# Upton's dogs



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I haven't seen this mentioned here yet, but I have been following this for months:

CALL 6: Dog kennel sues Indianapolis Animal Care and Control over raid - TheIndyChannel.com

2 bitches gave birth in the pound and 5 of the pups died already. They are charging this guy $6000+/month to care for the dog in a pretty slimy shelter, that has a terrible history. If he cannot come up with the money, the dog somehow get awarded to this pound. 

I watched some evaluations they gave the bitches. One of them clearly the bitch was ready to whelp and looking for a safe place to do so -- no time for a temperament test. And for what? The dog owner is trying to get his dogs back. Plenty of time for temperament tests after the court decides? The other was of a bitch that lost her puppies the day before. This was in December, a month after the dogs were in the care of this shelter. Doing a temperament test on a bitch in that condition is pretty sad. The bitches were both nice, just not interested in playing with the dumb toy.

This is just infuriating. We are being more militant about dogs than we are about children and I find that disturbing. I hope Indiana gets their act together and gives this guy his dogs back.


----------



## Rosy831 (Feb 27, 2016)

It sounds like someone has a personal vendetta against this guy.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

It's bizarre. I didn't know where the case was at this point. It's sad, the dogs are the ones suffering. Not only the ones he owns but others that come in and there isn't any room because they want to play games.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 10, 2012)

30 years of passing inspection including within 6 months of the raid? Yeah something doesn't smell right.


----------



## WIBackpacker (Jan 9, 2014)

I've been following this on and off via Facebook. The video clip of her being "tested" is upsetting and clearly not right. The fact that the "officials" still haven't released some sort of solid evidence of abuse makes it seem like there IS no such evidence....


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Also, why would they not allow his personal veterinarian to check his dogs?

It's scary. Because Animal Control can seize your dogs without due process, everyone is nervous. 

I mean, yes, he has a number of dogs. Not 600 or 800 dogs, certainly not a puppy mill. But more than your typical pet owner. Llombardo, you have more than the typical pet owner, and yours are pets. I certainly do. 

But that doesn't mean we aren't treating them as individuals. I think sometimes, because we have many, we can appreciate them for the individuals they are maybe a little better than your average pet owner, who is expecting XYZ in terms of obedience, training, social behavior, etc. That is just to make a point. We can have a dozen or more dogs, and still know that Milla is the one with the wonky ears, and the light eyes, and the cowlick, who is affectionate, a little less confident, ok with obedience, but more of a jumping bean that would be better at agility, who had a bump on her eyelid that was successfully treated at the vet, was skinny, barely 50 pounds up to 4 years old, and nearing 8, she is up to 68. She is soft, biddable, good with other dogs and people, but will scream bloody murder if she thinks she has been crated long enough and may be missing out on something. We know who she is out of, and where she gets her temperament from. We know what she likes and what she dislikes. 

We know as much and more about each one of our dogs. 

It's like kids. People with one or two kids cannot imagine having 19 kids. That's crazy, how can they get enough attention. But when we were young, people with 1-2 kids couldn't imagine how someone could give enough attention to six kids. Those of us from larger families can't imagine having no or only one sibling. But parents with a bunch of kids love each of them, individually. And maybe they do not run them to every extra-curricular activity available, but their kids have a good life.

Back to dogs. The government should step in if the dogs are physically suffering, and the owner cannot provide any evidence that the dog's issues have been addressed appropriately. The government should step in if the owner is breaking the law in how the animals are being kept -- not providing shelter, not providing water, if there are laws against chaining, evidence that they are not following the laws. In the US, they are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, and that should be by a jury of their peers, not AC. 

It doesn't sound like Upton's dogs fell into any of these categories. 

On either PETA's or HSUS web page it tells how to go after breeders. Upton is a breeder. It says that when you go, bring reporters and camera people, etc. Pick up the worst animal and make sure they photograph it. Ok. We haven't really seen any horror-story type pictures yet. It then says, if you cannot find anything wrong with the conditions of how the dogs are kept, check the structure. So, these yayhoos are going to take photos of the ceilings and structure that has nothing to do with where or how the dogs are kept. How does this serve justice? Not everyone is rich, and some of us put our money into our dogs and not into the structure. Less important things are fixed but not necessarily repaired to a like new state, like water damage from a leaky roof -- roof is fixed, water is stopped, but the stained ceiling remains, because that is non-value added. The money that could have went into that, went to another dog show, x-rays on a bitch, a dental cleaning on an older retired bitch. Barring that, they tell you to go after their tax forms -- so if you cannot find horrendous conditions on animals, and you cannot find anything less than perfectly kept up, then go after their taxes -- isn't this fishing for any way to trip someone up?

The government is going beyond their bounds here. Don't think that because you don't breed it cannot effect you. Because once they are done stealing breeder's dogs, what is this highly effective dictator-like panel of power hungry creeps going to go after next? Already you can't dock or crop in some places. And yes, I picked this breed, in part because I don't like the idea of those things. But what if? What if they made a law saying that dogs must be transported in vehicles in airline crates. What about those of us who can't fit an airline crate in our vehicle? If we cannot run out and get a larger vehicle, can they stop our car and grab our pooch? 

How about if tomorrow, they feel that prong collars or e-collars are inhumane, and go after the congress to pass laws forbidding them. Now, these people, remember do not need evidence or a court trial -- you have to prove to them that you are not using such a device and never have. A simple anonymous phone call can get a court order to search your home and check your dogs. If they see you have a tunnel and an A-frame in your back yard, they may determine that your dogs are being trained and most likely they are being trained with such a collar, so even though they haven't found one, they are going to seize your dog and force you to pay an exorbitant monthly fee for its keep while we wait for six months or 3 years for you to either clear yourself with the courts or fail to clear yourself. And all the time you know that your dog who is frantic in tight spaces is going berserk in that kennel, exposed to every disease under the sun. 

This is a horrible thing. 

2 litters were born there in the pound. 1 of them, all pups died. It is beyond disgusting. Taking a pregnant bitch away from a good home is reprehensible.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

I agree. There are many more things they need to worry about then this guy. It scares me to think that they can come in and take dogs like this. Many years ago I did have this happen to me and it boiled down to the town president not liking me because I didn't vote to elect them--sadly they knew who was voting how. The FBI took care of that and I had no problem calling them once they messed with me. I would be walking my dogs and here comes animal control, they were doing what they were told and told me as much. They knew it was wrong and luckily they liked me. They came one time and tried taking my dogs, every neighbor in my building claimed a dog and I put two in the garage, they didn't even try proving otherwise. They just wanted to cause problems. It was a rough couple years but I held onto my dogs and lots of the political people lost their jobs and/or ended up in prison. What a circus, something you see in the movies and not anything that anyone should ever go through. I completely understand how this guy feels. 

I also agree that I know my dogs well as individuals.i know what they like or don't like, I know how they each react to things. They aren't perfect in obedience, but they are well mannered and that is all I want. They come when I call them, they wait, they sit, they love kids. Those things are important to me. I would be crushed if someone tried to take them. I would up and move before that could happen. I would fight it tooth and nail. 

I hope this guy gets his dogs back, he needs to go as high up that chain as he can. They are counting on him backing down and I'm glad he isn't.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

6 months at 6,000 plus for maintenance on the dogs, I don't know how long he can hold out. There is a go fund me page for him. But it is so frustrating that you have to pay for something before you are even proved guilty. No due process. Someone needs to find this sort of thing unconstitutional.

The whole point of dogs being property, is that citizens do have rights when it comes to property. If your dogs are properly licensed, it says (in Ohio) that they cannot take them unless a natural disaster, without some form of due process. Not sure if they have changed that yet. 

If a dog is chained to a 2' post without ability to move or reach water, yes, animal control should be able to take the dog. But it ought to be immediately life threatening to take a dog before they can make a case before an unbiased magistrate, and you can plead your case as well. There should be some form of fairness.


----------



## WateryTart (Sep 25, 2013)

This is seriously disturbing.


----------



## Billie (Feb 13, 2012)

Yes very disturbing. I am glad that its being discussed here, as I started a thread today not seeing this. 
When a mill is raided, the pictures are all over the news THAT DAY of the horrid conditions and the horrid unhealthy dogs. Ive sure not seen this on this case. 
Also, his dogs have to have been pretty well cared for to not be completely mentally screwed up by being in the shelter . If they werent treated well and mentally sound to begin with- I think they'd be more basket cases at the shelter during these ridiculous tests they're putting them through. And the pregnant girl in labor- what is wrong with these people. Its scary -dogs who were taken from their owner are put into the hands of these folks who dont even know basic animal husbandry?! 
Makes my blood boil. I only just heard of this this week, but will be following it .


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

There is a Facebook page on these dogs too. It is criminal what they did to that pregnant dog.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair (Jul 27, 2010)

I agree MAWL. I saw the video with the pregnant dog on FB. It was hard to watch.


There's another video with the shelter people introducing a GSD to a pittie which is all wrong as well.


It's like they are trying to set these dogs up to fail. 


Something is seriously wrong here and I can't help wondering, is it a vendetta, PETA?


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

I agree. Of all breeds to use they sent Pit Bulls in there and it did not go well for the GSDs, especially the pregnant dog. Who in their right mind uses Pits to test another dog's aggression?


----------



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

More: CALL 6: Deputy city prosecutor admits to doctoring records - TheIndyChannel.com

And the trial is now set for August, 4 more months at $6100 a month.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

I was just informed by somebody involved with the Facebook page that it is speculated that one of the young dogs was euthanized due to an untreated Pit Bull bite during temperament testing that became infected and was left untreated.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

MineAreWorkingline said:


> I was just informed by somebody involved with the Facebook page that it is speculated that one of the young dogs was euthanized due to an untreated Pit Bull bite during temperament testing that became infected and was left untreated.


I'm not the type of person that is sue happy, but I would go after them with everything I had if this is true.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

llombardo said:


> I'm not the type of person that is sue happy, but I would go after them with everything I had if this is true.


It's a shame all the way around. I think this poor man's focus is on getting his dogs back and out of the hands of these maniacal shelter workers but I do suspect that somebody somewhere is logging all this and I would not be surprised if there is a lawsuit down the road.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 10, 2012)

I believe Upton is going to sue. The deputy prosecutor lied, being demoted is not enough he has no integrity and should be fired and any case he's been involved in should be in question.


----------



## Daisy&Lucky's Mom (Apr 24, 2011)

I've been reading this and it breaks my heart. I feel bad for theowner but especially for the dogs.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

They've come to some kind of settlement. I am not sure what the provisions are.

But, Paul Upton has gotten back 10 dogs so far, will get another 10 next week, and the rest the following week. 

Anyone with more info on this than that, please let us know. I hope IAC has to pay back that ransom for every month that they held his dog, and make compensation for the one that died, and the lost puppies.


----------



## angelas (Aug 23, 2003)

I saw part of the live reunion on FB. The dogs I saw looked so happy to be home.


----------



## Deb (Nov 20, 2010)

This kind of thing happens more than most know about. Several years ago a friend was raided and her twenty dogs taken. They were all show dogs and the number included two litters of puppies. She won and was able to get back about half her dogs. Every one of her dogs were in top condition. But they adopted out half her dogs illegally spayed and neutered.


And there's the case of the show sheltie who got out of the dog watcher's yard while the owner was at Westminster and caught by the dog catcher. A rescue group was called and the dog taken the same day. The dog was identified by it's microchip and the owner spent I don't know how much to try to get the dog back from the rescue group who refused to return it to the owner. She had to go to court and it took a year or two?


----------



## angelas (Aug 23, 2003)

Deb said:


> And there's the case of the show sheltie who got out of the dog watcher's yard while the owner was at Westminster and caught by the dog catcher. A rescue group was called and the dog taken the same day. The dog was identified by it's microchip and the owner spent I don't know how much to try to get the dog back from the rescue group who refused to return it to the owner. She had to go to court and it took a year or two?


The last I heard Piper's owner had over $120,000 in legal fees. My god, how many dogs in actual need of rescue could have been helped if a rescue spent that much on them instead of fighting the legal owner.

Upton had to pay something like $6100/month to keep IAC from selling his dogs. And they had them for over a year. $6100 x 13 months = $79,300. And that is just the ransom. It doesn't include all the court fees and legal fees he would have had to pay and the damage to his business.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

It's horrible. One of his dog's was injured while in their care, and they took it to the vet. Got antibiotics, and somehow, the wound became aggravated again. 2 year old bitch. They didn't get her back into the vet for a week to ten days. They decided they needed to euthanize her. If a breeder allowed a wound to fester for 10 days or more, and they were made aware of it, there would be charges brought. 

I just want this fellow to get his dogs back and hopefully the nightmare will be completely over for him and his dogs. 13 months is a long time, and one of the bitches had a live litter that no one is talking about. The other litter all died -- got to think it was that poor bitch they were temperament testing where anyone who knew anything, could see the girl was looking for a place to drop puppies.


----------



## Jenny720 (Nov 21, 2014)

This story is so incredibly messed up and sounds so illegal how can this be allowed. To bad the owner couldn't go in there with a gang of people with wire cutters and take their dogs back. I would sue this rescue group they should not get away with this. Such a crime what happened makes no sense at all.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Not a rescue group. Indianapolis Animal Control. It is a government run entity with too much power. What they did to him is really unconstitutional. The constitution really has few amendments, the bill of rights, protects us against unlawful search and seizure, which is what happened in this instance. 

There is a balance, where the voice of the people and the mood of the people tends to supersede the laws that are laid down in the interest of a perceived greater good. In this case, images of abused and neglected animals fueled the power of an entity to go beyond the bounds of law. They can seize animals without due process, before a person is proved guilty. And the person must spend a ton of money to prove himself innocent. It is a gross miscarriage of justice. 

As was said, gruesome images were not displayed from Paul Upton's facility because his dogs were healthy and cared for. And an attitude against any breeding, against purebred dogs, caused employees of this agency to steal his dogs, possibly in hopes of selling the well-bred, sound animals for profit. What normally happens in these cases is that people give up rights to their dogs because they cannot continue to make those ransom payments. 

I hope to find out what the final outcome of this was. Because I want the money restored to the man, and I want the Indianapolis Animal Control stripped of power and possibly for heads to roll (people should be fired over this).


----------



## Jenny720 (Nov 21, 2014)

Yes heads need to roll.


----------

