HomeCat NewscrimeKristen Lindsey Case May Proceed to a Contested Hearing

Comments

Kristen Lindsey Case May Proceed to a Contested Hearing — 49 Comments

    • Perhaps you’d like to explain yourself as your comment makes no sense. You are saying that if a person looks after 2 cats he/she is weird. I have to conclude that it is you who is weird.

  1. FerRealz does seem different to me than Woody, but other than that they’re cut from the same old boring fanatical cloth. Those folks have selective memories and they see what they want. Lindsey freely admitted that she killed Tiger, but then when she realized that the rest of the world wouldn’t worship her and adore her actions she covered up and disposed of the body. Supporting anyone who kills defenseless animals is pathetic.

    • Agreed, Serbella. All these troll cat haters have a bit of their brain missing. There is no way they’ll change. They are programmed and the only way to end what they say is the delete the programme.

  2. I meant dont go shooting any more animals !! i just woke up and could not believe that someone is sticking up for her!!Just own up to that fact its wrong..If that cat was homeless or not whatever happened to respecting life?

  3. The veterinarian needs to get a new job as a an archer .leave the pets and animals
    Alone !!And as for who ever sticking up for her…Maybe you should join her ?you guys can target practise together? Shoot each other maybe????hopefully !!!!Sounds like you already do !!just do go shooting any free roaming animals. Because us animalhuggers are gonna not like that.

    • Dont go shooting any animals i dont care who cat it was or wasnt !!!WHOS YARD OR WHATEVER ? Its wrong and if you dont agree youre a idoit

      • THANK YOU! Now back to the real subject & what we are all here for…I am a farm girl so I’ve seen hundreds of feral cats & now a city girl with 5 spoiled indoor cats & NOT 1 TIME DID I EVER THINK TO KILL A FERAL OR STRAY! Personally think it’s inhumane to kill such an innocent animal especially one that’s not for game…what is the benefit…not for meat & they do much needed rodent control! I don’t understand how there are human beings on this planet saying it’s OK for a veterinarian to do it! THAT’S WHY I DON’T GO ANYWHERE ANYMORE PEOPLE ARE CRAZY, LIARS, DECEITFUL, EGOTISTICAL JERKS!!

        • Thanks for your thoughts Jennifer. I agree with you. Any future comments you make will be published immediately without moderation.

  4. This is all absurd. The woman admitted that she killed the cat, bragged about it, posted a photo (taken by her own mother who witnessed it) on her FB page and now claims she did nothing wrong? Please…would anyone want this POS taking care of any animal?

    • KEL has convinced herself that killing a cat that strayed into her backyard is legal and ethical. It is neither. Thanks for visiting and commenting Tina. All future comments will be published immediately without moderation.

  5. It’s sad that there are actually evil people in this world who support such a horrible and self entitled person. Who’s main priority in life should be saving animals, not killing them. She needs to take responsibility for her actions, something I doubt she has ever done.

    • The mentality that KEL has is the sort of mentality which makes the world a much worse place than it could be. I hate people like KEL. Thanks for visiting and commenting Samantha. All future comments of yours will be published immediately without moderation.

  6. No, what bothers you is having to face up to the real world and the reality outside of your mommy’s basement. That’s why you want me gone. No other reason.

  7. FerRealz..

    I usually do not feed the trolls, especially ones who hide behind a fake name, I happen to know every sentence stated in your first little rant is a lie. I was at the conference, were you?
    That’s it. If people want facts, please see Tiger’s Justice Team News Page.

    • LOL! This is rich. In order for Elisa Black-Taylor/Irish, et al, to distance themselves from prosecution of all they have done to date, they started up a new facebook scammer’s site!

      facebook . com / tigersjusticeteamnews

      And when someone asked them who the admins were, well, read the reply:

      Scott Bryan — Who are the admins?
      1 · Yesterday at 7:22am

      Tiger’s Justice Team News Page — Due to TJT’s ongoing legal involvement, our administrators’ names are subject to confidentiality directives at this time. To help achieve the outcome we all want for Tiger, we must respect this restriction. Thanks for your understanding and support.
      10 · Yesterday at 10:22am

      They are under no such legal confidentiality obligation whatsoever, nor do they provide proof of any such legal obligation. Talk about deceptive and manipulative con-artists, eh? LOL

      This will be fun when the sh** hits the fan and they are all dragged off to jail cells. 🙂

        • You are obviously someone who was abused and that is why you justify torture and animal abuse. Michael is right. you should vacate the premises. You are trying to suck the air out of people who are good and just and you want to put an end to ALL criminality to all creatures. Even to whatever was done to you as a child no doubt. Don’t waste our time with your useless rhetoric. Go join a support group for your issues.

      • I’m not an administrator on the new page for Tiger. I don’t really have the time. And the only money I ever raise is on my own page to fund TNR for cats where I work. Tired of them reproducing and the kittens either dying or accidentally killed.

        Most of my time is spent on my private website doing shelter dog and cat articles to get the animals out in time.

        I may or may not cover the Lindsey decision. On 8000 Facebook likes for Examiner I made $15.

  8. Hmm, we all know that she thinks she did nothing wrong and she thinks she’s awesome. She’s not very bright, notwithstanding having somehow earned a degree in veterinary medicine. She’s only smart enough to know that she did something, that for some reason, everyone hates her for, aside from her amoral supporters. I think she’s obstinate enough to refuse any board sanction, especially as she slid through the “no bill” GJ unscathed like a greased pig. Her attorney gives her legal advice but as far as she’s concerned, she’s NOT concerned about anyone or anything but herself, and she won’t let the board put anything perceived as negative on her record if she can help it. She’ll say fight it, if for no other reason than to stay on people’s minds. Plus she has rich family and friends who pull strings and pay her attorney – who has no reason to stop that gravy train either. It’s still just about her bid for attention like when she posted the photo, except her family and friends probably insisted she keep her stupid mouth shut through all this.

    • No owner of the cat has ever come forward, nor was there ever an owner of the cat. The owners of that property live in Arizona and claim they have never owned any cats. Amy, the property caretaker, fed that cat 2 times per week (why wasn’t she fined for animal-neglect) and won’t claim ownership of it. She, and everyone involved with her, are only using this to line their pockets with myriad donation scams. Amy was quickly fired from her job of being property caretaker for this little stunt of hers for attention and donations. Kristen also legally killed that cat under the prevention of depredation laws. It is legal to kill any cat that is destroying other animals on your property, whether you want to believe it or not.

      None of the complaints filed can be used against her because none of those net-vigilantes were her client. The whole thing will be thrown out. Then the lawyers go after all the complainants, including the vet-board.

      • “Kristen also legally killed that cat under the prevention of depredation laws. It is legal to kill any cat that is destroying other animals on your property, whether you want to believe it or not.”

        This is incorrect. I have checked the law on this. I can quote it – read this page and this page. Now you quote me the law verbatim. If you can’t do it you will be admitting that you are incorrect.

        • Depredation is just one of the many reasons that you can legally kill any free-roaming cat, owned or not. Similar laws are on every book in every state of the USA. Some giving even more legal reasons to kill any stray cat.

          Here is the unedited list of laws from TX. Unlike those being posted by all the cat advocates who leave off the important parts just so they can appear to be in the right. This is why the DA found no reason to pursue the case.

          Pay particular attention to the sections pertaining to, “It is a defense to prosecution …” Meaning, that those animal cruelty laws are not applicable in those instances. She was perfectly within her legal rights. I hope they have excellent lawyers. They’ll own anyone who has tried to destroy their lives. Tread carefully, Micheal.

          Texas Law

          Sec. 42.092. CRUELTY TO NONLIVESTOCK ANIMALS.

          (a) In this section:

          (1) “Abandon” includes abandoning an animal in the person’s custody without making reasonable arrangements for assumption of custody by another person.

          (2) “Animal” means a domesticated living creature, including any stray or feral cat or dog, and a wild living creature previously captured. The term does not include an uncaptured wild living creature or a livestock animal.

          (3) “Cruel manner” includes a manner that causes or permits unjustified or unwarranted pain or suffering.

          (4) “Custody” includes responsibility for the health, safety, and welfare of an animal subject to the person’s care and control, regardless of ownership of the animal.

          (5) “Depredation” has the meaning assigned by Section 71.001, Parks and Wildlife Code.

          (6) “Livestock animal” has the meaning assigned by Section 42.09.

          (7) “Necessary food, water, care, or shelter” includes food, water, care, or shelter provided to the extent required to maintain the animal in a state of good health.

          (8) “Torture” includes any act that causes unjustifiable pain or suffering.

          (b) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:

          (1) tortures an animal or in a cruel manner kills or causes serious bodily injury to an animal;

          (2) without the owner’s effective consent, kills, administers poison to, or causes serious bodily injury to an animal;

          (3) fails unreasonably to provide necessary food, water, care, or shelter for an animal in the person’s custody;

          (4) abandons unreasonably an animal in the person’s custody;

          (5) transports or confines an animal in a cruel manner;

          (6) without the owner’s effective consent, causes bodily injury to an animal;

          (7) causes one animal to fight with another animal, if either animal is not a dog;

          (8) uses a live animal as a lure in dog race training or in dog coursing on a racetrack; or

          (9) seriously overworks an animal.

          (c) An offense under Subsection (b)(3), (4), (5), (6), or (9) is a Class A misdemeanor, except that the offense is a state jail felony if the person has previously been convicted two times under this section, two times under Section 42.09, or one time under this section and one time under Section 42.09. An offense under Subsection (b)(1), (2), (7), or (8) is a state jail felony, except that the offense is a felony of the third degree if the person has previously been convicted two times under this section, two times under Section 42.09, or one time under this section and one time under Section 42.09.

          (d) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:

          (1) the actor had a reasonable fear of bodily injury to the actor or to another person by a dangerous wild animal as defined by Section 822.101, Health and Safety Code; or

          (2) the actor was engaged in bona fide experimentation for scientific research.

          (e) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (b)(2) or (6) that:

          (1) the animal was discovered on the person’s property in the act of or after injuring or killing the person’s livestock animals or damaging the person’s crops and that the person killed or injured the animal at the time of this discovery; or

          (2) the person killed or injured the animal within the scope of the person’s employment as a public servant or in furtherance of activities or operations associated with electricity transmission or distribution, electricity generation or operations associated with the generation of electricity, or natural gas delivery.

          (f) It is an exception to the application of this section that the conduct engaged in by the actor is a generally accepted and otherwise lawful:

          (1) form of conduct occurring solely for the purpose of or in support of:

          (A) fishing, hunting, or trapping; or

          (B) wildlife management, wildlife or depredation control, or shooting preserve practices as regulated by state and federal law; or

          (2) animal husbandry or agriculture practice involving livestock animals.

          (g) This section does not create a civil cause of action for damages or enforcement of the section.

          • If you read those laws, you’ll also find out exactly why this Amy character refuses to claim ownership of that cat too (3 of which with same-similar markings were roaming everyone’s yards according to neighbors’ reports). If Amy claims ownership, then she could land in jail and pay hefty fine for animal cruelty. All of this is due to that Amy character not wanting to step-up to claim ownership of that cat. Kristen did the legal thing, Amy did the illegal thing.

            • It’s even legal to shoot any stray cats in the UK.

              wildlifearticles . co . uk / new-website-launched-to-help-scottish-wildcat-conservation

              “Persecution from land owners, especially those with game birds can also be an issue though the animals are often mistaken for feral cats which can legally be shot as a pest control method.”

              naturenet . net / law / seasons . htm

              Cats are listed as year-round, no closed-season.

          • “Pay particular attention to the sections pertaining to, “It is a defense to prosecution …” Meaning, that those animal cruelty laws are not applicable in those instances. She was perfectly within her legal rights.”
            FerRealz, you are obviously not an atty, because this is no way proves she was within her legal rights –
            Its is only a defense IF –
            (1) the animal (Tiger) was discovered on the person’s property “in the act of or after injuring or killing” the person’s livestock animals
            or
            “damaging the person’s crops”
            and
            [Lindsay] “killed or injured the animal at the time of this discovery”; or
            DEFENSE (1) is out, because although Tiger was on her property, Tiger was not in the act of killing or injuring livestock or damaging crops.
            Now lets look at #2
            (2) the person killed or injured the animal
            “within the scope of the person’s employment as a public servant”
            or
            “in furtherance of activities or operations associated with electricity transmission or distribution, electricity generation or operations associated with the generation of electricity, or natural gas delivery.”
            Nope, nope, nope and nope
            NEITHER OF THESE DEFENSES APPLY!
            Your reading comprehension and analysis is seriously flawed, FerRealz.

            • Thanks KittyP. These troll types who like to hurt cats always try and justify their actions by misinterpreting the law to suit themselves. They’re nasty, stupid people.

            • That’s okay. As long as you think it’s still legal to let your vermin roam free, then more of your vermin get legally shot to death. Release more practice targets. I know of lots of hunters that appreciate your efforts between hunting seasons. 🙂

              • Ferrealz…at the end of the day, your girl Kristen ruined her career whether her actions were legal or not. No one in their right mind would bring the pet to her for treatment. What she did was morally perverse by posting that picture.

    • I think you are right in suggesting that she will fight on. She can’t get it into her head that she has done something wrong. For her killing animals of fine.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>