Severe horse neglect - 8 horses and ponies seized
Larwill, IN (US)Date: May 15, 2004
Disposition: Convicted
Abusers/Suspects: James MullinsCynthia Mullins
|
|
James and Cynthia Mullins were found guilty on March 9, 2005 of neglecting to properly care for eight Welsh horses and ponies that lived on their Larwill property by County Superior Court Judge Michael Rush.
Rush explained three words define neglect as a law: knowingly, intentionally and recklessly.
Based on the evidence presented at the trial, Rush said he did not believe the Mullins' knowingly or intentionally meant to harm their horses as defined by the law, but their failure to remedy the horses' health concerns after being made aware of them displayed recklessness.
"You had a duty to know these things. An animal can't tell you its foot hurts," he said.
According to Whitley County prosecutor Matt Rentschler, the Mullins' failure to treat the hooves of the horses, which were overgrown and painful to the animals, was a standout point in his mind.
Rentschler cited the testimony of local equine veterinarian Dr. Robert H. Koontz to corroborate his opinion.
Koontz, who had an opportunity to inspect the horses when he assisted state and local authorities in their seizure, testified he believed the hooves of Mullins' horses had not been trimmed in about year. He said horses should have their hooves trimmed every six to eight weeks for comfort's sake.
Rentschler said at the point the Mullins' were notified of the animals' conditions by state and local authorities, they had an obligation to improve the animals' living conditions.
State veterinarian Dr. Shelly Chavis testified she visited the home of the Mullins' to inspect the family's horses on April 6 after being contacted by the Whitley County Health Department on complaints of neglect.
A letter addressing the needs of the horses was sent to the Mullins', and the couple were asked to comply with treatment.
A follow-up visit to the Mullins' home on May 15 led to the confiscation of eight of the family's 20 horses and ponies.
Koontz testified that the horses and ponies taken from the home suffered from malnourishment, rain rot and painful hoof ailments that were the result of infrequent trimmings.
Among the horses taken from the home was a foal that went blind after its eye ruptured from an untreated infection.
According to James Mullins, the aliment went unnoticed because he was not trained to detect the condition.
James Mullins said his wife had been the horses' main caregiver until she was bitten by a brown recluse spider and required to stay off her foot.
Cynthia Mullins' condition put James Mullins and their son William, 12, in charge of the horses' care.
James Mullins testified he worked 60 hours a week and cared for the animals after dark. He said the dark conditions and the horses' thick winter coats prevented him from seeing what became evident under the scrutiny of professionals.
Representing themselves in court, the Mullins' asked Chavis if she felt the family had intentionally neglected the horses.
"I do not think you intentionally neglected them. I think you were dealing with a difficult situation at the time," she said.
Throughout the trial, the Mullins' maintained that under different circumstances the horses would have been cared for properly.
Cynthia Mullins expressed guilt over not being able to care for her animals and assuming that her husband and son could respond to the horses' needs without having the proper experience.
"I feel bad that I put them in that position, and that they feel guilty and the shouldn't," said Mullins during her testimony.
The crux of the state's case hinged on the Mullins' failure to respond in a timely manner after being notified of their neglect.
However, the Mullins maintained they were unaware of the one-month deadline.
"No one said we only had a month to make it right. ... I felt I was complying with the recommendations," said Cynthia Mullins.
"I was making arrangements as expediently as as could, but I was trying to correct nine months of gradual decline."
Mullins added that illnesses within the family way-laid her efforts to care for the horses as well.
James and Cynthia Mullins' explanations did not appease members of the audience, which consisted of the injured horses' current caregivers.
Nancee Mencl and Anna Mutusik volunteered their homes to six of the eight confiscated horses.
Mutusik said the horses are happy and healthy now, but will continue to suffer long term effects of the neglect they suffered at the hands of the Mullins.
Mencl and Mutusik would like to see the horses remain in their custody. As a result of caring for the horses, the friends have created the Twiggy Equine Rescue Association. They hope to receive non-profit status soon, but until then will continue to pay for the care of these horses out of their own pockets.
Since assuming responsibility for the horses, Mencl and Mutusik have spent $36,651.28 on training, boarding and caring for them. They could recoup the cost through a victim's assistance affidavit filed in the courts, but they say it's not about the money.
"Money is not an issue to us, welfare is," Mencl said.
James and Cynthia Mullins said they aren't expecting to get the horses back.
"We were told from the start they would rack up the bill so high we wouldn't be able to get them back," James Mullins said. He added he has already spend $72,000 trying to comply with the state's recommendations.
However, no one will know until April 13, when Judge Rush sentences the Mullins if the Mullins will be able to retrieve their horses.
Rush said this case was begging for a creative sentence and ordered a presentencing investigation. He noted the Mullins will not have to serve jail time for the Class B misdemeanor, which under law allows a judge to sentence violators up to 180 day in jail.
"I am going to get some input to help determine a creative way to deal with this situation that serves justice and takes care of the animals," he said.
References« Back to Search Results 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.
|
