Why The Texas Attorney General dropped the case !
My name is John Fischer and I was the Animal Care Supervisor in 2003-2004 and again under the court appointed receiver from October 13, 2006 through May 1, 2007. I would like to address a few outright lies by Priscilla Feral and Stephan Tello attacking receivership actions while at Primarily Primates Inc. I have tried several times unsuccessfully to respond on the Primarily Primates Inc and Friends of Animals websites only to have my responses ignored and not forwarded to the pubic just like every other person who has tried to post the truth. First off let me tell you the real reasons the Attorney General dropped the lawsuit against PPI. It had nothing to do with the actual charges being found unwarranted. The AG said in court that the receiver had cleaned up the sanctuary and relieved the overcrowding allowing the PPI board the opportunity to maintain what we had started. This was just a way for them to get out from under a case they had mishandled from the beginning. This statement is equivalent to saying if a child is abused all you have to do is take the child away long enough for the bruises to heal then give him back to his abusers. The real reason is that FOA had enough money to buy outstanding legal counsel (counsel with obviously no sense of compassion for animals and viewed animals as simply property) and the Texas Attorney General got out lawyered. First the AG filed the suit in the wrong court. He filed in
Requested to be posted on FOA
Wasn't the horsemeat in the freezers long before the attorney general stepped in? Can you advise as to what happened to the bear that was on the propery? If I remember correctly the last time I was on site their was a lion in its cage. Did it die and if so how? I understand that many chimps had either been injured and died while under PPI care which is what prompted the attorney general to step in. Can you speak to misappropiation of funds by PPI in regards to the Ohio State chimps? The last time I was at PPI was quite a bit ago, but I only remember seeing 4 people working there. How many full-time staff were on-site prior to the "hostile take over"? How many are there now? How long does FOA plan to be at PPI? Are there any regulations or governing bodies that will prevent the horrible conditions that exsisted when the attorney general stepped in?
Reply to this
REQUESTED TO BE POSTED ON FOA
I keep seeing you guys posting that the recievership left the place in shambles. If it was this bad when they left then how bad was it before they got there? Do you have any video footage of the conditions prior to the Texas Attorney General stepping in. I'm pretty sure I saw some on PETA'S website a while back. Anyone who was offended by the conditions now should have seen what I saw in the video and in person. The place was a disaster. FOA wants to talk about a being impartial and doing what's in the best interest of the animals. FOA raised funds to defend PPI in court, once they had already been taken over. Where was this funding to take care of the animals from FOA? Why did FOA choose to become an active participant after PPI was seized by the Texas State Attorney General?
Reply to this
REQUESTED TO BE POSTED ON FOA.
How does FOA respond to the below allegations prior to the attorney genral stepping in:
1. That the distribution of blankets to chimps and monkeys has caused harm and at least one death.
2. That exotic birds self mutilated to deal with the boredom of tiny cages and virtually no care.
3. That animals admitted to the sanctuary were allowed to breed.
4. That a chimpanzee was confined to a small dark room, alone, for eight months.
6. That six chimps at the sanctuary have died in the past year alone.
7. That the facility lacked a proper septic field or sewage system and so animals sat in their own waste and open ditches of sewage were visible on the property.
8. That the facility only had five staff members to care for approximately 500 animals.
9. That Wally Swett purchased a baby chimpanzee, who was later confined to a bathroom and deprived of the company of other chimpanzees.
10. That many species of animals were confined to tiny cages for their entire lives.
11. That cockroach infestation grew so bad that tens of thousands of roaches swarmed the property.
12. That fleas were waist deep around the animal cages.
Where was FOA and all their money during all of this?
Reply to this
In 1993, the Texas attorney general accused Swett and board member Stephen Tello of spending on themselves donations that had been earmarked for animals.
Stephen Tello has been appointed to operate PPI now.
Reply to this
As reported in the San Antonio Express:
"In 2000, PPI began soliciting funds to build enclosures for between 11 and 30 chimps held at the Buckshire Corp. in Pennsylvania. More than $180,000 ultimately was raised, though the money has not been used to house a single Buckshire chimp. Only two dreary concrete buildings, with no outside access, have been built so far with the donations.
Meanwhile, while many primates were confined to small spaces, Swett and Tello earlier this year authorized the purchase of a $134,000 home, where the organization's bookkeeper lives.
In 2003, PPI collected $2,200 from 18 donors for a memorial walkway — but never built it.
Earlier this year, Ohio State University sent PPI nine chimps and three capuchin monkeys along with $236,000 to build enclosures for them.
Two of the chimps died within the first two months of arriving at PPI. The enclosures were started but not finished. Consequently, a 23-year-old chimp named Darrel had been isolated for eight months in an unheated, un-air conditioned windowless building with no access to the outdoors."
So again I will ask, where was FOA then and why are they set on blaming everyone except PPI for the problem that were there?
Reply to this
According to publicly available records, Ms. Feral, her husband, and Lee Hall are making approximately $250,000 per year in combined salaries, which, in my view, is a good deal of money.
I cannot speak to the matter of the PPI employee as I have no knowledge of that person or the situation.
I think that, as a general matter, both PETA and FoA failed PPI. But that is only my opinion.
Reply to this
I suspect there is more than the threat of a lawsuit by FoA. A lawsuit is not enough to make the AG of Texas drop a case.There has to be more to it. Was there threats of actions by FoA? Was $$$ received or promised to the AG? Something is not right with this. There is more to this than we are being told. Someone needs to look into this further and see if everything is as it should be. Any suggestions?
Reply to this
The outcome of this lawsuit leaves me with no faith in our legal system. I saw PPI in 2003-2004 and again during the receivership. The receivership must have been like a vacation for all the animals at PPI. What a horrible retirement/life they will have to endure. To have that much evidence against previous management (this includes Wally/ board members/ supervisors) and in the end say it was only one person at fault and return the sanctuary to the hands of the people who aided in this disgrace is unbelievable. I then have to ask; what is the purpose of a board? Are they not there to monitor decisions made concerning the sanctuary, which includes the health and well being of the animals in their care? This situation was not brought on by just one person. Several people could have chosen to intervene and speak up for the animals’ sake. The AG gave into settlement conditions that he said he would never agree to. Why? There are many different angles you can look at this case and ask this question over and over. And what of the ongoing inspections the AG's office promised? Are they even doing the inspections? Are they taking an expert with them that knows what he/she is looking for while on the property? I think the AG's office just wanted this case to be done with. I guess the majority of the people in this world see animals as mere "property". This baffles me! I can't believe PPI/FOA can't look at the animals entrusted to their care and not want more for them! It makes me question their motives.
Reply to this