Bane of companies, PETA spy reveals self

TRENTON, N.J. - Lisa Leitten is finished living her double life. For the past three years, the soft-spoken, 30-year old moved from Missouri to Texas to Virginia, applying for jobs at businesses dealing with animals. She gave her real name, and some real details about herself: a master's degree in animal psychology and prior work at a primate sanctuary in Florida.

What she didn't reveal was that she was also working for an animal welfare organization, and that she wore a hidden camera to document instances in which animals were treated with what she calls horrific neglect and cruelty.

Leitten called her last assignment for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals her most wrenching: nine months in a Virginia lab owned by Princeton, N.J.-based biomedical firm Covance Co. There, she says, monkeys were denied medical care and abused by technicians. The company denies the claims, says it treats the animals properly and has accused Leitten of illegally working under cover.

Two weeks ago, PETA presented Leitten's assertions about Covance in video footage and a massive report to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration, and Virginia prosecutors, calling for regulators to shutter the company's Vienna, Va., lab.

"This was my third assignment, and my final one," Leitten said in a recent interview with The Associated Press, the first time she has publicly revealed her identity. "You never forget the things that you've seen."

Leitten grew up an animal lover in a middle-class family in Buffalo, N.Y. While in college in Ohio, a psychology class took her to a zoo to study chimpanzee behavior.

"My love of primates grew from that," she said. "They are such intelligent, feeling animals, so like us."

She earned her graduate degree at Central Washington University's Chimpanzee and Human Communication Institute, famously home in the late 1960s to a chimpanzee who learned sign language.

While in college, Leitten had become a vegetarian and found herself increasingly concerned about animal welfare. PETA was a natural fit.

But she was more comfortable working behind the scenes than marching in rallies. The intrigue of undercover work outweighed her initial worries.

"At first I thought, 'There's no way.' The fear of everything, of having to wear covert equipment and move around. But then it sounded sort of exciting at the same time," she said.

Her first job began in May 2002, a nine-month stint at a Missouri lab that produced pet food for Proctor & Gamble's Iams label. There, she claimed she found animals that were injured, had untended wounds and receiving unnecessary surgeries. Leitten documented her findings, quietly left the job and let PETA make her allegations public.

Retailer PetSmart and Iams severed contracts with the lab, which laid off nearly half of its workers. Its owner accused PETA of playing on corporations' fear of negative publicity rather than exposing legitimate concerns.

By July of 2003, Leitten resurfaced at her next assignment, a wildlife refuge in Amarillo, Texas. PETA said it had received complaints of tigers and monkeys housed in waste-laden cages and being fed spoiled food.

Six months later, Leitten slipped out of Texas, and PETA held another news conference with another damning video. A subsequent USDA review backed up the group's assertions.

For what she says was her final assignment, Leitten was hired as a primate technician for Covance.

Leitten's camera work, and the report issued by PETA, depict frightened monkeys being yanked from their cages and handled roughly by aggressive, often cursing technicians.

She says she watched animals suffer with festering wounds, and that tubes were forced into their sinuses for research medicine to be administered, causing them to scream, bleed and vomit. Monkeys were housed alone in cages that were hosed down with the animals still inside, dripping and shivering, she said.

Laurene Isip, a Covance spokeswoman, says the company has complied with animal welfare regulations for its half-century in business, and doubted the credibility of PETA's charges.

"As an employee she has a legal right to be there, but she's there to fulfill and execute on the tasks and responsibilities give to her by her employer. She's not there to fulfill her own private agenda," said Scott Vernick, a Philadelphia lawyer specializing in professional responsibility and legal ethics.

Bruce Weinstein, who has written four books on ethics, said even noble ends do not justify deceptive means.

"The question is, can those perhaps noble ends be achieved legally and ethically? Can one legitimately document abuses that occur without pretending to be someone one is not, or breaking the law, or videotaping things surreptitiously?"

Mary Beth Sweetland, PETA's research and investigations director, said she now has two staffers working covertly, the latest of dozens of investigations conducted by the group's over 25 years.

In some instances, as at Covance, PETA says its moles have signed nondisclosure forms and claim to try to stay within the law by never removing anything from work sites or by revealing proprietary information.

So far only one company that's been infiltrated has sued: product-testing lab Huntingdon Life Sciences. The Somerset County-based company dropped its case in return for PETA promising to not infiltrate it again for at least five years.

"It's a risk we're willing to take," Sweetland said. "If it weren't for these investigations, no one would no what was going on."

For her part, Leitten says her time as a spy was spent worrying about the animals, not about being caught. She said she spent nights at home with her two dogs, weeping and writing up what she had seen during the day.

"That's why people only last in this job a couple of years," said Leitten, who asked that her current residence not be revealed. "I get migraines, a lot of anxiety. But if something can change for the animals, and their lives will be better in some way, then all those sleepless nights and crying at home will be worth it."

I find many members to be very hypocritical and inconsistent, especially with respect to the life of unborn babies. That's why I could not be a member.

I strongly object to the mistreatment of animals. If she witnessed these abuses, she should have reported it to her superiors at the company where she worked to see if they would take corrective actions.To stand idly by while these alleged abuses continued is inexcusable. I've known several people who work in animal research facilities, who are also animal lovers. There ARE ways to do animal research humanely.

Animals have no rights and can never respect nor understand them. Animals are not human.

I believe we are to be good stewards of them.

You would, pardon the pun, "have a cow" if you realized people on farms have to kick away animals when mobbed by them. That is life, but to you animal rightists, it should be "subject to legal penalties".

No, it shouldn't be legally handled. Simply shame those who do what you don't like. Keep the law out of it.

Do you think our Founders ever kept their animals in what we would now think was a "humane" fashion? Of course not!

You know, I hate PETA as much as anyone here. There are a million things to go after them for.... there links to terrorist activity, there apposition to necessary medical and scientific research, their war on the American farmer, their obsene and indecent nudity and gruesome media campaigns that our children are exposed to, etc. BUT I do not understand this whole "PETAkillsanimals.com" website and line of attack.

All they are doing in this case is euthanasia which they actually PUBLICLY endorse and PROMOTE as the "compassionate option" (so its not hypocrisy) which pretty much all humane shelters practice, etc. So I don't see how this line of criticism, that PETA puts animals down, will have any traction at all with the general public.

Let's focus on their real crimes.

I'd have to agree with this also. There is a distinct difference between utilizing animals as a resource and sadism. Those who inflict pain on an animal for the mere pleasure of it is socially ill and needs to be dealt with before they seek pleasure from inflicting pain on humans. Hunting, conducting medical experiments, fishing, etc. is different since the killing of the animal is directly tied to a utilized end.... inflicting pain for mere sport is not sport.

ConservativeMind: "Do you think our Founders ever kept their animals in what we would now think was a "humane" fashion? Of course not!"

Do you think our Founders kept blacks in what we would now think was a "civil" fashion?

My philosophy RE: animals is that I aspire to the balance of Ted Nugent.

I love his philosophy, of how he only eats want he hunts, traps or catches. He does not eat store boughten "flesh" as he calls it. I try to supplement my diet with as much wildgame as possible but am not able to go outdoorsing as much as I used to due to my health.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/04/0430_030430_tednugent.html

They like to pretend that they care for animals. Killing them is not care. It is not my line of attack. I just think they are Pharisees.

The technicians should be taught how to properly treat the animals in their care. They should not be treated roughly, cursed at, nor should they be left in their cages while the cages are hosed down. Their lives should be made as pleasant as possible. After all, they are valuable and they are doing humanity a great service. Also, they are living, breathing creatures belonging to God, just as we are.

I think that a family who puts a beloved pet "down" would say they are doing it out of compassion for that animal, to end their suffering. So I think any family who has had to go put a pet down will not think its hypocritical to both care for an animal and to practice euthanasia. That's just me.

I think PETAsupportsterrorists.com or PETAwantsyourkidtodie.com would be much better.

There most definitely should be laws against cruelty to animals. Animals are God's creatures just as we are. They deserve to be treated in a humane way.

Do you think that someone who sets a cat on fire or who ties a dog to a tree and leaves it there to starve to death should get off without punishment? If you do, I pity you.

"I do agree with documenting evidence of criminal activity at work. The perps will protest, complain and insist that employees have no right to have eyes that have seen, ears that have heard, or knowledge or evidence, of wrong doing but only what THEY say."

Boy would abortion clinics be pissed off if they were recorded giving false info to an underage girl in a parental notice state or hiding a statutory rape. Partial birth abotion on tape - would that be fair? How about PETA training programs or animal shelters? I'm not advocating as such but it is only time before someone starts fighting fire with fire.

The punishment should be social, not legal punishment.

Whatever happened to "shunnings"?

Is it right by animals to allow some to be "protected" because they are called "pets" while others are slaughtered or gassed by local shelters and that isn't called "abuse"? How about animals killed simply for meat? Did they not have a right to live? Who were you to kill that innocent animal?

Do you see the problem? There is no way to make this consistent in law.

So all animals should, especially if owned, be allowed to be killed in whatever way the owner deems fit. If the owner is Vietnamese and they own a dog, let them slaughter it.

Just because it offends your sensibilities doesn't mean it shouldn't be legal. There are plenty of things with which I disagree that should remain legal, too.

The obvious contradiction lies in their choice of words, which imply that Man and his artifacts are not part of "Nature"

Spot on. I have been using that argument for years and as usual with leftys they are silent for a moment(I think their heads hurt from unacustomed thinking) then they begin the name calling. Debate over.

I think animals should be treated well, but we have no concern as a nation for the unborn. A child molester is something to joke about, especially when he is a celebrity.

Michael Jackson owned a chimpanzee. Sort of ironic.

Let's focus on their real crimes. Such as supporting terrorist organizations like ALF, Earth First, etc?

They are self-righteous hypocrites whose philosophy, when examined in detail, is irrational. (A rat = a dog = a boy. I. Newkirk, PETA founder)

Okay, fine.

Injuring an animal for fun, or torturing it is something that should be punished by law. Those people go on to harm people, too. Euthanasia is, I guess, what has to be done when there a so many animals in shelters and no homes for them. I don't agree with it, but I can't take them all in.

Torturing and injuring for fun is a crime. You must agree with that. No animal should have to suffer just so people can get some kind of sick pleasure out of it.

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.