By Sharyn L. Decker
Lewis County Sirens news reporter
A pair of dogs apparently sprung from the animal shelter where they were awaiting probable euthanization were found by deputies yesterday on the property of the Centralia man who owned them.
One woman there was arrested and deputies are looking for the owner to question him about last week’s burglary at the shelter, according to the Lewis County Sheriff’s Office.
The female Pit Bull and male Rottweiler were scheduled to be put down; they had been impounded in mid-April in connection an attack on neighboring Alpacas.
Estara J.E. Bojorquez, 41, told deputies yesterday only that the animals showed up at midnight at their back door, according to the sheriff’s office.
She was arrested for possession of stolen property and rendering criminal assistance, the sheriff’s office said.
The sheriff’s office got a tip yesterday that neighbors heard the dogs barking at the 1400 block of South Schueber Road, the home of Bojorquez and Terry Petrich, the dog’s owner, according to Chief Civil Deputy Stacy Brown.
Brown said the animals were hidden in a wooded area behind the house, in a sheet metal-sided structure.
The dogs, Whitney and Max, were seized and taken back to the shelter, according to Brown.
Early last Friday morning, employees at the shelter on the 500 block of Centralia-Alpha Road discovered someone had cut a fence and taken the dogs.
Petrich had until tomorrow to pay fees and comply with county requirements regarding the pets which had been deemed dangerous dogs. They were scheduled to be euthanized this coming Monday.
Tags: By Sharyn L. Decker, news reporter
I said they shouldn’t have the dogs if they can’t pay the fines. If you own aggressive animals, and you can’t keep them at home, I stand by that comment. I don’t think of someone who has their pets annually vaccinated and takes responsibility for them in the same light as I do the asshole we’re talking about here. If you would allow your dog out to potentially kill someone else’s animals, then the remark would apply to you as well.
And (really????) what does this have to do with anything: To arrest his girlfriend does seem ridiculous to me though…she is all of 5 ft and some change and weighs around 100 pounds and has numerous health conditions (fibromyalgia and others).
If anything, this comment makes me sypathize even less because I will bet you she is sucking disability payments off the government instead of working for a living. I could go on forever about this subject because it pisses me off so much . . . but it’s off topic so I will leave it at that.
Someone also made the point somewhere (but I can’t find it so maybe they didn’t and I’m just blowing smoke) that if you can’t afford all the fines then you shouldn’t own a dog…… so a pet owner can afford monthly food, yearly vet visit to update shots, and an occasional chewie. Suddenly they are charged with a bill worth three or five months of dog food, due tomorrow (as it were). So they should not own a dog for that reason?
I have an older vehicle, and budget monthly for gas, insurance, registration, etc., with a little wiggle room for LOF’s, extra gas, etc. If something breaks on it I could probably swing the repairs, but when repairs cost more than one or two month’s extra wiggle room then I am in a quandry. So should I not own the vehicle because I can’t pay for the “above and beyond” bills?
Just wondering 🙂
@Outraged…. that logic would work if we all thought like you do…. and I am thankful that the law doesn’t work that way.
So, “Really????”, by your logic, if I have something impounded by the authorities, then I am completely within my rights to go break down the walls (or whatever) to get it back, since I am the owner of it?
The dogs were removed from the ownership of the person because of what happened. The now former owner of those dogs had ample opportunities to prove that he deserved to have the ownership rights returned to him, and failed every time (not showing up for hearings = fail).
As for arresting his girlfriend, what does her size or medical conditions have to do with her being accused of possession of stolen property? That makes no logic whatsoever.
I respond to this because I know the owner of the dogs, girlfriend and her children. The property in which they reside upon does in fact have fences around it, and as the former owner of both pit bills and rottweilers…these dogs love to dig…not hard for them to get past a fence. As well as jump…my pit could clear a 5 foot fence at a run if she wanted over it. That being said, I do not condone what Terry allegedly ( I use this word only because I refuse to convict someone without proof and as much as he looks guilty, I do not know for a FACT he is.) did. To arrest his girlfriend does seem ridiculous to me though…she is all of 5 ft and some change and weighs around 100 pounds and has numerous health conditions (fibromyalgia and others). I am a law major at WSU and even though the dogs were taken from the animal shelter by someone, the laws still says the owner of the dog is the owner of the dog…so possession of stolen property is a stretch. Anyone who has ever had a car impounded and sold at auction to cover the bill and when it doesn’t has gotten a bill…the situation is the same here…the owner is still responsible for the dog even thought the shelter has possession they do not own the dog. I feel for the folks who lost their animals at the alleged acts of these dogs, as I have lost animals in this fashion as well and I know how emotional it can be. Not to mention the loss of income and the cost to replace…which the laws in this state do not even begin to cover the loss to the owner in any way. As I read these articles though I recall something my grandfather said to me many time as a kid “Remember there are three sides to every story…their side, your side, and the truth.” It appears to me there are parts to this story missing everywhere…maybe we could get the rest of the story if we dug deeper.
I really believe it is time for this country to get rid of all this garbage called “rule of law” and “democracy” return to vigilante justice. I believe firmly that if someone tries anything I disapprove of and I believe I am harmed in any manner, the determination of guilt or innocence is mine alone and the ability to deliver the appropriate justice is mine alone. I should also be the sole arbiter of their intentions. If I believe the “crime” warrants being shot, it should be my choice and I would be proud to do the shooting. That way everyone would behave in a manner that is civilized and conforms to what I believe is appropriate.
I agree completely, Leslie. Unfortunately, as a “civilized society” we treat eveyone with mercy and legally can not inflict “cruel or unusual” punishment. Since most criminals are not civilized, too bad we can’t re-think that theory. I am all for executing child molesters and if some idiot breaks into my home to steal what I work hard for every day, why can’t I kill them? I have to wait until they threaten my life before taking action. How stupid is that?
ok…. ya know…. too bad we dont treat our humans the same as our animals… deemed dangerous… euthanize them… no trial.. no jury.. dead… should be same for murderers and child molesters.. dont ya think… or.. wait.. the dogs could live in a kennel the rest of their life.. cant they???? there are more restrictions on keeping the public safe from “dangerous dogs” then there are for sex offenders… you can chastize my way of thinking… or you can just think about it… THINK about the differences…. i think sometimes I wouldnt wanna be a dog!
Sadly, George that is all too true. Anyone who owns a pet should be able to keep it under control at all times, have it regularly vaccinated and be able to treat any illness it may suffer from. If you can’t afford the vet bills, licenses and possible fines – you have no business owning a pet. Also, if you do not spay or neuter your animal before it has it’s first litter, you absolutely have no business having an animal. Period.
“Disgusted”, you used the one word that describes the whole thing: “RESPONSIBLE”. Something that not too many people can say they are these days.
I couldn’t agree with you more, George. It is sad for the dogs, but once they get a taste for blood, my understanding is that it is hard for them to stop killing other animals. Particularly if the “pack mentality” is in play.
The owner is obviously a moron if he thought he could steal those dogs back, hide them on his own property, and get away with it. I hope they prosecute his dumb ass for burglary and whatever else they can charge him with.
If he had been a responsible pet owner, none of this would have happened. It’s entirely his fault that the animals have to be put down. I hope he is happy with himself. He should also never be allowed to own another dog as long as he lives.
Sherry, the dog owner could have used legal routes to get the dogs back. Instead, the dogs were “sprung” from dog jail… so there’s a crime right there. The owner let the dogs run free and terrorize area pets, so there’s a crime right there. The owner did nothing to contain his dogs (leashes, fences, whatever), so there’s a crime right there. “the Owner” is the key part of this whole mess. It’s not the dogs that need to be punished… it is the owner.
There are no bad dogs, just bad dog owners. This is one such case. Do I feel sorry for him because his dogs are now going to be put down? Not one bit. HE is the one who needs to be put down.
Any owner would be heart sick to have their dogs euthanized, and would do what they could to stop it. I’m sure the owner of the alpacas are heart sick as well. And would have done what they could to have stop it. Just a sad story all around.