ohmidog!

A Monroe County judge has upheld the First Amendment rights of animal activists appealing for the lives of three dogs rescued from a dog fighting bust.

Advocates from the Monroe SPCA and Buster Foundation, a pit bull rescue group based in Belleville, Mich., posted photographs and videos of the three dogs online — including the one above of a dog named Dusty — to support their case that the animals should not be put down.

The county’s response? The  Monroe County prosecutor wanted the groups held in contempt of court for distributing materials about the case online.

On August 4, a judge ruled that forcing the advocates to remove the photos and video from Change.org, their websites and social media would infringe on their First Amendment rights.

With that battle won, the fight continues on behalf of the three dogs, who the same judge ruled July 13 should be put down because they “lack useful purpose and pose a threat to public safety.”

Michigan animal advocate Jennifer Burke started the petition to save the three dogs on Change.org, and, as of yesterday, it had gathered more than 4,000 signatures in less than three weeks.

Included on the petition was the video (above) of Dusty, being evaluated by by Dr. Katherine Houpt, the prosecution’s expert witness. Dr. Houpt concluded Dusty, and two others, should be euthanized, even though Dusty seems to be doing everything right in the video.

According to her written notes and testimony, though, Dusty snarled at the doll Houpt taunted her with. The petition seeks to have Houpt recant her testimony.

“I created the petition because we were finally allowed to show the public what sweet, gentle dogs these are, and my opinion is that the expert was biased based on the testimony from her evaluations,” Burke said.

“This is about fighting for what’s right,” said Burke. ”…If we continue to stand by and watch these needless killings we aren’t getting to the root of the problem. Michigan taxpayers have a right to know where their money is being spent.

“We are shocked that the prosecution has made our battle for getting these dogs vet care, training, and human contact almost impossible,” Burke continued. “This is wrong, and we are standing up for ourselves and for these dogs that deserve a second chance. This victory means we are re-energized for our appeal. The community support has been amazing.”

The groups will gain custody later this month of one of the seized dogs, Razzle, who the county decided deserved a second chance. The appeal to save the lives of Dusty and two other dogs has not yet been scheduled.

Does having a dog on your side imply — to jurors, anyway — that you’re telling the truth?

That question may be headed to New York state’s highest court in a case in which the state’s first judicially approved courtroom dog sat in the witness box with a 15-year-old girl as she testified that her father raped and impregnated her.

The father went on to be convicted, but defense lawyers are appealing, saying that the courtroom dog — a golden retriever named Rosie — may have swayed jurors, according to a report in The New York Times.

Rosie is a therapy dog who specializes in comforting children and other vulnerable witnesses and victims – one of a growing number of which are being used by prosecutors to put crime victims at ease. They’ve been allowed in courtrooms in Arizona, Hawaii, Indiana, Idaho and other states.

Defense lawyers argue that the dogs may unfairly sway jurors with their cuteness, that they can evoke sympathy for a victim, and that they can even be seen by some as a reason to trust the human they’re alongside.

The new witness-stand role for dogs in a handful of states began in 2003, when the prosecution won permission to use a dog named Jeeter in a sexual assault case in Seattle.

In a ruling in June that allowed Rosie to accompany the teenage rape victim, Dutchess County Court judge Stephen L. Greller said the teenager was traumatized and the defendant, Victor Tohom, appeared threatening.  Greller ruled that Rosie was similar to the teddy bear that a New York state appeals court said in 1994 could accompany a child witness.

At least once when the teenager hesitated in Judge Greller’s courtroom, Rosie rose and seemed to push the girl gently with her nose.

Lawyers for the father, who was convicted and sentenced to 25 years to life, have raised a series of objections that they say seem likely to land the case in New York’s highest court. They argue that jurors are likely to conclude that the dog is helping victims expose the truth.

Rosie’s presence “infected the trial with such unfairness” that it constituted a violation of their client’s constitutional rights.

Since that case, Rosie has been busy, the Times reports. She spent  recent weeks with two girls, ages 5 and 11, who were getting ready to testify against the man accused of murder in the stabbing of their mother.

An Ohio firefighter who was fired for executing his two dogs walked out of an appeal hearing yesterday in which he was seeking to get his job back.

As a result, the Civil Service Commission dismissed David Santuomo’s appeal of his firing, the Columbus Dispatch reports.

Santuomo, 43, was waiting for the hearing to begin, but left after a television news crew set up a camera in the commission’s hearing room.

“He came here with the intention of going forward but changed his mind,” said Barbara McGrath, the commission’s executive director. The commission had agreed to postpone the original hearing in the fall and informed Santuomo that his appeal would be dismissed if he didn’t attend today’s hearing.

Santuomo was fired in July after being convicted of two counts of animal cruelty and one count of possession of a criminal tool. Prosecutors say Santuomo tied his two mixed-breed dogs to a pipe in his basement and shot them so he wouldn’t have to put them in a kennel while he went on a vacation cruise with his girlfriend. He dumped the bodies in a trash bin behind his fire station

He was sentenced to 90 days in jail and fined $4,500.

An autistic student’s right to bring his service dog to school was upheld by an Illinois appeals court last week.

The appeals court upheld a Monroe County court ruling that permitted Carter Kalbfleisch to bring his autism service dog, Corbin, to school. The Columbia School District had appealed the lower court decision.

Instead of following the lower court’s ruling, the district decided it could not meet Carter’s educational needs and sent him to the Illinois Center for Autism, agreeing to pay for his education there, but refusing to pay the cost of trasnporting Carter and the dog to school, according to the Belleville News-Democrat in Illinois.

 ”We’re happy that it went our way,” said Chris Kalbfleisch, Carter’s father. “Hopefully the school will change their direction with this. … Hopefully we can move forward and get our son back in school.”

“We hope they come to the realization that the law is the law and they have to follow it,” said Kalbfleisch’s attorney, Clay St. Clair. “Just because you don’t like a law doesn’t mean you don’t have to follow the law. We hope they do what they are supposed to do.”

School and district officials argued the dog would be disruptive, and possibly cause allergic reactions in other students.

The school district has the option of accepting the appellate court’s decision, or appealing the case to the Illinois Supreme Court.

There’s some irony in here somewhere:

In June, Sioux City Councilman Aaron Rochester had his dog seized by authorities after the dog bit a man and was deemed vicious. Under the local dangerous dog ordinance, the dog has to be euthanized.

The councilman appealed Animal Control’s decision twice, and has until Aug. 16 to appeal again. But he said he has no plan to do that, according to an Associated Press story.

Many others came forward to try and save the dog, including someone who came forward with wire cutters, broke into an outdoor kennel at Sioux City Animal Control, and stole the councilman’s dog. No other dogs in adjacent pens were taken — only Jake, the councilman’s 3-year-old yellow Labrador.

Police say there are no suspects, and Rochester was adamant that he didn’t take his dog and has no idea who did.

To top it all off, Rochester is the councilman who led a successful effort last year to ban pit bull terriers from Sioux City, Iowa, saying they were too dangerous.

Margaret Bucher, the Wheeling, Illinois woman who was instructed to get rid of one of her five dogs because she was over the local dog limit, has wheedled her way out of the requirement.

A Cook County Circuit Court judge ruled Monday that she can keep her fifth dog, the suburban Chicago Daily Herald reports.

We first told you about Bucher back in early April, when she appeared before the village board, trying to get an exemption from the rule by bringing a letter of support from her mail carrier, and a letter ”written” by her dogs: “Please let us stay in our home. We are house dogs and live in a clean home. We have to depend on our owner to fight for us. She loves us very, very much.”

The emotional plea fell flat, so Bucher found a technicality.

Bucher was issued two citations, after the meeting, for violating the village’s four-pets-only rule and for not registering all of her dogs. She was facing daily fines of between $50 and $500.

Appearing in court for that, and representing herself, Bucher argued the village ordinance did not specify four pets per household, but instead four pets per person. In that case, she said, since she lives with her 43-year-old daughter, they should be able to keep all five dogs – a Pomeranian, two Maltese, a Shih Tzu, and a Maltese/shih tzu mix — or, for that matter, as many as eight.

After 35 minutes of hearing arguments from both sides, the judge sided with Bucher and advised village officials to rewrite the ordinance if it wants to limit households to four pets.

Bucher, 63, broke out into tears at the ruling. “I just screamed and I just ran and hugged everybody I could find to hug.”

Village officials, meanwhile are considering an appeal, or a rewrite. They’re also considering lowering the limit on pets to three per home in multifamily residential complexes, meaning it would impose a different standard on those who dwell in apartments, condominiums or townhouses.

A relieved Bucher was on her way Monday afternoon to to register her fifth dog, Gizmo, in her daughter’s name. “Gizzy is going to be so excited,” Bucher said. “We’re going to order a pizza. My dogs love cheese pizza.”

After an appeal from Pamela Anderson the Indian Supreme Court has issued a ruling against killing stray dogs in Mumbai.

The former Baywatch star appealed to the authorities in India’s financial capital not to put down nuisance stray dogs, instead calling for them to be sterilized.

“It is well established that killing stray dogs is not a permanent solution to controlling their populations,” the former “Baywatch” star said in a letter to the municipal commission of Greater Mumbai, made pubic by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).

About 70,000 stray dogs are in India’s financial and entertainment capital and there are widespread concerns about the spread of diseases, including deadly rabies.

Anderson’s letter, which cited World Health Organization and Animal Health Board of India support for mass sterilisation, cam after a legal ruling here to destroy nuisance dogs.

Anderson’s stance was supported by the Mumbai-based charity Welfare of Stray Dogs, which has been carrying out mass sterilization of stray dogs since 1989.

India has so many dogs roaming its streets because of its high numbers of slum and street dwellers, who often keep the animals as pets, plus a large amount of garbage, which provides readily accessible food for scavenging mutts, according to an AFP report.

India’s Supreme Court ruled Friday that a dog can be put down only if it is rabid, mortally wounded or incurably ill.