THE HERENDEEN CASE
HERENDEEN’S MILITARY RECORDS: Herendeen is every inch a traditionalist and above all, proud of having served his country. To answer the personally insulting insinuation that he lied about his service, Charles (Skip) Herendeen scrambles to provide keepsake photographs, letters of commendation, his unit insignia, even a military newspaper article, all verifying his service as an Army Sentry Dog handler. It wasn’t enough.
Darrel Hayes and AKC’s legal counsel determine all of that was not adequate proof and demand his “official” military records! With the allotted six days running out, Herendeen reminds John Wade that it took AKC 3 months to ask for information not germane to his application and he would need 3 months to obtain records from the Army. AKC graciously extends the deadline to 30 days.
Herendeen then writes his U.S. Congressman Lamar Smith who persuades the Army to expedite the records which were finally received in October.
Those Military records prove that Charles “Skip” Herendeen was a Sentry Dog Handler during part of his seven years of U.S. Army service. Four of those years in Korea, Southeast Asia, and guarding chemical sites in Okinawa where he also trained South Vietnamese dog handlers.
Our country thanks Skip Herendeen as well as every person who ever served their country, especially during times of conflict.
THE AKC JUDGES APPLICATION: August heats up as the war of the words begins between the ladies, AKC’s senior attorney Heather McManus and Herendeen’s Ohio attorney Lisa Summers. McManus points out that Herendeen signed the application form certifying that he is familiar with the “American Kennel Club Rules, Regulations, Policies and Guidelines for Conformation Dog Show Judges” and agreed to abide by them. Of course he did. McManus reiterates what every judge agrees to, emphasizing the line which states “I attest that all the information given on this application is true and correct.”
The judging application also states “AKC’s Staff Committee may suspend or revoke my judge eligibility at any time.” McManus advises Summers that AKC will not process the application because Herendeen has not answered the question about his military service. Was she aware that his military records would not be available for months? Perhaps AKC did not ever expect to receive the records.
Summers responds that her client will provide such information as is possible but suggests that AKC might be more interested in Herendeen’s knowledge of the breeds he is applying to judge instead of those he handled 30 years ago.
BACK TO EMAIL PRIVACY: Herendeen’s attorney responds, charging that her client has been repeatedly denied his right to due process, pointing out that AKC has refused to produce any “inaccuracies” on his application upon which AKC appears to have delayed judging approval. Lisa Summers again, patiently, explains that Skip had charged no one, that he was simply complying with AOL in filing a police report to find out how Darrel Hayes came into possession of a private email he had sent only to Col. Purkhiser.
Interestingly, in late September, in a letter to Herendeen’s attorney, AKC’s Heather McManus reaffirms AKC’s belief that Herendeen alleged that Darrel Hayes hacked into his computer! She further states that Herendeen’s “allegation to the Ft. Worth police department” is the only remaining aspect of the AKC investigation” although she conveys that AKC is not one bit happy about the fact that Skip refused to be questioned by the Kroll investigative agency which sources say is kept on retainer by AKC.
THE KROLL AGENCY: This would seem to have no bearing whatsoever as the incident to which Ms. McManus refers occurred in 2006 when the Kroll Investigative Agency burst into Herendeen’s place of business, flashing badges and credentials giving the impression that it was an FBI raid! Employees and customers were frightened and subsequently ill at ease even after he ordered Kroll off his premises. Yet a moment’s pause serves to remind that the Kroll incident to which Ms. McManus refers was in regards to his cooperation with AKC regarding the attempted bribe by McAteer/Shipley. A bribe which Herendeen promptly reported to the AKC Rep but which he alleges exacerbated tension between himself and Darrel Hayes. [Details in Part 1]
Ms. Summers tactfully suggests to Ms. McManus that AKC’s Kroll Investigative Agency might want to start in AKC’s own IT Department if they were really that interested in getting to the bottom of the email issue. Apparently the suggestion was disregarded because after all, if Kroll discovered that Mr. Purkhiser, as President of one of the three Judges Organizations, sent the email to Darrell Hayes, it would be embarrassing. It would also be disconcerting to judges to know private comments sent to an organization they believed to be advocating for them, might in fact be sent to the AKC Judges Department.
In October Herendeen sends a letter to John Wade, Judging Operations, in which he emphasizes that he did not accuse anyone with regard to his email. He quotes Darrel Hayes’ response to him in which he says he has “no intention or obligation to provide you with any information regarding the email” and explains that because of Hayes’ position he had no other option but to file a complaint with AOL, etc.
BACK TO THE BRIBERY ATTEMPT: In that letter to Judging Operations, Herendeen revisits the 2006 attempted bribery which he immediately reported and subsequently resulted in lifetime suspensions for the handler and the judge (see part 1) and cites another similar incident in which he had protected AKC. He also explains that he has been hospitalized four times for coronary episodes brought on by the stress imposed on him since 2006. He tells Wade that the latest was three weeks ago, during the time he was desperately trying to meet the impossible time limits set forth in AKC’s demand for response to all those questions, including providing his military records.
He offers to provide Wade with copies of his medical records and “respectfully requests” that Wade revisit the reasons for the delay and not recommend suspension at the Oct. 18th Board meeting. He asks for more time to “comply fully with your requests.” He closes by stating again what no one can question – his love for the American Kennel Club and his wish to continue the legacy left to him by his father and grandfather. It was of no avail. His judging privileges were suspended for life. He is however given opportunity to plead his case at the January 10, 2011 Appeals Board.
As an aside: During one interview, Mr. Herendeen reflected on the bribery attempt he reported to the AKC Rep. As a result, both (judge) Shipley and (handler) McAteer were suspended for life. Within a year after their suspensions, both individuals passed away, one from his own hand, the other gave up his will to live. Herendeen says that not a day goes by that he isn’t haunted by that. With no bitterness, he has admitted that if he had known what the outcome was to be, both for those two life-long participants in the sport, and for himself for having reported it, he would have done things differently, perhaps just walked away from the incident. There was a long silence as we both contemplated the results of his actions to protect the AKC.
This is the young man who served his country with valor, who protected his fellow soldiers, his father's good name, and who protected his own integrity and the American Kennel Club.
The result, what follows, his collapse after stewarding at Westminster, where the Herendeen case is currently, and what may happen to April Fools will be covered in April. We guarantee it will disturb and distress the fancy, if not the AKC… stay tuned. In the meantime, seeSUSPENDED "Compiled 6 months to Life" for the wording and reason for suspending Charles P. Herendeen III.
Get more information and dig for gold below.
Herendeen Case - Background (Part 1)
Herendeen Case - AKC Judges' Privacy & Legal Rights (Part 2)- A Clear Message to AKC Judges (Part 3)
AKC’s Proposed Judging Fee Fails – Again.
The Evil Empire Strikes down an AKC & International Judge