The Duck Whisperer's day in court: Case dismissed!

    RAVES that a no-nonsense Fayette County magistrate judge dismissed charges against a disabled
    Fairchance veteran for raising her voice from a distance to middle-school-age minors and their
    inattentive parents at the town park, reportedly after observing one of the minors kicking the ducks.

    Without bias, the use here of the descriptive word inattentive is certainly justified, based on the
    conflicting testimony of the parents and another witness and the different versions of the "truth" that they
    and the town cop unsuccessfully tried to pass off in frustration as hard-core evidence.




    RANTS that the borough of Fairchance wasted so much time and public funds trying to get their stories
    to jive to prosecute anyone in a half-ass manor, without a shred of evidence.

    RANTS of the most putrid kind that the borough, which no longer could afford to hold its annual
    community Veterans Day picnic, shamefully squandered valuable police time and borough public money
    prosecuting an elderly disabled veteran for raising her voice to alert middle-school age minors and their
    inattentive parents to stop hurting the ducks. Oh, and did we forget to say earlier that the harassment
    charge was made because she told them in a raised voice that the police were being called.



    Yes, the borough has a solicitor. Respectfully, we must ask where was he before today -- i.e., where,
    before sitting in the public seats of the courtroom today -- in helping the trio and cop prosecutor realize
    they had no evidence against her to constitute harassment, fighting, or disorderly conduct?

    Respectfully, we ask why didn't the borough solicitor realize before -- or even right after  -- the charges
    were filed against the elderly disabled veteran that the three witnesses were each other's worst enemies
    with their all too different tales of what happened on July 25. They didn't even agree on which area of
    the park the verbal exchange actually happened for goodness sakes.  



    As readers here well know, the father of the minors one month earlier in June walked towards the elderly
    Fairchance Duck Whisperer when she raised her voice, again from a distance, as the family brought
    their pet fox through the park on a leash.  

    The father of the middle-school-age minors pled guilty to disorderly conduct, for walking a distance that
    evening in June towards the elderly disabled veteran to impose his-up close, angry mug in her face. He
    reacted that way after she raised her voice from a distance, in shock that one of the middle-school-age
    minors pulled a pet fox on a leash around the community park with clearly visible posted signs that not
    even harmless dogs on a leash are permitted.   

    The father of the minors, as a result of that June move towards the elderly disabled veteran, later pled
    guilty to having a fox without proper state permits. Naturally and conveniently for the prosecution, none
    of those guilty pleas and fines imposed against the father could be discussed today in court, however.



    Who knows if the state game commission got complaints from anyone other than the Duck Whisperer
    about the fox. Today's prosecutorial farce in a Masontown court was simply a foolish personal action
    taken against the vet turned Duck Whisperer after complaints were made to the state game commission,
    the state police and borough police about the fox being in the park and reportedly carried in arm out of
    the park to the vet's home property to harass and intimidate her.



    RAVES to watching intriguing court hearings. Intriguing, we say, because the Duck Whisper's case
    was held in a court with a no-nonsense judge and skilled defense objections that stopped it from
    becoming a kangaroo court.

    But, no, there was certainly nothing intriguing in the least about the shameful farce that the prosecution
    and witnesses produced this afternoon. RANTS that a cop would push so hard to convict a spite case
    and RANTS that he and witnesses would protest in shout out after the judge dismissed the case without
    merit.  



    RAVES of hope that the ducks at the park won't be hurt again. That happy thought might just be too
    much to wish for, given the players here did not even think to refer back to the already scripted account
    that the cop wrote in the original citations of what happened on July 25 as they winged it in testimony
    under oath today about it.

    Fairchance Borough has a long history of allowing the ducks to be harmed. Nobody has ever been
    charged in all the documented complaints that people such as the elderly, disabled vet and others have
    made to the state game commission and police clear back over a few decades.

    That sad fact must change.
    jt
    8 Dec 17

    Copyright Protected
A poll of Fairchance residents

  • A recent poll of persons leaving a
    local grocery and drug store tallied
    18 of 25 persons of various ages
    saying they witnessed the ducks
    being kicked, hit with large rocks
    and snagged with hooks
    intentionally to maime wings and
    legs during their time over years in
    the borough.
  • None polled had ever received
    dead white or brown mallard ducks
    delivered anonymously by bullies of
    the night to their doors as the
    defendant in this case has.
  • Almost all polled noticed and
    wondered about the dead white
    ducks sometimes tossed along the
    highway, especially when hundreds
    of feet around, paths of freshly
    plucked white duck feathers
    covered the ground.
  • Few polled realized the maimed
    ducks were plucked.
  • Most expressed disappointment
    that they live among such sick pups
    who would do that.
  • Most said they had or would raise
    their voices to stop any animal from
    getting hurt.
  • More -- probably than today's
    prosecution thought possible -- said
    they would let the defendant in this
    case babysit their children or let
    their children tour the park with
    today's defendant to teach them all
    she knows about the ducks and
    most animals.
  • 3 of the 25 polled, including 1 who
    left and returned for additional
    comment, said no town officials
    seem to care about the abuse of
    ducks and care about the park only
    when or if non-Caucasians visit it at
    or after dusk.
  • 90% of those polled agreed with
    the statement that the police and
    middle-school-age minor's parent in
    health care, as mandated reporters
    of child abuse, should have
    reported the Duck Whisperer in
    July to child protective services, if
    they truly saw her as being a threat
    to children. No mandated reporter
    made such a complaint.