Case Snapshot
Case ID: 2161
Classification: Hoarding
Animal: dog (non pit-bull), rodent/small mammal (pet), rabbit (pet)
More cases in Herkimer County, NY
More cases in NY
Login to Watch this Case

New features are coming soon. Login with Facebook to get an early start and help us test them out!



For more information about the Interactive Animal Cruelty Maps, see the map notes.



Friday, Oct 31, 2003

County: Herkimer

Disposition: Convicted

Defendants/Suspects:
» James Fagan
» Henriette Fagan

Case Updates: 2 update(s) available

An eye doctor and his wife are facing multiple charges after close to 200 animals were seized from their home in the town of Oppenheim. Authorities found at least a dozen dead animals, a horse that was 500 pounds underweight and dogs, guinea pigs and rabbits, among others. They were not properly fed and were living in unsanitary surroundings.

Sharon Hayes of the Fulton County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals said, "There's some droppings, there's smell of ammonia, which indicates they've been urinating wherever they choose. The ammonia smell, I believe, was the worst."

Fulton County Sheriff Thomas Lorey calls the owners, Dr. James Fagan and his wife, animal collectors. Lorey said it appears the couple did not intentionally neglect the animals.

He said, "I think they have so many animals that they're not able to properly care for them. I don't think there's any intention to do anything bad to the animals here."

But some contend that's besides the point and that ignorance is not an excuse to break the law.

Hayes said, "These are animals that require food, water, they feel pain, they feel hunger, they feel cold. So ignorance is not an excuse."

The Fulton County SPCA has been put in charge of the surviving animals' care.

"I'm confident the remainder will survive. It's a matter of getting them food and water and proper shelter and clean environment," said Hayes.

Charges against Dr. and Mrs. Fagan are pending, but authorities said they will likely be charged with failure to provide sustenance for animals -- punishable by up to a year in jail. The rescued animals have been taken to animal shelters throughout the state to receive proper treatment.


Case Updates

Henriette Fagan was accused of neglecting approximately 230 various animals, including dogs, farmed animals, and prairie dogs. All animals were seized from 3 different properties owned by Fagan and her husband and are now in the care of Humane organizations. By mid-March 2004, the Fulton County DA's office had failed to file even one formal charge against the Fagans. The Fulton County SPCA and Spring Farm CARES (who had participated in the rescue, and were interim caretakers) were afraid that the animals would be given back to the Fagans after a plea bargain. The groups had spent over $100,000 on medical treatment, food, and shelter for the animals. They called ALDF on March 23, 2004. Working with the SPCA, Spring Farm CARES, and the NY State Humane Society, heavily publicized press conferences were held in Clinton, NY - March 29 & 30. At their March 31 arraignment (one count of neglect each), Mr. Fagan plead not guilty, and Mrs. Fagan plead guilty and was immediately sentenced. No restitution, no real penalty, 30 animals to be returned to them. ALDF helped find a local lawyer to represent the animal groups' interests. In April, the Fagans filed a civil suit against the SPCA and Spring Farm CARES which was later dropped. The DA responded to pressure, the plea bargain was withdrawn, and multiple charges against the Fagans were sought- then both pled guilty to one count on Monday October 25, 2004. They agreed to surrender all seized animals, but they were allowed to have one Belgian horse and 8 cows. Monthly DVM inspections are part of the agreement.
Source: ALDF - March 26, 2005
Update posted on Oct 24, 2005 - 10:37PM 
Apr 2, 2004 - Oppenheim couple gets some animals back in plea deal.

Oppenheim Town Court hearing where Dr. James Fagan, 63, and Henriette Fagan, 57, accused of failing to provide proper care to more than 200 animals.

There was a plea agreement that would allow the Fagans to get some of the animals back would not be reached. Their efforts were in vain, however, as although the couple relinquished some 200 animals, they are getting an undisclosed number of those animals back.

The Fagans' story began last November when their home, in Oppenheim, was paid a visit by the Fulton County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA).

More than 200 animals were seized on that day including dogs, guinea pigs, rabbits, various species of fowl, horses, donkeys and others.

Sue McDonough, from the New York State Humane Association (NYSHA) in Albany, was at the courthouse Wednesday night. She was also at the Fagan home in November 2003.

"It was a nightmare," she said. "It was one of the worse cases I had ever seen." McDonough has worked for the NYSHA for the past 15 years and prior to that was a police officer.

She said in those years she has handled thousands of cruelty cases involving hundreds of animals. This case, she said, was the worst yet. She described seeing dead animals on the property, some she said, had been there for awhile. She also described some of the "horrors" she saw.

"A donkey had to be carried away it was so weak. Guinea pigs were in cages with at least six inches of feces lining the cage. They were invested with parasites. Dogs were outside and covered in mud and feces," she said, describing some of what she saw. "In my opinion, they should not get any of the animals back."

McDonough handed out copies of the law the Fagans were charged with, an Agricultural and Markets Law which prohibits "overdriving, torturing and injuring animals" and "failure to provide proper sustenance."

McDonough was not the only one who believed the Fagans should not get a single creature back. Owen Brown and his wife, Sharon, from Beavers, Wetlands and Wildlife of Dolgeville, called the couple "animal collectors" and said they feared they would continue to do so unless ordered by the court not to have any animals.

"They can't help themselves. They are most times well-intentioned, but it is like an addiction," Sharon Brown said.

Finally, an agreement was reached with Mrs. Fagan on her case. She would plead guilty to one count of failure to provide proper sustenance and a Department of Environmental Conservation charge of keeping three Canadian geese captive.

The agreement? Three years probation, plus the return of some of the animals.

According to the agreement, the animals had to be returned to Mrs. Fagan by Monday, April 5, or else the plea agreement would become null and void and Mrs. Fagan's case would be back to square one.

Another condition of the agreement, a veterinarian would make weekly visits to check on the animals. "We are asking the court to speed up formal sentencing from the traditional six-eight weeks to two-four weeks from now. As per the agreement, once formally charged, veterinarian visits would be cut down to one every month. Once a week visits, paid for by the Fagans, would create a financial hardship," Holubar said.

Holubar also reiterated that if the animals that are being returned to Mrs. Fagan were not back at the home by April 5, the agreement would be scrapped.

Dr. Fagan pled not guilty to the same charge as his wife.

"There is an outstanding motion on the validity of the search warrant. I ask that you reserve ruling until such time as the D.A. and myself come to a closure," Holubar asked Oppenheim Town Judge Pamela Lamphere.

She set a new date of Wednesday, April 7, for Dr. Fagan to return to court.

"I want to thank everyone who is here in support of the animals, said Dana Campbell, of Oregon, an attorney from Animal Legal Defense Fund.

"I assure you I will keep close tabs on this case to its final conclusion."
Update posted on Apr 5, 2004 - 6:16PM 

References

« NY State Animal Cruelty Map
« More cases in Herkimer County, NY

Note: Classifications and other fields should not be used to determine what specific charges the suspect is facing or was convicted of - they are for research and statistical purposes only. The case report and subsequent updates outline the specific charges. Charges referenced in the original case report may be modified throughout the course of the investigation or trial, so case updates, when available, should always be considered the most accurate reflection of charges.

For more information regarding classifications and usage of this database, please visit the database notes and disclaimer.