Quantcast
Home | Back

Former animal control officer's dogs confiscated

Share Story:     Share_email E-mail Story    |    Share_print Print Story    |    Comments    |   

A former Franklin County animal control officer had 13 pit bull dogs seized from his property Thursday for alleged animal cruelty.
For Derrick Rayborn, 29, of 4010 St. Johns Road, it was the second time in nine months a large number of pit bulls were seized from him by current county Animal Control Officer Todd Moore.
According to Franklin County District Court records, Rayborn was served a summons in March 2007 on a charge of second-degree cruelty to animals. The criminal complaint signed by Moore said 16 dogs owned by Rayborn appeared to be "mistreated, malnourished or otherwise neglected."
Another court document, a March 2007 statement from veterinarian Gina Yeargan, said she accompanied Moore to 4010 St. Johns Road.
"I was able to view eight pit bull dogs from the road " one whose ribs were visible but had muscling on rear legs, hips and one whose body was hidden by its dog house," Yeargan's statement said. "The other six were extremely emaciated, three of which appeared weak by their stature and gait. This condition definitely constitutes cruelty to animals."
Twelve of those pit bull mix dogs were taken to the Franklin County Humane Society's animal shelter for temporary lodging.
"One of the dogs had to be euthanized because she ended up with a prolapsed uterus," said Regina Mitchell, manager of the animal shelter, Friday.
Then on June 6, 2007, District Judge Guy Hart signed an agreed order in which the dogs seized in the investigation were to be released to Rayborn. One condition in the order was that Rayborn would allow "Franklin County law enforcement, including but not limited to animal control, to inspect the animals" on his property "at any time without prior notification."
That animal cruelty case is still pending in district court. A pretrial conference is set for Wednesday and the trial is scheduled later in January.
Mitchell said Moore brought 13 pit bulls, belonging to Rayborn, to the animal shelter Thursday " 10 new ones and three that had been previously lodged at the shelter.
"When the animals came in the first time, we de-wormed them and nursed them back to health," Mitchell said Friday. "You get attached to these animals. They had gained weight and were happy. What hurts so much is they were returned to the person who did this to them the first time. Then we get them back in a worse condition than they were previously. They look horrible.
"I feel I have failed the animals by not making sure everything was right. But that's something I have no control over. We can only house them and take care of them while they are here at the shelter."
Franklin County Attorney Rick Sparks said Friday a new complaint has been presented to his office, and it's being investigated. But no charges had been filed as of Friday afternoon.
Mitchell said the dogs being returned to the shelter also take up critical space. They have to be put in separate cages, she said, "because they fight when they're put together."
She said the shelter could use donations of puppy food, which provides more vitamins and nutrients, and canned dog food, so they will eat more. "We're feeding them two to three times a day," she said.
Neither Rayborn nor his attorney, Chris Olds, could be reached for comment Saturday.




Comments
By Posting to this site, you agree to our Terms of Service Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed. State-Journal.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.

Login above or Register to comment.
Jump to Page: 1 2 3 4
Previous 10 Comments   Next 10 Comments of 33 Total Comments
13.
    Posted by shewee January 8, 2008
I live up the road from this residence. I'm glad these dogs were taken. Every day when I drive home from work it sickens me to see all those poor animals. Why in the hell would they give them back. I know they can only house them for so long, but that little bit of time was a waste if you're just going to hand them back over. There are too many dogs there-always has been. Why would someone want that many animals? Especially if you're not going to take care of them! I see them chained up and outside all over the yard and they've always looked underfed and not taken care of.

12.
    Posted by kentuckycat1 January 8, 2008
I hope he gets some good "treatment". Maybe he should have to shovel some crap at the local shelter and let the dogs deal with him. Dogs are not people, understood. They are family to most people. If you are not going to treat them like that, why even have them?

11.
    Posted by Icebaby January 8, 2008
Shock is the word. Shock. I would never ever have thought this about Derek. WOW. It sounds like some legal action needs to take place, as well as strict restriction about the placement and care of future pets.

10.
    Posted by CAM January 7, 2008
This is proof that Kentucky is one of the five worst states in the country as far as animal abuse. Nothing is done about it. When is this going to change! We have to demand it. Does any one have any ideas on how we can do this? This has to stop. This man should be in jail for what he has done to these animals. JAIL! He is an animal abuser and should never have been considered for an animal control officer. He obviously HATES DOGS/Animals.

9.
    Posted by kentuckycat1 January 7, 2008
Yeah, well the Legislature starts tomorrow, maybe Romeo's law will become a felony and he will get his!

8.
    Posted by the.fishery January 7, 2008
Derrick Rayborn was an animal control officer??? Do they not check into these peoples pasts before they offer the jobs??? Did he get his dogs back the first time because he was an officer???

Frankfort needs to get their act together! Luck for Rayborn he will won't be charged with a couple felonies.

7.
    Posted by itsmeisityoutoo1 January 7, 2008
Put that sorry individual in a cage and not feed him for awhile....Let him feel their pain......Shame on the ones that let this happen as much as the individual responsible.

6.
    Posted by sweetie_p January 7, 2008
'a faster form of euthanasia' is NOT an answer, unless you can use it on the owner. And YES It should be a FELONY to mistreat an animal. When these animals were given back to the owner (something is WRONG here) no one inspected the animals while in his custody, and why not???? It was in the court order!!!! ..but again we are talking about Frankfort.

5.
    Posted by ronandglomoore1 January 7, 2008
If the Franklin County Humane Society cannot find placement for thse animals,I suggest a faster form of euthanasia than returning them to their abuser.If a social worker did that with a child the act would be grounds for criminal charges.

4.
    Posted by ronandglomoore1 January 6, 2008
If the Franklin County Humane Soeiety cannot find placement for these animals, I suggest a faster form of euthanasis than returning them to their former abuser. If a social worker did that with a child the action would be grounds for criminal charges.

Previous 10 Comments   Next 10 Comments | Home | Back