I have gotten quite a bit of feedback on this website both positive and negative. I’ll start with the most negative. I found out Saturday that I am a defendant in application for a restraining order along with five others filed by the founder of the Taos Mesa Animal Sanctuary. I got the application from the court yesterday and in it there is section for special requests to the court. It states, “Plaintiff also requests that the defendant be ordered not to do the following, post flyers, post on blogs, post on social media anything including my name or the Taos Mesa Animal Sanctuary, we ask that they stop inciting the rumors and lies to the community at large.” This is a direct attempt to silence me and this website. Obviously, she is unaware of the first amendment of the US constitution and that it applies to the citizen journalism I’m doing on this website just as much as to any other form of journalism. I’ve already filed a brief affidavit of fact with the court and I will do another filing where I’m going to be essentially “pleading the first”. This actually makes me proud of what I’ve done. Pleading the fifth means you’re guilty of something you don’t want to talk about. Pleading the first means I’ve done something meaningful that’s been effective. I’ve also put a lot of thought in how to go about doing what I’m doing. In so much as I’m engaging in citizen journalism, my editorial policy has not been to name the main person behind TMAS and Golden River directly and use her various business names instead for the reason that I don’t want to engage in name calling and focus on the issues. It also keeps the reporting local. Those in the community will know exactly who I’m talking about but the outside world on the Internet will just be able to read about the issue and situation without knowing who this is. I also don’t want to make the mistake corporate media made with Donald Trump and give her free publicity which could ultimately be to her benefit. All I have done is criticize TMAS online and comment on Golden River’s ongoing land grab attempt via a fraudulent quiet title suit. I have gotten a lot of information and feedback from various members of the Tres Orejas community and the greater Taos Pet and Rescue community about the website and the general consensus from both is that there are serious issues with TMAS. Once members of our local community are aware of where TMAS is located, they know where all the dog noise is coming from and everyone I’ve spoken to has said it should not be there without getting the proper special use permit from the county and the consent of the surrounding community. The local animal rescue community has multiple issues with TMAS as well. I’ve also been contacted by people who purchased property in which the TMAS founder acted as the realtor and they feel that there was serious misrepresentation by her and that her real estate license should be revoked. In this she is doing exactly what the Great Southwestern Land Co. did in the early 1960s: Marketing property to out of state buyers unfamiliar with the local market and local conditions and vastly overstating the condition and value of the property. There is one notable difference. There is no record whatsoever of the Great Southwestern Land Co every having engaged in any form of aggressive behavior, threatening anyone, or abusing the court system to try and silence critics. They were friendly swindlers. There is a restraining order filed against the TMAS founder for just such behavior and reports of many more incidents of it. What is emerging from my ongoing citizen journalism is a clear pattern of unscrupulous and unethical business practices and that she has engaged in harassment and threatening behavior when questioned or criticized. There has also been clear abuse of the court system to try to silence her critics as evidenced by the restraining order application. There is a serious difference between criticism and harassment. I’m sure Richard Nixon would have shut down the Washington post if he could have but he couldn’t due to the first amendment and that protection also applies to this website.
In regards to the claim of the road to TMAS being blocked and threatening signs being left on May 26th and June 9th in the restraining order application and also posted on Facebook, there is no evidence whatsoever of anyone named as a defendent in the application having any connection to this. There is no incitement in this website for such actions, I’m making the community aware of what’s going on, not suggesting what should be done about it and even if I did, I would never suggest any such vigilante actions. I personally feel that there’s something wrong with the picture in these threats. As I’ve previously reported, it’s really hard to get anywhere near the TMAS site without being confronted and I spoke recently with someone who is being paid to guard it when the founder isn’t there. So it’s easy for me to consider these incidents as what the conspiracy theorists refer to as “false flags”. And if they are real, my mostly middle aged and elderly co-defendants in this are not the type to engage in violent threats. They are all working within the system at great personal expense.
And one further comment on feedback. Due to the restraining order application, I’ve done something I’ve been reluctant to do, examine the TMAS facebook page. It looks like the post “Dogs, Lies and School buses” really got to them. That amuses me because when I finished that post, I felt that it was really well crafted, the same feeling I get when I finish a really good bracelet and know someone is going to want it.
4 responses to “Pleading the First, Update and Feedback”
Very clarifying. Thank you. This molehill has become a mountain of bipolar insanity.
Without naming myself, I live very close the location, where these animals are being held.
I personally find the owners social media comments, “that Every close neighbor is supportive” …of this dog project. This is a very broad claim by those owners, and it is simply not a clear or wholly true statement. I am NOT supportive of this out here.
It’s loud. And in their own posts, they say dogs have gotten away from them. If found later, what ever. As a person who has been attacked by roving packs of dogs out here the very loud barking of 50 dogs, is unnerving to me. I worry every single day for my personal safety if those dogs in total, or in part..become uncontainable and escape.
Further more, there is no photo accounting for every animal housed there. I cannot see where this has been made public. Why is that?
Without publicly disclosed photos of every single animal housed there, this community here..has no verifiable way to know if a stray dog or cat is from their location.
This situation is lacking..in many ways.
Also, I am NOT supportive of this restraining order at all.
This is exactly what I referred to in a previous post. They should have liability insurance for incidents like this but are unlikely to be able to get it without adequate infrastructure and ownership of the property and proper permitting by county planning.
FYI, the RO granted against the TMAS founder (also a licensed “Associate Broker” #53250 with Keller Williams, Santa Fe) was filed (2022) by an 87-year-old woman who purchased a home in Tres Orejas. The elder was being systematically harassed, bullied, threatened and had 50% of her household (down to the dishes & dog food/treats) stolen from known and proven friends of the founder. In fact, it was more of her friends who sent direct threatening texts to the elder. This all took place after the elder filed a complaint with the Taos County Sheriff. The elder’s complaint was taken seriously, as the elder was never able to file her deed. The individual who was selling the property was a close “friend” of the Founder, yet he never actually owned the property. So, nearly $175,000 in cash was paid to the friend of the Founder, who then vanished. If this is how the Founder treats the elderly, how on earth could she be considered an advocate or protector of animals? The totality of hardship (anxiety, suffering, sadness, worry and stress) brought into this elder’s life has had her in tears on numerous occasions. The Founder is a con artist through and through. Indeed, the term ‘menace to society’ is an apt description for this individual who perpetrates elder abuse.