The Workers Speak Out

Yesterday, the pseudo-sanctuary's (ps) directors informed the workers that later in the afternoon, the board would like to speak with the employees, without the male and female director present. The workers were told they would be interviewed one at a time and no attorneys were allowed.

Needless to say, the rules changed once again, because the meeting consisted of the one board member present, three members on the phone, and of course, the ps' attorney. The attorney was supposedly there to "take notes."

I was told that the attorney kept making faces each time an employee made a negative comment about the male and female directors, that it became such a distraction, two employees actually stopped talking and addressed the attorney's bad behavior.

Three employees told the board exactly what was happening at the ps and two employees, wrote letters to the board explaining why they did not attend and what their thoughts were regarding the male and female directors' work performance.

I was saddened, but not surprised, to learn the two most senior animal caretakers did not participate in the meeting. I don't know if they also wrote letters, but it would not surprise me if they just sat on the sidelines and let the other workers defend the animals. Sure they have a lot to lose financially, but that is NO excuse for not standing up for the animals.

The board meeting lasted several hours and no doubt the members had a lot to think about at its conclusion. I was told the three board members on the phone seemed receptive to the information provided by the workers, but the one member that was there in person (the one with the criminal record and apparently is having a "sexual relationship" with the directors' daughter--the same daughter that allegedly collects a paycheck for very little work performed) asked questions normally posed by a "defense attorney." It would not surprise me if the attorney prepped this board member before the meeting.

Now the board is exactly where I was at three years ago -- they know the truth about what is transpiring at the ps. Question is what will they do now? Do they turn the reins over to the workers and fire the male and female director or do they do absolutely nothing? Did the board even consider the animals' welfare? Do they even care about the animals? When was the last time any of the board members spend a day with the animals? Have they even been to the non-regulated, non-inspected property?

Meanwhile the ps is dangerously close to violating the USDA agreement. It doesn't look like the perimeter fence will be installed by September 30th at the non-regulated, non-inspected property.

It is good to know the workers now understand what I did and why I did what I did. It was never personal -- it was all for the animals. I learned the current board is still upset that I went to the media -- but hey! I would not have gone to the media if they took my allegations seriously. Instead, they followed like sheep behind the female and male director and took absolutely no initiative to learn the truth about what was happening to the animals. In my opinion, this entire board needs to go and a new professional board (with no family members, current/past lovers, or friends ties) installed to overlook the ps.

So now we all have to wait and see what the board will do next. I pray the board makes the right decision for the very first time ever. Will this story have a happy ending?

In His Time

In His Time Ecclesiastes 3:11

"He hath made every thing beautiful in his time:"

In His time, in His time,
He makes all thing beautiful in His time.
Lord, my life to You I bring,
May each song I have to sing,
Be to You a lovely thing, in Your time. In Your time, in Your time,
You make all thing beautiful in Your time.
Lord, my life to You I bring,
May each song I have to sing,
Be to You a lovely thing, in Your time.

God's timing is truly a miracle - especially when it comes to this case. There is so much to blog I don't know where to begin.

Okay, first off, the pseudo-sanctuary (ps) workers are now in total support of saving the ps animals. With the exception of just a few workers (such as the son and one of the daughters and the senior animal caretakers), everyone is working hard to gather evidence and document alleged misappropriation of funds and violations of the Animal Welfare Act.

I am so proud of the workers that stepped out and spoke out on half of those that could not - the animals. I am worried about the workers though, especially after learning the male director removed 3 shotguns, 1 semi-automatic, and related ammunition, and took them to the director's house along with the animal and financial records. Apparently the male director has a real fear of law enforcement personnel, consistently fleeing to the back of the property if a law enforcement vehicle shows up to the property (either driving by out of curiosity or dropping off "road kill"). I am also worried the directors may have relocated the government controlled drugs (i.e. Ketamine) to their personal residence as well; I'm waiting for confirmation regarding this concern.

Next news -- it was reported in the on-line newspaper that the female director, under a false name, filed a police report in which she claimed her husband, in an attempt to use a "company vehicle" clipped the daughter's vehicle in a hit and run accident.

The real story?

According to the information I received, the following events allegedly took place on the night of February 19, 2009.

The female director, wanting to catch her husband with his girlfriend, enlisted the aid of her daughter to follow her husband to the mistress' house. The male director arrived at the mistress' house and parked the vehicle behind the house, so his vehicle could not be seen from the street. The daughter parked her vehicle in such a way that it partially blocked the mistress' driveway, thereby attempting to block any attempt made by the male director to leave the property. The daughter exited the vehicle and approached the mistress' front door to confront her father while female director remained in the vehicle. Apparently, male director saw his daughter and fled out the back door to the truck he was driving. In attempt to avoid the blocked vehicle, the male director hit the daughter's vehicle and then fled the scene. It is my understanding; the vehicle the male director was driving was a ps vehicle, purchased in October 2008, registered to his home address and not to ps' business address (Ford F350SD King Ranch - white/tan in color). It is also my understanding; the male director frequently uses this truck for his personal use. In any case, either the female director or the daughter called the local police department to report the male director was intoxicated and driving erratically on public roads and requested assistance. The male director returned to the directors' personal residence, with the female director and daughter in hot pursuit.

It appears the female director did not provide accurate information to the police officer. While she left off critical details regarding the reason/cause of the accident, she also filed the report under the false name of "Cassidy xxxx." I believe this report was filed in this manner, so she could use it as leverage against her spouse during divorce proceedings or as a means to have him removed as the ps "general manager."

Clearly, the directors had little regard for the ps's property, and the Board of Directors appears to have no control over the use of said vehicles. This type of reckless behavior puts the animals at both properties at great risk; therefore, I highly encouraged the Texas Office of the Attorney General (once again) to assume receivership of the ps before a serious accident occurs.

To make matters worse, one of the animal caretakers told me the female director pulled her away from work to stake out the mistress' place of work before the above incident occurred, so as to learn where the mistress lived. For two hours, the ps employee and the female director staked out the work place, until the mistress came out of her place of employment. They followed her to, what they would learn later, was the mistress' brother's home. While staking out the new location, the male director, riding his motorcycle and his "head bandanna" rode up next to the staked out ps vehicle. Recognizing the vehicle and the ps worker, the male director sped away into a near by lot, know the ps' SUV could not follow. The ps worker was really scared the male director would fire her, but the female director assured her that she would protect her--that she was only following her orders. Needless to say, the animals paid for the time lost while both employee and the highly paid directors were on stake out. The employee said she felt she had no choice but to follow the orders of the female director.

So, not only did the ps directors use ps vehicles for their own gain, but they also use the ps workers for their own personal (and may I say disgusting) reasons!

Where do the board members stand on the issue? I received word that the VP is interested in exploring the idea of removing the male and female directors from the board in light of the blog information, OAG records (which were kept from the board members), and the stories coming out on the on-line newspaper. Apparently, the VP wants to hold a board meeting to discuss the directors' actions and discuss steps to remove them from the ps. I am trying not to get my hopes up -- but this is first positive sign the directors are willing to take fiduciary responsibility for the animals and the finances. The workers are hopeful they will finally do something soon because of what is happening to the animals.

What is happening to the animals? Well, once again, the directors are forcing the workers to serve slimy rotten green meat to the animals. Just like last time, several of the animals went on a hunger strike and now the female director has a policy that if any animal refuses to eat for 2-3 days, then it's to be euthanized. I received this report from one of the senior animal caretakers, and I have no reason to doubt her because I was a witness to the serving of green meat at the ps when I volunteered out there. What is sickening is the female director apparently directed the workers to "wash off the slime" and put out the rotten chicken for the big cats' consumption, telling the workers that if the cats are truly hungry they will eat the green meat. How long can a big cat eat rotten chicken before it refuses to eat one more bite? Right now, Savo, a female lioness is having trouble eating the green rotten meat -- are her days numbered?

Tonight, I learned the employees wrote the board of directors via email, begging them to meet with them privately so they could discuss all the problems and incidents at the ps. I'll say it again -- I am so proud of the workers for standing up for the animals. They are risking everything in the hopes of a change in management. It may have taken them some time to find their voice, but then I guess now is the right time.

[Updated:  Present Day]

Here's the SAPD Incident Report filed by "Cassidy".

SAPD Incident Report - 021909

Betrayed

The workers were betrayed by the vice president of the pseudo-sanctuary (ps)!

I'm shocked! Considering he did the exact same thing to me in December 2005 I guess I really shouldn't be too surprised by his latest action!  Today, a senior animal caretaker was called into the office, where one of the daughters, the male and female directors plus the director's personal attorney (who clearly represents the ps directors and NOT the animals) were waiting to fire the employee. Since she lives on the unregulated, non-inspected property, she was given three days to leave the rental mobile home which she shares with her common-law husband and fellow animal caretaker.
 

Shortly thereafter, the ps daughter, lawyer, and female director (the firing squad) arrived at the unregulated property to serve notice to male employee -- advising him that his common-law wife had 24-hours to leave the property and if she was seen with him at their rental home, after the 24-hour notice, his employment would also be terminated and he would be evicted immediately. Since they could not find the employee during his lunch hour, the firing squad left a typed memo on the rental property's door way!
 

The firing squad also fired the other daughter (the only family member standing up for the animals) after the PS director's lawyer allegedly assaulted the daughter's husband, resulting in a Sheriff's Office report.
 

When the employees contacted the ps vice president, telling him what was happening to the workers, the vp told the workers he supported the attorney's actions! Betrayed!!! What happened to firing the ps directors? Well, apparently the directors' attorney found out about the workers' plea for help (via emails) to the board of directors and so he spoke to the vp at great length, explaining to him that getting rid of the workers would be in the best interest of the ps. How, I ask you, could it possibly be in the best interest of the animals to fire the very people that want to save them? This sounds like a wrongful termination suit just waiting to be filed! Fired the day after they ask for help from the Board! Are you kidding me? What in the world were the directors thinking?
 

Were all the board members in agreement to this action? If not, are they going to take a stand or are they going to betray the animals and the workers too? Only time will tell. All I can say to the workers is "well done for standing strong and true." I am so proud of them for not betraying the animals--unlike the board of directors whom have a lot of explaining to do.