« Critter Safety on Thanksgiving | Main | So, Mr. Vick, Was it Worth It? »

November 21, 2007

Gag Order on the Tammy Grimes Case

From the Dogs Deserve Better website (FYI: I support the mission of this caring and compassionate group, and I hope the jury gets what this case is really about).

Judge Imposes Gag Order on Tammy

On Monday, September 19th a Jury was selected in the Case of Tammy Grimes and the trial has been set for December 12th, 13th and 14th according to the Court Administration's Office at Blair County Courthouse. 

The judge issued a Gag Order on Grimes and everyone involved in the case, however, a call to the court house revealed that the jury has been selected and the above dates have been set for the trial. It is unlikely that Grimes' evidence including a video of the dog's suffering and the veterinarian's report  will be deemed admissible.
Grimes was arrested for theft when she rescued a dying dog on September 11, 2006.  Just remember, Grimes voice may be temporarily silenced, but you still have yours. Let your voices be heard December 12th, 13th, and 14th! More information

In other news, on this same day, Dogs Deserve Better has signed a Private Criminal Complaint against the Arnolds. These dog owners "allegedly" left their dog "Jake" renamed "Doogie'' lying on the ground without being able to stand for days before Grimes stepped in on September 11, 2006 and took Doogie to the vet and refused to return him. Grimes was subsequently arrested for theft of the dog from the Arnold's property.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b26169e200e54f9ed5f28834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Gag Order on the Tammy Grimes Case:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Thank you so much for reporting on this case. The gray, misunderstood world where "property rights" and "animal welfare" intersect is going to be a hot area of debate in coming years, I think, as more people realize that an animal - while it may not have "rights" like those we attribute to humans - cannot be considered mere property in the same way that a car or a piece of furniture is "property." Tammy's case might be considered "small town" and insignificant, but it is a harbinger of things to come. I wish more people would cover the trends and issues afoot here. thanks!

Seems backward that this one horse town can pass an ordinance to protect their trees from the tree's property owner - yet, a dying dog's welfare doesn't matter. Wow -

http://www.altoonamirror.com/page/content.detail/id/500714.html?nav=742

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Copyright | About The Miami Herald | Advertise