Ed Boks sent out a 4 page email response to my general email about the Mason case. Over the next few days I will rebut almost all the points he raises in defense of the department’s action. What is blatantly obvious is that Ed can never admit he or anyone else in his department ever made a mistake or did anything wrong.
Since Boks decided to go public with details about an ongoing criminal investigation, he has opened the door for multiple requests for public records of the details he brought out, such as impound numbers of all cats taken off Mason's property between October 7 and October 11, impound health status, diagnostic tests performed, medical treatments administered (Boks makes a big deal about medical treatment in his letter), and dispositions of the cats, as well as the original complaint that led to the warrant for Mason's arrest. There is no doubt in my mind that no medical tests were performed on any of the cats euthanized except the ones that were found not to have panleukemia—which they killed. I would like to see if any were medically treated or all were deemed to be irremediably suffering or were treatable, without any diagnostic tests.
Regarding Muffin being strangled, apparently Ed thought nothing was wrong with noosing him around the neck and hoisting him into the air.
No cats were strangled during this rescue. The cat photographed on the end of a catch pole was found wedged behind a cabinet inside the garage, and was hiding on top of a dead cat’s decomposed body. After many attempts to reach the cat by hand, cat-nabbers (net basket), and a traditional net failed, the cat was finally secured on the end of a catchpole as a last resort. At the time the scene was noisy and not conducive to the kind of quiet, gentle coaxing any one of us might employ trying to persuade a cat out from a narrow space behind an immovable piece of furniture. Once secure the cat was quickly brought out from behind the cabinet and safely placed in a wire cage. It was at the moment the cat was freed from behind the cabinet that the Daily News photographer snapped the picture featured in the newspaper and circulated on the internet. The cat was not being held up in display for the photographer.
Let’s look at the two pictures of Muffin. The first is Muffin being lifted into the air by the neck—strangling. Behind him is a small refrigerator. There is nothing next to the refrigerator.
The other picture shows Muffin hiding behind something on the ground. The mirror reflection of his face suggests it is some reflective appliance or a mirror, not a cabinet as Ed alleges, nor is Muffin behind a cabinet. In fact, I just talked to Mr. Mason, and he said it was a mirror next to a cabinet which he had taken down to repair the wall. These photos were not taken in Mason's garage as Ed alleges, but from inside his house.
As you can plainly see, Muffin is not hiding on top of a dead cat’s decomposed body. This is a pure Boks’ lie to justify a horrendous act. Boks does not state whether the use of a catch pole and strangling the cat (albeit not to death, but definitely a strangling) is allowed or against department policy, but he is saying it was appropriate in Muffin’s case.
If Muffin were hiding next to a cabinet on the ground to the left of the photo #1, he was swung through the air a great distance rather than being walked to a cage along the floor. It is obvious from photo #2 that he could have been carried out without being lifted into the air.
As the commenter below remarks, can you imagine what else happened to those cats that the photographer did not capture.
Ed has responded with 4 pages of lies that just do not hang together and I will expose them all. Ed should also be prepared for a flurry of requests for public records which Brad Jensen is already preparing and which I will post.