Club News: Adhering To The Highest Journalistic Standards

AKC vs Boulton - Part II

THE DEFENDANT

BIS Judge George Boulton won the trial board but still gets suspended with no appeal and no constitutional rights afforded.

May 2006

Louis A. Fallon, AKC Historian & Legal Analyst

Sadly, George Boulton was publicly embarrassed and humiliated by the AKC at its May 8, 2006 board meeting when despite having been cleared of any wrong-doing, the board revoking his judging approval privileges for one year.

The AKC board decision was made without any hearing or personal appearance by George or his lawyer. The AKC publicized the one year judging revocation on the AKC website and it will be printed in the AKC Gazette, even before George has a chance to file an appeal, an appeal provided for in accordance with the AKC’s own written procedure.

This unlawful and illegal double jeopardy action by the AKC happened after the March 29, 2006 AKC South West Trial Board thoroughly tied the case of AKC vs. George Boulton and found him "not guilty." The AKC Trial Board dismissed AKC's charges on the factual grounds that the charges against George were not sustained. Read the 7-page Trial Board decision^{1}.

George Boulton won at the AKC South West Trial Board hearing, but the AKC Board ignored its own Trial Board and the Constitution of the United States of America by revoking George’s judging license approval for one year. The AKC’s own written bylaws and the Trial Board decision were flushed down the toilet by the AKC Board. The AKC board includes one lawyer, one California Municipal Court judge and ten other people that are no strangers to Courts of Law in their professional and personal lives.

Double jeopardy - As we all learned in high school history or civics class, the phrase "double jeopardy" comes from the Fifth Amendment^{2} to the United States Constitution^{3}: "nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb". This clause is intended to limit prosecutorial abuse by the government^{4} in repeated prosecution^{5} for the same offense, as a means of harassment or oppression. It is also in harmony with the ancient English common law^{6} concept of res judicata^{7}, which prevents courts from re-litigating issues and claims that have already been the subject of a final judgment.

The AKC South West Trial Board was represented by a very experienced in-house AKC staff attorney with over ten years experience in prosecuting cases before Trial Boards. The South West Trial Board issued its written judgment in dismissing the AKC charges that George Boulton appeared on a television show where he made derogatory and inappropriate comments about judges.

Being tried twice for the same offense is prohibited by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The double jeopardy clause protects against three distinct abuses: [1] a second prosecution for the same offense after acquittal, as in George Boulton’s case; [2] a second prosecution for the same offense after conviction; and [3] multiple punishments for the same offense. See, U.S. v. Halper, 490 U.S. 435, 440 (1989, also Justices of Boston Municipal Court v. Lydon, 466 U.S. 294, 306 (1984). A defendant may not be tried again on the same or substantially similar charge, Fong Foo v. United States, 369 U.S. 141 (1962).

Though the Fifth Amendment applies most often to the federal government, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that the double jeopardy clause applies to the individual fifty states as well, through incorporation^{8} by the Fourteenth Amendment^{9}. The AKC is a non-profit corporation of the State of New York which operates in all fifty states of the USA. George Boulton is a resident of Arizona. The AKC South West Trial Board held its judicial hearing in southern California.

Taxing Situation - The AKC is not a private club. it is a public corporation since April 1963 when it finally obtained a federal tax exemption under 501-C-4 of the IRS code. The AKC was originally turned down by the IRS in 1938 and by a Manhattan Federal District Court in 1940 and a New York Federal Appellate Court in 1943. It took twenty more years and a change in Presidential administration for the AKC to cash in its political support of the election of President Dwight Eisenhower and obtain the federal tax exemption. As a 501-C-4 public corporation if anyone would like to have a copy of the AKC’s annual tax report to the IRS, just ask the IRS or the AKC itself for a copy, or you can read salary and benefits paid to the AKC officers and board members^{10}.

In his own words before the Trial Board George admitted that he was foolish, that he signed a blanket waiver and consent form for the TV production company that produced the cable TV mini-series ShowDogs Moms and Dads. As the Trial Board took judicial note of in their logical and reasoned decision, the TV production company cut-and-pasted participant words out of context to make it appear that George was attacking other dog show judges when in fact, he was talking about a hypothetical bad dog show judge.

I saw the TV mini series and did not care for it, in my opinion it was poorly done and the production value was negligible as well as the fact that the film segments were too fast and disjointed. Watching the TV mini-series reminded me of the AKC produced video films “Dealing with Misconduct at Dog Show and Obedience Trials”, “Dealing with Misconduct at Field Trials and Hunting Tests”, and “In the Ring with Mr. Wrong” which also related to hypothetical bad dog show judges.

George Boulton sincerely regrets signing the TV production company waiver form. I ask, how many dog show exhibitors have ever read the reverse side of the standard AKC dog show entry form? How many exhibitors know what legal rights they are waiving by entering their dog in a dog show and agreeing not only to the AKC rules but also to the different additional host dog clubs rules as printed in each dog show premium list? As a member of several host dog club show committees I have enforced the rules and prosecuted people who violated the premium list club rules or the AKC rules and have heard many exhibitors complain “I didn’t know”. A few years ago the Westminster Kennel Club enforced its local club rules as printed in its premium list and fined many of its dog show exhibitors for violating that dog club’s rules against removing a dog from the dog’s bench.

I urge each of you to read the written opinion of the AKC Southwestern Trial Board^{1} (here on TheDogPress website). A reasoned, logical document written after a two day sixteen hour Trial Board hearing, with lawyers on both sides presenting their case, documents, and witnesses. George Boulton was judged by AKC's own Trial Board and the charges were dismissed.

The AKC could have appealed the dismissal of the charges from the AKC South West Trial Board verdict to the AKC Appeal Trial Board. The AKC chose not to take an appeal. Instead they violated George Boulton’s legal rights; the AKC violated the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The AKC violated the double jeopardy clause which protects against abuses by having a second prosecution for the same alleged offense after acquittal.

It can happen.... I do not personally know George Boulton, but when a fellow dog fancier’s legal rights are violated, then all dog fanciers rights are violated. If it happened to George Boulton it can happen to you, your spouse, your junior handlers, to the people in your dog club.

Only Two Have Prevailed! There is a 7-page AKC publication titled “Trial Board and Appeal Trial Board Procedures (Amended to February 6, 2004)”, AKC # RDTBD1(05/04) . You can obtain a copy of it from the AKC, from the executive secretary office or from any of the AKC legal department’s three in-house lawyers. The publication provides the only public document on the inner workings and process of the AKC Trial Board operation. Be advised that every trial Board member throughout the USA is also an AKC dog show judge and many of them are also AKC delegates. I believe that this results in a built in AKC prosecutorial basis in favor of the AKC against the defendant.
In over thirty years of reading the AKC Secretaries page listing those peoples names that had been found guilty by an AKC Trial Board I have only seen one report, about a year ago, with the persons name omitted, of a field trial dog show judge that prevailed against the AKC at a Trial Board. In the Gazette words following that dismissal report, there was an AKC comment to the effect that the AKC was going to strengthen and tighten up its prosecutorial might to insure that a Trial Board dismissal never happened again.

Then in 2006 the George Boulton case came along and George and his lawyer, Lonnie Kocontes, prevailed at the South West Trial Board. Imagine that, two dog show judges prevailing at an AKC Trial Board.

The AKC document “Trial Board and Appeal Trial Board Procedures (Amended to February 6, 2004) is not, in my opinion, a model of judicial fairness. Obtain a copy from the AKC and read it for yourself. Let us know what you think about its most egregious part as found on page 3:

“The Trial Board is not bound by the rules of evidence. The weight to be given to any hearsay evidence, affidavits, or letters should be carefully considered.”

If court rules of evidence do not apply, what is next? Disregarding the dog breed standards at dog shows?

Conscious decision - An unimpeachable source told me that Gorge Boulton spent over $20,000.00 in legal fees and expenses to hire a defense lawyer and bring in witnesses from three thousand miles away.

Would you spend $20,000.00 to defend your good name and reputation before an AKC Trial Board? George Boulton stood up for his legal rights and asked to be judged fairly and honestly and the AKC South West Trial Board, consisting of three dog show judges who are lawyers rose to the occasion. Following the Trial Board dismissal the AKC made the conscious decision to violate the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and charge George Boulton with the same charges which the Trial Board had heard over sixteen hours time, evaluated and dismissed.

George Boulton was badly treated by the AKC. He was treated like a low cur, his dog show judging license approval revoked without trial after having the identical charges dismissed by an AKC Trial Board.

TheDogPress.com EST 2002 © 0605  https://www.thedogpress.com/ClubNews/AKC-vs-Boulton-2-Fallon-0605.asp

Reference & Related Articles and Information, dig for gold below

^{1} Boulton's Southwestern Trial Board Report and Findings The first copy made public.

^{2} Amendment V     ^{3} Constitution Of The United States     ^{4} Government     ^{5} Prosecution

^{6} Common Law     ^{7} Res judicata     ^{8} Incorporation     ^{9} Amendment XIV     ^{10} AKC Salaries and Benefits

AKC vs Boulton Part 1 How the nightmare began and the charges.

AKC vs Boulton Letters AKC Judges' Dept. Letter to Mr. Boulton, his Attorney's Response.

AKC vs Boulton Part 2 So what happened?  You won't believe it!

AKC vs Boulton Part 3 Where are we now?  Depends on where you sit.

SSI

SSI

Brought to you by NetPlaces Network:

Advertising   ~   Mission Statement   ~   Privacy Policy

ii NetPlaces Network   ~    Disclaimer