ER - http://www.eurekareporter.com/

Defense in Mad River dog trial to present case today
by Heather Muller , 9/20/2007

After a third day of testimony Thursday in the Mad River dog trial, Deputy District Attorney Eric Heryford from the Trinity County DA’s Office neared the end of his case.

Only one prosecution witness remained, Heryford said. He planned to call to the stand today Trinity County Sheriff’s Deputy Ron Whitman, who was the Mad River resident deputy when the surviving dogs were discovered in August 2006.

On Thursday, Humboldt County Public Guardian Ramon Herrera testified, Heryford said. Herrera was the owner of record for the property, previously owned by Roberta Bugenig, from which 13 surviving dogs were recovered Aug. 11, 2006, by Shannon Miranda, owner and operator of Miranda’s Animal Rescue in Fortuna.

Miranda also testified Thursday and spent two hours on the stand describing the events leading up to the rescue, as well as narrating dramatic video footage shot by volunteers as they arrived at the kennels that ringed Bugenig’s former property.

The trial, taking place in Trinity County Superior Court in Weaverville, will decide the fate of John and Stacy Malcolm, who are each charged with 41 felony counts of animal abuse and one additional count related to a small marijuana-growing operation found on the property.

The charges stem from the discovery of the surviving dogs and an as yet undetermined number of dead dogs on and around the property located only a few miles across Humboldt County’s eastern border on Highway 36.

The Malcolms have denied responsibility for the deaths and for the condition of the surviving dogs, most of which subsequently died.

Heryford said he plans to interview Whitman briefly today, and then the defendants’ attorney, Timothy Noal Gray, will present his case to the jury of 10 women and two men.

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

ER - Two stand trial in connection to Mad River dog abuse case

Two stand trial in connection to Mad River dog abuse case
by Heather Muller , 9/18/2007

The trial of John and Stacy Malcolm, charged in connection with the deaths of dozens of dogs found in and around the town of Mad River, began Tuesday in Trinity County Superior Court in Weaverville.

The Malcolms have been charged with 41 counts each of felony cruelty to animals and one additional charge apiece stemming from the discovery of a small marijuana growing operation on the former Mad River property of Roberta Bugenig.

Trinity County Deputy District Attorney Eric Heryford, who is prosecuting the case, said progress was brisk the first day, with the jury selected, opening statements delivered and two-and-a-half hours of direct examination of the first witness — former U.S. Forest Service law enforcement agent Steve Frick — already completed.

Heryford said the Malcolms’ defense attorney, Timothy Noal Gray, began his cross-examination of Frick, with more to follow when the trial resumes today at 8:30 a.m.

The case stems from Frick’s discovery in August 2006 of several dead dogs in blue plastic barrels on forest land near Mad River.

Frick traced the barrels back to Bugenig’s former property, where he found numerous dogs dead and dying in and around an elaborate system of kennels.

Frick contacted Shannon Miranda of Miranda’s Animal Rescue in Fortuna, to recover 13 dogs that were still alive. Miranda found several survivors locked in kennels with dead dogs.

A Ferndale veterinarian who examined the surviving animals wrote in a report that their condition “was consistent with a prolonged period of starvation and neglect.”

Tips to The Eureka Reporter led to the discovery of a second pile of dead dogs that appeared to be linked to the former Bugenig kennels, and Heryford said even more remains were found in the woods behind the residence.

Throughout the past year, Gray has maintained that his clients bore no legal responsibility for the animals, the ownership of which was hurriedly signed over to the Malcolms by Bugenig on March 15, 2005, as she was forcibly evicted from the premises.

Gray has also argued that responsibility lay with a third suspect, itinerant fence-builder Roger Zampatti, who was temporarily living at the property when the dead dogs were discovered.

But Gray’s case suffered a setback in August when Zampatti cut a deal with the prosecution in exchange for his testimony against the Malcolms.

As part of the plea agreement, 40 felony charges were dropped, but Zampatti could still spend up to a year in jail, Heryford said. He is expected to be sentenced after the Malcolm trial ends.

Heryford said he had initially anticipated the trial lasting only a few days, but because of an extensive witness list submitted by the defense, proceedings could take as long as two weeks.

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

ER - Defendant in Mad River dogs case accepts plea deal

Defendant in Mad River dogs case accepts plea deal
by Heather Muller , 8/20/2007

After weeks of negotiations, one of three suspects in the deaths of dozens of dogs in Mad River has agreed to plead guilty to a single count of animal cruelty in exchange for his testimony against the other two defendants.

Roger Zampatti entered into the agreement late last week, said Trinity County Deputy District Attorney Eric Heryford, who is prosecuting the case.

Zampatti and co-defendants John and Stacy Malcolm stood accused of 41 counts each of felony cruelty to animals and one additional charge apiece stemming from the discovery of a small marijuana growing operation on the former Mad River property of Roberta Bugenig.

Under the terms of the deal, the remaining 40 animal abuse charges and the drug charge against Zampatti will be “dismissed in a technical sense,” Heryford said, but can be considered by the judge for purposes of sentencing.

The only other condition, said the deputy district attorney, is that Zampatti was promised he could serve his sentence in the Trinity County Jail.

“I didn’t feel I had enough evidence against John Malcolm,” Heryford said. “By getting this statement and information from Mr. Zampatti, that gives us evidence as to John Malcolm’s involvement in the case.”

He added that he hopes the statement “will clear up the timeline and some of the details” of the case.

Timothy Noal Gray, the Malcolms’ defense attorney, said the plea deal was just one more sign of a rush to judgment against his clients.

“They’re not concerned about who’s guilty. They’re just concerned about getting a conviction. There was never any real investigation. They never seriously considered anyone but my clients. It was a very high-profile case, and they just want a conviction.”

Gray has contended from the start that his clients did not own and were not responsible for the animals, but did the best they could to care for them after Bugenig was arrested, convicted and imprisoned for brandishing a firearm at law enforcement officials who were attempting to forcibly evict her from the property.

Public officials from both Trinity and Humboldt counties were aware of the existence of the dogs, he said, and apparently did not find cause to intervene.

“Everybody expressed a lot of concern and surprise and disgust and everything, but there was no real investigation.”

Thirteen surviving dogs were removed from the property on Aug. 11, 2006, after dead dogs found dumped in a nearby forest were traced back to the property.

Heryford said Zampatti is looking at a maximum of one year in jail, but would not be sentenced until after the Malcolms’ trial, which is set to begin in September.

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

ER - Trinity County Animal Control warned of dogs' plight since 2005

Trinity County Animal Control warned of dogs' plight since 2005
by Heather Muller , 8/18/2006

As far as shocking discoveries go, this one doesn’t look like much.

It’s a copy of a two-page letter addressed to Trinity County Animal Control Officer Christine Edwards and printed on the letterhead of Eureka legal firm Morrison, Morrison & Cooper.

But its contents are explosive.

“I have been upset about the condition of these dogs since March of 2005,” said Allison Jackson, a Eureka attorney who provided the document to The Eureka Reporter.

Jackson became angrier when she learned that 13 dogs, some barely alive, were rescued last Friday from the former Mad River property of Roberta Bugenig, who is serving a 16-month prison term for her role in a two-day armed standoff with Trinity County Sheriff’s Deputies attempting to evict her from the property.

The land where the surviving dogs were found — along with dozens of dead dogs, many of which appeared to have been eaten by the survivors — had been the subject of civil litigation, and Jackson had represented a client with a tangential interest in the case.

But Jackson’s anger turned to what she called “complete outrage” when she read in Thursday’s paper that Edwards had denied ever having been notified of concerns about the animals housed at the Bugenig residence.

“Christine Edwards is lying,” Jackson said. “I personally had numerous conversations with her begging her to take control of these animals. Begging her.”

Jackson said her pleas for intervention dated back to March of 2005.

“I had so many phone calls with her I’ve lost count.”

And she had something more.

The letter she provided to The Eureka Reporter, dated Nov. 3, 2005, asserted the legal firm’s belief that the animals were not being cared for.

“We believe they were abandoned by the former occupant of the property, Roberta (Kiki) Bugenig. Alternatively, they have been abandoned by the persons who now claim to be the owners of the animals, John and Stacy Malcolm.”

The letter continued, “There are serious problems with the health and well-being of these animals. It is imperative that a report to the District Attorney and to the Sheriff be made for their protection. As it is your duty to oversee Trinity County’s animal protection services and to make and file such reports, it is respectfully demanded that you cause both to occur immediately.”

On the same day, a similar letter was sent by certified mail to the Malcolms, stating that they, too, had abandoned the animals.

Both letters were signed by Daniel Cooper, a partner in the firm and the attorney of record for Humboldt County Public Guardian Ramon Herrera, who was the legal owner of the property.

Jackson said that when Edwards told her Trinity County lacked adequate staffing and resources to remove so many animals, Jackson suggested that she contact surrounding jurisdictions for assistance.

“But she refused,” Jackson said. “She flat-out refused.”

Officials from the Trinity County Sheriff’s Office confirmed Thursday that the county is actively pursuing multiple felony animal cruelty charges against John and Stacy Malcolm.

But anyone wanting to point fingers in this case is going to need a lot of them.

By most accounts, the animals were only sporadically cared for after March 2005, when the eviction occurred.

As previously reported in The Eureka Reporter, Bugenig was released on bond and was on and off the property through March 2006, when she was remanded.

By then, the Malcolms had assumed legal ownership of the animals, which at one time included several horses and sheep, in addition to an unknown number of dogs.

The letters show that Trinity County officials were informed, and Herrera, the legal guardian of the property, already knew about the condition of the animals by November 2005.

But there is no evidence to suggest anyone did anything to intervene on the dogs’ behalf until Aug. 11, when U.S. Forest Service law enforcement agent Steve Frick and Shannon Miranda, owner of Miranda’s Animal Rescue in Fortuna, rescued the surviving animals.

Of the 13 dogs, one could not be saved, and a second may have to be euthanized.

“He just went insane,” Miranda said. “He was ramming his head into the side of the stall, and I couldn’t get him to stop.”

Miranda said he is sedating the dog, but if that doesn’t work he’ll have to be put down.

“I sat with him last night and tried to soothe him, but he’s pretty far gone.”

When the dog was rescued from the Mad River property, Miranda said, it had been locked in a kennel with five dead dogs.

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

ER - Defense attorney says John and Stacy Malcolm not to blame for abuse of dogs

Defense attorney says John and Stacy Malcolm not to blame for abuse of dogs
by Heather Muller , 8/18/2006

An itinerant fence-builder identified only as “Roger” is the true culprit in the Mad River dog abuse case that has rocked Trinity and Humboldt counties, according to John and Stacy Malcolm’s defense attorney Timothy Noal Gray.

In a news release issued Wednesday, Gray stated that the Malcolms had hired Roger to help with a fence on their property, and the man “became the caretaker on the property and gradually took over the duties of feeding and watering the dogs — which were the only animals left.”

On Aug. 11, 13 dogs were removed from the property, previously occupied by Roberta “Kiki” Bugenig who, according to civil court rulings, obtained the land and three buildings on it with money illegally acquired from a family trust.

Rescuers said the dogs were starving to death in and around kennels that contained the remains of dozens of other dogs that had already died.

Not coincidentally, Gray had previously been retained by Bugenig to, as he put it, “unwind” her civil dispute.

Bugenig and the Malcolms were friends, and when Bugenig lost title to the property and was subsequently arrested by Trinity County Sheriff’s deputies for brandishing a firearm during a forced eviction attempt in March 2005, she transferred ownership of her animals, including an unknown number of horses, sheep and dogs, to the Malcolms for $20.

Stacy, Gray said, “volunteered” to feed the animals.

“This was to be a temporary (arrangement) that developed into a full-time job,” according to the release.

But Gray didn’t say whether the Malcolms legally owned the animals.

In a Wednesday interview, he told The Eureka Reporter, “The purpose (of the transfer) was to allow Stacy to deal with the animals as an owner. I think $20 changed hands and here, you can have all the dogs. It was like a guardianship thing, not a transfer, because the Malcolms originally didn’t know how long Kiki would be incarcerated.”

Bugenig was sentenced to 16 months, and problems with the animals began almost immediately.

Gray said that even before Roger “took over,” Stacy “downsized about 20 dogs.” Three more dogs were “put down” because they had killed the sheep, and Lucky, an older horse, died on the property. Additional dogs “passed away,” Gray said.


Gray said Roger moved onto the Bugenig property in June 2006 and gradually assumed responsibility for the remaining animals.

At first, Stacy continued bringing dog food to the property, but over time, Gray said, Roger began picking it up at the Malcolm residence.

After that, according to Gray, the Malcolms had little to no involvement with the remaining dogs.

They visited the property “not very often,” Gray said.

“And when they did, it’s not like they checked on the animals or went in there. They just went by and said hi. I don’t know how many times Stacy went up there.”

But Shannon Miranda said he doesn’t buy the argument that the Malcoms were uninvolved with the animals.

“Stacy told me she was feeding those dogs herself once a day,” Miranda said.

According to Miranda’s phone records, conversations with Stacy began on June 20, when she first contacted him about surrendering some dogs to Miranda’s Animal Rescue in Fortuna.

But at the time, Miranda said, he believed the problem was one of dog hoarding, not dog abuse.

Miranda said he spoke with Stacy about the condition of the animals and was repeatedly told they were fine.

“She said, ‘Shannon, I go every day and sometimes I go twice a day.’ She said, ‘put your mind at rest,’ or something to that effect. ‘I’m feeding those dogs myself,’” Miranda said.

“She never told me about any guy feeding them. She said she was doing it herself.”

Miranda said he offered repeatedly over the next few weeks to take some of the dogs to his shelter, but he had no idea about the true condition of the animals until he was called onto the property by Steve Frick, a U.S. Forest Service law enforcement agent stationed at the Mad River Ranger District.

Miranda found dozens of dogs both dead and dying in and around the kennels that lined the perimeter of the former Bugenig property. Several of the dogs appeared to have eaten dozens of other dogs locked in kennels with them.

But on Thursday, Gray said that, to date, he had still seen no proof that any of the dogs was starved.

The dogs might have died from a lack of water, he said, rather than a lack of food, which would shorten considerably the time frame of the abuse — and possibly point the finger at Roger instead of the Malcolms.

“You can be starved for a long period of time, but you can’t be without water,” Gray said.

“I don’t know. I’m not a veterinarian. I’m just asking the question.”

Gray said people should refrain from making judgments until all of the facts in the case are known.

“In the beginning it looks real terrible and bad and all that, but then you kind of have to wait until the dust settles,” Gray said.

“Right now, everybody’s upset, everyone’s emotions are high, but several weeks down the road, it takes on a different complexion. People are going to be more deliberate.”

In the news release Gray stated, “There have been threatening phone calls to (the Malcolms) since last week, and the latest incident involves a sign next to their house calling Mrs. Malcolm (a) killer.”

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

ER - "Dogs seemed fine"

"Dogs seemed fine," Animal Control Officer Edwards says
by Heather Muller , 8/18/2006

With plenty of blame to go around in the Mad River dog abuse case, plenty of people have lined up to deflect it.

The most recent is Trinity County Animal Control Officer Christine Edwards who reiterated Friday that she “never had any idea” dogs housed at the former residence of Roberta Bugenig were being abused — this despite a letter sent to Edwards in November 2005 from Eureka legal firm Morrison, Morrison & Cooper.

The letter, signed by Daniel Cooper, “respectfully demanded” Edwards do something to address “serious problems with the health and well-being” of the animals.

While she acknowledged receipt of the letter, Edwards said a deputy from the Trinity County Sheriff’s Office was dispatched to the residence, and no evidence of abandonment or neglect was found.

“I had deputies go and check, and they were fine,” she said in a telephone interview.

Subsequent to that inspection, Trinity County’s legal office sent a return letter to Cooper, stating that Trinity County had no obligation to remove animals left at the residence.

“Officer Edwards investigated the status of the animals, and they are fed daily and otherwise cared for by Stacy Malcolm. You haven’t supplied proof that there are ‘serious problems with the health and well-being of the animals.’ Nor is there indication that a crime has been committed, and prosecution warranted.”

The letter continued, “Under the law, animals are considered to be personal property. This involves a civil dispute between a landowner and tenant. Your remedy is under the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 1174 for storage and redemption, or sale of the animals.”

“Whenever law enforcement is overwhelmed and they don’t have the resources, suddenly it’s a ‘civil matter,’” said Allison Jackson, who provided the Cooper letter to The Eureka Reporter.

No stranger to the law herself, Jackson is an attorney at The Harland Law Firm in Eureka, and a former prosecutor with the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office.

“They want to make it a civil matter, but it’s not,” she said.

But Edwards said that at the time of the November inspection, the situation did not meet the legal definition of abandonment.

“I want to stress to you again, if these animals were abused and were dying, I would have been there,” Edwards said.

But at some point, the animals inarguably were abused and dying, and by Edwards’ own admission, she last checked on the welfare of the dogs in November or December of 2005.

People told her the dogs were fine, she said. “That’s good enough for me. I don’t have time. I’m just one person.”

Edwards is, in fact, the one and only person charged with animal control in all of Trinity County.

When Trinity County Sheriff Lorrac Craig was asked if he believed he had adequate resources to manage the animals in the county, his response was unequivocal.

“Absolutely not. Christine gets more calls than our patrol units get,” he said.

“I think last year was 1,800 calls, in addition to everything else,” Edwards said.

“At this point, the deputies have to fill in when Christine’s not there,” Craig said. “And that’s a little difficult, because like today, I only have one patrol deputy on. That makes it a little difficult when you’ve got 3,200 square miles of county.”

Sheriff’s deputies, typically dispatched from Weaverville, also have extensive drive times to contend with. Checking up on the Bugenig dogs would easily have consumed half a workday.

“Like today, if something goes on in Mad River, I’m going to be looking at a two-hour response time, even if they roll code-3,” Craig said.

But neither Jackson nor Shannon Miranda — who rescued the 13 surviving dogs — believes a lack of staffing was to blame.

“Christine Edwards had enough time to tell me to butt out,” Miranda said. “She actually told me she would have me arrested if I went on the property to look at the dogs.”

Miranda tried to intervene in the situation as early as June 20, he said, when he was informed by Cooper that the Bugenig dogs were in bad shape.

But Edwards, Miranda said, told him to mind his own business.

While neither Edwards nor Craig admitted any wrongdoing in the matter, Edwards said the tragedy probably would change the way she does her job.

“It makes me open my eyes now, too,” she said. “A lot of people have a lot of dogs in this town, and I need to just start going by more often.”

And Craig hopes the incident will result in increased funding from the county for animal control. “I’m attacking it in my budget already this year. It’s something that will come to the forefront in this year’s budget discussions,” he said.

“It will be interesting to see how the board will react to this kind of situation.”

Where have all the dead dogs gone?

Investigators trying to determine the magnitude of the macabre dog abuse case near Mad River may now have an additional obstacle to overcome: a lack of evidence.

Mad River residents informed The Eureka Reporter that the remains of dozens of dead dogs had been removed from the former property of Roberta Bugenig shortly after the 13 surviving dogs were rescued.

“If there were other dead dogs there, I have no idea where they went,” said Timothy Noal Gray, defense attorney for John and Stacy Malcolm, the Mad River couple expected to be charged in Trinity County with multiple felony counts of animal abuse.

But later in the Wednesday interview, Gray reversed course and said that the carcasses and bones had been “cleaned up.”

“I don’t know who took them,” he said. “I didn’t ask the question because when I got there, it had already been done.”

Gray said he first saw the property on Aug. 12, two days after the dogs were discovered by Steve Frick, a law enforcement agent with the U.S. Forest Service, and one day after the survivors were rescued by Frick and Shannon Miranda, owner of Miranda’s Animal Rescue in Fortuna.

Trinity County Sheriff Lorrac Craig confirmed Friday that the dead dogs had been removed, but said he didn’t believe this would present a problem for the prosecution should charges be filed against the Malcolms.

“I don’t know that we need to determine how many dogs there were,” Craig said. “All we need to do is determine that there were dogs.”

Of that there is proof in abundance.

Trinity County Animal Control Officer Christine Edwards said she plans to obtain a copy of video footage shot during the Aug. 11 recovery of the 13 survivors so that a charge can be filed for each dog — dead or alive.

“I want to be able to say, see, there’s a skull, there’s a skull and there’s another skull,” Edwards said.

She also said she plans to present evidence linking dogs found at two dump sites near Mad River to the Bugenig dogs so that additional charges can be filed.

But given the cleanup of the remains at the kennels and the possibility of additional dump sites, it may never be known how many dogs once lived, or died, on the property.

Estimates have ranged from the mid-50s to more than 100.

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

ER - Dogs' condition consistent with starvation, report states

Heather Muller/The Eureka Reporter
A dog rescued from kennels near Mad River gets a little love from the hands of Shannon Miranda.

Dogs' condition consistent with starvation, report states
by Heather Muller , 8/20/2006

A veterinary report issued Saturday left little doubt that at least two of the dogs rescued from kennels on the former property of Roberta Bugenig were suffering from starvation.

“On physical exam I found both dogs to be emaciated and too weak to walk on their own,” stated the report, written by Dr. Sarah Schroer from Ferndale Veterinary Inc.

One dog had open sores on its flanks, and “both were fearful of humans and avoided physical contact and eye contact,” the report stated.

“The condition of these dogs was consistent with a prolonged period of starvation and neglect.”

All 13 of the surviving dogs were examined at Ferndale Veterinary Aug. 11, the day that they were rescued. The two dogs Schroer referred to in her report required additional treatment.The report is likely to be a key piece of evidence should charges anticipated against John and Stacy Malcolm be filed.

The Malcolms’ attorney, Timothy Noal Gray, a former Humboldt County public defender, said as much last week when he suggested dehydration rather than starvation as the possible cause of the dogs’ condition.

Dehydration would shorten considerably the time frame of the neglect and would help Gray make the case that the Malcolms were not responsible for the abuse — because a shadowy itinerant fence-builder, so far identified only as “Roger,” had taken over the care and feeding of the dogs.

Roger moved onto the former Bugenig property in June, according to Gray, and gradually assumed responsibility for the animals. After that time, Gray said, the Malcolms had little to no contact with the animals.

“You can be starved for a long period of time, but you can’t be without water,” Gray said.

“I don’t know,” he said. “I’m not a veterinarian. I’m just asking the question. And I’m wondering if when the hot weather came, it brought it on a lot quicker.”

But Schroer, who is a veterinarian, didn’t think a dehydration defense would hold water.

“I’m pretty confident in saying that anyone would agree those dogs hadn’t had enough to eat, and that was the problem.”

Dehydration can make a dog depressed, sluggish and slow, she said, and can result in modest weight loss.

“But it doesn’t turn a dog into a rack of bones, which is what I saw when I treated the two dogs here.”

She added, “I’ve been at Ferndale Veterinary for three years, and I would say that these are the worst dogs I’ve seen.

“We see a lot of dogs for Miranda’s (Animal) Rescue, but I certainly don’t think I’ve seen dogs quite that thin, even coming into the rescue.”

One of the 13 Mad River dogs had to be euthanized, and last week one of the two dogs Schroer had treated took a turn for the worse.

“He just went insane,” Miranda said Thursday. “He was ramming his head into the side of the stall, and I couldn’t get him to stop.”

The dog was sedated, but Miranda said that seemed to make the condition worse.

On Saturday the dog was euthanized. “I just couldn’t stand it anymore, and neither could he,” Miranda said.

“I was bawling like a frigging idiot, but I told him. I promised him. I said someone is going to pay for what they did to you.”

Timeline of dog abuse scandal

2004:
Roberta Bugenig moves to property near Mad River. Civil litigation begins almost immediately stemming from Bugenig’s misappropriation of funds from the Wilson Family Trust, of which she was at one time the trustee. Bugenig was accused of having purchased the property with funds from the trust and was found civilly liable of fiduciary elder abuse. Title to the property is restored to Humboldt Public Guardian Ramon Herrera as new trustee.

January 2005: Eviction proceedings against Bugenig begin.

March 2005:
Eureka attorney Allison Jackson phones Trinity County Animal Control to report that animals may be abandoned as a result of the eviction, and the county would need to be prepared to immediately deal with the problem. On March 15, marshals and deputies from Trinity County attempt to forcibly remove Bugenig, and a two-day armed confrontation ensues. Bugenig flees into the woods behind the property and is subsequently apprehended. She is charged with brandishing a firearm at a peace officer but gets out of jail on bond. Around this time, Bugenig transfers ownership of her animals to John and Stacy Malcolm for $20.

April to November 2005:
Bugenig is on and off the property while she awaits trial. The Malcolms assist Bugenig with the animals. Eureka law firm Morrison, Morrison & Cooper continues efforts to remove Bugenig and her animals from the property so that it can be sold and the trust repaid. According to Jackson, she continues to phone animal control about the care and condition of the animals.

November 2005:
Bugenig remains out on bond, and the Malcolms continue to assist with the animals. A series of letters change hands reporting, from the Morrison firm, that the animals are being improperly cared for and, from Trinity County counsel, that the reports are unfounded. A deputy is sent to check on the animals and says that they seem to be fine. This is the last recorded inspection of the animals.

March 2006:
Bugenig is remanded and begins serving a 16-month prison term.

April 2006:
A Mad River resident finds a dog dump site off the side of Highway 36 that reportedly contains 40 to 50 dead dogs. The discovery is not reported to law enforcement officials.

July 2006:
Daniel Cooper, attorney for Herrera, tells Shannon Miranda that the animals are not fine and that he should contact the Malcolms about removing them. John Malcolm is given Miranda’s phone number, and on July 20, Stacy Malcolm calls. Miranda said she told him 25 dogs would be delivered to him on the 25th, but on the 24th she calls back and cancels. According to Miranda, Stacy reported the dogs to be in good condition. A second appointment is made and missed, and then a third. The last week of July, U.S. Forest Service law enforcement agent Steve Frick finds a dog dump off of South Fork Mountain Road near Mad River containing the remains of seven dogs. The dogs had been placed in a blue barrel.

August 2006:
Frick traces the blue barrel back to the Bugenig kennels. He goes onto the property Aug. 10 and finds dogs dead and dying. He calls Miranda and assists with the rescue of 13 surviving dogs on Aug. 11. One dog is euthanized the following day. On Aug. 14, a resident of the Mad River area tells The Eureka Reporter the location of the dog dump first seen in April. Shannon Miranda and The Eureka Reporter find the dump still containing the remains of 10 to 15 dogs. The skulls of most of the animals contain small-caliber bullet holes. Animal Control Officer Christine Edwards is led back to the site, and evidence is recovered that links the dogs to the Bugenig kennels. On Aug. 18, a second dog is euthanized due to severe psychological problems. The dog had been recovered from a kennel containing the remains of five dead dogs.

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

ER - Death toll rises in Mad River dog deaths

Shannon Miranda picks up a skull near Mad River at a dump site found Sunday that contained 10 or 11 dead dogs. Ferndale veterinarian Dr. J. Kevin Silver said the skull came from a sheep. Heather Muller/The Eureka Reporter

Death toll rises in Mad River dog deaths
by Heather Muller , 8/22/2006

High atop South Fork Mountain, only a few feet from a breathtaking view of Ruth Lake, stood seven blue barrels that looked all too familiar.

Made of heavy plastic with a large, U-shaped hole cut in each lid, dozens of barrels matching the description were found at kennels on the former property of Roberta Bugenig.

Laid on their sides, they served as makeshift doghouses for the still unknown number of dogs that lived — and died — at the Bugenig residence.

Standing upright some four miles off Highway 36, the seven barrels were found Sunday night to contain the remains of another 10 or 11 black-and-brown dogs and part of a sheep.

“I have completely lost my ability to be stunned,” said Shannon Miranda, who went to the dump site with The Eureka Reporter, which had been told of its location by two bowhunters looking for deer.

This was the second dog dump site Miranda had visited in six days, and it appeared to be the third such site containing dogs from the former Bugenig property.

But was it?

Miranda said he was stunned again when he learned Monday morning from Steve Frick, a U.S. Forest Service law enforcement agent, that Frick said he had found the seven barrels himself approximately three weeks ago — and left them there.

Miranda said Frick previously told him the barrels contained seven dogs, but it was evident Sunday that the contents of the barrels had not been examined.

Dead animals still stuck to the bottoms of the barrels were pried out by Miranda so he could see if they matched the Bugenig dogs.

Seven dogs and a sheep skull were found in the three barrels Miranda examined, and the other four barrels appeared to contain one dog each.

Miranda also found a red dog collar still on the neck of one skeleton and a panel from an Attaboy dog food bag — both of which matched items seen in a videotape filmed Aug. 11 at the Bugenig kennels when the surviving dogs were rescued.

“Why on earth would evidence like this be left out there?” Miranda asked.

The Eureka Reporter asked Frick the same question, and his response was terse.

“Unknown,” he said.

And how many dogs had he said were in the barrels?

“No comment.”

What looked like a large-caliber bullet hole was found in one dog skull, while other dogs appeared to have been killed by blunt-force trauma to the head.

Miranda said three of the dogs appeared to have been only recently killed. Other carcasses looked several months old.

Trinity County Sheriff Lorrac Craig was called Monday afternoon to comment on the status of the investigation, but he was out of the office and did not return the call by press time.

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

ER - IN THE 'INTERESTS OF JUSTICE'?

Shannon Miranda examines the contents of blue barrels found Sunday night near Mad River. The seven barrels contained 10 or 11 dead dogs and part of a sheep. Heather Muller/The Eureka Reporter

IN THE 'INTERESTS OF JUSTICE'?
by Heather Muller , 8/23/2006

In yet another twist in the Mad River dog abuse scandal, information uncovered late last week suggests that officials on this side of the county line missed at least two opportunities to intervene on behalf of the unknown number of horses, sheep and dogs that ultimately died at the former Trinity County residence of Roberta Bugenig.

As recently as June 2004, Bugenig, now 65, lived in Humboldt County, on Chalk Mountain Road near Bridgeville, and in January and June of that year was investigated for alleged offenses related to her care and treatment of 61 dogs and a blind horse named Lucky.

But according to public records, charges against Bugenig requested by the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office — including 122 alleged misdemeanor county code violations for failure to vaccinate and license her dogs, and one alleged felony violation for abuse of the horse — were never filed by the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office.

John and Stacy Malcolm are expected to be charged in Trinity County with multiple felony animal cruelty charges stemming from their treatment of the Bugenig animals.

But why were charges not filed against Bugenig years earlier in Humboldt County?

Lt. Steve Knight, who heads up the animal control division of the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office, said he doesn’t know.

“As I understand it, we had one case where (Bugenig) was cited for numerous counts for no rabies vaccination and licensing of the animals,” he said. “That was back in January 2004. In June of 2004 deputies went out again to investigate a report of animal neglect and cruelty, and a case was referred to the DA’s Office for charges.”

Knight added, “I don’t know what the DA did with it.”

District Attorney Paul Gallegos said Monday that the first case, involving the 122 alleged misdemeanor violations, was received by his office June 15, 2004, and was rejected Oct. 26 of the same year.

“These were regulatory offenses, not neglect offenses,” Gallegos said, adding that the reason given in the file for rejection of the charges was “interests of justice.”

“There could have been issues of proof,” he said.

The alleged felony offense of abuse of the horse was received by the DA’s office July 9, 2004, and rejected Aug. 23, 2004, for lack of evidence, according to Gallegos.

“We can do nothing unless we have sufficient evidence of an offense,” he said. “That’s it in a nutshell.”

Sheriff’s Office Public Information Officer Brenda Godsey said Tuesday that she could not speak to the evidentiary value of information provided to the DA’s Office, but could officially confirm that a videotape had been booked into evidence.

Godsey also confirmed that deputies had posted a pre-seizure notification on the stall of the horse June 4, 2004. But when deputies returned June 9 to follow up on the notice, all of the animals were gone.

Bugenig had left Humboldt County and moved approximately five miles across the county line near Mad River in Trinity County.

Timothy Noal Gray, the Malcolms’ defense attorney, confirmed that Lucky died on the Mad River property of unknown causes in March of this year.

The horse was old, Gray said, and he believed its death was “a natural thing.” The Malcolms, he said, had it buried at “considerable personal expense.”

Dozens of dogs were found dead and dying in and around the kennels at the former Bugenig property on Aug. 10, after a U.S. Forest Service law enforcement agent found blue barrels containing dead dogs that had been dumped in Six Rivers National Forest. They were eventually linked back to the kennels.

Knight said Humboldt County Animal Control did everything it could to intervene in the matter. According to documents obtained by The Eureka Reporter, one deputy even prepared a declaration in support of a warrant requesting the arrest of Bugenig for alleged “failure to provide care” for the animals.

Although charges were not filed by the DA’s Office, Knight said his office did inform Trinity County that Bugenig was moving into its jurisdiction.

Trinity County Animal Control Officer Christine Edwards confirmed that she had been notified about Bugenig in 2004.

“There were complaints at one time of a woman locating here with too many dogs,” Edwards said in an Aug. 18 interview.

But Edwards insisted that she didn’t know who the woman was or where she had moved until law enforcement personnel were called to the property in March 2005 to forcibly evict Bugenig from the residence.

“I think we did our job,” Knight said — and, in light of subsequent events, “I’m glad we did our job.”

It is impossible to know whether the prosecution of Bugenig in Humboldt County could have averted the tragedy.

“If we had filed, based on the charges,” Gallegos said, “probably the best results — or the worst results from her perspective — would have been probation.”

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

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

ER - Report details 'horrific' conditions

Katie O’Neill/The Eureka Reporter
Shannon Miranda, owner and operator of Miranda’s Animal Rescue, holds the seventh dog rescued Aug. 11 from the former property of Roberta Bugenig. “He did not move as I approached,” Miranda wrote in a report submitted Tuesday to the Trinity County District Attorney’s Office. The dog turned out to be blind.

Report details 'horrific' conditions
by Heather Muller , 8/26/2006

As the Trinity County District Attorney’s Office reviews the numerous documents that have been submitted in the Mad River animal abuse case, one report is likely to rise to the top of the stack.

It was submitted Tuesday to the DA’s Office by Shannon Miranda, owner and operator of Miranda’s Animal Rescue in Fortuna, and describes in sometimes graphic detail what he called “the most horrific case of abuse and neglect I’ve ever seen.”

Miranda was called to the former property of Roberta “Kiki” Bugenig Aug. 10 after Steve Frick, a law enforcement agent from the U.S. Forest Service, found seven barrels containing the remains of dead dogs dumped on federal land and traced them back to the residence.

The following day, Frick, Miranda and four volunteers rescued 13 surviving dogs in and around kennels littered with piles of bones and fur left behind by what Miranda has called “dozens” of dead dogs, many of which appeared to have been eaten by the survivors.

Miranda’s three-page report documents numerous missed opportunities to rescue the animals earlier, because the people responsible for their care, identified in the report as John and Stacy Malcolm, allegedly canceled appointments to surrender the dogs. Miranda said that Stacy told him on at least two occasions that the dogs were “fine.”

On July 31, for example, Miranda’s report indicated that he told Stacy that Humboldt County Public Guardian Ramon Herrera, who owned the property in trust, and Daniel Cooper, Herrera’s attorney, had told Miranda that the dogs were “skinny and not being fed.”

“Stacy assured me that the dogs were fine and that she feeds them herself once daily and sometimes she goes twice a day,” Miranda wrote.

This statement is likely to play an important role in the possible criminal case against the Malcolms, after their defense attorney Timothy Noal Gray said in a news release issued last week that a fence-builder identified only as “Roger” had been responsible for the dogs’ care.

On Aug. 10, 10 days after the last missed appointment, according to the report, Miranda received a phone call from Stacy.

“She called asking when I could come get these dogs. She said there are dead ones, they’re dying and I don’t know what’s going on. I said I thought you were finding homes for them. She said nobody wants them because they are afraid of people, and (the) deals fell through.”

Miranda said in an interview that he knew then that the dogs were in terrible shape, but said he was still “shocked” by what he found at the residence the following day.

“Upon entering the property, you can see filth, old cars and garbage everywhere. When we approached the first set of kennels, you could see feces everywhere. It … appeared that nothing had been cleaned. There was garbage in and out of the kennels. Walking (farther) down … there were dead dogs, parts and pieces of dogs — skulls, heads, rib cages, spine(s) and many other bones and hair.”

According to the report, it was in this area, which Miranda called “the doggy dungeon,” that he rescued the first dog.

“He was extremely fearful of people, severely underweight and extremely dehydrated with large open sores on each side of his hind legs. There was a dead dog in the kennel next to him that had died the day before I got there, clearly of starvation and dehydration.”

The second dog, Miranda wrote, “was in a large kennel (that) appeared to have housed five more dogs at one time judging by the amount of hair and piles of bones in the kennel. …

“I stood in amazement as to what I was seeing. I’ve been doing rescue work for 11 years, and this clearly is the worst abuse and neglect case I’ve ever witnessed. I was praying that the rest of the dogs were in better shape than the two dogs I just found.”

Three additional dogs were found in kennels behind the house. “Once again, neither food nor water was present.” One dog was described as “very underweight. You could see her backbone and rib cage and could also see that the dog was pregnant.”

A blind dog was found under a trailer on the property. Another was in a 55-gallon barrel behind the house.

“When I pulled the dog out, she just collapsed. She was so sick from starvation and dehydration that she could not walk.” According to the report, Miranda had to carry her to the truck.

“(M)ost of the dogs were emaciated and had feces on them from their living conditions,” he wrote. “All of them were underweight with the worst flea infestation I’ve ever seen. The dogs were put in the trailer and taken to Ferndale Veterinary. Two of the dogs were kept overnight on IV fluids. The other dogs were examined and I was advised to euthanize one older female dog that was really (in) terrible shape. She was beyond help. …

In my opinion, this is the most horrific case of abuse and neglect I’ve ever seen. It is hard to imagine what went through the minds of those poor dogs waiting for someone to come feed and water them, ultimately ending up having to die, due to starvation and dehydration, slow and agonizing death(s).”

The report includes an account of Miranda’s two subsequent trips to Mad River, which occurred after The Eureka Reporter received two separate anonymous tips providing the locations of two dog dumps on South Fork Mountain near Mad River.

“The first one was right on the main road at a turn-off. The dogs matched those that I rescued from Kiki’s property,” the report stated.

The second dump site contained “seven blue barrels, the exact same ones that were present on Kiki’s property. I pulled at least 10 dogs from the barrels. These dogs also matched the ones found on Kiki’s property. You could clearly see that some of (the) dogs had bullet holes in their skull(s) and others had been bludgeoned to death due to the blunt force trauma to the skull bone. I can only assume that the rest starved to death.”

In conclusion, Miranda wrote, “I respectfully ask that the persons responsible for this needless, senseless and tragic animal cruelty be brought to justice. The animals that died can’t speak for themselves, but I can speak for them.

“Someone must be held accountable to show others that this kind of behavior is unacceptable.”

As of Friday, no charges had been filed in the case. Trinity County Deputy District Attorney Eric Heryford said he expects charges against the Malcolms and a third subject to be announced early next week.

“We’re working on it,” he said. “We’ve made some decisions, and I’d probably be more comfortable talking about it next week.”

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

ER - Community responds to dogs' abuse by donating to rescue

Community responds to dogs' abuse by donating to rescue
by Heather Muller , 8/27/2006

Dozens of cards and letters and thousands of dollars in donations have been received by Miranda’s Animal Rescue in Fortuna following the rescue of 13 dogs from the Mad River area, according to Shannon Miranda, who owns and operates the rescue.

“The community response has been unbelievable,” Miranda said. “People have really opened their hearts to these animals.”

They’ve opened their wallets as well. Miranda said some $15,000 had been sent to support the care and feeding of the dogs, along with more than 1,000 pounds of dog food.

Blankets, towels, dog bones and a variety of other treats and necessities have also been contributed, Miranda said — and all of it for a very good cause.

The dogs, several of them near death, were found Aug. 10 at the former property of Roberta Bugenig near Mad River. Miranda and four volunteers rescued the dogs from among the remains of numerous dead dogs, many of which appeared to have been eaten by the survivors.

Two of the dogs recovered Aug. 11 have been euthanized due to untreatable physical or mental problems. But Miranda said that as a result of the generosity, the surviving dogs are receiving “the best medical care money can buy.”

In some cases, both businesses and their employees have donated to support the dogs.

One example is the Coast Central Credit Union on Harrison Avenue in Eureka.

“We want to take a moment and thank you for your service, contribution and willingness to rescue and care for the animals in our community that have been neglected or abused,” according to a letter from credit union employees.

“In recent news, our hearts were broken and it sickened us to hear about the dogs that were literally starved to death, but yet thankful that you were able to save the remaining dogs,” the letter stated.

“As you may know, Coast Central Credit Union already sent you a contribution, but many of us as individuals who work here wanted to also contribute to you. We hope this helps in the treatment and care of these dogs you have saved.”

The employees of another Eureka business, Longs Drugs on Myrtle Avenue, contributed cash and dog food, both of which were delivered to the rescue.

Marlena Gillespie, the photo and sporting goods manager at the store, organized the fundraiser by soliciting small donations from co-workers and a few of her neighbors.

“I said you could give me $5 or $10 or buy a bag of dog food,” she said. In three days, she raised $250 and collected 300 pounds of food.

“Everyone’s just sick over this whole thing,” Gillespie said. “If we didn’t have Shannon, what would happen to these dogs?”

Miranda said the kind words included in cards and letters have helped him get through a difficult time.

“It’s been tough,” he said. “Really tough. I can’t even tell you how much the thank you cards of support and encouragement have kept me going.”

One card thanked Miranda and his volunteers for their “honor and service. You bring hope to the pure hearts of despairing creatures.”

He laughed when he produced two letters referring to him as “Saint Miranda,” but he was serious again when he talked about the work of his no-kill shelter.

“These kinds of rescues are expensive,” he said, “which is why so few people do them.”

Miranda said a June 30 rescue of 22 horses from a Santa Rosa ranch resulted in little publicity and few donations — “and that cost us a fortune, by our standards. Just to pay everyone’s fuel there and back was more than $600, not to mention the feeding and care afterward.”

He said all of the donations will be used for the care of the rescued dogs, with any additional funds applied toward the continuation of the rescue’s work.

“I’d like to personally thank the community for its overwhelming support and generosity,” Miranda said. “When I saw the condition of those dogs in Mad River, I just wanted to quit. I didn’t want to ever have to see something like that again.”

But because of the encouragement he’s received, Miranda said, “I know I have to keep going. Now I want to do even more.”

For more information about Miranda’s Animal Rescue, phone 707-725-4449, or write to 1603 Sandy Prairie Road, Fortuna, Calif., 95540.

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

ER - Specious arguments

Specious arguments
8/30/2006

The Eureka Reporter has been the subject of some criticism in the community regarding its coverage of the tragic Trinity County dog scandal.

Once again, it seems like this newspaper has unjustly come under attack for alleged ideologically biased reporting, when all we have done is report on facts in an increasingly tragic case that involved the outright shooting, bludgeoning and starvation deaths of dozens of dogs.

When we began reporting on this scandal, we did not know that the dogs’ owner — Roberta Bugenig — had ever lived in Humboldt County. We did not know about the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office’s involvement nor the involvement of the Humboldt County District Attorney’s Office.

That a confidential paper trail led back to District Attorney Paul Gallegos is not this newspaper’s responsibility.

That some community residents are critical of Gallegos for his apparent non-action is not this newspaper’s responsibility.

That the Animal Legal Defense Fund contacted The Eureka Reporter is not this newspaper’s responsibility.

That the ALDF finds Gallegos’ explanations less than plausible is not this newspaper’s responsibility.

And it is not this newspaper’s responsibility if individuals are charged with misdemeanor and/or felony counts related to this case. The responsibility for that lies solely with those individuals.

Our responsibility is to report on this horrific scandal. We have shown that the wanton execution and/or neglect of any animal is serious business and should be reported and prosecuted.

Instead of thinly veiled specious claims against this newspaper, perhaps our critics can donate to Miranda’s Rescue and spend time helping Shannon Miranda care for the rescued dogs and making sure that such acts never occur again on the North Coast.

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

ER - National, international animal groups weigh in on abuse scandal

Thirteen dogs were rescued Aug. 11 from the former Mad River property of Roberta Bugenig. Two of the dogs had to be euthanized, and eight others are still looking for caring homes. File photo

National, international animal groups weigh in on abuse scandal
by Heather Muller , 8/30/2006

At least three major animal welfare organizations have declared their active involvement in the Mad River animal abuse cases that have rocked Trinity and Humboldt counties.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund, the Humane Society of the United States and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals have offered their services to law enforcement officials in both counties, and have been working behind the scenes to assist officials struggling to deal with the legal issues — and public relations disaster — that have arisen from the discovery of dozens of dead dogs and other animals found at three locations near Mad River.

“This is a very disturbing case,” said Stephanie Bell, a cruelty caseworker from PETA, the Virginia-based international animal rights organization that has been quietly involved in the case for more than a week.

“One of our biggest concerns … is the prolonged substandard conditions these animals were apparently subjected to, and we are very interested in finding out why it took officials so long to get help for these animals. It is our understanding that Trinity County officials were made aware of these animals in June of 2004, and it is extremely disturbing to us that these animals did not get the help they so desperately needed until August of 2006, more than two years later,” Bell said.

Known the world over for its nude photos of supermodels (“I’d rather go naked than wear fur”) and its guerilla-theater tactics — including the splashing of paint on wearers of expensive furs — the sometimes controversial organization has taken a decidedly measured approach to these cases.

“We generally don’t take action on cases that are reported to us until we have all of the facts at our fingertips, so that we can know how best to proceed,” Bell said. “Without factual and accurate information, we can’t weigh in in a helpful manner.”

Bell said she had been in contact with officials from the Trinity County District Attorney’s Office. “They have been very responsive to my phone calls,” she said.

But Bell added that she would like to see action taken in Humboldt County as well.

“We are heartened by the fact that charges have been filed in Trinity County, and that additional charges may be pending. We certainly believe, based on the information that we’ve seen … to date, that felony cruelty to animal charges are merited. We also would like to see charges pursued in Humboldt County based on the condition of an apparently emaciated blind horse found on the (Roberta) Bugenig property in June of 2004, and we will be contacting Humboldt County officials about that matter.”

That point was seconded by Paul Bruce from the Humane Society of the United States.

“Trinity County Animal Control obviously dropped the ball, but the Humboldt County District Attorney certainly could have filed charges and maybe got this thing resolved before it got as bad as it did,” said Bruce, who is the regional program coordinator for the HSUS’s West Coast regional office.

“Things were handled horribly,” he said, adding that both Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos and Trinity County Animal Control Officer Christine Edwards would be the recipients of two of “many” letters he plans to write.

“Of cases we’ve known about, this one’s pretty horrific,” Bruce said. “When you throw in the horrible fact of dogs cannibalizing each other to stay alive, that leads us to believe this situation is worthy of a lot more attention than it’s been getting.”

As previously reported in The Eureka Reporter, Gallegos said Monday that he would reconsider a felony animal cruelty charge against Bugenig that had been rejected by his office in 2004.

While residing in Bridgeville in 2004, Bugenig owned more than 60 animals, many of which are believed to have died or been killed near Mad River after she reportedly moved across the county line in June of that year.

Gallegos’ announcement came on the heels of a challenge by attorneys from the Animal Legal Defense Fund to his interpretation of the legal statute under which a felony charge against Bugenig had been requested by the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office.

In an e-mail Friday to The Eureka Reporter, Eileen Stark, the ALDF’s director of education, stated, “We urge that a very thorough investigation be performed — in both counties — so that appropriate charges can be filed in this case. We are offering our free assistance to the prosecutors in both counties, and we are available for advice on the investigations as well.”

And PETA has not yet ruled out direct action in the cases.

“We don’t know what’s going to come to pass,” Bell said. “We will continue to make decisions as information becomes available.

“What I can definitively tell you is that we have been and will continue to monitor this case very, very closely. We want to make sure justice is served.”

For more information about People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, visit www.peta.org. For information about the Humane Society of the United States, visit www.hsus.org. For the Animal Legal Defense Fund, visit www.aldf.org.

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

ER - National Animal group challenges Gallegos over abuse case

National Animal group challenges Gallegos over abuse case
by Heather Muller , 8/30/2006

One of many questions related to the Mad River dog abuse scandal resurfaced again late last week when comments made by Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos were challenged by the Animal Legal Defense Fund, a national nonprofit organization that works to ensure the enforcement of state and federal animal protection laws.

On Wednesday, Gallegos said in a phone interview that he stood by decisions made by his office not to file 123 charges against Roberta Bugenig that had been requested in 2004 by deputies and animal control officers from the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office, who found at least 62 dogs and a horse living in questionable conditions at Bugenig’s Bridgeville residence.

Dozens of Bugenig’s former animals, which included horses, sheep, goats and an unknown number of dogs, died or were killed after Bugenig left Bridgeville and moved less than five miles across the Trinity County line near Mad River.

Subsequent to the move, according to the Malcolms’ defense attorney, Bugenig transferred ownership of the animals to John and Stacy Malcolm, who were charged Monday in Trinity County, along with a third subject, Roger Zampatti, with 16 felony counts each of alleged animal cruelty.

While it is impossible to know whether the filing of the 2004 charges against Bugenig in Humboldt County would have prevented the Mad River tragedy, Gallegos said charges could not have been filed because evidence in the case did not demonstrate “an aspect of intent to the neglect,” which, he said, would have been necessary for the case to proceed.

But not so, said representatives of the ALDF.

ALDF Director of Education Eileen Stark stated in an e-mail Friday that the organization could not comment on the specific merits of the 2004 case against Bugenig because it did not have access to evidence that was submitted.

“However,” she wrote, “regarding Mr. Gallegos’ comment that they couldn’t demonstrate intent in the 2004 charges, ALDF attorneys advise me that, under California law, assuming adequate evidence, an animal neglect charge does not require intentional conduct. It should be fairly easy to prove as it requires minimal criminal culpability.”

The Eureka Reporter spoke with one of those attorneys, Stephan Otto, who said that the statute under which the felony charge was requested, Penal Code 597(b), requires “a low burden of proof.”

According to Otto, “What the courts have said, and they’ve been quite clear on this issue, is that (the statute) requires proof of criminal negligence, which is the lowest level of criminal culpability under the law. It’s one step up from strict liability, in which you have to show no criminal intent at all.”

To win a conviction under PC 597(b), Otto said, the DA’s Office would have needed to convince a jury only that the conditions of the horse represented a departure from “the ordinary standard of due care,” regardless of whether that departure was intentional.

On Monday, when presented with the ALDF statements, Gallegos stood his ground.

“I know exactly what the law is, and I know what the difficulty is with those cases,” he said. “If we thought there was sufficient evidence to move forward and thought that there was a likelihood of success, we would have filed the case.”

According to Gallegos, conviction depends on the circumstances of the case and the quality of the evidence presented.

Charges requested by deputies included 61 misdemeanor violations for alleged failure to provide proof of legal rabies vaccinations, 61 misdemeanor violations for alleged failure to license the dogs, and one felony count alleging failure to care for a horse, whose poor health and substandard living conditions were graphically documented in a series of investigative reports, photographs and a videotape.

In the reports, one deputy described the horse as thin, blind and suffering from severe foot problems.

“The front feet were grown out and curved up. The (heels) of all the feet appeared to be rotted or worn off and appeared to cause pain. The horse at times appeared to be putting weight on its leg, not the hoof. The mound the horse was standing on was a buildup of manure … soaked with urine.”

The dogs, according to the reports, were living in kennels filled with mud, with 55-gallon barrels serving as shelter.

“The smallest kennel had two or more dogs in it and one barrel. Some dogs … appeared to be unable to move without extreme effort and in obvious pain,” the report stated.

The same deputy documented conditions at the Bridgeville property after the animals had been moved to Mad River.

“The pile of manure looked to be about 2.5 to 3 feet deep. I placed a 3-pound coffee can nearby in a hole where the shelter had sat, and took a picture to show the depth of the manure.

“I also took photos of the area where the kennels had been. Now that the kennels are gone, you can see how deep the mud was during the winter in the small kennel. The videotape, booked into evidence …, will show how much room the animals had inside the kennel and the barrel they had to get into.”

The horse, named Lucky, eventually died at Bugenig’s former Mad River residence. Dozens of dogs were found dead or dying at the property earlier this month, and at least 20 more, all dead, were found at two dump sites Trinity County investigators have linked back to the residence.

The ALDF contacted The Eureka Reporter on Friday, after having been contacted by Barbara Shults, director of the North Coast Animal Welfare Advocacy Center, seeking a second opinion on the legal argument.

Gallegos’ campaign Web site, www.votepaul.org, lists Shults as a supporter of his successful 2006 bid for re-election.

“I’ve been an avid supporter of (Gallegos) from the get-go, but now I’m just really disgusted with him,” Shults said Sunday.

“What kind of precedent does this set for the community? Does it tell people who might harm animals that they can get away with it?”

Under the terms of the penal code, the statute of limitations on the 122 alleged misdemeanor violations has expired, but Gallegos could legally proceed with the alleged felony.

When asked if there was a chance he would reconsider the charging decision, he said, “Based on politics? Extremely remote. But in all candor to you and everyone else, I will take another look at the file. I will look at it again based on the evidence that is available.”

But the outcome, he said, is likely to be the same.

“I will give deference to my deputy’s decision,” he said, referring to Assistant District Attorney Wes Keat, who Gallegos said originally rejected the felony case, “and I certainly am not going to make a decision based on politics.”

“It’s still not too late for Paul to do the right thing here,” said Shannon Miranda, owner and operator of Miranda’s Animal Rescue in Fortuna, and one of six people who rescued 13 surviving dogs from the Mad River property on Aug. 11.

“File the charge now,” Miranda said.

To that end, the ALDF offered its assistance.

“We urge that a very thorough investigation be performed — in both counties — so that appropriate charges can be filed in this case,” Stark wrote. “We are offering our free assistance to the prosecutors in both counties, and we are available for advice on the investigations as well.”

For information about the Animal Legal Defense Fund, visit www.aldf.org or phone 707-795-2533.

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