The attorney, Brian W. Bishop, is representing Kristen Lindsey in her defense against the investigation by the Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners (TBVME) to sanction Dr Lindsey for her alleged killing of a domestic cat (claimed to be feral) with a bow and arrow at close range. Most of us have heard about this notorious case. If not, please click this.
Mr Bishop must also be representing and defending Kristen Lindsey generally. I believe Brian W Bishop has his own law firm in Austin Texas (900 West Avenue).
Update at 1st June 2015: his website is currently down probably as a consequence of acting for Kristen Lindsey. A visitor to PoC, kindly provided his details in a comment.
A colleague of mine has kindly sent me a copy of a leaked letter that Mr Bishop wrote to the TBVME. It is reproduced below and I have typed it out as the image is small and hard to read.
Dear Ms Hudson,
This firm represents Dr. Lindsey DVM in the referenced complaint.
Dr. Lindsey denies that she engaged in any violation of Board Rule 573.4. Among other things, neither the act of posting of a photograph, nor this alleged act of killing of a ferel [sic] cat on Dr. Lindsey’s residential property were “connected to the practice of veterinary medicine’ or otherwise a criminal activity.
Please cease and desist from any further attempts to contact Dr. Lindsey or her family. Also as you are aware, TBVME complaints are confidential per Texas Occ. Code § 801.207 – the TBVME has, however, been discussing the complaint and related matters with third parties (including Dr. Ron Stried DVM) in flagrant disregard of Dr. Lindsey’s right to privacy and confidentiality – these disclosures must stop immediately.
Yours Very truly
Brian W. Bishop
My comment (please add your below): firstly I apologise for adding to Dr Lindsey’s lack of privacy in this matter but feel it needs to be aired due to public interest.
The key statement, I believe, is that the lawyer claims that Lindsey’s alleged killing of Tiger, the ginger tabby, is unconnected with the practice of veterinary medicine.
I strongly disagree with this. It has to be closely connected to the work of a vet because the attitude and behavior of a vet outside of her/his workplace is critical to (a) the standing of the veterinary profession generally in the USA and further afield and (b) the way a vet conducts herself at her workplace.
The work of even the most highly skilled veterinarian will be compromised if the vet in question has a poor attitude towards animal welfare. Compassion is a key characteristic of the good veterinarian. You could argue that it is essential.
Judging by the behavior of Dr Lindsey she has a poor and unsuitable attitude towards the welfare of animals. There was not an ounce of compassion in her alleged close range shooting of her neighbor’s cat.
Whether what she allegedly did is criminal or not is down to a court to decide. However, the broad opinion on the internet, where this notorious example of cat cruelty has been widely discussed, is that she committed a crime and should be punished accordingly.
I am surprised that Mr Bishop is demanding that the TBVME should stop contacting people other than Lindsey because how else can they investigate the matter?
I have been following this for awhile now. I guess there is a court date for the 24th and she may or may not be on the docket. From the original story I found out that in the town where she shot the cat it is legal to kill feral cats (*0*) which is disgusting anyways ! However this is why it has been such a big deal about the cat being feral or not. Regardless of it being legal or not she took an oath to the health and welfare of animals which she obviously broke. I am sorry (not really) for my attitude but I am glad this woman is being harassed, she deserves a plate of karma served up nice and hot and bitter.
Nice summed up, Anne. Thanks for taking the time to write it. Most of us feel the same way.
Her arrogance is shocking, her malevolence is saddening and her claims to privacy are disingenious, she posted the event to the public on FB and thereby made herself a public figure. Her real complaint isn’t privacy, it’s that she is being publicy shamed – big difference. Public shaming is a relatively new phenom, in this case it serves a valuable purpose – unlike the cases where truly private people have been targeted for meanspirited, unwanted public attention. She chose to tell the world about it, “LOL”. Ny sense is that KL would be the first to bully a person who wasn’t deserving, fortunately what goes around comes around – of that we can be certain.
You are right Leslie. The poor lawyer has the challenge of defending the indefensible. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
quote “Dr. Lindsey denies that she engaged in any violation of Board Rule 573.4. Among other things, neither the act of posting of a photograph, nor this alleged act of killing of a ferel [sic] cat on Dr. Lindsey’s residential property were “connected to the practice of veterinary medicine’ or otherwise a criminal activity.
I completely disagree. In her facebook post of killing this cat – she stated that she deserves the Vet of the Year award. Clearly – she connected her killing of this cat to being the Vet of the Year. That absolutely connects this to veterinary medicine. She is a mentally sick person who need jail time and mental therapy.
It seems that some people wish to defend her by saying that the cat was a feral cat. In addition, initially, there was some talk of the cat being a feral cat. Now, it is pretty much common knowledge that the cat was a domestic cat belonging to an neighbour. It is rather strange that we don’t know anything about the neighbor and neither have we heard from them in any way at all.
Thanks for commenting. Your sentiments are shared by more than 90% of the people.