# Stolen Texas LGDs turn up in Arkansas Rescue



## Wisher1000 (Jun 10, 2015)

I just got a call from a very excited friend.  

You see, last year her LGDs were stolen from her fenced property.  She knew they were stolen because a fence panel had been removed to gain access.  She was devastated and vowed to find her dogs.  She filed a report with law enforcement and pressed them to follow up.  She rode around for hours and hours for weeks on end, asking people for information and following up on every lead.  Some of those leads lead her into unsavory areas of Texas and uncomfortably close to illegal activities.  She put posts on Facebook and other social media.  She registered them on many, many lost dog sights, she contacted rescues in Texas and surrounding states.  She notified vets and sent them pictures.  Months went by and she acquired another pair of dogs.  She later acquired two more, but she was still determined to find her original dogs.  

She was excited because she had been contacted by a woman who had seen one of her posts, and also seen the dogs on a rescue sight out of Arkansas.  She looked on the sight and saw her dogs!  She called me from the road, on a beeline to the rescue.  

Now the questions.  Why weren't they scanned?  Both were chipped.  Why won't they answer her calls, texts, and emails?  She has contacted the athorities at her destination and they will meet her there.  I am waiting to hear back from her with word about what happened.  I sure hope they are there and she can bring them home tonight.


----------



## samssimonsays (Jun 10, 2015)

Oh Wow!!!  That is a horrible story and yet I am so happy she found them. Will be praying she is able to get them without a hassle!


----------



## Baymule (Jun 10, 2015)

I hope she can reclaim her dogs and rescue them from the rescue.


----------



## Southern by choice (Jun 10, 2015)

You would think they would have had a reader.
Serious issue there...they will have some explaining to do.

I am curious as how the dogs would get stolen in the first place.
I wonder if the dogs knew or were familiar with the abductors... can't see any LGD allowing someone to take them off their property without a serious fight.

So very glad she found them! Hope you will update with the report that they are now in her custody!


----------



## Wisher1000 (Jun 11, 2015)

I have not heard back from her and I'm getting a bit worried. 

SBC - That was my first question to her, "Why didn't they scan them?"  She didn't have an answer but was sure going to find out.  The other worry was that they wouldn't return her calls.  Like I said, she had notified the sheriffs department at the rescues location and was meeting them there, so I feel confident that she is okay, I'm just dying to know what happened.  

She'll get back to me when she can.


----------



## samssimonsays (Jun 11, 2015)

On the edge of my seat waiting to find out if she got them! I know rescues around us are horrible. Even if the animal is verified yours you will have to pay the adoption fee for them or they can refuse you because you don't meet the rescues requirements... I have seen it happen which is why I left the rescue scene....


----------



## Hens and Roos (Jun 11, 2015)

for your friend!


----------



## Wisher1000 (Jun 11, 2015)

In Alabama, we have laws against that, I don't know about Texas or Arkansas.  Here, if you file a police report of stolen property, the person who is found in possession of that property must surrender it and/or face charges (Receiving stolen property - felony) with NO compensation for what they paid or have invested in the property.  That is to encourage people to find out if something is hot before they buy it.  The rescue should have no claim, especially since the dogs are chipped. 

It is different if the dog or other property is lost, but there is a misdemeanor charge of "Theft of Lost Property" if the finder doesn't make a reasonable effort to find the owner.  Again......that would have been easy in this case.


----------



## Mike CHS (Jun 11, 2015)

The law reads the same in Tennessee Wisher.  The Rescue would be in big legal manure if they demanded payment for an animal that can be proven to belong to the friend.


----------



## Wisher1000 (Jun 11, 2015)

The dogs are home!!!!

Quick update. 

They are in great shape, really too good. She said she thinks they have gotten fat and lazy.   No complaints, it's better than many alternatives.

The woman said she scanned the chips and "no information came up" ........ Really?  It was checked while being discussed and came back to my friend AND was tagged as stolen dogs.  

She produced a form from a man from Tennessee that showed he had released them to her. This will be followed up on. 

A happy ending, no matter what.


----------



## Wisher1000 (Jun 11, 2015)

btw - they were missing for eight months, and the male had been neutered


----------



## Hens and Roos (Jun 11, 2015)

Glad that they are back with her! if the dogs could only talk....thinking it would be a very interesting story!


----------



## Southern by choice (Jun 11, 2015)

So happy to hear this!


----------



## Wisher1000 (Jun 11, 2015)

Hens and Roos said:


> Glad that they are back with her! if the dogs could only talk....thinking it would be a very interesting story!


 
Yeah, especially the one from the male that got neutered...

"They took me!  Then they didn't bring me back!  Oh, and they were not nice to me.  And...and.... and they cut off my... "   




I know, that's not funny.


----------



## Wisher1000 (Jun 11, 2015)

She said that it is okay with her that someone paid to have him neutered, she would have had to anyway, the four new dogs are all females!


----------



## Bunnylady (Jun 11, 2015)

Wow, Wisher - my hat's off to your friend for her tenacity. A lot of people wouldn't have stuck with it so long over "just a dog" (or two). So glad things turned out so well.

But of course, there are all those questions that will never have answers - how did the original thieves manage it, and why? How many hands did these dogs go through, and how many of them knew that they were stolen? You'd think if the "man from Tennessee" knew, he'd have just dumped them rather than signing them over to a rescue. 

BTW, I have heard that it isn't unusual to find a chip on a dog, and be unable to get any information back. There are several possible reasons for that to happen, so the frequent response is to just shrug and go on. 

I'm also a little curious about whether the female has been altered. It's more involved and more expensive, but I'd think a lot of folks would find an intact female more of a problem than a male, in most situations.


----------



## Wisher1000 (Jun 11, 2015)

I have thought and thought about the possible explanations for the end result.  One thought was that the dogs were stolen to resell as pets or even breeders and not working dogs, then were disappointed that they didn't work out.   

The female had been spayed before she and her buddy were taken.


----------



## Southern by choice (Jun 11, 2015)

I still wonder if the dogs were familiar with the person/people that took them.
None of my LGD's can be bribed with food and no way could anyone come in or even if they opened a gate no one could get their hands on them. I just cannot believe someone did not get hurt trying to steal them.  This is the part I find very strange.


----------



## babsbag (Jun 11, 2015)

So glad she got her dogs back; that is amazing. I think both of my LGDs would open the gate for anyone that sweet talked them. I don't know that for a fact, just a gut feeling. Maybe I should set up a camera someday and get a stranger to come for a visit. Both of my dogs are incredibly friendly when I am around.


----------



## bonbean01 (Jun 12, 2015)

Thinking sweet talking and a treat and Keera would go willingly too.  Saw a warning for our area tonight about being alert to a couple in a blue truck stealing dogs


----------



## samssimonsays (Jun 12, 2015)

I am SO glad they were found and in good shape/condition! I look forward to seeing if they find anymore info out. It is kinda fishy about the whole chips coming back with no information deal since BOTH had one and the chances that BOTH would not register at the same time is slim to none...  But, OH SO GLAD THEY ARE HOME! We too have had people stealing dogs in and around my area and sadly I think if anyone even so much as left their car door open to go steal a different dog, mine would end up in it with them thinking htey could go for a ride... However, if someone walked through our front door our Collie would most likely kill them if they meant harm. Our pyrenees.... sadly would invite them in for a hand to hold and a pet.


----------



## Wisher1000 (Jun 15, 2015)

I think that excuse is fishy, as well.  My friend, Cee, called the rescue as soon as she located them on their website and left a message that said you have my dogs, they were stolen, and I am getting in my vehicle to come get them right now.  The lady called the police and said she was afraid of this lady on the phone.  The officer she called is a special animal investigator whom Cee had already contacted to tell him what was going on.  He offered to meet her and go with her to get the dogs.  I'm sure he wanted to prevent any altercation and also wanted to see the dogs' reaction to her.  He told Cee that he didn't think those were her dogs (he knew and trusted the rescue owner) and that he would be there to make the determination.  While on the seven hour drive, she got a phone call from him.  Evidently, he was there, with a reader, and had found the chips and asked Cee for the numbers.  She had and read off both and he confirmed that those matched.  I wonder if he is still so sure that the rescue lady is trustworthy.  When Cee asked her why she was trying to sell her dogs, the lady threw up her hands and said, "That's what I do!"  I told Cee she should have said, "What?  Sell stolen dogs?  Is that WHAT YOU DO?!?"  

I know that the chances of prosecuting any of this is slim.  The crime was committed in Texas, the recovery was in Arkansas, and the dogs (supposedly) came from Tennessee.  The only prosecution would have to be from the state of Arkansas for receiving stolen property, and I doubt that will happen since the dogs were returned, it was a Texas crime, and the property is "only a couple of dogs."  

The moral of this story is, NEVER give up looking.  I am ashamed to say that I would likely not have been as tenacious and persistent as my friend.  For eight months, Cee never gave up hope of getting them back.

I will keep everyone posted.


----------



## samssimonsays (Jun 15, 2015)

I am so so so happy that all has turned out. The lady just seemed fishy with that... Like she knew and tried to use her ties with the local law enforcement to make your friend look like a crazy.  :/


----------



## Bunnylady (Jun 15, 2015)

Wisher, you know me - I'm trying to give people the benefit of the doubt here.  I agree, it seems unlikely, but this woman may be guilty of nothing more than not trying hard enough to find out where those dogs had come from. A chip reader just gives you a number; you then have to enter it in the appropriate program (possibly writing it down first). People update those data bases periodically; some of the companies that keep them charge monthly fees to keep you in the system. Some chips get put into an animal, and for whatever reason their information never gets entered into any data base anywhere. I know I personally have a tendency to transpose numbers, so I know it's disgustingly easy to put the wrong number in and not know it. There are possibilities for human error all over the place, and not just by the lady at the rescue. I mean,  look -the officer got the numbers from Cee, and compared them directly with what he saw on the reader. Almost all the potential for "operator error" and "computer glitches" had been eliminated when he checked.

And ask yourself this - if she knew the dogs were stolen, and knew they had chips, why did they _still _have the chips? There would always be the possibility that someone, somewhere, would pass a reader over the dog, find out it was stolen, and trace it back to her . . . . And even if it wasn't likely that she would face prosecution, the internet has made the world a very small place, and rescues depend on the public's goodwill. Some rescues are little more than hoarders by another name, but that doesn't sound like the case here - she could lose a lot if word like that got out.

And as for the phone call - Wisher, you're a cop. If I got a phone call from someone who said, "I just saw a picture on the Star-News website of a girl that was identified as your daughter, riding a horse that was identified as yours. Well, I'm telling you that horse was stolen from me 8 years ago, and I'm coming to get her just as fast as I can get my trailer hooked up and drive over there," what would you expect me to do? My "paper trail" on Sunny doesn't go back further than 2 owners; it's unlikely, but not impossible. Calling the authorities and saying, "I've got a nutcase coming over here making wild claims" seems like a very logical response to me.


----------



## Wisher1000 (Jun 20, 2015)

I hear you, Bunny, and agree, but there is more.

Looking back at some blog entries on the rescues website, we have found that she mentioned the dogs coming in from T E X A S.  She knew where they came from, but said they were from Tennessee.  She lied.  She also posted them as up for adoption the next day.  That doesn't lend one to believe she made any reasonable effort to find out if the dogs were strays, lost, or stolen.  Especially since both were chipped and the investigator had no problem reading the chips and pulling up the owner information and the flag that the dogs were stolen.

Cee now recalls a neighbor that made a big deal about the incident where the dogs went missing and stressed that it was probably "just some kids, messing around."  Then a couple of months later, the neighbor's brother stopped along the drive to ask about her luck in finding the dogs.  When she started talking about all she was still doing to find them, he, too, said it was probably "just some kids, messing around."  Does that seem like a coincidence?  Or suspicious?  

Cee now suspects her neighbors felt the dogs were not being treated well, having to stay outside, with the chickens, all the time (working) and may have taken them to find a new home for them.  She also suspects that the brother, who lives out of town may be "the man from Tennessee."  The Texas investigator is off this week for vacation but will be checking on all of that when he gets back next week.

Cee wants to prosecute and is considering suing for her out-of-pocket expenses that arose from her dogs being taken.  That caused her a lot of trouble, expense, and worry.  I think that is reasonable (and I am not a litigious person) since she lost many birds before getting replacement dogs and spent many hours looking and driving to try to find them and to go to get them.  That alone was a seven hour trip.

Whomever took the dogs removed a cattle panel from a steel frame to get them out.  They knew where and to whom the dogs belonged.  They did it on purpose, and they caused her a lot of problems.  I think if it can be proven who did it, they should be charged and should have to make it right.


----------



## Bunnylady (Jun 20, 2015)

OK, _now _we have a story that doesn't add up. I mean, if she was anticipating a couple of dogs from Texas, and then says she had paperwork from Tennessee, that could be passed off with, "oh, I talk to lots of people; I just got confused about what this guy said." And of course, if she believed the dogs belonged to this man, then why wouldn't she put them up for adoption as soon as he left them with her? She'd have no reason not to. If she believed the dogs had been turned over to her by the owner, why would she even look for chips, let alone check to see what information there might be about them? But to know that the chips were there, and to say they got no information back when clearly, it worked for someone else - that is where the story falls apart. Why check if she believed the guy? And if she didn't believe the guy, why didn't she try harder?

If this is a story of a couple of "do-gooders," trying to save a couple of dogs from what they believe to be a miserable life, I can see why nobody had the nerve to remove those chips. But I agree, it sounds like this woman knows too much to try to make herself out to be innocent. I wonder how her "rescue" will fare if word gets around that she is fencing stolen animals?

I wish Cee well in her search for justice!


----------



## Wisher1000 (Jun 20, 2015)

I have never been involved in a rescue.  I don't know the ins and outs of taking in dogs to rehome.  But would it be standard procedure to just BELIEVE what "owners" claimed was the back story on their dog(s) with no verification or at least an attempt to verify?  If not, how about getting a picture and ID on the person that surrenders the dog?  I understand that to them "It's all about the dogs" and previous owners are all horrible people, but is there no protocol for AT LEAST checking chips?  

I never thought about the chips being removed...I'm sure glad they weren't.  

As prevalent as microchips are these days, I would think anyone who regularly works with dogs would be expected to verify ownership when the dog is accepted - especially a rescue.  I would also think that shelters, vets, groomers, animal transport people, etc. would routinely scan the animal, document the number, look it up on the computer, and at least keep a record of the registered owner in the dog's file.  Dogs DO get given away often, but the owner info should be updated or the new owner should at least be able to provide the previous owner's name and address.  One of these dogs had been neutered!  I HOPE that was done at a vet's office.  Why wasn't the chip read then?  If it had been read by anyone in the past eight months, that person would have known that the dog was reported stolen by the real owner.


----------



## Bunnylady (Jun 20, 2015)

I remember a tale of a woman who bred some small breed - I think it was Cavalier King Charles Spaniels. She sent one of her dogs to someone in another state on a breeding loan. Tragically, the person she sent the dog to was murdered, and when she contacted the authorities to find out the status of her dog, they said all of the animals were being held as evidence, or something. Then she learned that the animals had all been rehomed through a rescue after being spayed or neutered. I don't remember how she learned that another breeder had a dog that might be her missing stud, but that's where it had gone - intact, of course. Her dog was chipped, but mysteriously, this dog had a small scar in the precise spot where the chip had been inserted, but gee, wow, quelle surprise - no chip. Unfortunately for the unscrupulous individuals involved, the woman had also had the dog DNA'd just before she sent him off, and when they tested the animal in question, it was a match. _GOTCHA_!

(Apparently, this dog's genetics were so important to this other breeder, they didn't mind the fact that any puppies he produced would only have half-papers. Not sure how they thought they'd get around that one.)

But chips aren't infallible. I've heard there are a lot of chips that are informational dead-ends out there, so one that leads nowhere is more likely to get shrugged off than get a "what the hey??!" reaction. I had a friend that had her dog tattooed on the inside of his (thinly haired) leg simply because the tattoo couldn't be missed or removed, and a chip could.


----------



## Southern by choice (Jun 20, 2015)

My GSD is chipped because she couldn't go the Schutzhund trials without one.

I don't care for the chips for many reasons, some mentioned here already. My dogs and pups are DNA'd. 

Although I am considering chips if I ever do another litter, for many reasons.


----------



## Wisher1000 (Jun 20, 2015)

Bunny, you likely know that there are lots of litters that shouldn't have papers, but do by the time they are sold.  I got a letter from AKC in reference to a litter I was trying to register.  I don't remember what the letter was about, but I know it was not any big deal.  I called and told them that there was a problem.  The problem was, I was not trying to register a litter.  Someone had taken my name, address, and registration number off some registration papers for a dog I sold several years prior.  The lady had forged my signature on the litter registration application.  I did not get in any trouble, but my AKC membership was flagged and whenever I tried to get papers in my name, I had to go back and explain what had happened and who at AKC had investigated it.

I would definitely be interested in DNAing dogs.  I hope that the cost eventually goes down so that it is more accessible to more people.  The chips, however, provide a way to get information on the owner in case the dog is recovered.  DNA can't tell you that.  A tattoo is helpful in IDing a dog once the owner locates it, but useless to the person who finds it (unless, of course, the tattoo is the owner's phone number!)

We suggest that people collect DNA from their kids by swabbing inside the cheeks for cells and storing that swab for future analysis if needed.  That would not be a bad idea for our dogs.  All you have to do is use a Q-tip or a sterile swab if you can get one from your doctor.  Just rub it firmly against the inside of the dog's cheek and let it dry in a paper bag, then transfer it to a labeled ziplock baggie once it is dry.  It wouldn't hurt to put the dog's name on the stick with a pen in case it comes out of it's bag. Just keep the baggie in the dog's file and pray you never need it.


----------



## Wisher1000 (Jul 24, 2015)

More interesting developments.  The above mentioned blog has been edited.  Surprise, surprise!  The dogs that previously had been said to be coming from Texas, are now shown to have been coming from Tennessee. 

Hmmmmmmmm

I wonder if she breathed a little easier after making that "correction."  I wonder if she even considered the fact that Cee could have already printed a copy of the original blog entry for the investigator. 
Would she have a logical explanation for changing it now that he has BOTH copies?

I get madder and madder.


----------



## Bunnylady (Jul 24, 2015)

isn't that rule #1 in every detective's book -"watch for changes in the story?"

As I recall, she had previously said not only that they were coming from Texas, but that they weren't coming with some other dogs from Texas because the person providing the transportation didn't have room . . . . and now, they just came from Tennessee. Nice try, dearie, but a little too late.


----------



## 258 Pots (Jul 25, 2015)

Southern by choice said:


> None of my LGD's can be bribed with food and no way could anyone come in or even if they opened a gate no one could get their hands on them.



My friend has a fierce pyr, everytime I'm there I sneak a scratch behind her ears, the other day I led her right out to my car, she was wagging and ready to go, my friend was less amused...


----------



## Wisher1000 (Feb 26, 2016)

Hi, all!  I was admonished for leaving a couple of threads here hanging so I thought I would come back and tie up some loose ends. 

My friend Cee, filed a lawsuit in the state where the dogs were found.  She had done her homework, had everything documented, and in hand.  The judge heard both sides, and decided in favor of the rescue.  His comment was that Cee should just be happy that she has her dogs back........ ugh.  The rescue continues to operate and the owner continues to refer to Cee as the devil (one of the nicer terms) in her blog.  I myself have developed a bad taste in my mouth for rescues and would likely not trust them if I ever decided to look for a dog to adopt.

At least the dogs are happy.


----------



## samssimonsays (Feb 26, 2016)

WOW! I am so sorry she is going through that! That judge makes me sick! I am glad she has her dogs back and they are happy though.


----------



## secuono (Feb 26, 2016)

There are different chips and scanners, there is no one for all.
Also possible that since they were in a different state and so much time passed, they assumed the owners wouldn't want them any more or drive that far for them. Many people choose not to get them back.

Glad she found them and got them back. Hope they can fit in with her others without fighting.


----------



## secuono (Feb 26, 2016)

Wisher1000 said:


> I have never been involved in a rescue.  I don't know the ins and outs of taking in dogs to rehome.  But would it be standard procedure to just BELIEVE what "owners" claimed was the back story on their dog(s) with no verification or at least an attempt to verify?  If not, how about getting a picture and ID on the person that surrenders the dog?  I understand that to them "It's all about the dogs" and previous owners are all horrible people, but is there no protocol for AT LEAST checking chips?
> 
> I never thought about the chips being removed...I'm sure glad they weren't.
> 
> As prevalent as microchips are these days, I would think anyone who regularly works with dogs would be expected to verify ownership when the dog is accepted - especially a rescue.  I would also think that shelters, vets, groomers, animal transport people, etc. would routinely scan the animal, document the number, look it up on the computer, and at least keep a record of the registered owner in the dog's file.  Dogs DO get given away often, but the owner info should be updated or the new owner should at least be able to provide the previous owner's name and address.  One of these dogs had been neutered!  I HOPE that was done at a vet's office.  Why wasn't the chip read then?  If it had been read by anyone in the past eight months, that person would have known that the dog was reported stolen by the real owner.





Wisher1000 said:


> More interesting developments.  The above mentioned blog has been edited.  Surprise, surprise!  The dogs that previously had been said to be coming from Texas, are now shown to have been coming from Tennessee.
> 
> Hmmmmmmmm
> 
> ...




Did you take screen shots of the blog ad proof??


----------



## Bunnylady (Feb 26, 2016)

I was afraid of that. Reading the blog, I got the impression that the rescue owner was a rather batty old gal with a bit of a martyr complex and possible hoarder tendencies, but it might be hard to prove that she was an active and willing participant in the theft of Cee's animals. I imagine part of her defense was that she hears a lot of stories that are bits and pieces that don't altogether add up, but she's in it to help the animals and she figures that they are at a safe place with her and that's what's important, blah, blah, blah. When you look at what she puts into feeding, vet care, etc, you can't really say she is profiting by her activities, so there isn't any obvious criminal motive, and I'm sure the judge took that into account.

I am sorry that Cee's search for justice has miscarried, and that this rescue owner feels vindicated in her (at the very least) slipshod methods, but I'm very glad that Cee and her dogs were reunited and are happy together.


----------

