Posted on 05/22/2005 9:40:12 AM PDT by BenLurkin
Bomber the dog has gone underground. He was given a new home in a new town with a new family, even a new name. "He's in the doggy witness protection program," Jill Parnham said.
Parnham and the 2nd Chance Pet Rescue chose to pay $5,000, as stipulated by a small claims court ruling, rather than surrender the Labrador mutt to the family who lost him last year.
That much money could buy a purebred champion, possibly a multiple champion "with super breeding potential" in the world of show dogs, said Judythe Coffman, a longtime breeder, author and American Kennel Club judge from Grayfire Weimaraners in Rosamond.
That is also roughly one year's operating budget for 2nd Chance Pet Rescue.
The "dog-formerly-known-as-Bomber" has been the center of an emotional seven-month battle of wills between Parnham and the Gormont family, who owned him before he escaped their yard in October.
A Los Angeles County Animal Care and Control shelter mistakenly allowed Parnham to adopt Bomber despite a microchip implanted to identify the owners - a microchip discovered in a routine scan by a shelter vet during the adoption process.
The vet read the Gormonts' contact information encoded on the chip but disregarded it, and the shelter later gave that data to Parnham.
After the mistake came to light, the shelter and the county department asked Parnham to give Bomber back, but she refused.
The pet rescue owner discovered the shelter's mistake when she called the Gormonts, thinking they had surrendered the dog.
She also learned that the dog she calls "Judd" spent nights in a doghouse or garage, was not house-trained and was sometimes hooked to a cable in the back yard.
Parnham said she believes pets should have "full house privileges," and that she would not "give in, back down or give up the dog."
The Gormonts sued Parnham in small claims court and won. The judge ordered the rescue to return Bomber or pay $5,000 in reparations - the maximum claim possible in a small claims case. Parnham had 30 days to appeal the decision. Just days before the appeals period was to expire, 2nd Chance chose to pay.
The rescue, "a registered California charity, has secured a loan to pay the Gormont family … the $5,000 they demanded in court for the 'emotional loss, pain and suffering' caused during our dispute over the dog previously known as 'Bomber'," a release from the rescue said.
The Gormonts had stated repeatedly - on court documents and in person - that they wanted the dog, not the money. They called the court to protest but were told that the ruling had been fulfilled, Ann Gormont said.
"They said, 'That's it. She fulfilled the judgment.' We're never gonna see our dog again ," Ann Gormont's 23-year-old son, Anthony Valdespino, said.
The family reacted with dismay.
"All the (evidence was) stacked in our favor. We won the judgment, but we still don't have our dog," Valdespino said.
"We went through all the proper channels … and our hands are tied," Gormont said. "I was in shock for three or four days."
The Gormonts said they had been confident they would win an appeal and the idea that Parnham would pay the judgement never crossed their minds.
"I was really under the impression that Bomber was coming home," Ann said. "Any reasonable person would not really go to that extent."
When the truth settled in, shock was replaced by pain and anger.
"It was a heartbreak for me and for the family," Gormont said.
"We're pretty bent about this thing," Valdespino said. "It's pretty lame. Nobody understands why - I don't know what kind of person would keep a dog from a family."
In a release, Parnham wrote:
"In all good conscience, our committee and Board members felt we could not return this dog to his previous life of abject misery. He is now on his way to a loving home with a warm indoor bed, daily walks and regular grooming."
The $5,000 payment was a significant sum for the rescue.
"That's pretty much our annual budget," Parnham said, adding that they may be paying it off for quite a while.
"It takes as long as it takes, but it won't take as long as the life of the dog that will have a nice home," she said.
The Gormonts said the money is irrelevant.
"I know a few people made comments that we were doing this for the money," Gormont said. "I don't need money. We just wanted our … family pet back."
Money was not the only cost, Parnham said.
"We spent years building up a reputation, and now there are people out there that think that we're the scum of the earth," she said.
Passersby have shouted at her at fund-raisers, and someone even keyed her truck when she was in Lancaster, she said.
But Parnham said she feels all costs were justified.
"He was a mess and he is beautiful now," she said - beautiful and living with a 2nd Chance-approved family far away.
After paying the claim, 2nd Chance sent out an appeal to all its contacts in the pet world, asking for funds to help pay down the debt.
By Thursday , it had received about $3,800 in cash donations, as well as salable items including autographed celebrity keepsakes.
The Gormonts take some solace from the vehemence of Parnham's commitment to Judd.
"It gives me some piece of mind … that she really seems to love the dog," Valdespino said.
The family recently adopted another dog from the shelter, a golden retriever. They hoped he could offer Bomber some companionship when he came home, Gormont said. Instead the new dog will have the dog house, the garage and the back yard, with its new block wall and double-locked steel door, all to himself.
"DOG GONE - This dog, formerly known as Bomber and Judd, has been the center of a pet custody fight between his former owners and the proprieter of a pet rescue who got the dog from the Los Anglees County Animal Care and Control after he escaped his former owners' yard."
Steal back the dog.
That's no Labrador.
What I don't understand is why Parnham hasn't been arrested on charges of theft. She had a possession that she knowingly belonged to someone else and refused to return Bomber to his rightful owners.
The dog was flat out the Gormont's property, that rescue worker is a nut and a thief.
I can sympathize when an animal is abused, that is a case for rescue. (there are laws in most counties). BUt this dog clearly was not being abused.
She stole that dog, and she was clearly being a vindictive bitch (pun intended) in deciding what was "right"care in her mind, not what the owners think.
Well, as I said, the home needed to be checked out. The dog had to be checked over by a vet. "He was a mess," she said. Was he? Also, had the owners reported their dog missing? I don't remember that being in the report. One would think that a family who loved their dog would have reported their dog missing.
However, this should have been settled without it having had to go to court. I agree.
Certainly doesn't look like a lab to me.
Why would neglectful animal owners go through the trouble and expense of implanting a microchip? That woman has a couple of screws loose.
Many shelters chip dogs these days, just because an 'owner' has their dog chipped does not mean they were responsible or caring enough to do it.
Keeping a dog outside, chained up is just plain wrong. No room for discussion. If you don't want to take the time to treat the animal with respect then why have it?
I currently have 4 dogs living with me, and one of my Border Collies prefers being outside as much as possible, but he comes in whenever he feels like it as well, he's not confined to the back yard, he's there by choice, his choice.
I think it was wrong of the shelter vet to ignore the chip and not contact the Gormants (sp), and that's the person who should be punished, he was neglectful regardless of personal opinions.
I've no problem picking up the phone if I see animal abuse, but let them take too long to act and see if that animal doesn't 'vanish' I may have a screw loose myself, hard telling, but I won't tolerate abuse of any sort, be it to animals, women or children.
That dog did not ask to be with that family, he had no choice in the matter, and you can bet, he didn't ask to be chained out in the yard and left there, so when he found the chance to escape, he took it... the same as any one of you would have if you were being mistreated.
And before one of you points out that 'they are only animals' keep in mind that you too are 'just an animal' you just happen to have opposable thumbs and, in some cases, a higher intelligence. I say in some cases, because I work with a couple of dogs that I personally am sure are smarter than some of the first and second-graders living in my neighborhood, my dogs have enough sense not to run out in traffic, they know to come in out of the rain, they come when I call them instead of sitting around with a dumb look on their faces... and there are some adults out there that I have met that I'm not so sure are as bright as those kids up the street....
Core in Largo, FL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
