Yucca Valley, Ca.-(Introduction by Margo Sturges)- Gerard Van Der Veen is a new contributor to Cactus Thorns and realizes the importance to stick with the facts.
For this reason, he has taken an extraordinary step to attach his sworn Affidavit with this update post regarding the Lovell’s family pets, Blaze and Dakota. The readers are looking forward to the final chapter of this saga when the pets are returned home and we can sleep well knowing there are some happy endings taking place on our planet.
In the meantime, Gerard feels it is important to keep the readers updated about the unfolding events.
Here is his update……
I was advised to make what I wrote last basically short n sweet, so here goes.
1. There are 2 dogs being held for who knows what, it should only have been 1 period.
2. If Dakota would have been released after her 10 quarantine period the rest wouldn’t have happened.
3. The town has spent over $50,000,they say. Why and where is the itemized breakdown of costs?
4. The impound fees should only be for 1 dog not 2.
5. Dakota would and should not be considered “Potentially Dangerous” for being at the wrong place at the wrong time.
6. Neither dog was declared “Potentially Dangerous” by a professional expert qualified to label them as it states in A.S.P.C.A. own standard rules or laws.
7. Mark Mahoney is not a qualified expert, nor is Kim Casey whom manufactured the incident 3 different ways as to how it happened.
8. All evidence used against the pets was based on hearsay and untruths by witnesses that are not credible.
9. Dakota shouldn’t have gotten pregnant and lose 3 pups while in custody of animal control.
10. JR (owner) wouldn’t have been forced to sign his life and rights away before he could get them back.
11. So what the heck was the problem? I couldn’t tell you.
12. It all started over not being able to visit the dogs while they were at the animal shelter and trying to get it straightened out with Yucca Valley Town Manager, Mark Nuaimi.
13. I ask this simple question, why I was being blackballed against visiting the dogs? Go Figure.
I’m at the point of not caring who’s fault it is, “This is only hurting the dogs and now pups” So what is “really going down?” Tell us Mark, or have a heart and some compassion, and let the dogs go home!
Cruelty to animals? Who’s the guilty one now?
Respectfully, Gerard Van Der Veen.
PDF Document Links:
IMG Gerard Van Der Veen Affidavit, under penalty of perjury
IMG_0001 Notarized signature
Related Posts
Town of Yucca Valley to Euthanize Veteran’s Pets, Dakota & Blaze
$50,000,8 Months and 4 pups later…..Pets Returned to Lovell Family
The Yucca Valley Animal Shelter Story Just Got Worse! Town spends over $51,000.00!
Seven Months and Counting – Yucca Valley Shelter Still Holding Family Pets
UPDATE: Here Honey, hold the dawg next to your head whilst I shoot it.
Thank you Margo, I feel now as nothing more needs to be said. Its up to the public as to what they choose to believe. Respectfully, Gerard Van Der Veen aka Damn Dawgers. Let’s see what happens now…
Gerard (damndawgers), what happened to the negotiations to work out a payment plan (although the best plan is to waive costs and fees on a hardship)?
Is Nuaimi the Terrible just being difficult and totalitarian by nature?
They were supoosedly taken according to animal control for not being liscensed, I wish someone would make up their minds? Since when do they hold a dog for 7 months for no liscense? Respectfully, dawgers.
There was once a payment plan offered, with of course some heavy demands by the town manager. That bieng he JR. could never bring this issue up or any other future issue he may have with the town, etc. in other words covering thier ass if he signed, also it never stated he’d get his dogs back at that time, but he could make $75 a month payments. At the last court hearing, after Nuaimi showed up for one of the many on this issue, JR was not offered payments nor would or will Nuaimi bend on this issue of having to pay off in full. Small dent into the $50,000 he spent huh? That was the same time JR’s visiting was stopped and if he showed up at the pound he’d be arrested? Respectfully, damndawgers.
You can not have an issue without another side…
The Animal Control Division provides and maintains a state mandated rabies control program through dog licensing.
Town of Yucca Valley
NEWS RELEASE 9/5/12
Jim Schooler, Melanie Crider, 9/5/12 760-369-7211
For months, attempts have been made to elicit public sympathy and support for the owner of two dogs that attacked an 83-year-old woman who was out for a walk near the entrance to her mobile home park. It is important to understand that Yucca Valley Animal Control responded to the incident professionally and has provided excellent care for the dogs while the owner has drawn the case out.
On February 8th, 2012 Animal Control responded to an emergency call regarding the attack. Witnesses reported that both dogs came up behind the woman knocked her down on the street and bit her multiple times on her ankle and hips. The woman also sustained injuries on both forearms after being knocked over by the dogs.
Both dogs were impounded and quarantined at the animal shelter. Neighbors told the investigating officer that both dogs constantly ran loose, chased children and threatened other dogs in their own yards. Witnesses said that they feared retaliation by the dogs’ owner and feared testifying at the hearing.
An Administrative Hearing was scheduled and after hearing the testimony from both sides, the Hearing Officer declared both dogs “potentially dangerous” and ordered the owner to license his dogs, register them as “potentially dangerous” dogs, micro-chip both dogs, provide a secure area from which the dogs could not escape, to keep the dogs on leashes when off their property, to obtain liability insurance and to reimburse the Town for the costs incurred. Compliance with these conditions would have resulted in the release of the dogs.
The Town negotiated a settlement with the dog owner and his attorney who then tried to place the dogs with family or a rescue, but no home was ever found for the dogs. The owner then took the case to Superior Court, but further delays occurred when his attorney failed to show up for court. The owner chose to represent himself and the judge granted him several extensions and opportunities to present his case, causing substantial increase in cost to the Town. On August 22nd, the Town and the owner received the court’s final determination which fully supported the results of the administrative hearing. The owner was once again given the opportunity to retrieve his dogs by complying with the stated conditions.
The $3,800 in charges owed by the owner is nowhere near the estimated $51,500 incurred by the Town in staff costs and legal fees. The dogs have been cared for at the animal shelter for close to seven months due to the owner’s actions. When the female (who had had two previous litters) was in season, the shelter staff separated the dogs but kept them in adjacent enclosures. During their brief separation the health of the male dog, which was already showing signs of stress, worsened. He refused to eat or drink and was taken to the veterinarian for a check-up. Once he was put back in with the female, he began to drink water and eat his food. Staff determined that due to this unusual circumstance, it was better to allow them to have puppies than to let the male dog continue to suffer and possibly die.
Four of the seven puppies born on August 29th survived. The Town has offered to turn the puppies over to the owner pending agreement with conditions that release the Town from future liability.
Both adult dogs have been well cared for by the shelter staff. They share the largest, fully covered pen at the shelter; they have been vaccinated, wormed, regularly exercised outside of their pen and are well fed. The enclosure is cleaned daily. The dogs get toys, chews, treats, elevated beds with clean bedding to get them off of the concrete, an igloo and a kiddie pool. The dog owner has been permitted numerous visitations with the dogs at the shelter during this period.
The Town of Yucca Valley’s Animal Control division works hard to protect animals and people. Unfortunately, there are aggressive dogs and owners who allow them to run loose. During this past year, the Town has responded to several dog attacks that left victims disfigured and/or handicapped for life. The elderly woman in this case was knocked down and bitten many times. Her jacket, which was torn up by the dogs, probably saved her from more serious injury. Where is she now? She suffers from nightmares of the attack, she does not take her daily walks anymore, and she lives in fear of the dogs returning to the neighborhood.
The Town ended up in control of these animals for the past seven months because it was apparent from the preponderance of the evidence that the owner lacked control of his dogs and was unwilling to take responsibility for his actions that led to this aggressive behavior of the animals. The Town remains committed to protecting the health and safety of the public — our citizens deserve no less.
The entire case history is available for public review on the Town of Yucca Valley Animal Control web page. For Information Contact Jim Schooler, 760-369-7211
Town of Yucca Valley
Community Services Department
This is a bogus Press Release. It’s nothing more than spin and propaganda, not the subject matter of a press release — yet Mikey post it again in CT hoping someone will mistake it for a genuine press release.
“…state mandated rabies control program through dog licensing.”
Allegations That Both Dogs Attacked + No Licenses = Rabies Concerns About Both Dogs
It would be irresponsible not to quarantine… BOTH DOGS!
Good Morning Mike,
It’s so nice to see a face to place you with. I’m not arguing that point with you, yes they should have both been quarantined as they were, at least 1 should have been released after they were cleared of not having rabies, that never happened! Thank you for putting the press release up again, now those who haven’t seen it as of yet, will see just what a farce that is.
So answer this for me Mike, “Who’s responsible for the 3 pups that died while they were under the protection of the shelter?” Why wasn’t Lovell notified of the borths till 4 days later? Respectfully, Damn Dawgers.
What makes the the town’s/”Mark Nuaimi’s” press release a farce?
The owners of the dogs are responsible for all the puppies, they are the ones that did not get their dogs altered, also altering animals tends to render them less aggressive, so possibly the incident with the 83 year old woman may not have occurred.
The four day notification delay is moot, as it is not an unreasonable amount of time, what would earlier notification done, saved the puppies? Birth is a hard process, dogs lose puppies, even under the best conditions.
Especially on the third litter in a row. Nature’s way of limiting population.
The dogs should not have been placed together. Most dog people know when a female is in heat. They made a mistake.People make mistakes. If the dogs had not been a problem, the city would have not been put in the position to make a mistake. You are right, it boils down to those in charge of the dogs, the owners.
Melanie Crider and Jim Schooler authored the press release.
Melanie and Jim have earned the respect and appreciation of the citizens of Yucca Valley! They are long time servants of our community and they have dedicated their lives attending to the things that make life better for everyone. They are friends of this entire Basin.
Branson says they are liars.
Mike, are you trolling for attention by making up stories? I’ll immediately pay you $100 if you can provide evidence where I said Ms. Crider or Mr. Schooler are liars.
@ Mike, I’m sure without meaning to, you are the one dragging Melanie and Jim through the mud while you declaring their devotion to the town. Servants? They have worked for the Town for several years and are very,very well paid. All the Staff are very dedicated at the animal shelter. While their names are on the Press Release, please know it came from Town Manager,Mark Nuaimi.
Nuaimi has taken this situation out of control spending over $50,000.00 of our public funds on this. BTW, I have confirmed the SB County will NOT pay half of this fiasco, it will have to come out of the General Fund.
Please know your cut and paste of Nuaimi’s Press Release was not necessary to post to this story. It was put up as a story on September 6th. TEN days ago…where were you?
Here’s the link: http://www.vote29.com/newmyblog/archives/39601
The Press Release was a knee-jerk response to Cactus Thorns coverage of this saga which went viral to National coverage, London and France through animal rescue network of over 60,000 members and their email lists.
You seem to like to call everyone a liar…
Branson never said they (Melanie and Jim)are liars…so I guess that makes you a liar about Branson lying? Gerard submitted a notarized sworn statement to correct the “Press Release.” Gerard never said they were liars. Did you mean to call Gerard a liar too? His statement is under penalty of perjury…and yours? Are you lying about calling Branson a liar? And Gerard a liar? You have some attachment to that word…Liar. Hmmm. Did something happen to you when you were younger? Now don’t lie about it, okay?
Are you aware a person needs a photographic memory to be a liar to remember which lies were told to whom and date,time and place? On the other hand, compulsive liars have no choice, they are unable or unwilling to tell the truth….I have run across a few in my lifetime and fortunately medication helped one to cope with reality. I welcome these Mashuganas adding variety to my life as long as they do not harm anyone, and of course, are not my business partners.
Mark Nuaimi forced the high paid dedicated staff to put out a bogus press release. Did he use water torture? How did he force them?
Opinion under threat of perjury is still opinion.
Terry, please tell that to the Judge that you are entitled to your opinion after being sworn in to tell the truth. I promise to put money on the books for you.
The notarized document I attached to this follow up story is addressed to the Superior Court. I asked DanO to help me as they are not visible to the public.
Thank you for your comments.
1. There are 2 dogs being held for who knows what, it should only have been 1 period.
Opinion
2. If Dakota would have been released after her 10 quarantine period the rest wouldn’t have happened.
Opinion
3. The town has spent over $50,000,they say. Why and where is the itemized breakdown of costs?
Guestion
4. The impound fees should only be for 1 dog not 2.
Opinion
5. Dakota would and should not be considered “Potentially Dangerous” for being at the wrong place at the wrong time.
opinion
6. Neither dog was declared “Potentially Dangerous” by a professional expert qualified to label them as it states in A.S.P.C.A. own standard rules or laws.
unsupported fact
7. Mark Mahoney is not a qualified expert, nor is Kim Casey whom manufactured the incident 3 different ways as to how it happened.
unsupported fact and opinion
8. All evidence used against the pets was based on hearsay and untruths by witnesses that are not credible.
opinion
9. Dakota shouldn’t have gotten pregnant and lose 3 pups while in custody of animal control.
opinion
10. JR (owner) wouldn’t have been forced to sign his life and rights away before he could get them back.
opinion
11. So what the heck was the problem? I couldn’t tell you.
guestion
12. It all started over not being able to visit the dogs while they were at the animal shelter and trying to get it straightened out with Yucca Valley Town Manager, Mark Nuaimi.
opinion
13. I ask this simple question, why I was being blackballed against visiting the dogs? Go Figure.
question
You can sign your name to opinions and questions under threat of perjury with no recourse. They are truly your opinions, you have not perjured yourself.
The town should ask for the full amount. It isn’t a charity. Then those upset should work not only to find a home for these two dogs, but every condemned dog at the shelter.
The owners sound irresponsible. The shelter could use a makeover. My dogs always got kennel cough when they were in there. That was my fault for not having adequate fencing for an escape artist of a dog. I was lucky that some ol’ lady didn’t get scared and fall down. That too would have been my responsibility. While ol’ ladies may get spooked by the friendliest of dogs, one should not put ol’ ladies in that position.
Now find a home where the dogs can be dogs or help build a fence. You may not like Mark. I don’t like a lot of the city’s policies, but that has nothing to do with problematic dogs and irresponsible owners.
You’re barking up the wrong tree.
- “While their names are on the Press Release, please know it came from Town Manager, Mark Nuaimi.” –
Now Margo is calling them liars.
@ Mike. Love using that four letter word, do ya? LIAR. Ooops you did say liars, plural this time. I did not call them liars. I have the email Press Release from Nuaimi, do you?
I have other Press Releases from Nuaimi too.
SUBSTANTIATE…
1. to establish by proof or competent evidence
2. to give substantial existence to
3. to affirm as having substance
@ Mike-To affirm to a court of law submitting sworn Affidavit, under penalty of perjury as to the facts of the case. At least you didn’t use the word lie on this post.
Margo posts a LINK here to a less than obvious LINK there where the news release can be found and others have posted LINKS to it as well. I don’t think I missed any of the LINKS including the two LINKS that Nuaimi posted first (the rest of the story) which prompted Branson and Margo to follow suit. It looks suspiciously like they intentionally avoided any reference to the town’s account until they no longer could.
For some reason, both Branson and Margo seem displeased that someone finally posted the whole damned thing right here, right out in the light of day to be readily read without having to be tracked down.
That the integrity of good folks dedicating their lives to the service of our community are attacked by a duo who are dedicating their lives to muck raking, disgusts me!
@ Mike,I agree, you do appear disgusted. Now go back to the Hi-Desert Star blog and add your cuts and pastes on their site.
In the meantime, thank you for your multiple comments to Cactus Thorns. Also thanking you in advance for increasing the ratings and/or any donations in support of this blog.
@ Mike. Seems you will not be happy until the two pets are put down, too bad.