ASPCA and HSUS fined

[Karen]

The article you appended does not support this statement; not even close.

It does, if you read it, it states that the ASPCA paid a lot of money to the former handler to make up the charges.

[pomtzu]

It does, if you read it, it states that the ASPCA paid a lot of money to the former handler to make up the charges.

I've seen the videos. Videos don't lie.

[Lady's Human]

I've seen the videos. Videos don't lie.

Yes they do, they lie all the time. PETA hiring people to go inside processing plants, abuse animal carcasses and video it as proof? Been done. Same with slaughterhouses. Same with Hamas, same with 60 minutes (rigging tests on GM pickups to "prove" that they were fatally flawed). CNN and others have been caught broadcasting their lies, but the retractions are normally buried 50 clicks into a web page or on the last page of a paper underneath the legal ads.

Besides, pay one witness, who's to say they didn't pay witnessses to perform the acts in the first place?

Seems to me a couple of their fellow travelers have been nailed more than once for doing exactly that.

PETA, HSUS, (national) ASPCA.....peas in a pod, lying bastards in the charity business to make money and get attention. (note, none of the above applies to LOCAL humane societies and LOCAL SPCAs)

[lizbud]

It does, if you read it, it states that the ASPCA paid a lot of money to the former handler to make up the charges.

The ex-trainer was paid for his testamony, the same is done in many criminal cases. He wasn't paid to make up charges. He was paid for his
time and expenses to be available for court hearings. It is done all the time.

The B & B Circus Group has been, and are now, guilty of animal cruelty every day of the week. Why don't you find & post the many trials where B & B have
been found quilty & had to pay heavy fines for just this very thing. Treating animals like disposible commodities.

[Lady's Human]

The ex-trainer was paid for his testamony, the same is done in many criminal cases. He wasn't paid to make up charges. He was paid for his
time and expenses to be available for court hearings. It is done all the time.

He was paid $190,000 "just for his time"?????

Must be one heck of an hourly rate. Experts are paid for their testimony (docs, forensics experts, etc), witnesses normally aren't. A paid witness is going to make their testimony fit the angle of whoever is signing the paycheck.

The B & B Circus Group has been, and are now, guilty of animal cruelty every day of the week. Why don't you find & post the many trials where B & B have
been found quilty & had to pay heavy fines for just this very thing. Treating animals like disposible commodities.

As opposed to ALF and ELF (who have both financial and personnel ties to PETA and HSUS) who treat Humans as disposable commodities?

Sorry, I'm not buying what you're selling on everyday animal abuse at B+B. Animal performers need to be healthy to perform. "abuse" needs to be defined, and what would be abuse for one species isn't abuse for another. I can pick up a cat by the scruff and it's normal for the cat. Try doing the same with a large dog and it's abuse. If you hit a horse with the same force you whack a pup on the nose to get the pup's attention the horse won't even notice. If you hit a dog with the same force that you'd hit a horse to get the horse to move into a stall it's abuse.

Videos lie, and issue activist charities lie like rugs.

[Karen]

One of my radio show hosts/friends - I am often a guest on her show - is a Florida veterinarian, who has treated circus animals, and is very familiar with the B & B facility down there. She described it to me as excellent, and said the animals are well-treated there. On the show today, she had a guest who described the facilities, which she confirmed.

This is a woman who routinely has done surgery on tigers and lions, as well as treating ordinary household pets. She has no qualms about calling out abusers, and has no patience with them. So when she tells me the animals there are well loved and cared for, and not abused, I believe her.

[Freedom]

It does, if you read it, it states that the ASPCA paid a lot of money to the former handler to make up the charges.

No Karen. It says that they paid him to testify, which reduces his credibility. This does not mean what he said was false.

[smokey the elder]

A conflict of interest clearly exists, calling the witness into question.

[Cataholic]

It is 2013. If people are not aware of the rampant abuse towards the animals in the circus, the non-charitable use of the money by the large "animal rights" groups, and that people lie (gasp, even our friends,)(double gasp- even vets) every day of the week, they need to go to their womb. Yep, intentional play on words.

Paying someone for their testimony (and, it does happen in all areas of the law, and in with respect to all witnesses) does not mean what they say is false. Just that they were paid. Hell, we call lots of those people Doctor.

[Karen]

Paying someone for their testimony (and, it does happen in all areas of the law, and in with respect to all witnesses) does not mean what they say is false. Just that they were paid. Hell, we call lots of those people Doctor.

It isn't that he was paid that brings his credibility into question, but the amount that he was paid that does!

And as I said, my friend the Florida veterinarian, a person of sound mind and strict conscience, has been to some of those facilities and was impressed with how nice they were. She is a surgeon, and of course some animals are too large to transport to a clinic when they need routine care, so it is not an infrequent thing that she is at these facilities. Many circuses "winter" in her area.

No one will deny that years ago, some circus animals were abused, that we all know that. But that does not mean that people and trainers have not learned, changed methods and developed new, safer, more humane techniques in the intervening years!

[lizbud]

It isn't that he was paid that brings his credibility into question, but the amount that he was paid that does!

The witness was paid $1000.00 every two weeks for the duration of legal process. This case went on for years.

[Lady's Human]

The witness was paid $1000.00 every two weeks for the duration of legal process. This case went on for years.

And it was one hell of a bribe for doing nothing.

I guarantee he wasn't sitting in a court room doing nothing else but being available as a witness for almost 7 years.

[Cataholic]

A conflict of interest clearly exists, calling the witness into question.

How so? The whistleblower statute comes to mind, most immediately.