Dog-Sense: For All Dog Owners

Maynard Collie Case - pt. 3

Downey Maynard defends her collie dogs all the way to Superior Court when targeted under small town Limit Law and a neighbor's barking dogs complaints.

May 2009

Barbara "BJ" Andrews, Editor-In-Chief, SAAB

The Maynard Collie Case of Feb. 2009 was a common enough story involving court action to force Ms. Maynard to give up her retired show dogs and the occasional rescue dog she occasionally took in until they could be re-homed.

Ms. Maynard said the complaint charges were generated by one neighbor whom she referred to as “the neighbors from hell.”  Maynard's story is typical of cases across the country as Animal "Rights" activists step up their efforts to gain influence with state and local politicians level through campaign donations, political support, and other pressures intended to promote Limit Laws, mandatory spay/Neuter and other laws.

After the story ran, we received a rebuttal letter and photo showing more dogs than Ms. Maynard claimed to have.  Of course, they were barking at the person holding the camera.  Perhaps they were being teased as has been alleged. The unsigned emails said our coverage of the Maynard case was biased and inaccurate, that the barking collies were not “house dogs” as stated in our interview.  There were strong suggestions that Ms. Maynard was actually cruel to the dogs and "boxes them up in an 8 x 8 building farthest from her house so she doesn't have to listen to their incessant barking."  In the interest of fairness, we let the neighbor tell Part 2 of the Collie story ^{1} as they saw it and we ran it that way...

Downey Maynard was offended when online friends told her about our "equal time" follow-up story.  She had a friend send us hard copies of the detective's reports and several photos.  Seeing is believing.  These pictures were are all that we needed.  No person could maintain collies or any other profusely coated dogs in such superb condition if they were left outside.  Period.  It would take weeks or months to bathe and brush the coats of neglected "outside" dogs into this glorious state of loving and attentive care.

The detective's reports show seven neighbors living in the same block were interviewed and statements were taken.  All spoke in Maynard's favor.  All denied the "barking dogs" allegations against Maynard.

One neighbor stated she had witnessed the complaining neighbor "aggravating the dogs to make them bark."  Another stated that the neighbor from hell had "asked her to sign a petition against Maynard" before they even moved in!  Another neighbor in very close proximity reported she had personally seen the complaining neighbors use a "silent dog whistle" which got all the dogs in the neighborhood "barking uncontrollably."  She also stated the neighbors had "barrels in the {name deleted} backyard" filled with something that made a loud noise and which "caused Maynard's dogs to bark."

A detective's report of 7-15-07 stated the Nashville Police Department had investigated several alleged complaints but that he "never saw the dogs violating the law" and he offered to testify in Maynard's defense.  In walking around the Church Street block, the detective recorded a "large dog barking (loudly) in a man's back yard" and wrote that two housedogs barked as he approached different houses.

He interviewed former police officer Antill who is now employed by the hospital.  Antill stated he was dispatched to Maynard's house, parked in the church parking lot, and observed for some time.  Then while "Ms. {deleted} was on the phone to communications telling them the dogs were barking right then" his report stated there were no dogs barking nor had any dogs been barking.  On another occasion he was at Maynard's house and her dogs were outside, silent, but the complaining neighbor's dogs were barking and he suggested that Maynard file a complaint.  She would not as she did not want to escalate the situation. Officer Antil reported that Maynard "made every effort" to keep peace in the neighborhood but that the neighbors (from hell) "would not be satisfied" until Maynard got rid of her dogs.

This was already published and scheduled for inclusion in HEADlines on the 12th.  On May 11th, we received an email on Ms. Maynard's behalf from Fern Sinclair who assisted in the first report.  Ms. Sinclair provided more details "in 12 years there were only 2 barking dog citations.  The first one issued in  2003 [heard in '04], she won in court due to the fact that the police, animal control, and some neighbors testified that the dogs did not bark [unless provoked at the fence].  The judge who presided grandfathered her in concerning the 3 dog limit.  The new neighbors {name deleted by editor} were livid about losing and proceeded to antagonize the dogs and make them bark.  Other neighbors heard the barking, and joined in, in support of the [neighbor] who then solicited other neighbors to support their agenda.

"It took them until 2006 when a second barking citation was finally issued, this time for night time barking.  Downey's nearest neighbor, Vicky Luper, with the longest adjoining property line, testified against allegations made by the [neighbor] that the dogs barked at night.  The police never investigated the [neighbor] complaint because rather than complain that night, they had emailed the police a week later.  That was the basis of the 2006 citation which Downey was served.

"In the Superior court case, Downey's nearest neighbors testified on her behalf.  Some of the people who testified for the prosecution lived much further away, on the far side of the street, in the next block.  The same judge who heard the '03/'04 case, again heard the '06 case, but this time refused to grandfather her in.  During testimony from Downey's witnesses, the judge had his back to them and was talking to the clerk of court, paying no attention to the testimony.  Also strange, many of Downey's witnesses were not there because they had not been notified by Downey's attorney, who had told Downey he would subpoena them, but he neglected to do so.

"Also it's interesting to note that one of the prosecution's own witnesses testified that he didn't think the dogs were a problem, [the dogs didn't bother him].  When asked why he was testifying for the prosecution, his answer was 'I was told to do so'.  Makes us wonder by who: his wife, the D.A., the [neighbor], but regardless he felt he had to follow these orders."

If you haven't read part 1 and part 2, do so now and you be the judge.  We would like to hear your thoughts on this or any other ongoing case in your area.