By now I assume you have heard the court recording and sent a correction to the media, as they are currently reporting the August 1 date.
Why won’t the results of your assessment of Brindi be made public? It would certainly seem proper, given that the assessment is quite obviously a matter of public interest. Presumably, the outcome of the assessment will be easily deduced once HRM makes a decision about whether to adopt Brindi. Not only does the public have every expectation of being informed about such matters, but they are also directly relevant to both the appeal and the lawsuit filed against HRM. Concealing them would reasonably be interpreted as vexatious and is therefore hardly advisable under the circumstances.
Furthermore, it must be remembered that I voluntarily shared the results of every assessment. This includes the June 20 assessment by Susan Jordan, which be available online in a few days, and the first assessment in December of 2008, already available online. At that time, HRM would not permit a trainer to access Brindi without a court order, forcing me to obtain one at great expense.
Of the four assessments by trainers/behavioral consultants, plus the vet’s own extensive observations (posted online and submitted to the Court), none resulted in an outcome remotely favoring the destruction of my dog – quite the contrary. It would be very unlikely, therefore, for any reasonable evaluation to yield a dramatically different result. Therefore, for HRM to withhold the information will only serve to arouse suspicion.
I strongly suggest that the municipality carefully review its decision.
Francesca Rogier
From: "Salsman, Katherine"
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 17:39:15 +0000
To: Francesca Rogier
Cc: "MacDonald, Andrea"
Subject: RE: URGENT Still awaiting your confirmation re Aug. 1
Ms. Rogier,
I have not yet received our recording of the June 26th proceedings. My notes indicate August 21st as the date. However, if I misheard and the court in fact ordered August 1st, we will wait to take any action until the end of the appeal period.
With regards to the assessment, it is an internal document that will not be released to the public.
Katherine E. Salsman
Municipal Prosecutor
From: Francesca Rogier
Sent: July-12-12 11:22 AM
To: Salsman, KatherineCc: (the court clerk; Animal Services; David Hendsbee; the vet; the trainer; Mayor Kelly; legal consultant Kirthi Jayakumar; MP Peter Stoffer)
Subject: URGENT Still awaiting your confirmation re Aug. 1
Importance: High
Ms. Salsman:
Again, I request your immediate response to my messages below. The urgency is self-explanatory.
Francesca Rogier
From: Francesca Rogier
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:23:03 -0300
To: "Salsman, Katherine"
Cc: (the court clerk; Animal Services; David Hendsbee; the vet; the trainer; Mayor Kelly, and Kirthi Jayakumar)
Conversation: Awaiting your confirmation re Aug. 1
Subject: Awaiting your confirmation re Aug. 1
Ms. Salsman:
While I am certain that the Hon. Judge Buchan did say Aug. 1 (the appeal deadline) rather than Aug. 21, I would appreciate a response from HRM to my email of yesterday regarding when HRM will make and/or carry out a decision on Brindi.
As you have announced it to the media and the public, will HRM hold to the Aug. 21 date? If not, will a correction be announced?
In addition, will you kindly keep me apprised of plans to assess Brindi, and the results thereof?
Francesca Rogier
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 17:39:15 +0000
To: Francesca Rogier
Cc: "MacDonald, Andrea"
Subject: RE: URGENT Still awaiting your confirmation re Aug. 1
Ms. Rogier,
I have not yet received our recording of the June 26th proceedings. My notes indicate August 21st as the date. However, if I misheard and the court in fact ordered August 1st, we will wait to take any action until the end of the appeal period.
With regards to the assessment, it is an internal document that will not be released to the public.
Katherine E. Salsman
Municipal Prosecutor
From: Francesca Rogier
Sent: July-12-12 11:22 AM
To: Salsman, KatherineCc: (the court clerk; Animal Services; David Hendsbee; the vet; the trainer; Mayor Kelly; legal consultant Kirthi Jayakumar; MP Peter Stoffer)
Subject: URGENT Still awaiting your confirmation re Aug. 1
Importance: High
Ms. Salsman:
Again, I request your immediate response to my messages below. The urgency is self-explanatory.
Francesca Rogier
From: Francesca Rogier
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:23:03 -0300
To: "Salsman, Katherine"
Cc: (the court clerk; Animal Services; David Hendsbee; the vet; the trainer; Mayor Kelly, and Kirthi Jayakumar)
Conversation: Awaiting your confirmation re Aug. 1
Subject: Awaiting your confirmation re Aug. 1
Ms. Salsman:
While I am certain that the Hon. Judge Buchan did say Aug. 1 (the appeal deadline) rather than Aug. 21, I would appreciate a response from HRM to my email of yesterday regarding when HRM will make and/or carry out a decision on Brindi.
As you have announced it to the media and the public, will HRM hold to the Aug. 21 date? If not, will a correction be announced?
In addition, will you kindly keep me apprised of plans to assess Brindi, and the results thereof?
Francesca Rogier
From: Francesca Rogier
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 15:36:52 -0300
To: "Salsman, Katherine"
Conversation: URGENT
Subject: Re: URGENT
Ms. Salsman:
Would you please confirm the date of the 21st of August? The judge gave a different date in the recording of the proceedings.
Thank you,
Francesca Rogier
From: "Salsman, Katherine"
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 13:18:47 +0000
To: Francesca Rogier
Subject: Re: URGENT
Ms. Rogier,
As a part of the Court's decision today it was ordered that no action be taken with regards to the adoption or destruction of Brindi prior to August 21, 2012. HRM will comply with that order.
Katherine E. Salsman
From: Francesca Rogier
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 09:51 AM
To: Salsman, Katherine
Cc: Wendy Cummings
Subject: URGENT
TO: HRM
June 26, 2012
Ms. Salsman:
I was stricken with food poisoning early this morning and violently ill. I am therefore unable attend the courthouse today. This is not my choice,
Earlier, I prepared this message to print and give to you at the court.
If the judge orders that Brindi must be put down, I shall file a Notice of Appeal pursuant to the Civil Procedure Rules, within 25 clear days. I ask that you honor this notice by allowing me the time to do so. In addition be advised of the pending matter of Rogier v. HRM before the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, self-represented, prohibits the HRM poundkeeper from taking any action until all court matters are ended, pursuant to Section 16(2) of A-300. Further precedent exists from 2008, to honor this message and suspend the date of euthanasia in a verbal agreement struck between David Green and prosecutor Scott Hughes of HRM so that Green could file a statement of claim. That initiated the matter in which I now represent myself.
Ms. Salsman, I rely on your sense of decency and respect for precedent and natural life to honor this request immediately. Please confirm receipt and observance this message.
Francesca Rogier
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 13:18:47 +0000
To: Francesca Rogier
Subject: Re: URGENT
Ms. Rogier,
As a part of the Court's decision today it was ordered that no action be taken with regards to the adoption or destruction of Brindi prior to August 21, 2012. HRM will comply with that order.
Katherine E. Salsman
From: Francesca Rogier
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 09:51 AM
To: Salsman, Katherine
Cc: Wendy Cummings
Subject: URGENT
TO: HRM
June 26, 2012
Ms. Salsman:
I was stricken with food poisoning early this morning and violently ill. I am therefore unable attend the courthouse today. This is not my choice,
Earlier, I prepared this message to print and give to you at the court.
If the judge orders that Brindi must be put down, I shall file a Notice of Appeal pursuant to the Civil Procedure Rules, within 25 clear days. I ask that you honor this notice by allowing me the time to do so. In addition be advised of the pending matter of Rogier v. HRM before the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, self-represented, prohibits the HRM poundkeeper from taking any action until all court matters are ended, pursuant to Section 16(2) of A-300. Further precedent exists from 2008, to honor this message and suspend the date of euthanasia in a verbal agreement struck between David Green and prosecutor Scott Hughes of HRM so that Green could file a statement of claim. That initiated the matter in which I now represent myself.
Ms. Salsman, I rely on your sense of decency and respect for precedent and natural life to honor this request immediately. Please confirm receipt and observance this message.
Francesca Rogier
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated. Only users with Google accounts may post comments. Others may contact me via facebook.