top of page
Writer's pictureseattleanimalwatch

Animal Hoarding: Part 3

Police cars with their lights on

In this section, we take a look at the challenges law enforcement face when investigating and prosecuting a suspected hoarder. ASPCA anti-cruelty expert Randall Lockwood advises attorneys that will be prosecuting hoarders. His presentation is summarized and linked below. Animal hoarding is described as the accumulation of a large number of animals and a failure to provide a minimum standard of sanitation, veterinary care and nutrition.


The Investigation

The investigation into the suspected hoarding must be done with a lawful search and seizure. Thorough documentation of the case is critical and complex. Every animal must be assessed for injuries and medical conditions, and living conditions recorded. Healthy animals must also be documented - they show the hoarder has made choices to neglect some and not others. Medicines prescribed for sick animals should be listed and noted whether they have been used. Sanitation, parasites, disease, malnutrition and preventable conditions will be listed with each animal’s case. Authorities must archive social media channels, including websites. “Happy animal” photos are important for prosecuting exploiters (exploiters are hoarders who sell some of their animals). Investigators will want to follow the money, and if it is a non-profit, analyze the organization’s IRS form 990. 


Other conditions that will be noted by investigators are unsocialized behavior, aggression, and household habits including housebreaking. If an animal recovers while in foster or vet care, the hoarder can be charged with willful denial of proper care. 



Filing Charges

Next, the prosecutor must decide whether or not to file charges. If the accused is amenable to the removal of animals, sign an agreement to limit the number of animals owned, allow unannounced monitoring of the property, have a mental health assessment and pay restitution, the prosecutor probably will not prosecute.


If the hoarder does not agree to those conditions, the prosecutor will file charges. In Seattle, prosecutors will use Seattle Municipal Code 9.25.081 “Cruelty to Animals”. Because Seattle Municipal Court is a court of limited jurisdiction, charges will be misdemeanors. If the hoarding rises to the level of felonies, the Seattle Prosecutor will refer the case to the King County Prosecutor. Violations of RCW 16.52.205 or 16.52.207  “Animal Cruelty” are felonies and fall under the purview of King County Superior Court. 


Another challenge prosecutors face is the calculation of included charges. While the hoarder may have injured or neglected dozens or hundreds of animals, judges generally don’t have time for long trials with multiple charges. In some cases, judges may be insensitive to the gravity of injury to animals. Since companion animals are property under the law, injury to animals is often viewed as a less serious crime than injury to people. Other challenges for prosecuting hoarders include low compliance rates for following court-ordered actions, little hope of recovering restitution, prolonged disputes over ownership of the animals, and perceived criminalization of mental illness.


Prosecutors largely agree that special statutes addressing animal hoarders are not needed. The accused can be charged under cruelty, neglect and violation of mandatory licensing and vaccination violations. However, hoarding statutes do overcome the multiple charges problem - a defendant could be charged with one violation of a hoarding statute instead of 53 counts of cruelty. 


Sources:

bottom of page