Alla McGeary, the theft of Stella ~DPCA BoD a Train Wreck???

[Elaine]

It might be unfair calling the current DPCA leadership a train wreck -- at some point, a train knows where it's going.

Our DPCA Board just voted on the DPCA membership application of Alla McGeary, who is currently being prosecuted in the State of Virginia for the theft of a dog. Irrespective of your feelings about Ms. McGeary’s conduct, she is the defendant in a criminal prosecution for the theft of a dog. I believe that Alla recently lost a motion to exclude emails and other evidence. Her case is scheduled to go to trial soon. Why she choose this time to apply for DPCA membership is highly questionable. Her sponsors to membership were, I believe, drum roll please... Cheri McNealy and Steve Martin.

On September 4, 2008 Mr. Phil (Da Kid) Green used the DPCA members list to call out the three board members who voted against Ms McGeary’s membership, ranting on and on about the club’s right to know how our elected officials voted, asserting that the Board members who voted against Ms McGeary were embarrassed or ashamed to have their votes made public and that they should resign or be thrown out of the DPCA.

This outrageous, inflammatory post by Mr Green was allowed to be disseminated to the DPCA membership, presumably with the expressed approval of Dana Johnson (who moderates the DPCA list). This was Dr. Greenwood's response:


From: arthurgreenwood@hotmail.com
To: dpca_on_line@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [DPCA_on_line] Membership voting...
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 06:16:32 -0400

RE the comments of Mr. Da Kid Green:

Isn’t Alla currently being prosecuted by the state of Virginia for the theft of a dog? The DPCA membership has heard one side of this. Cleary the Virginia prosecutor, who has access to the defendant’s emails and other evidence the DPCA has not seen, sees things differently. I don’t find it difficult to believe that some DPCA Board members thought it prudent to wait until this criminal case was resolved before voting her into the DPCA. Time will tell if they were right.

Dr. Arthur Greenwood

http://logresfarm.com/ (http://logresfarm.com/) and http://dogshownewsnetwork.com (http://dogshownewsnetwork.com)



Dr. Greenwood's post is not allowed to go through to the membership, yet Phil (Da Kid) Green’s post was allowed through to the membership. Why is that? Why was Dr Greenwood moderated if Da Kid was not? Apparently Dana Johnson and Burke approve of Da Kid Green’s post and content. His post speaks directly in favor of Alla (a criminal defendant in an ongoing prosectuion), and is highly inflammatory.

It seems pretty clear that Dana, Burke and McNealy are allowed to use the DPCA membership list to advance their private agenda, in this instance supporting a criminal defendant in a dog theft prosecution, and DPCA members (like Dr. Greenwood) are not allowed to respond. Is this how we want our DPCA to be run? Isn't this kind of conduct toxic to our club's long term interests?
(more later)

[pitbull]

Elaine,
It's just one of those situations where the DPCA simple should not have taken sides. As I recall, we had an "ectrodactyll rescue doberman" in the care of a well known veterinarian -- who wanted to adopt the dog, and Alla made the call that the home was not appropriate and took the dog underground -- therefore possibly doing something illegal. By the DPCA making a decision at this point they are clearly making a statement that the actions of Alla were in their opinion "OK." I definitely don't think this is appropriate. I especially fell it is inappropriate to raise money to defend a TOTALLY unecessary situation -- to help someone fight over a dog, when so many other dogs need homes. Can't we tunnel our energy into something productive. I doubt the home of the licensed veterinarian -- who apparently loved Stella -- was that bad. Sometimes people take a turn in the wrong direction (like Alla maybe) and they simply don'y know how to make things OK.
Maybe they get BAD advise from the wrong people. But the whole situation to me seems senseless. And it clearly looks to me that the DPCA is taking the side of Alla over Dr. Kim Danoff -- which is a BIG MISTAKE.

Sophia Koster, DVM
Eastwick

[andyhilt27]

It seems pretty clear that Dana, Burke and McNealy are allowed to use the DPCA membership list to advance their private agenda, in this instance supporting a criminal defendant in a dog theft prosecution, and members are not allowed to respond. Is this how we want our DPCA to be run? Isn't this kind of conduct toxic to our club's long term interests?
(more later)

It certainly does not entice me to apply for membership any time soon!!! Oh what the hell....I love being a thorn in the sides of those that I despise.:cool:

[Elaine]

Elaine,
It's just one of those situations where the DPCA simple should not have taken sides. As I recall, we had an "ectrodactyll rescue doberman" in the care of a well known veterinarian -- who wanted to adopt the dog, and Alla made the call that the home was not appropriate and took the dog underground -- therefore possibly doing something illegal. By the DPCA making a decision at this point they are clearly making a statement that the actions of Alla were in their opinion "OK." I definitely don't think this is appropriate. I especially fell it is inappropriate to raise money to defend a TOTALLY unecessary situation -- to help someone fight over a dog, when so many other dogs need homes. Can't we tunnel our energy into something productive. I doubt the home of the licensed veterinarian -- who apparently loved Stella -- was that bad. Sometimes people take a turn in the wrong direction (like Alla maybe) and they simply don'y know how to make things OK.
Maybe they get BAD advise from the wrong people. But the whole situation to me seems senseless. And it clearly looks to me that the DPCA is taking the side of Alla over Dr. Kim Danoff -- which is a BIG MISTAKE.

Sophia Koster, DVM
Eastwick
Just got back from running a few errands... stocking up on supplies before this blasted hurricane hits us. :(

Noticed an email from Dana Johnson on our inbox. In this email Dana is complaining that Arthur copied a few people in his exchange with Dana, all but one of whom are current DPCA members, and the one that is not a current member is a former member. At one point Dana tells Arthur that she has sought and received Burke’s permission /approval to refuse to post Arthur’s comments, while disseminating this Da Kid crap to the membership. Dana writes to Arthur:

"I am appalled that you have chosen to include in our correspondence people who are not members of the DPCA.

If I remember correctly, you are in service to this country, and are dedicated to serving her well. I would assume that if you are given orders from a superior, you follow them - without involving non-military friends in the action. There was absolutely no valid reason to include non-DPCA members in this exchange."

Dana is wrong... there are many valid reasons to let people know that goes on behind the scenes, especially when it relates to the DPCA taking a position to support the defendant in a criminal prosection, including: this is a non- profit dog club and it's policy decisions should be transparent. We all have a right to see up close the judgment and the agendas of people who seek or hold leadership positions. In this instance we should be concerned that non dog people (like McNealy, who does not even own a Doberman), and this child/man who signs his name "Da Kid" and Burke are taking this club down a very questionable path in siding with the defendant in a criminal prosecution. It would be have been much wiser policy to wait until the outcome of this criminal trial, when all the facts are known, and the case is resolved, before involving the DPCA in this mess.

But even more disturbing, Dana and Burke are seriously delusional if they think that Burke is on par with an officer in the United States military and that Burke is entitiled to give orders that are to be unquestionably obeyed. Geez, what a bag of gas!!! Burke is a gynecologist and an elected official of a non–profit dog club, nothing more. His conduct over the years is questionable at best, but more on point, when the membership of a dog club elect a slate of officers, they are not giving these officers free rein to run amuck with the club. At no point are we saying, "We defer to you on important issues. Once elected, do as you please." Quite the opposite. Burke is not remotely deserving of obedience to authority rightfully owed a military leader who has taken an oath to defend this country, and then served this country for a time sufficient to become a ranking military officer. To compare Burke to a military officer would be hysterically funny if it were not so disturbing that this is how he sees himself.

[Absolute]

It’s funny, but everyone I’ve ever talked to says they didn’t vote for any of the current board, makes you wonder who did? Many of these people on the Board aren’t even Doberman owners or breeders, or if they ever were, it’s been so many years ago they are simply out of touch. I have to laugh when I read people say that they don’t like where the dogs are going, I am far more concerned with the way the DPCA is going. In my 48 years, I have never, in any area of my life, seen the level of viciousness I see in some of these Doberman people. I remember when they talked about trying to breed the viciousness out of the Dobes. It worked, now we need to breed the viciousness out of the people in the breed.


The bottom line is this: good, bad or indifferent, these board members have had their day in the sun; they’ve made their contribution to the club. The DPCA needs a breath of fresh air.


Also, when we start handing out life time achievement awards shouldn’t people like Mary Rogers and Irene Biven be at the top of the list? How can we give life time achievement awards to some of these people who have owned, shown or finished only one or two Dobermans? These great awards should go to GREAT people in our Breed, like Mary and Irene, people who really have had the life-long love of Dobermans, and still do! We should not be handing out life time achievement awards to egocentric, power-hungry, agenda-playing, non Doberman people who have owned and shown less than half a dozen Dobes. Or who showed one, so long ago no one even remembers the dog or what he did. We should be awarding the people that do the hard work day in and day out, today, sweating, and loving it every minute.

When I look around the breed ring I think, “Where are the young people?” Maybe, if I stop showing and it’s all a memory this will look better. For now, my mentors will continue to be those who walk the walk, not those who can only talk bullshit in a bull pen. What I see now is a lot of political connections and games, in and around the ring, like trading wins for judging assignments. Some people only show to the judges they have hired or will hire. Maybe these people think we don’t notice, but everyone notices. We notice who wins and who did the hiring. “You judge my show here, I win under you there.” All I can say is, if your dog can only win when it’s set up (but that's as far as he gets), what does that say about what you breed?

[doberdogsfd]

The will of the few forced upon the will of the many.

Cheryl

[andyhilt27]

“The seed of revolution is repression.”

-Woodrow T. Wilson

[dobesign]

"If I remember correctly, you are in service to this country, and are dedicated to serving her well. I would assume that if you are given orders from a superior, you follow them - without involving non-military friends in the action. There was absolutely no valid reason to include non-DPCA members in this exchange."

Since when does Arthur take orders from a civilian!!! Dictatorial Mental Midgets using the patriot act to further a private agenda. :mad::mad: The last time I glimpsed at the constitution, I noticed this little part about free speech. Maybe someone thinks that the Constitution and By-Laws of the DPCA supercede the Constitution of the Nation. :eek:

[Elaine]

The situation with Alla McGeary is most unfortunate. My opinion is that what she did was wrong, and this whole mess might have ended immediately if not that Alla was egged on by some vocal people with very bad judgment, who apparently can not grasp applicable law. It seems to me that Alla got herself boxed into a corner and may be too stubborn to do the right thing. And, in my opinion there is absolutely no way on earth that Stella’s situation (even if you buy the garbage you hear) EVER warranted all this fuss. It is patently absurd that this ever became an issue. There are thousands and thousands of abused and neglected dogs suffering around the world, all of whom are deserving of our help; Stella was NEVER in such a category. It is outrageous that a group of people have encouraged Alla to break the law. This situation was never worth the risk to Stella, Alla or the DPCA.

I believe that recently in the court in Virginia, Alla moved to have the evidence in her emails and on her computer excluded from trial.. and that the judge denied All’s motions to suppress. I believe that as a result, Alla's emails are now admissible. I sincerely hope that no DPCA members are implicated in any emails to or from Alla. IF they are, now might be the time to come forward to avoid prosecution as an accessory.

[Athy]

now might be the time to come forward

As always, I would encourage anyone who has any information regarding Stella's disappearance to contact police investigator Eric Heflin at 540-665-6383. If you helped to transport her or if you were asked to help transport her or if you have information at all about her, I encourage you to contact the police and tell them what you know.

All that DAR&E and Dr Danoff have wanted from the beginning has been the return of Stella to her rightful owners. Stella was wrongfully taken and should be returned. Please help us bring her home.

Athy

[Kissntell]

Absolute:

You make some very good points.

I have been watching these show rings for some time. I have also been watching the sidelines.

What I did notice for awhile is that everybody who was new was just getting out after a couple of years. It makes no difference to try and show when the wins are already preplanned.

No wonder the sport of showing dogs is going nowhere fast. Who wants to join in when there is no possibility of the win?

I also notice, and have noticed over time, that it is always the same judges used over and over.

I am looking now to show under the "unknown" judges because unless you are known, you are just wasting money and putting points on other peoples' dogs. Having a professional handler too is another ball in itself.

[Elaine]

As always, I would encourage anyone who has any information regarding Stella's disappearance to contact police investigator Eric Heflin at 540-665-6383. If you helped to transport her or if you were asked to help transport her or if you have information at all about her, I encourage you to contact the police and tell them what you know.

All that DAR&E and Dr Danoff have wanted from the beginning has been the return of Stella to her rightful owners. Stella was wrongfully taken and should be returned. Please help us bring her home.

Athy

It would be nice if people would do the reasonable and rational thing here, bring Stella home and put this ridiculous situation behind us, for everyone’s sake, including Stella’s, Alla’s and the DPCA’s. The DPCA should not be siding with the defendant in a criminal prosecution. There are dogs in rescue (or in need of rescue) who are truly deserving of people's time and effort. Stella is simply not one and never was. This rash, ego driven fiasco has gone way too far… and has put too many people at risk. There are much much much better uses of everyone’s time and money.

[RonBabics]

Being in the military, this post caught my eye. I think we should be fair to Sam though. Unless I am reading the post wrong, Dana is the one who made foolish reference to "following orders from superiors", not Sam. I would hope Sam does not view himself in that way, and since he did not say it, I would have to assume there is no way he does. I think most of us can agree that comparing any decisions made involving a dog club to those made in the military is patently absurd.

With that said, I totally disagree with not sending Arthur's post to the membership while allowing the one by "Da Kid" I did not follow anything with the "Stella" story so I can't comment one way or the other but it would certainly appear the DPCA or some of the leadership is pushing one side of the story. They may turn out to be right, but why supress Arthur's email while allowing the other point of view?

[Elaine]

Being in the military, this post caught my eye. I think we should be fair to Sam though. Unless I am reading the post wrong, Dana is the one who made foolish reference to "following orders from superiors", not Sam. I would hope Sam does not view himself in that way, and since he did not say it, I would have to assume there is no way he does. I think most of us can agree that comparing any decisions made involving a dog club to those made in the military is patently absurd.

With that said, I totally disagree with not sending Arthur's post to the membership while allowing the one by "Da Kid" I did not follow anything with the "Stella" story so I can't comment one way or the other but it would certainly appear the DPCA or some of the leadership is pushing one side of the story. They may turn out to be right, but why supress Arthur's email while allowing the other point of view?

You may be right Ron... I don't really know one way or the other. My experience with Burke is that he has a healthy ego, but as you point out.. it is Dana’s comment, not Burke's.

Da Kid’s post that the DPCA Board members who voted against Alla’s membership should resign or be forced out of the DPCA is an outrageous editorial point of view. It should not have been allowed on that DPCA list. Either Da Kid’s post was reviewed by Dana and /or Burke and allowed to go through or Da Kid is not moderated ... but Dr. Arthur Greenwood is. We know that McNealy sponsored Alla and has supported her http://www.cyberdobes.com/auction_for_alla.shtml) and that McNealy and Burke are buddies. We know that DaKid is a groupie of McNealy’s. Is it a stretch to believe that Da Kid’s post on the DPCA email list (which attacks three DPCA Board members), was allowed because of the chummy relationship between McNealy and Burke? Is that playing politics with our club?

It's fair to say that the DPCA email list is being edited to reflect a policy decision to support the defendant in an ongoing prosecution, and that is not a good position for the DPCA to be in. If the DPCA wants to support Alla, at least wait until the trial is over and ALL the facts are known.

As for the rest of Dana's comment, personally, I am sick to death of people outside the military telling us how it is in the military. Just like I am sick to death of the hypocrisy of “We really appreciate you guys putting your life on the line for this country by serving … (e.g., going to Iraq), but let me vote to cut veterans benefits.” :mad:

[Tracy Daugherty]

I will admit it was interesting reading Dr. Danoff's post about the time she had with Stella. I have been a supporter of Alla since the beginning, because in my heart I feel that she is/was doing what she felt was right for that dog. She is not a malicious person by any means. There were other details circulating around this time that made myself (and I'm sure others) feel that DARE's removal of Stella (from Dr. Danoff) was warranted. From reading (and learning) more about Kim Danoff I can also see that her reputation and business can and probably has suffered greatly from all of this and she too doesn't appear to be a malicious person. In the end I feel that BOTH parties could have probably handled things differently. This is a very sad situation.

Tracy Daugherty

[Elaine]

I so agree with you Tracy… in that it is a sad situation. It is sad to see so many truly good people being led so far astray from reason. In my heart I do not believe that Stella was in need of being ripped from Kim Danoff. I truly wish that Alla and those who have Stella would simply return her and end this idiotic situation, so that everyone could go on with their lives. Even Alla has better things to do with her time and energy than this. There are dogs truly in need of rescue… we should be focusing our resources and energy on giving them a better life, on giving them the love and commitment that Kim was giving Stella.

I think sometimes we all get very stubborn... and the hardest thing for us to do is actually the simplest... i.e., admit when we’ve made a mistake and correct it. Wouldn't it be nice, for everyone's sake, to have a happy ending here. I'd love to be able to announce that Stella had been returned to Kim.

[Elaine]

Well, we all know a bit more about Dr. Danoff and the reckless stupidity of Alla McGeary and the people who supported her than we did on September 8th. The photos and letters on these threads paint a very clear picture. There is no "Alla had her side to this and both sides are wrong" spin possible here. The Virginia Prosecutor had it right all along; Alla and her co conspirators deserve to be in jail.

http://dogshownewsnetwork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=464

http://dogshownewsnetwork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=461

http://dogshownewsnetwork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=441


I was about to post that this DPCA BoD has a history of doing things that could seriously backfire on all of us. Possibly 20 years ago the judgment of the DPCA Board was not such a critical thing, but in 2008 we live in a political climate where our very right to own and breed Dobermans is at risk. I cannot begin to imagine how it would look to the mainstream press if it became widely known that the DPCA is supporting the defendant in a criminal prosecution for the theft of a dog OVER a woman like Dr. Kim Danoff and the home she provided. Add in the other outrageous bits of lies, deceits and the possible mutilation / amputation of Stella’s front leg, and you have a public relations disaster for the DPCA.

If the truth about what a wonderful home Kim Danoff provided for Stella is picked up by the media, this will reflect very poorly on the DPCA. Couple all of this with facts, like that the DPCA Members Only Yahoo list (Dana Johnson and/or Sam Burke) allowed Phil (Da Kid’s) inflammatory post to go through, but barred Dr. Arthur Greenwood’s rational observation, you have a clear picture of a series of really bad DPCA BoD judgments.