~ doglover from Elkins, WV wrote ....
Cat rescue folks are the NEW targets of animal rights groups who want to take away our right to share our lives with pets
I guarantee you folks that if you went to ANY shelter at the right time of the day, you would find feces, filth, trash, smells, worms and god knows what else.
A raid can be orchestrated to occur at just the worst time of the day, such as early in the morning. Don't judge people so harshly. You don't know the entire circumstances of this persons life
The woman obviously was trying to do what was right and was overwhelmed. For the court to now assess her $100K in fines is indicative of a judicial branch --- and jurist --- wholly out of touch with reality. Grinding her into financial ruin is hardly what "justice and mercy" means.
.... Where in the world do you think SHELTERS put bodies of dead cat and dogs after they have killed them? IN THE FREEZER - they go in the freezer until the garbage truck hauls them to the land fill.
~ ricbee from Danbury, CT wrote ...
The elitest pig judge was wrong & I hope Ms Koczur proves her so.
~ Kelley from Austin, TX wrote
.... Is there a law against having a cluttered and dirty house in CT? Just curious, because there isn't one here.
.... I really wish people would learn what a hoarder is and is not. Hoarders, by definition, do not adopt out animals, and often resist attempts by others to help them get animals adopted. Therefore, anyone who is doing rescue on any serious level cannot possibly meet the definition of a hoarder. If this woman is a hoarder (which I doubt, just from reading the description, but can't be sure with so little information) she is mentally ill. Why would one fine a person $100,000 for being mentally ill?
.... What seems to be being debated in the comments section is whether or not she is a "hoarder." The animals of "hoarders" by definition are being kept in horrible conditions. If you have 200 cats but keep them all in pristine conditions you are not a hoarder. People seem to have picked up on this "buzzword" of hoarder and use it to apply across the board to mean "person who has more animals than I think is appropriate".
It seems likely to me that she was keeping the sicker cats at her home to ready them for being taken to the store to be adopted out. You can't take sick cats there. When you get cats from a shelter, they are often in horrible shape to begin with. They have been exposed to coronavirus, possibly giardia, ringworm, URI, fleas, etc etc, just from having been in the shelter. Rescuers realize this, but the general public does not.
It doesn't cost $100,000 to care for 47 cats over several months, or possibly even several years, unless they are all gravely ill and need massive amounts of vet care, so I am sure there were punitive damages thrown in there. I just did the math and could board 47 cats at my vet's office for $15,510 per month (not that I would want to do so, but that is what it would cost).Animal rescue is the only charity I can think of where one runs the risk of being jailed, fined, etc. Cases like this are putting rescue in grave danger, IMHO. I hope this does go to the Supreme Court and I hope it is reversed.
.... Actually, having gone back and read the article again, it says the $100,000 was "fines and other penalties." It says nothing about care of the cats whatsoever. Of course the news article could be incorrect. So basically this woman was fined $100,000 for doing charity work and saving animals from deaths in shelters or on the streets. Very scary.
.... I would likely be against such a bill (the proposed shelter inspection bill). If it meant some legal entity could go into people's homes at any hour of day or night without a warrant and "inspect" them I would definitely be against it.
.... unlike animal rescuers, polygamous cult members have lots of money, and are able to hire lots of good lawyers and PR firms. Therefore, unlike animal rescuers, they get their stolen children back.
.... They love to steal people's animals under color of law and sell them in TX (and apparently in CT as well). John Stossel did a piece on it. I can only imagine what they would do with such a bill here.
http://www.topix.net/forum/source/hartford-courant/T22KKUOHOF0BPRPLR/
