Kristen Lindsey not required to attend Veterinary Board meeting because she has done no wrong?

I’m told by Elisa Black-Taylor that the news circulating on the grapevine is that Kristen will not be required to attend the Veterinary Board conference due to take place on 28th August because there is no evidence that she has done anything wrong. In addition, if the “Veterinary Board” (Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners) does sanction her by, for example, suspending her license then she plans to sue them. The same goes for the AVMA. [Note: by ‘not be required’ I mean she believes that she has done no wrong and therefore has no reason to attend. Attending is not mandatory.]

tbvme

Two useful tags. Click either to see the articles:- Toxic to cats | Dangers to cats

The first question then is whether she has, or has not, done anything wrong when she killed Tiger with a bow and arrow. She has done wrong but the problem is EVIDENCE.

It’s a boring subject but you have to refer to Texas law for the answer (ยง 42.092). And the answer is clear: a person cannot kill a feral cat or any cat for that matter, and it makes no difference how you kill the cat, unless one of the exceptions is applicable. You can kill a feral cat under certain circumstances and get away with it in Texas.

One exception is that if the “actor” had a reasonable fear of being injured by a dangerous wild animal. This is inapplicable in this instance as it is about dangerous dogs. The only other possibility in defence is that she killed the cat because he was on her property in the act of or after injuring or killing “the person’s livestock animals or damaging the person’s crops”. That’s the only other defence and it makes you laugh to read it because it is totally inapplicable.

The problem that the Veterinary Board has in this case and the same applies to the AVMA is that the Grand Jury decided that she had not committed a crime and therefore should not go to trial. Therefore there is no formal, verified evidence she has done anything wrong from a criminal standpoint. This was an incorrect decision. In fact it is obviously incorrect but no doubt her lawyer will use that in her defence and it may well be effective.

But she has committed a crime. In fact I have discussed this earlier in a previous post because she could be prosecuted under a different and lesser offence.

In addition the Tiger’s Justice Team have written the most comprehensive complaint to the Veterinary Board setting out in the clearest terms what she has done wrong and why she should be sanctioned.

Therefore if she states through her attorney that she has not done anything wrong, she is incorrect and the Board should be aware of that. There is no doubt in my mind that she really must attend because she has a case to answer. It isn’t just about the criminal evidence it’s about the complaint. The complaint is a bigger matter and covers more issues than just the criminal aspects of this case.

It would seem to me that the argument in discussion at the conference will hinge on the complaints as set out by Tiger’s Justice Team and the criminal matter will be put to one side because of the Grand Jury’s decision. It’s a great shame that the Grand Jury was manipulated by the district attorney into coming up with the wrong decision. You could argue that the attorney behaved in a criminal manner in engineering that outcome.


Please comment on Facebook as well as it helps spread the word – thanks.


21 thoughts on “Kristen Lindsey not required to attend Veterinary Board meeting because she has done no wrong?”

  1. I’ve ran into a lot of rumors and heresay lately that were denied as being the truth and later turned out to be a coverup. I’m having to investigate one right now that the Greenville shelter is killing the FIV+ cats because the vet at the shelter considers it a risk to send them out among non FIV+ cats. Hopefully I’ll know more by the weekend when I do my “crisis” article. A cat was killed last week when a rescue was in the building ready and willing to take it and it was kill for being FIV+

    Reply
  2. FOlks, The Texas Board can tell you the FACTS. (Speculation , opinion, conjecture are a different form of online writing than is reporting the facts). No one has control over nor can predict K. Lindsey’s movements on the day she is to appear. However, she IS summoned to appear, and if she does not, there are legal consequences.

    Reply
  3. But she has admitted wrong doing.. she has admitted that she now shot tiger due to rabies…. she did not do what was supposed to be done by possible rabies case she should at least be made to produce the body which in turn would be evidence? ? No???

    Reply
  4. I am surprised you posted “rumors/grapevine stuff”. It does nothing but rile people up, and it is just grapevine stuff as you stated. You’ve posted in the past facts, posting grapevine stuff shouldn’t be happening.

    Reply
    • Yes, I agree that but sometimes rumours are interesting to people and they can shed some light on what people are thinking and what is going on. I believe the post is justified. Also it gives me the chance to challenge the thoughts which are rumoured to be happening.

      Reply
      • Posting “interesting” comments just invalidates your other posts, do you want to be a factual poster, or just a rumor poster? As you know, rumors are the cat was rabid, the picture is years old, perpetuating rumors doesn’t look good for you and your site.

        Reply
        • Sorry Michael, but I’m with Jean on this. Unverified rumours tend to get people riled up, when what’s really needed now is a calm and collected approach at the Veterinary Board Hearing.

          Good luck on the day to the TJT. I’ll be thinking of you and wishing I could be there.

          Reply
  5. I just telephoned the Legal administration department at the Texas Board regarding this rumor. The Board clearly refuted the rumor to be incorrect.
    I know emotions are high, but fact checking is crucial.

    Reply
          • I PM’d a member of Tiger’s Administrators page and was told Amy and someone named Gisele were in the room for the hearing and Kristen wasn’t present. So everyone can quit sending me the nasty messages because it appears Kristen wasn’t required by law to attend, although it was probably a bad move for her missing it.

            Reply
            • I understand, too, that she was not required to attend by law. She had a choice. I presume her attorney was there, however, to represent her.

              Reply
              • According to Salinda the Texas Board said she had to attend. I was jumped badly on this Michael. I doubt I’ll do any more Kristen articles since I can’t get my “FACTS” straight.

                Reply
    • Thank God! It was on an administrative group for Tiger. The person who posted it said they had checked with the ALDF. I’m glad to hear it’s false.

      Reply
  6. My suspicions have been confirmed. But I’m confident Tiger’s lawyers will do their best anyway.

    I don’t have FB, I avoid it at all costs, but I wonder about Michelle Lynn’s comment about “if she was a minority would it be the same.” Race doesn’t have anything to do with this case. Let’s deal with the facts, please: a white female vet did the deed. With the way the system is set up, if a black vet had done the same thing I think it’s a sure bet that he or she would be protected the same way Lindsey’s being protected. The prevalent attitude in society appears to be “after all, it’s just a cat.” I’ve seen that exact same attitude directed towards canines too, and that’s the problem.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

follow it link and logo