Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Federal Racketeering Lawsuit Stuns Humane Society

You may have missed our New Year’s Eve exposé covering the dismissal of a federal lawsuit pushed by a consortium of animal rights groups that included the deceptive Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). The groups alleged that Feld Entertainment (the parent company of the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus) mistreated elephants in violation of the Endangered Species Act, but in December a judge tossed out the lawsuit. Now the plot thickens: The circus is suing HSUS, two HSUS lawyers, and a number of other animal rights organizations under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. (The lawsuit is exclusively available at HumaneWatch.org.)

The original animal rights lawsuit, filed more than nine years ago, was based on information provided by a former Ringling elephant “barn helper” named Tom Rider. After Rider left his circus job, he was paid by animal rights groups to testify about the supposedly “bad” treatment of elephants there. In all, the original lawsuit’s plaintiffs paid Rider more than $190,000—his sole source of income for years—while the litigation made its way through the court system.

Sound a bit like pay-for-play? As Judge Emmet Sullivan noted in his December ruling that dismissed the animal rights groups’ lawsuit: “The Court finds that Mr. Rider is essentially a paid plaintiff and fact witness who is not credible, and therefore affords no weight to his testimony…. [T]he primary purpose [for the payments] is to keep Mr. Rider involved with the litigation…”

Based on Judge Sullivan’s finding, Feld is suing everyone who played a part in this collaborative scheme (hence the “racketeering” aspect). This includes Rider and a nonprofit “Wildlife Advocacy Project” charity that the Washington, DC law firm of Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal allegedly used to launder money between their plaintiff clients and Rider.

One of these clients putting up dough to support Rider was the Fund for Animals, which merged with HSUS in 2004.

Feld is leveling bribery, fraud, obstruction of justice, and money laundering charges against HSUS and two of its corporate attorneys, three other animal rights groups, Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal, and all three of that firm’s named partners. It’s an earth-shattering lawsuit. Today we’re telling the media:

America’s farmers, ranchers, hunters, fishermen, research scientists, fashion designers, and restaurateurs have seen for decades how the animal rights movement can behave like a mobbed-up racket. But it’s still shocking to see the evidence laid out on paper. In a treble-damage lawsuit like this, a jury could actually do the humane thing and finally put HSUS out of business completely.

You can read the full, 135-page lawsuit over at HumaneWatch. It’s worth more than a glance. If these allegations are proven true, HSUS employees might be finding themselves walking the same breadline they’ve tried to put so many others in.


Feld is suing:

  • The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS);
  • The Fund for Animals (which merged with HSUS in 2004);
  • Jonathan Lovvorn, an attorney employed by HSUS;
  • Kimberly Ockene, an attorney employed by HSUS;
  • The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA);
  • The Animal Welfare Institute;
  • The Animal Protection Institute (d/b/a/ Born Free USA);
  • Tom Rider (a discredited witness in a recently dismissed lawsuit against Feld, who a judge ruled was paid at least $190,000 for his testimony);
  • Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal (the outside law firm which handled that lawsuit against Feld);
  • Katherine Meyer (of Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal);
  • Eric Glitzenstein (of Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal);
  • Howard Crystal (of Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal); and
  • The Wildlife Advocacy Project (a nonprofit organization founded and managed by Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal, which was used as a pass-through vehicle to allow animal rights groups to pay Tom Rider for his discredited testimony against Feld).

10 comments:

Warren said...

I am not an attorney nor do I play one on Television. I did try to read the entire 130 page doccument and although confusing to a non legal mind, the statements of evidence presented are detailed and convinving.

I admit that these filings are one sided in every case and that the defendants side is not presented until later in the process. However, if the allegations made by the Feld legal team are even partially correct, I wish them all the best in winning this case.

All of us, no matter what our connection to the circus industry, should be thankful to have a corporation such as Feld Entertainment that has the resources to fight through the legal system to bring to light the truth about our animal partners.

I do not claim that the circus industry always gets everything about animal care and husbandry 100% correct but I do believe the industry, on the whole, does a good job of protecting, caring for, and preserving the survival of so many animal species that are on the verge of extinction in the wild due to the lack of concern by the remainder of the human race.

A job well done, Mr. Feld, and I will continue to follow this with interest and support.

Jimmy Cole said...

While I applaud the Feld people for taking a stand against the animal rights extremist groups, I would hope they do so with some caution.

To the avarage "John Q. Public", the Humane Society and the SPCA is their local animal shelter where they go to adopt their pet cat or dog. It is the agency that takes action against legitamate animal abuse and rescues stray and injured animals that have been abandoned.

There are many animal welfare agencys that do good work. It is the extemist groups, such as PeTA and some others that are doing all the damage. And yes, unfortunatly there are portions of the Humane Society and the SPCA that are now falling into that category as well.

Unfortunatly as well, there have been a recent rash of circus animal incidents that have recieved very negative coverage by the news media.

My concern is that these "animal welfare agencys" will use this legal action from the circus to gain public sympathy and project the image to the media that "the circus is against us and wants us out of buisness!".

Hopefully the Feld legal team will take this into consideration, go about their legal action and not tarnish their image of concern for animal welfare from a public relations point of view.

Anonymous said...

Most people mistake HSUS as being the same organization as local humane societies, who actually do run shelters. Few local shelters get any aid from HSUS, which uses the confusion to raise tens of millions, and takes away donations from the local shelters that are barely keeping their heads above water.

Anonymous said...

I agree with both posters above, there needs to be a distinction between your “Local” Humane Society, Rescue groups and ASPCA.

My Boston terrier was rescued from Hillsborough County Animal Services and my mixed breed from a local rescue group here in Lakeland. I am Facebook friends with the woman who fostered one of my dogs for over a year. The number one complaint is HSUS & ASPCA always give these sad tails of whoa with images of animals they have saved or rescued, when in fact some nice person from a “local” rescue group has been fostering the animal for weeks, months and even years. The local groups and foster families do not receiving any money from the BIG NATIONAL Groups of HSUS or the ASPCA.

Bottom line when considering a donation please support a local rescue group or a local animal shelter. DO NOT Send money because of a Television commercial or a Magazine add. There should be a disclaimer at the bottom of these adds.

Okay off my soap box again….enjoy the day!

Lil’ dw

Anonymous said...

Perhaps the Ringling PR people could identify some of the legitamate animal welfare groups, and have the Feld organization donate to them. What a PR boost that would be for the circus!

Anonymous said...

It is important to note in the case that the damages being sought are not to financially fill the pockets of Feld Entertainment, Inc., but the 10 years worth of donations to these groups that were received through the bad publicity indicting FEI's handling of elephants are actually ill-gotten gains, which must be returned to those who made the donations under false pretenses. If this were to occur the donors would be able to make claims to get their donations returned. The whole point is that such a ruling would bankrupt each and every one of these organizations and that should put an end to them once and for all. It would then behoove the local shelters to step up their own fund-raising campaigns to try and have those funds originally donated to help animals, go to the local shelters instead, or perhaps FEI could suggest that the court disburse the ill-gotten gains to reputable animal shelters on a more localized level. I love the law and most certainly the FEI case should at the very least bankrupt the corrupt law firm that was behind the original case in the first place and set a strong precedent for any future lawyers who try and pursue this type of predatory law suit against those who use animals in entertainment. I think everyone even remotely affiliated with or interested in the circus, should thank FEI for first suffering through the ignominious initial case and for taking the offensive now. May they be successful and win every part of their case!!!!
Neil Cockerline
Minneapolis, MN

Anonymous said...

So what some of the bloggers are saying that feld lawyers should not go after all humane societys? Why not any local shelter They would be the first ones protesting the circus for animal abuse! The locals shelters are ran mostly by animal activists. So why not go after them?

Mike Naughton said...

I hope the Feld attorneys nail those rat bastards to the wall.

Mike Naughton
PO Box 4039
Sarasota, Florida 34230

Michael@NaughtonAttractions.com

warren said...

Neil, thanks for your input and insight into this case. You obviously understood the subtilities of the filing better than I did and clarified what I thought to be true but was not sure.

What becomes clear is that everyone should be cautious in determining who and for what purpose so called "humane societies" are doing and why before donating to them. Also, it is important to understand how much of your donation actually goes to real work and how much goes to "administrative costs" and such fraud as paying people like Tom R. to support ulterior motives.

There are many local run shelters that do excellent work in providing rescue, shelter, medical treatment, and finding homes for abandoned or strayed household pets, resorting to euthenasia only when no other options exist for that particular animal. However when a group of nationwide or world wide extremists run an organization that can afford huge corporate law firms to mount unsubstantiated lawsuits, pay large staffs to travel, and mount costly PR campaigns to disrupt countless lives and legitimate business, they deserve to be shut down.

A law firm that blatently pays so called expert wittnesses, who have no qualifications to bring suit should have their right to practice revoked and be required to bear the financial damage they have caused others.

FEI is entitled to recoup their costs in defending this suit and I believe that they will attempt to return all other funds to those who were wrongly led into donating to the pockets of lawyers, extreme activists, and others whose sole goal is to line their wallets with cash.

Jimmy Cole said...

To Anonymous, Can you imagin the bad press and the public outrage against the entire circus industry if their local animal rescue shelter got sued and had to be shut down!