Please also see the original petition site set up by Lucy's guardians.
Tongith, at this very moment, David Kahn, Sunnyvale city attorney, ordered that Lucy be put to death at 5:15 (8:15 EST) this evening. Gov. Schwarzenegeer chose not to got involved in the matter. In what was a despicable, unforgivable act of callous vindictiveness in retaliation for the international campaign to save Lucy, Sunnyvale city attorney David Kahn refused to allow Lucy's guardians to be with her when she was killed by the Humane Society.
Evil exists in this world. It is evident that we the people have little control in stopping it, or at least our public officials want us to believe that.
Thank you all for your efforts to save Lucy. Even for those of us who never met Lucy, she was a good dog. Our hearts go out to Liam, Ian and Desiree for their great loss. Our hearts also go out to Shannon Keith and Christine Garcia who worked tirelessly for five months to save one dog from a grievous injustice. As for the rest of us, the very first commenter to this blog (KC) said it best when he or she wrote, "I AM SO PROUD TO BE PART OF THIS COMPASSIONATE MOVEMENT." That is precisely what this was all about. Our public officials still do not understand that.
We cannot let Lucy's unjust death at the hands of our government just disappear. So please return to this site --- and others --- for or with suggestions on what we all can do to make sure this wonderful dog did not die in vain. I intend to keep this blog up for as long as Lucy remains in my heart, probably forever. Lucy was our dog, too.
And we call ourselves a civilized society. And we call a dog our best friend.
For those wishing to express their opinions in writing by mail to the Sunnyvale and Santa Clara County officials involved with this case, please click here to/or see appendix (2) for their office addresses. E-mail addresses and other contact information can be found elsewhere on this blog. In your communications to these public officials, Blogger suggests that you be polite and constructive. Avoid criticizing their person and comment only on their actions and behaviour. (Of course, we all know that actions speak about the person, but that's not the point.) What you are trying to do is to improve the process of government for Sunnyvale and Sana Clara County, because if it improves there, it will save many dogs in the future there, and then it will serve as a model for elsewhere. You can say everything you would ever want to say in a calm, constructive tone, everything. It will go much farther than angry, ad hominem remarks. But you do what your heart tells you to do.
Please also see Palo Alto News report on Lucy's death (In the report, Ms. Fulda, of the Humane Society makes an ambiguous hypothetical comment about Lucy that I must point is wrong. She said that to cover the Humane Society's actions in this case. Lucy tested zero for aggression on a scale of 0-10. All at the Humane Society who knew Lucy there agreed. Fulda's comment was purely hypothetical and could have applied to any dog. For that reason, her comment was totally irresponsible. And she calls herself a member of a humane society? Her comment was even HUMAN.)
Shannon Keith and Christine Garcia represented Lucy for over five months as part of their pro bono efforts, which they do from time to time in their work. To learn how you can help out and support their efforts, please visit their their organizations' web sites:
A.R.M.E. (Shannon Keith, President)
Animal Law Center (Christine Garica)
Please note: Blogger is not connected in any way with either of these attorneys.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Thank you for your updates. There are many of us who have been following Lucy's family's fight and are utterly heartbroken and in tears tonight. I phoned, emailed and faxed everyone on the lists of those who could help. I was struck by the uncaring callousness of these people and the way they all wanted to pass the buck. One woman at the city attorneys office even hung up on me. In this day and age of so many wrongs being commited, It would have been one small but extremely meaningful gesture to save Lucy. They had the opportunity to right a wrong,and they failed miserably. So it would have only meant saving a little dogs life and not breaking one family's heart. I just don't understand why was that so hard to do?
Sophia wrote in an e-mail:
I'm sorry that Lucy had to die like so many other pit bulls have. These dogs were bred by man to have such power. It is just a characteristic of the breed. Unfortunately, dire consequences can be the result. They should not be punished for what they were bred to be.
It's always so painful to hear about animals being put to death by people. We don't have that right to pick on species who are less
fortunate. We are not God.
Sophia
I have been following this horror story from the East Coast. Please remember, all of you in Sunnyvale, you DO VOTE...energize yourselves to use that power and vote these nut-cases out of office/judgeships.
Thanks for your comment, Anon. And thanks for reminding the people in Sunnyvale and Santa Clara County about the power they do have to stop this and other unethical, callous, prejudicial practices when they go to vote. From what I can tell, the good people of Sunnyvale know that and will remember that. In the meantime, for the sake of the other dogs in Sunnyvale that are sure to go to their deaths in the future now that police chief Johnson, Mayor, the city council, the Humane Society, Judge Walsh, and even the Governor think that they cannot be stopped, people everywhere must constantly remind these people of Lucy. I suggest, therefore, polite Christmas cards every year as reminders on the anniversary of Lucy's death in order to keep Lucy's memory --- and the memory of the pain these people caused to compassionate people everywhere --- alive in their minds.
I read your About This Blog notice, but would greatly appreciate it if you would publish this comment in whole. Below is a message I sent this morning to all the officials in California who had some role or opted not to play a role in Lucy's sad death. While I am not close to the particular legal issues involved in this sad case myself, although I was a attorney and do understand them, I strongly believe that the moral and ethical issues in this case are paramount. I spend a great deal of my time on matters regarding our stewardship of animals on this planet and believe that if God could see what we are doing to the animals, he would say that this was not the way that He intended it to be at all, and then He would weep. I myself am still weeping for Lucy, for her certainly, but also for the symbol she has now become for how we are treating our animals. Thank you. Father Gatian
Here is the message I sent this morning:
December 24, 2007
Subject: Christmas Message
Tomorrow, as you celebrate the joyous feast of Christmas, whatever meaning it has for you, I pray that you all have a joyous day. But as you celebrate at home with your loved ones and friends, I ask that you take a moment and pray for the dog Lucy, whose life was unjustly taken four days ago. I ask also that you reflect for a moment on the family whose life has been devastated by the loss of their beloved pet, the young boy whose heart will be scarred for life, the many other creatures of God that will now die as the result of callous public officials, and the thousands of compassionate people from around the world whose own lives were and will continue to be saddened by an unethical taking of one of God's own beautiful creatures. If you have a pet, or a child for that matter, please take just one moment tomorrow to hold him or her, look into his or her eyes and then just imagine what Lucy's guardians have been deprived of, tomorrow and for years to come. I, in turn, will pray for each of you, that God may forgive you of whatever role you had, if any, in this immoral act.
To those of us who genuinely care about both the welfare of both humans and other animals on this planet, the killing of Lucy will be remembered as the most unjust killing of an animal by a municipality since the hanging of Mary the elephant in Erwin, Tennessee, on September 13, 1916. To this day, that is what that town is known for. If you have not read the story, I suggest you read it tomorrow instead of the Bible. It is available on the internet. Please pay particular heed to the comparison of the spectacle of the killing of an elephant to spectacle of other hate killings. Just as it is known that people who abuse animal are more likely to commit crime against humans, so also the same applies to municipalities.
Soon the year 2007 will end. It was a good year for scapegoats in America, but not for dogs, or humans for that matter.
Father Gatian, SA
"Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." Luke 23:34
"Just as my life as full meaning to me, I must assume that the life of every other creature has full meaning to itself." Albert Schweitzer
As I was mourning for Lucy on Saturday (and still am), even though I did not know her except in spirit, the holiday message of PEACE on Earth was everywhere around me. It then occurred to me that the word PEACE to me shall forever be the acronym for the expression "Put an End to Animal Cruelty and Exploitation." I searched for that expression on the Googlesphere, and it existed nowhere, meaning that it has never been used in the history of humankind, at least in English. Therefore, having created that expression, I hereby dedicate it and its acronym to animals everywhere, in memory of Lucy. Every time someone uses it from here on, they shall use it in Lucy's memory, whether they know that or not.
Rigid grammarians will make an observation on the expression, but it is my expression and so I can define its meaning however I want, and so I have: "We must Put an End to all Cruelty to and Exploitation of Animals." And as Lucy's sad fate demonstrated, in our governments would be a good place to start.
Thanks, Lucy, for giving birth to a new meaning for the words PEACE on Earth.
LCS
As someone that was intimately involved with this case during the judicial proceedings, the characterizations made by this and other websites highlight only the favorable facts of this case and decline to mention ALL the facts, which happen to include negative facts. Furthermore, what is being said about Judge Walsh is incredibly unfair and far from the truth. He is an impartial and fair judge who, I know for a fact, wrestled with this decision and made it a point to not consider Lucy's breed. I heard the testimony from both sides and saw the lawyering, and Judge Walsh made the right decision. It's not fair to play the "poor little boy" card. Other people and their lives were hurt/affected in this proceeding, not just one family. To say the legal system is broken or biased because your side didn't win is wrong. The fact is that the family had many avenues to appeal to and did so. This alone shows the justice system is fair: Just because all those avenues agreed with the original decision does not mean there was injustice. It is a sad situation indeed, but again, as someone who was privy to the inner workings, there is more to this story than what is portrayed on biased internet sites. I am a dog lover myself, who has had both small and large dogs.
Thank you for your comment. I just have a couple of comments.
First, you refer in your message to "your side." "My" side happens to be the side of ethics, what is right, and when ethics loses, we all lose. You were right in saying that Lucy and her guardians were not the only losers in this case, we all were. Granted, the judge was dealt a bad hand with a bad law, vindictive people, and callous city and humane society officials, but he and he alone had the discretion to deal with this in the final analysis in an ethical matter, and he chose not too. He could have done that and stayed completely within the law. Unfortunately, he chose death over life by introducing his own opinions about the facts and by choosing to ignore the fundamental, dispositive legal question of whether Lucy would have remained a threat to the community. (By virtue of the fact that Lucy's guardians had agreed to remove her from the community she would not have been a threat. ) Judge Walsh's decision, while perhaps legally justified (although we personally doubt that), was unethical. We have seen this act replayed too many times in this country.
Second, you wrote that you were "intimately involved with the case." Of course, you cannot be intimately involved in any case without taking a side, and so your opinion is understandable, albeit wrong. And it does not make any difference whether you are a dog lover (I personally do not love dogs) or have owned small, big or even no dogs. Ethics does not demand to know what you relationship with dogs is. We were not involved in the case (except as informed bystanders from afar) and so we could look at it objectively exclusively from an ethical standpoint. Judge Walsh's decision was unfair and abhorrent to compassionate, ethical people everywhere.
Third, you say that the judge "wrestled with this decision." That only proves our point and strengthens our convictions about how broken the process is. (For instance, had the evidence burden been "beyond a reasonable doubt," he could not have "wrestled with the decision" and ordered Lucy executed. ) Thank you for telling us that because we did not know that.
Lucy's case has already been and will continue to be used in Dangerous Dog conferences as an example of where things can go terribly wrong with the administration of our laws, supposedly left to impartial and fair judges, who, admittedly, did nothing to bring the cases about. It is just another example of where our laws and the people who administer them are failing all of us, but that is nothing new. Fortunately, judges everywhere are beginning to understand this in these so-called Dangerous Dogs cases (see Congo's and Duke's cases, for example) and are finding ways to patch the process until the laws --- and the people who administer them --- are changed. Sadly, Lucy was not fortunate to have had one of those judges review her case. In her case, the judge opted for death over life, and that should be troubling to anyone who ever has a case in the judge's courtroom on any matter. People everywhere are still grieving for Lucy and her guardians.
Lucy is dead, deprived of a life that only God should have taken. Her guardians still grieve, as do thousands of people across the world who learned of her plight. I am sure that the owners of the small dog that was killed still grieve. Five months later, we still feel great compassion for all of them. But most of all, we feel compassion for Judge Walsh either because he will one day realize the gravity of his decision and how wrong it was or will never have experienced the joy of feeling and acting compassionately.
Again, thank you for your insight into this matter. It was helpful.
Post a Comment