Followup: In starved-dog case, investigators ‘not ruling anything out’

In case you missed the story late Friday about an emaciated dog found in West Seattle and the reward “up to $2,500” offered for any information leading to who’s responsible – we just talked with Seattle Animal Shelter director Don Jordan to ask some followup questions. Read on for what we found out:

First, some who commented on Friday’s story wondered about the circumstances of the dog’s death after it was found. Jordan confirms it was euthanized – after animal-control officers picked it up, responding to a report by someone who said “a very sickly, very thin dog” had turned up on their property (in the 9400 block of 26th SW), a vet told them it was too emaciated and “already close to death” and that euthanization would be the best thing.

The biggest question: Is there any chance the dog had simply been wandering and unable to find food for so long that it was not deliberate? “We’re not ruling that possibility out,” said Jordan. “At this point in time, we know so little, we’re trying to ascertain if people saw this animal on anyone’s property, in a particular location, or out wandering about.”

(Here again is a link to a photo of the dog while it was in the clinic.)

He did disclose that a “former owner who now lives in Eastern Washington” had been found before last week’s news release, and she claimed that “the dog was lost at least 30 days ago.” However, he added, it did not appear she had been “making concerted efforts to find it, which is unfortunate.”

While again stressing that they just don’t know yet what happened here and are hopeful some information will emerge, Jordan added that there have been cases in the past where animals with owners have been “intentionally starved,” so they want to find out if that was the case here, or not.

If you can help with the investigation – here again is the essential information from the end of last Friday’s news release:

If you recognize the dog and have seen him or know where he has been over the past several weeks please call Seattle Animal Shelter Enforcement Supervisor Ann Graves at (206)386-4288. The case number is 5319. Any information about the dog’s whereabouts is vital to helping determine the circumstances around the dog’s condition.

bertha May 21, 2012 (10:37 am)

Yes, animals are “intentionally starved.” I know because my former neighbors did it. If I hadn’t seen their dog when I did I am sure he would have died within the week. He was emaciated, dehydrated and could barely hold his head up. He was removed by animal control in March and is recovering in a new home. I don’t know what happened to the dog in this story but it is very important that we realize this does happen and to speak out whenever we suspect abuse.

Anne May 21, 2012 (10:44 am)

After reading this-there really are lots more questions-“former owner who now lives in Eastern Washington”-does that mean she sold/gave the dog to someone else? “the dog was lost at least 30 days ago” Does she know because she lost it-or did the person she gave/sold the dog to tell her that? That she “made no concerted effort to find it” sounds like this “former owner” might know quite a bit more about this case than Mr. Jordan can say right now.Very sad situation.

JanS May 21, 2012 (11:32 am)

Anne..my thought was…did she move and leave the dog behind? “former owner” doesn’t explain a lot. Did she abandon it, and call it “lost”? She does know more..at least where the dog was 30 days ago…before it got “lost”. I have visions of this poor dog roaming around, unable to fend for itself..no food…water, except for what comes out of the sky…so sad…

LivesInWS May 21, 2012 (11:38 am)

How someone treats animals tells you a lot about that person.

Jim May 21, 2012 (11:58 am)

Why did you publish the original press release from the Humane Society? It was full of inflammatory language without factual basis, which seems now to be reluctantly admitted.

I cannot figure out how terms like “atrocious act of negligence,” “truly heinous act,” “this type of abuse,” and “felony” made it into this story. I had to sort though all of that to learn that very little is actually known about what actually happened to this animal. And now that the owner has possibly been located the event is merely “unfortuate?”

Whatever happened to “just the facts?” It troubles me that moral and legal judgements are being drawn and published for public consumption based on an assumption of the facts.

This is not a comment about the dog, none of us has enough information to make a judgement yet. This is a comment on how the information was presented.

WSB May 21, 2012 (1:34 pm)

Jim, we published the news release after receiving it from the Seattle Animal Shelter, not from the Humane Society, which is one of the organizations involved. In addition to sending it to news organizations, SAS published it on their “The Scoop” website:
.
http://thescoop.seattle.gov/2012/05/18/2500-reward-offered-seattle-animal-shelter-looking-for-information-about-emaciated-dog-found-in-west-seattle-2/
.
and that link was sent to me yet again by several people over the weekend who hadn’t seen that we had already published it.
.
We publish a fair amount of city news releases, when directly relevant to West Seattle, verbatim, at least a few a week. Like other news releases we publish, they are identified as such and they are italicized and surrounded by a blue block – that is a heavy layer of attribution; it basically makes the news release a quote – this is what the Seattle Animal Shelter SAID. We publish only a small percentage of the news releases we receive – many are fodder for event-calendar listings, for example – but this one was presented as urgent, and so we published it. I got it late on a Friday afternoon, when following up was impossible, but I promised to follow up today and have done so. Regarding “reluctantly admitted,” no, I would not characterize my conversation with Don Jordan as “reluctantly admitt(ing)” anything – I asked the city PIO who sent the news release who would be the BEST person to follow up with, of the four different contacts that were listed, and the reply was to call Don, who is the SAS’s media contact most of the time as well as its leader. So that’s who I called, and this is what he said. I asked him whether the former owner was located before or after this news release was issued and he said, before. – TR

ca May 21, 2012 (1:46 pm)

Im sorry but looks like crap owner and should be investegated a bit more. Who the hell just moves and doesnt make effort to look for your pet. This paturbs me more!

c May 21, 2012 (2:13 pm)

I have 3 dogs, one is an escape artist. Normally, he’s just next door. But, if he were missing for more than 15 minutes, I would be in a panic. If he were missing over night, I would be a basket case. Animals are a life time committement!

Jim May 21, 2012 (2:23 pm)

Is the person who moved to Eastern Washington actually the owner of the dog?

K May 21, 2012 (2:42 pm)

I’m concerned about two things:

— The SAS press release’s characterization of the dog’s condition as being from deliberate neglect. This stemmed from HSUS’s involvement and their offering of the reward money. It’s difficult from the press release to see how the city was not effectively endorsing HSUS’s presentation of the case. They should have been more careful. As Jim points out, there’s so much that’s unknown that it was inappropriate for such inflammatory language to be used.

— The fact that the dog was put to death. Anyone who reads about animal cruelty cases would have questions about whether this was really necessary, despite what the vet is reported to have said. I’ve seen many photographs of starved dogs that were considerably more shocking than the one linked to here, and those were cases in which the dog recovered. I can’t help but wonder whether this dog might have recovered, too. If HSUS became involved early on, when the dog was actually at the vet’s office, that would deepen my questions. I think it’s legitimate to ask how and when they became part of the case; did SAS call them to ask for reward money, or did the person who found the dog contact them at the same time he/she presumably called Seattle Animal Control? What was HSUS’s role, if any, in the decision to bring about the dog’s immediate death?

To see an especially graphic example of what I mean, search on “Patrick: His health is good, his former owner heads to trial, and his custody still disputed”.

Alki Resident May 21, 2012 (3:06 pm)

Sounds to me she didn’t want to bother taking the dog with them on their move to Eastern Wa. Probably some angel would just somehow find the dog and take it in. I hope they get her to tell the truth about this situation. Too bad dogs don’t talk.

Sorry, comment time is over.