Poor Ellen D, bitten by the rules she forces on us

[Brad Johnson]

Ellen Degeneres, a long-time PETA supporter and animal-rights advocate, has her dog repossessed.  Guess it's not so much fun when bitten in the rear by the "sensible" rules you helped create and force on the rest of us.

DeGeneres under fire for giving away dog
By BETH HARRIS, Associated Press Writer
Today at 9:30 am
 
Ellen DeGeneres is in the doghouse with a pet rescue agency after giving a pooch away to her hairdresser because it didn't get along with her cats.

The talk show hostess and her partner Portia de Rossi adopted Iggy, a Brussels Griffon mix, on Sept. 20. But when things didn't work out, DeGeneres gave the dog to her hairdresser.

In doing so, DeGeneres violated an agreement with the Mutts and Moms dog rescue agency by not informing them of the handoff.

When the agency called DeGeneres to ask about Iggy, she said she found another home for the dog. The agency sent a representative to the hairdresser's home Sunday and took the dog away.

DeGeneres went public about the situation Monday while taping an episode of her show to air Tuesday. She admitted she didn't read all the paperwork involving the adoption.

DeGeneres said she spent $3,000 having the dog neutered and trained to be with her cats. But the dog had too much energy and was too rambunctious, she told her television audience.

"I guess I signed a piece of paper that says if I can't keep Iggy, it goes back to the rescue organization, which is not someone's home, which is not a family," she said in a show transcript provided to The Associated Press.

"I thought I did a good thing. I tried to find a loving home for the dog because I couldn't keep it."

DeGeneres said her hairdresser's daughters, ages 11 and 12, had bonded with Iggy and were heartbroken when the dog was taken away.

"Because I did it wrong, those people went and took that dog out of their home, and took it away from those kids," a sobbing DeGeneres said on her show.

"I feel totally responsible for it and I'm so sorry. I'm begging them to give that dog back to that family," she said. "It's not their fault. It's my fault. I shouldn't have given the dog away. Just please give the dog back to those little girls."

Mutts and Moms, a volunteer nonprofit organization in Pasadena, does not have a listed phone number and didn't immediately respond to an e-mail request for comment.

Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

Brad

[Paddy]

Hoisted by her own petard, as it were. 

[Sergeant Bob]

As much as I don't care for Ellen D (don't really care about her one way or another) she actually only violated an agreement she made with Mutts and Moms, which really has nothing to do with us.

In doing so, DeGeneres violated an agreement with the Mutts and Moms dog rescue agency by not informing them of the handoff.

Why is this news?

[Ex-MA Hole]

Because the similarity to the anti gun famous people that also have armed body guards is pretty clear?

It will allow "gunners" to look at a similar situation and maybe get ideas about why we think the way we do, and idea on how to fight the issue.

Think of it metiphorically (if I spelled that correctly, I'm going to be amazed).

[Manedwolf]

So she's a moron who can't read a contract. Most breeders make the purchaser sign a Right of First Refusal, that they reserve the right to buy the animal back if the buyer doesn't want it. Apparently the shelter did as well.

[mtnbkr]

When we adopted our dog, there was similar wording in the agreement.

Chris

[Joe Demko]

This has ****-all to do with us.

[Tallpine]

The agency sent a representative to the hairdresser's home Sunday and took the dog away.

How the hell do they get away with that ? 

The family she gave the dog to had signed no agreement with anybody.  The "representative" came and stole the dog.  The family should have told the "representative" to get the hell off their property and then slammed the door in his/her face.

[Perd Hapley]

Yawn.  Ellen is funny. 

[280plus]

Reminds me of something mom used to say at times like this: "You want to CRY!?! I'LL give you something to CRY about!!"

Mom was great like that... 

 

[RadioFreeSeaLab]

This has ****-all to do with us.

Yeah, but it's funny.

[grampster]

All your dog belong to us.   

[Hawkmoon]

The agency sent a representative to the hairdresser's home Sunday and took the dog away.

How the hell do they get away with that ? 

The family she gave the dog to had signed no agreement with anybody.  The "representative" came and stole the dog.  The family should have told the "representative" to get the hell off their property and then slammed the door in his/her face.

Ummm ... nope.

If you receive stolen property, the item remains the property of the rightful owner and can be taken from you and returned to the rightful owner at any time. If you paid money for the stolen item ... if you're lucky, you'll stay out of jail, and maybe even get your money back.

Same thing here. By signing a contract, EG agreed that if she didn't keep the dog it reverted to the shelter. In other words, once she didn't want the dog, the shelter became the rightful owner. They didn't "steal" anything -- they recovered possession of their property.

[MechAg94]

The strange thing to me was the silly reason she gave up the dog. 

[Tallpine]

If you receive stolen property, the item remains the property of the rightful owner and can be taken from you and returned to the rightful owner at any time.

The property (dog) was not stolen from the pet place.

If there was a violation of the contract with Ellen Degenerate, then that is a civil matter, and the pet place would need to sue to try to enforce the contract.

In the meantime, they can keep their grimy hands off the dog and their grimy feet off the new dog family's property.

[brimic]

Mutts and Moms

Sounds like a bunch of bitches.

[Antibubba]

Actually, if it were discussed all the way through (which it won't be, because that would take longer than a 30-second sound bite), it really sets PETA back, because it acknowledges that the dog is property, and not a "person" with rights of it's own, like deciding who it wanted to live with.

[Firethorn]

Actually, if it were discussed all the way through (which it won't be, because that would take longer than a 30-second sound bite), it really sets PETA back, because it acknowledges that the dog is property, and not a "person" with rights of it's own, like deciding who it wanted to live with.

And, just like property but unlike people, you can dispose of unwanted animals as you wish - even when the reason is something as silly as 'the dog had too much energy'.

[jnojr]

Actually, if it were discussed all the way through (which it won't be, because that would take longer than a 30-second sound bite), it really sets PETA back, because it acknowledges that the dog is property, and not a "person" with rights of it's own, like deciding who it wanted to live with.

And, just like property but unlike people, you can dispose of unwanted animals as you wish - even when the reason is something as silly as 'the dog had too much energy'.

...except when you sign a legally-binding contract stating that you will not do so.

There's a reason why rescues put verbiage like this into their contracts.  I'll give an example... I used to foster dogs for Pit Bull Rescue San Diego  One of the dogs in the program was a blind old guy named Homer.  He was eventually placed, and all was well... until I saw a post in the free Craigslist section for a blind pit bull.  It was hard enough to get someone to adopt him in the first place... what would have happened to that poor dog if someone got him for free, on a whim?  How soon before he might have been abandoned, or dumped at the shelter to be killed?  How likely is it that someone would pick up a "free" dog for bait, torture, or to sell for medical experimentation?

If you wind up with a rescue dog, and try to keep him/her even though s/he belongs to the rescue, I can guarantee the police will be the next ones knocking on the door, and telling them to go to hell and slamming the door in their face won't work out quite the way you'd like.

[Tallpine]

"Mutts & Moms" are not the police, and the family that received the dog had signed no contract.

I didn't know the cops were so bored as to spend time on dog repossessing - heck, you can't even get them to evict somebody from your house without a court order.


But, what do I know...?  Maybe there's a whole new career path available here, that of "Dog Ninja".  You get to dress up in tactical black and sneak into back yards to recover Rover 

[280plus]

I wonder how Portia is taking all this? (Talk about a WASTE!    )

 

[Perd Hapley]

Tallpine, it doesn't matter whether the new "owners" signed a contract. 

[Firethorn]

...except when you sign a legally-binding contract stating that you will not do so.

Exactly.  I was simply making an example.

If you tried to give away a baby for 'having too much energy', you'd most likely be looking at jail/prison time.

[Antibubba]

If you tried to give away a baby for 'having too much energy', you'd most likely be looking at jail/prison time.

A good defense attorney would put other young parents on the jury.  Good chance they'd walk.

[nico]

fwiw, the story I saw on the news last night said the cops were involved, and that the rescue people were allowed to take the dog because the implanted microchip still said the dog was theirs. 

It bugs me that ellen is being painted as the good guy in this, when (especially with the audio tapes coming out) it's a pretty clear case of a celebrity expecting the rules to be bent for her.