ER - Evidence mounts in animal abuse case

Investigative reports mistakenly released Tuesday by the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office demonstrate sheriff’s officials visited Bugenig’s former Bridgeville residence numerous times and ultimately recommended 123 charges against her for alleged animal-related offenses. ER graphic

Evidence mounts in animal abuse case
by Heather Muller , 8/24/2006

“This situation would be funny, if it weren’t so completely disgusting.”

So said Shannon Miranda, of Miranda’s Animal Rescue in Fortuna, about the endless bureaucratic drama surrounding the former animals of Roberta Bugenig that died or were killed at Bugenig’s former residence near Mad River in Trinity County.

Bugenig, who owned as many as 100 horses, sheep, goats, dogs and other animals, previously lived near Bridgeville, where she was investigated for a variety of alleged animal offenses in Humboldt County.

The story reads like a comedy of errors on the part of officials in two counties — with numerous charges requested but not filed, warnings about the animals’ welfare not heeded, kennels not inspected and crime scenes and evidence left unsecured.

Or maybe it’s a horror story, in which the rotting remains of dead dogs are seemingly tripped over every time a Mad River hunter walks into the woods.

For the animals Bugenig owned, however, the story is pure tragedy. An unknown number starved on the property, while others were apparently shot or bludgeoned and dumped at various locations around South Fork Mountain.

But the comic aspect of the situation was back on full display Tuesday when the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office inadvertently provided Miranda with confidential investigative reports prepared by deputies and animal control officers who had first been called to Bugenig’s Chalk Mountain residence for a complaint of an illegal kennel operation.

Miranda was charged a standard $10 fee for each report.

But on Wednesday morning, Miranda said he received a call from Melva Paris, a records supervisor for the Sheriff’s Office, who said he had been given the reports in error, and advised him that the documents needed to be returned at once.

Paris confirmed that the transaction was “an oversight” and said Miranda’s money would be refunded if he returned the reports.

But copies of them had already been obtained by The Eureka Reporter, whose legal counsel determined that the reports had lost their confidentiality at the time they were released to Miranda.

“Gee,” Miranda said Wednesday. “Do you think that means they’re not going to give me back my 20 bucks?”

He added, though, that he was more concerned about the contents of the reports, which he said show the extraordinary efforts made by Humboldt County sheriff’s officials to help the Bugenig animals — and raise serious questions about decisions made by the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office not to pursue 123 charges against Bugenig for alleged animal offenses.

According to the reports, deputies first visited the Bugenig residence on Jan. 23, 2004. At that time, officers reported, “We found several dogs tied up on chains and others in chain-link kennels. We found that 55-gallon drums were being used as kennels for the dogs,” many of which “ran and hid in the barrels as we approached… . Some dogs appeared to be aggressive while others hid in fear. None appeared to be socialized.”

Sheriff’s officers reported that Bugenig kept so many animals, it was impossible to get an accurate tally.

“The count for the number of dogs was between 60 and 62,” according to one report, “with three people each doing their own count. There could easily be twice that many dogs at this location hidden in the barrels. …

“The floor of the chain link areas was muddy, and there was an extremely strong odor of fecal matter.”

On Jan. 26, there was a second contact, the report stated. Bugenig came to the Humboldt County Animal Control Office and “demanded to know” why sheriff’s officers had been on the property. An animal control officer told Bugenig she need to provide proof of legal rabies vaccinations for her dogs, and Bugenig left after saying “she would be moving out of the area within two weeks.”

In the middle of March, according to the report, officers returned to the residence to check on the animals. “Another notice of correction was left for Roberta Bugenig to have the dogs vaccinated and licensed.”

On April 23, they returned again. “The dogs were still there and we observed dogs we had not seen before. There were three or four young dogs about 4 months old at that location.

The officer continued, “I also saw a dog tied in the yard which had not been there before. It is unknown whether it was in one of the kennels or not. Another notice of correction was left for Bugenig.”

Five days later, the report stated, an animal control officer at a livestock auction was “commanded” by a woman that he “step outside.”

The woman identified herself as Bugenig, according to the report, and again complained about officers visiting her residence.

“Bugenig denied she had 62 dogs on the property,” the officer reported, “but would not say how many she did have.”

The officer continued, “Bugenig told me she was going to have some of the dogs destroyed. I told her that was fine, I would call the Humane Society and advise them she was bringing them in. Bugenig told me she was going to destroy them herself, indicating she would shoot them. I advised her we would need to verify the dog(s) had been destroyed prior to her disposing of the bodies. Bugenig said, ‘You want me to call you to count the bodies?’ I told her that would be fine… .

“At this time, it appears Bugenig may have complied with the vaccination requirements; however, (she) refuses to comply with the licensing requirements. I request a copy of this case be sent to Christine Edwards of Trinity County Animal Control for her information and action if Bugenig moves the dogs to Trinity County.”

A distribution field on the document listed Edwards by name.

The next recorded contact occurred June 4. A deputy had received information that Bugenig was being evicted, and the deputy had gone to the residence to make sure none of the animals had been abandoned.

“If the dogs were not gone, we were going to attempt to use the (video)tape to gain a seizure warrant to show the condition the dogs were living in and the demeanor of the dogs,” the deputy wrote.

Some of the dogs remained.

Another officer reported, “On the property there were a number of medium-size dogs of different colors, breeds, and age(s) all chained to tires, trees or the axle of vehicles. One such dog was loose from its area, running free on the property with several feet of chain attached to its collar. (A deputy) requested (that) I videotape the area and include the condition of the pens (and) kennel areas, as well as the water dishes.”

The officer continued, “One dog chained to a tire appeared to have an injury to his/her hip and was not able to stand or walk properly.”

As on previous visits, both food and water were present in the kennels, the officer wrote, but the water in some of the kennels was dirty, muddy and full of mosquito larvae.

Additionally, “It appeared that bags of dog food were just dropped over the top and broken open by the animals or busted from being dropped,” the officer stated.

It was in the report of the June 4 visit that a horse, evidently seen earlier, was first mentioned.

“While we were videotaping the kennel area, we noticed the horse had lost weight, about 100 pounds,” according to the report.

“Now that the ground has dried out, we were able to get a good look at the horse’s feet. The front feet are now curled up and have big chips in them.”

The horse appeared to be “standing back on its (heels) and even almost appears to be starting to sit down. We attempted to get the horse to walk, but it did not appear to want to. We eventually videotaped it as we got it to turn and then turn back, walking only a few steps. While watching the horse walk, we observed the foot (to) rotate extremely to the side. (Two officers present) have never seen a horse turn its foot to that position. Both of us are experience(d) horse people. …

“On prior visits we notice(d) the horse was standing on a mound, but thought it might be part of the contour of the property. Now looking at it, there is an indication that this is where this horse stands, urinates and defecates, causing the mound.”

A veterinarian was asked to review the videotape of the horse, and the condition was not determined to be life-threatening.

“Based on this conversation,” the deputy wrote, “I decided to post a pre-seizure notice for the horse, requesting the animal be checked by a vet.”

The notice was posted June 5, according to the report.

On June 9, the deputy stated that she had contacted Edwards, who had recently encountered Bugenig in Mad River.

“Edwards will attempt to locate Bugenig and the animals,” according to the deputy. “Edwards will check the welfare of the animals.”

Also on June 9, the deputy returned to Chalk Mountain to find that all of the animals and kennels were gone.

“It appears Bugenig has moved the dogs and horse from the county in an attempt to avoid prosecution. I believe Bugenig was attempting to remove the dogs to avoid the fees involved in licensing the dogs. I believe Bugenig’s attempt to license the dogs in Trinity County was also an attempt to avoid the fees due Humboldt County. …

“I request this report be sent to the District Attorney’s Office for their consideration in the prosecution of Bugenig for not licensing her dogs and for not having them vaccinated at the time of the citation.

“I will also send (a case) with a declaration requesting prosecution for (Penal Code violation) 597 (b) for failing to provide care,” a felony offense.

Miranda described himself as “livid” about the contents of the reports.

Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos, Miranda said, “has got some explaining to do. It’s there in black and white. I want him to read those reports and tell me there’s not enough evidence to file charges. That’s crap.”

Gallegos said he understands that people are upset about the dog case, but he believes the charging decision was appropriate.

“We always have to deal with what we can prove in court,” he said.

It would not have been enough to prove the horse was neglected, Gallegos said. “We would also have had to demonstrate intent.”

A jury would have been instructed to consider Bugenig’s mental state, he said, and he didn’t believe a jury could unanimously decide beyond a reasonable doubt that Bugenig intended to neglect the animals.

“I certainly own animals. I’ve grown up with animals. I still am an animal lover. I hate suffering in any animal. But there are the legal aspects to these things where we have to deal with hard facts,” he said.

Former Humboldt County prosecutor Ed Borg had reviewed the case in 2004, according to Gallegos.

“I might have made a different decision, but I think the decision made was appropriate. I stand by it, and I can live with it.”

Miranda was unpersuaded. “I guess a poor excuse is better than no excuse at all, although not by much,” he said.

But Paris, the records supervisor who mistakenly authorized the release of the reports to Miranda, said something no other public official in either county has said to date.

“I take responsibility for the mistake, and I think we can look at this as a learning experience for all of us.”

Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved.

Related Stories:
Two mass dog graves discovered near Mad River 8/16/2006
Trinity County Animal Control warned of dogs' plight since 2005 8/18/2006
"Dogs seemed fine," Animal Control Officer Edwards says 8/18/2006
Defense attorney says John and Stacy Malcolm not to blame for abuse of dogs 8/18/2006
Dogs' condition consistent with starvation, report states 8/20/2006
Death toll rises in Mad River dog deaths 8/22/2006
IN THE 'INTERESTS OF JUSTICE'? 8/23/2006
Evidence mounts in animal abuse case 8/24/2006
Report details 'horrific' conditions 8/26/2006
Community responds to dogs' abuse by donating to rescue 8/27/2006
51 CHARGES FILED IN DOG CASE 8/30/2006
National Animal group challenges Gallegos over abuse case 8/30/2006
National, international animal groups weigh in on abuse scandal 8/30/2006
ER Editorial - Specious arguments
8/30/2006
78 additional felonies charged in Mad River dog abuse case 9/1/2006
Malcolms 'walked through' arraignment 9/2/2006
When law enforcement fails, 'vigilantism' sometimes needed 9/4/2006
Third suspect in dog case arraigned 9/7/2006
Mad River dog abuse case suspect speaks out 9/9/2006
Hearing set for Mad River dog suspects 9/14/2006
Dog suspects head for trial 10/13/2006
Code addressing animal abuse requires low burden of proof 10/16/2006
Animal abuse linked to serial killings, needs to be addressed 10/16/2006
Gallegos says he will not file felony in Bugenig horse case 10/21/2006
If Lucky had been seized, perhaps he would have survived 10/23/2006
Original owner of Mad River dogs released from prison 11/1/2006
Malcolm attorney requests charges be dropped 12/13/2006
Defendant in Mad River dogs case accepts plea deal 8/20/2007