Articles & Viewpoints

Reinwald Report
is more than a report, it is someone "doing something" about puppy mills.

JUSTICE OUTWEIGHED? - Sept. 18, 2002 Editorial

We present two real situations that sharply contrast one another as regards interpretation and enforcement of AKC rules and policies. The first example involves cruelty charges against handler Junior McDaniel. Uncharged but believed equally guilty are Kenn Little and an assistant known as “AJ” Little. AKC was first informed of the current situation on August 18th. Sharon Masnick and Benson Ray filed a complaint August 26th with the Case Management Department. It states in part “Junior McDaniel is on parole until 11-14-02 for abandonment of an animal” and goes on to cite specifics including a pending cruelty warrant, provides names and phone numbers for local law enforcement and Animal Control. officials who will substantiate the charges. Masnick and Ray ask that AKC “inspect this (NC) location for conditions and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of purebred dogs” stipulating that it should be done quickly “before they are tipped off” so as to bring themselves temporarily in compliance”

August 29th AKC replies that “it takes a few weeks to acknowledge receipt of complaints.” August 30th warrants were issued for Ken Little and Junior McDaniel. September 6th, the story breaks in the press and on Television. September 14th, Ray and Masnick send another letter to Bob Slay (V.P. Compliance Director) and the AKC Board Of Directors, again with extensive documentation and specific charges as relates to violation of AKC Rules, some of which took place on AKC show grounds. The letter was accompanied by volumes of evidence relating to the horror, including sworn statements of past cruelties to show dogs, some of which we will share with you.

As of September 17th AKC has taken no discernable action.  

Sept 20th McDaniel arrested, thanks to exposure!  Trial date Oct. 9th.  Read this article and then go to Petition to AKC  Sept. 28th, AKC calling people who sent sworn statements.

The other case pertains to Debbie Martin, popular “down south” handler. She was benched by Bayou Kennel Club (Monroe LA) on August 31st due to a report that the Fairfield Inn room rented in her name suffered damage to the bedspreads caused by fecal matter as a result of her Chihuahuas having been left uncrated.

The Bench Show Committee Procedure and Post Hearing Statements, both of which were in direct violation of specific AKC Rules, are alleged to have been initiated and controlled by certain of Mrs. Martin’s competitors. Mrs. Martin points out that several other rooms involving other exhibitors were also reported as damaged but but they were not penalized. Mrs. Martin continued her stay as a welcome guest at the hotel and she exhibited without incident for the remainder of the weekend under assurance by the kennel club president and the AKC Rep that the AKC report would recommend only a reprimand.

The following week however, Mrs. Martin received a personal call from Bob Slay advising that she was suspended for three months and fined one thousand dollars. The conflicting statements and evidence gathered so far by Mrs. Martin’s attorney have resulted in a strong Petition for Reconsideration.

These two cases have a lesson attached and with that in mind, we will provide you with pertinent details so that you can make your own determination. The question is not so much who is right or wrong. The question is whether or not rules are equitably applied; what criteria prompts an investigation; what constitutes “inappropriate treatment”; does neglect of an animal to such a degree that it suffers physical harm translate to automatic suspension, and if so, does someone have only to notify AKC or must a formal complaint be filed, and if so, how much does it cost? Do other animals count or only dogs? To ignore other companion animals would be bad for breeders and for AKC’s public image. The courts and investigative organizations acknowledge that people known to abuse or torture animals are more likely to take human life. Are people in the fancy different than the general population? Does the nebulous term “prejudicial conduct” allow some in the sport to continue to do harm and reflect badly on the sport? Can it be interpreted so that others can be destroyed at the whim of an inexperienced or less than impartial “judge and jury”?

Our job is to report the news. When we received over ninety pages of documentation regarding these two cases, we contacted AKC to obtain more detailed information regarding the suspension process. As both of the above cases are still “open” we made no attempt to discuss them. Mr. Slay was out but we were able to speak with Ms. Patricia Fiore. She was most cordial but refused permission to record her responses as opposed to taking notes. In essence, she repeatedly advised us to “go to our website.”

We did so. There was nothing to indicate whether it was customary to accord someone the courtesy of a personal call to advise them of suspension. Mrs. Fiore had acknowledged there was no set policy in that regard. She said that the Bench Committee procedure is “well defined” but after a 15 minute search, we gave up and will await the printed copy she graciously offered to mail. We could not find anything on the AKC site regarding specific to due process but we are told that it does provide one the right to confront an accuser. The chart shows that Section III h. and i. provides long suspension penalties for conviction of cruelty, abuse, or abandonment of animals but we were unable to find information regarding if, when, or how such charges would be initiated or investigated.

We will leave interpretation of the two following examples to each reader’s common sense and understanding of common law and decency. Here are the allegations against both individuals.

Junior McDaniel and associates caused the death of horses and dogs in their care. Several reports furnished to AKC offer proof of embezzlement, fraud, bounced checks and unauthorized use of credit cards. Many of the sworn statements are heart-wrenching and document a long history of abuse. The air conditioner in the McDaniel motor home quit. They were staying in a motel. Most of the dogs were saved by a passerby but several witnesses reported watching them dump one dead Peke in a public trash can. One had its eyes popped out of the socket. Numerous other dogs are have been lost, injured or died. There are signed statements of horrible neglect including one chow that was so badly eaten up by maggots that it nearly died in spite of top veterinary care. One owner let McDaniel take a six month-old group winning puppy until warned by exhibitors whereupon he called Junior who said the puppy had been stolen, dropped, and injured by the thief. The owner left immediately, drove six hours, confronted McDaniel and rescued his puppy with a badly broken and incredibly swollen leg that had been that way for days - without any veterinary attention. The traumatized puppy has so far had over $2500 in surgery, steel pins, pain and fear in efforts to save the leg.

The sworn complaints totaling more than twenty five, go on and on, some as simple as leaving dogs unattended in the show buildings with no food, water, or exercise. Others are more serious. One unattended Pom fell off the grooming table and was strangling until rescued by another exhibitor. The newspaper story and first hand statements by those involved in rescuing the 11 abandoned horses are painfully graphic. The Sept. 6th issue of the Hickory Daily Record reported “horrendous conditions” with horses “standing in 3 feet of horse manure which had turned black.” One worker said “There were dead rats, the water buckets were black, no hay or bags of grain in sight, but the smell was the worst.” She continued “I saw that their hooves were no longer hard, but like sponges. When they stepped on the concrete, they made noises like suction cups.”

Quoting the newspaper account “Last year, McDaniel was convicted of abandonment. Jennings said McDaniel was accused of allowing a mare to starve to death.” Among the recently rescued horses it was reported that another starving mare had foaled, and then apparently gone down. Bones protruded from her spine, hips, and knees where she had struggled unsuccessfully to rise. She did the best she could, lying on her side, raising her hind leg up, offering her dry bag to the foal…..

It is now one month since AKC was notified. It appears that no action has been taken on this matter. Perhaps that is because, despite repeated requests, the people filing the complaint have not been able to find out whether they are required to post a bond and if so, in what amount.

In frustration and out of concern for others who could stumble in to the same situation, the following notice will appear in Top Notch Toys, the Pom Reader, and the Orient Express 

“I am sure you have seen the ……. newspaper article ….. This of course was a chilling revelation to many of us who knew these persons from dog shows, used their services, and thought we knew them! This …. was done to enlighten and inform……... It is not a crime to believe in someone and trust them but it is a crime to be cruel to animals, any animal, be it horse, cat or dogs. This is a reminder to be most careful in selecting someone to be in charge of and care for our beloved dogs. Let us hope that justice will prevail in this case.”

And what of the suspension that did happen? At the request of her friend Kathy Short, Mrs. Martin and her traveling companion agreed to share their room with Melissa Klass who was arriving late without reservations. Mrs. Klass left a Rottweiler in the back of her pickup truck but brought her two Bedlingtons into the room. Mrs. Martin’s companion was exonerated of damage charges because she at no time had any of her personal dogs in the room and also testified that the room was clean when she left earlier that morning while Debbie and Melissa were getting dressed. Debbie says that her Chihuahuas slept in the bed with her as they always do. The next morning she put them out in the x-pen she had set up on grass outside the door. She then put them in the crate and they were taken to the show sight by her assistant without ever coming back into the room, as was attested to the committee. Debbie said the room was clean when, impatient with Melissa, she told her to crate the loose Bedlingtons and went outside to wait at the truck.

Melissa dropped Debbie off at the show building about 7:30 A.M. and then drove away, presumably to deliver the Rottweiller to a handler and go to her setup on the other side of the building from where Mrs. Martin was set up. Debbie did not see Melissa again until much later in the morning but undisputed testimony proves that Melissa had in fact gone back to the hotel and been given access to the room. The maid then came in to clean around 9:30, saw the mess, and reported it. An officer of the club, already at the hotel to investigate earlier complaints, took Polaroid photos of the bed soiled with feces.

News of the impending Bench Hearing was received by people in different parts of the country as relayed by phone hours before Debbie Martin learned there was a problem and some five hours before the hearing was convened. People were told that “everyone was talking about it” and one judge was quoted as saying “she should be suspended for life.”  Mrs. Martin's attorney states in a letter to AKC that Mrs. Martin was pre-judged and convicted  because  “… members of the Bench show committee met and decided the parties were guilty before the hearing took place. 

The attorney cites numerous violations of the AKC rules and regulations as specified in Section 9, Dealing With Misconduct, including the fact that Mrs. Martin was not given written notice, or even adequate notice of the hearing; no opportunity to confront her accuser, not allowed to cross-examine witnesses (stipulated by the AKC rules), and incredibly, no sworn statement of evidence was taken or presented against her. It is also notable that Mrs. Klass had moved her belongings and her dogs out of the room prior to the hearing of which Mrs. Martin had not yet been notified.

After the hearing, Mrs. Martin was told by the bench committee chairman and the AKC Rep that they had to find her guilty because the room was in her name but that the report would recommend only a reprimand, not suspension. She paid the $75 damages to the hotel, half of which was collected from Mrs. Klass and returned to Mrs. Martin by the club president. It was however alleged that after the hearing Mrs. Martin made threatening statements, used physical force and vulgar language to Mrs. Klass and on that basis, she was tried again without her knowledge, without calling a bench committee regarding the allegations, and the AKC report was changed to “aggravated” which is what resulted in such a stiff suspension and fine. Mrs. Martin did not know this until Mr. Slay called and she has subsequently provided witnesses, including other show officials, who refute that charge, stating that the only thing Debbie said when she was approached by Mrs. Klass was “get away and leave me alone.”

Mrs. Martin has handled for twenty years without incidence of complaint. She is Vice President of another kennel club, works on their show committee, and knows the value of good relationships with the motels. It is a stretch of the imagination to think she would walk out leaving a damaged room. Mrs. Martin also cites the inarguable size of her Chihuahuas, incapable of jumping high enough to get on the bed to deposit the impossibly-large stools as shown in the photograph. One might assume that Debbie lifted the dogs onto the bed, allowed them to soil it, then sat on the soiled bed to do her makeup before going outside to wait for Melissa, and that Melissa then gathered up and crated her own dogs, and left the room without noticing the mess on the bed.

Whatever conclusion one might reach from the evidence or lack of same, the bench committee committed serious violations of AKC Rules. That in itself provides sufficient reason for the attorney's request that the findings and the “aggravated” recommendations be set aside. Mrs. Martin is a single parent with a son in college and has already suffered grave financial damage. Her new Top Ten ranked specials dog has been effectively stopped in mid-career. Her clients stand behind her 100% but their dogs have also been harmed by a strangely convened and inefficiently organized bench committee.

Perhaps the charges against Mr. McDaniel or those against Mrs. Martin are false? You weigh the evidence. We are sure you will join us in the expectation that Mr. Slay’s office will get to the bottom of both cases and that Justice Will Be Served.

Barbara J. Andrews, Managing Editor