Tonight I filed a report about an animal rescue shelter called Molly's Place. It's located in Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, along Trindle Road. Judging by their website, http://www.petfinder.com/shelters/PA328.html, it appears they help many, many animals find new homes. Shane Kope, the attorney for the owner of Molly's Place, says the shelter adopts out thousands of dogs and cats to area families. They pride themselves on being a "no kill" shelter, meaning they will never euthanize an animal they rescue. In fact, several "kill" shelters in the area give their animals to Molly's Place instead of putting them down if they can't find a home.
The reason we're reporting on an animal shelter is because of some serious allegations being made against the owner of Molly's Place, Lori Johnston. She is charged with theft and concealment of a dog. According to State Police, Johnston removed an ID micro chip from a lab named Rex, inserted Rex's chip into another lab, hid Rex at a volunteer's home, then attempted to give Rex's owner the new dog with Rex's chip.
Also, the West Shore Humane Society, one of the aforementioned "kill shelters", has suspended its dealings with Molly's Place after receiving several complaints about Molly's adopting out sick puppies. Trina Shughart, of York County, made one of those complaints. She adopted Casey, a six-week old puppy, from Molly's in late July. The day the Shughart's brought Casey home, they discovered a fresh surgery scar with stitches, not documented on her medical records. It was a hernia operation. Two days later, a vet diagnosed Casey with an intestinal parasite and Parvo, a contagious and potentially deadly disease. The Shughart's opted to have Casey put down, because their vet told them she would not likely make it. The Shughart's allege Molly's Place knew full well their dog was sick, but still allowed Casey to be adopted for a $325 fee.
I have met Lori Johnston. She comes across as a completely believable person who seems to genuinely care about what she does. Lori told me in an interview late last month that animal rescue isn't just a job for her, it's her life's passion. I applaud people who will take the time to help out our furry friends; especially the ones who desperately need a home.
Following the advice of her attorney, Lori won't speak about the theft allegations. But she does say the dog, Rex, came to her shelter twice. The first time, she says, it was covered in fleas and its collar was dangerously too tight. The second time Rex came to her, she decided to take action. Lori says you can't go too far in an attempt to do the right thing. To her, saving an abused dog is the right thing. And her attorney is willing to take this case all the way to the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court to prove that animals, and the people who protect them, deserve the same rights as everyone else.
I have also met Rex. He seems to me to be a completely normal, well-adjusted dog. I will admit this - I wasn't there to see what Lori saw. I see Rex now, presumably long after his owner would have had the chance to fix him up nice for the tv cameras. But Rex also seemed very loving of his owner and her kids.
If what happened to Rex is true, the micro chip dog switch, that is the most bizarre thing I have ever heard of. I'm sure that I'm not alone. A question I have - if Lori truly wants to save animals, and if she felt Rex was abused by his owners, why would she give them another dog? Would the owners not abuse it as well? I also disagree with her reasoning that a dog that runs away must be an unhappy dog. Dogs are not people. When people run away and don't want to come back, something is wrong. Dogs run away for all sorts of reasons. And they're not all like the one in "Homeward Bound." I'm sure Fido isn't crossing rivers and hitching rides on trucks just to get back home to his family.
The Shughart family's situation is an interesting case study. If Molly's Place knowingly adopted out a sick puppy, should they not be liable just the same as a car dealer who sells a lemon to a customer? Pennsylvania says no. The state does have a puppy lemon law, but it does not apply to non-profit shelters like Molly's Place. Only to pet stores. The idea behind that is that a shelter, for the most part, has no choice over the animals it takes in.
Do not (underlined) misinterpret the previous paragraph to read "Molly's Place knowingly adopted out a sick puppy." There is no way, that I can think of, to ever prove that. And I can't imagine Lori Johnston sitting behind a desk, plotting some wicked plan to pawn off sick puppies to unsuspecting children for a tidy little sum of 300-plus dollars.
This story is already getting a lot of viewer feedback. Much of it is from people with similar complaints about Molly's Place. Some of it is in support of the owner's decision to protect the dog. One reply to the forum I posted, http://community.whptv.com/forums/thread/748618.aspx, is reportedly from a volunteer at Molly's Place. Being personally involved in the business, this person is understandably upset.
Please continue to sound off. Good. Bad. Everything. That's exactly what this forum is for.
