Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Mary Cummins appealing unjust Texas court ruling
June 14, 2012 Judge William Brigham ruled in favor of Plaintiffs in the case Bat World Sanctuary v Mary Cummins. Cummins had reported Lollar to authorities for animal cruelty and animal neglect which she witnessed while at Bat World in Texas. She posted her reports and public documents online and was sued for defamation. Cummins is appealing this unjust ruling.
Mary Cummins an animal rescuer in Los Angeles, California reported Amanda Lollar of Bat World Sanctuary for animal cruelty, animal neglect and health code violations. Cummins witnessed Amanda Lollar performing surgery on bats when she is not a veterinarian and hasn't gone past the ninth grade. Bats were dying under Lollar's care. Cummins posted her findings on her website AnimalAdvocates.us.
Cummins also posted the results of Freedom of Information Act requests on her website. She posted complaints and reports made by others about Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary. The complaints stretching back 18 years were about animal cruelty, animal neglect, violations of the health code, violations of Texas Parks & Wildlife regulations, violations of the Animal Welfare Act, building violations and a report about a rabid bat biting a toddler directly next door to Bat World Sanctuary.
Cummins also posted negative reports bat experts had made about Lollar's procedures. Lollar recommended freezing bats to death in her manual which is illegal and inhumane according to the American Veterinary Medication Association. Lollar also recommended the improper use of anesthesia which Lollar admitted caused some bats to die.
Amanda Lollar then sued Cummins for defamation. Plaintiffs in court did not prove that Cummins defamed Lollar. The essential elements of a defamation cause of action that must be proven in Texas are, (1) The defendant published a statement of fact, (2) The statement was defamatory, (3) The statement was false, (4) The defendant acted negligently in publishing the false and defamatory statement, and (5) The Plaintiffs suffered damages as a result.
Plaintiffs did not prove that Cummins made all of the statements. Most of the items were the results of information act requests. They were public documents written by others. Cummins contends that everything she posted was the absolute truth. Plaintiffs did not prove that the items were false or that they suffered any financial damages.
Cummins was also sued for breach of contract. The essential elements of a breach of contract cause of action that must be proven are, (1) There is a valid contract; (2) The Plaintiffs performed or tendered performance according to the terms of the contract; (3) The Defendant breached the contract; and (4) The Plaintiffs sustained damages as a result of the breach.
Cummins contends she never signed a contract. Plaintiffs' own signature expert report stated that the signature on the contract was only "probable." It was not "strongly probable" or a "positive identification." Plaintiffs did not perform according to the contract. Cummins actions would have never been considered a breach. Plaintiffs showed no financial damages.
Even though Plaintiffs did not prove defamation or breach of contract Judge William Brigham ruled in favor of Plaintiffs. The Judge will soon sign an order to force Cummins to remove items from her website and others. The items are the results of information act requests. They are complaints made by others about animal cruelty, animal neglect and violations of the health code. The order will also include websites owned by others who were not a party to the action.
Cummins stated "I clearly did not defame Amanda Lollar or Bat World Sanctuary. I reported her for animal cruelty and neglect. I provided photos and videos to authorities besides detailed reports. Lollar just wants to hide these complaints from the public. Most of the items they want removed were written by others or are on websites I don't even control. I cannot possibly remove other people's websites or content. This order is overly broad."
Cummins continued "I most certainly did not sign their contract. Their own expert handwriting report did not state that I signed it. The authorship report by their so-called 'expert' Eric Shupps is also flawed. Shupps has never been an expert witness before in any case. He used a free beta software called JGAAP. The author of the program stated it cannot be used for court cases because of its inherent limitations. Shupps also used the writings of others as samples of my writing. Garbage in, garbage out. On top of this Shupps accused me of planting a Google bomb. Google bombs have been impossible since 2007."
When asked about the ruling Cummins replied, "I'm shocked because Plaintiffs did not show the essential elements for a claim of defamation or breach of contract. Then again I'm not shocked. Before one hearing Plaintiffs' attorney Randy Turner told me that he's known this judge for years. He insinuated that the Judge will automatically rule in his favor, and he did. There was a conflict of interest."
Cummins stated she is contesting the Judge's order, requesting a new trial and appealing the decision. Cummins is currently suing Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary in Federal court in California for libel and defamation.
Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates rescues ill, injured and orphaned native wildlife for release back to the wild. http://www.AnimalAdvocates.us
Cummins also posted the results of Freedom of Information Act requests on her website. She posted complaints and reports made by others about Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary. The complaints stretching back 18 years were about animal cruelty, animal neglect, violations of the health code, violations of Texas Parks & Wildlife regulations, violations of the Animal Welfare Act, building violations and a report about a rabid bat biting a toddler directly next door to Bat World Sanctuary.
Cummins also posted negative reports bat experts had made about Lollar's procedures. Lollar recommended freezing bats to death in her manual which is illegal and inhumane according to the American Veterinary Medication Association. Lollar also recommended the improper use of anesthesia which Lollar admitted caused some bats to die.
Amanda Lollar then sued Cummins for defamation. Plaintiffs in court did not prove that Cummins defamed Lollar. The essential elements of a defamation cause of action that must be proven in Texas are, (1) The defendant published a statement of fact, (2) The statement was defamatory, (3) The statement was false, (4) The defendant acted negligently in publishing the false and defamatory statement, and (5) The Plaintiffs suffered damages as a result.
Plaintiffs did not prove that Cummins made all of the statements. Most of the items were the results of information act requests. They were public documents written by others. Cummins contends that everything she posted was the absolute truth. Plaintiffs did not prove that the items were false or that they suffered any financial damages.
Cummins was also sued for breach of contract. The essential elements of a breach of contract cause of action that must be proven are, (1) There is a valid contract; (2) The Plaintiffs performed or tendered performance according to the terms of the contract; (3) The Defendant breached the contract; and (4) The Plaintiffs sustained damages as a result of the breach.
Cummins contends she never signed a contract. Plaintiffs' own signature expert report stated that the signature on the contract was only "probable." It was not "strongly probable" or a "positive identification." Plaintiffs did not perform according to the contract. Cummins actions would have never been considered a breach. Plaintiffs showed no financial damages.
Even though Plaintiffs did not prove defamation or breach of contract Judge William Brigham ruled in favor of Plaintiffs. The Judge will soon sign an order to force Cummins to remove items from her website and others. The items are the results of information act requests. They are complaints made by others about animal cruelty, animal neglect and violations of the health code. The order will also include websites owned by others who were not a party to the action.
Cummins stated "I clearly did not defame Amanda Lollar or Bat World Sanctuary. I reported her for animal cruelty and neglect. I provided photos and videos to authorities besides detailed reports. Lollar just wants to hide these complaints from the public. Most of the items they want removed were written by others or are on websites I don't even control. I cannot possibly remove other people's websites or content. This order is overly broad."
Cummins continued "I most certainly did not sign their contract. Their own expert handwriting report did not state that I signed it. The authorship report by their so-called 'expert' Eric Shupps is also flawed. Shupps has never been an expert witness before in any case. He used a free beta software called JGAAP. The author of the program stated it cannot be used for court cases because of its inherent limitations. Shupps also used the writings of others as samples of my writing. Garbage in, garbage out. On top of this Shupps accused me of planting a Google bomb. Google bombs have been impossible since 2007."
When asked about the ruling Cummins replied, "I'm shocked because Plaintiffs did not show the essential elements for a claim of defamation or breach of contract. Then again I'm not shocked. Before one hearing Plaintiffs' attorney Randy Turner told me that he's known this judge for years. He insinuated that the Judge will automatically rule in his favor, and he did. There was a conflict of interest."
Cummins stated she is contesting the Judge's order, requesting a new trial and appealing the decision. Cummins is currently suing Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary in Federal court in California for libel and defamation.
Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates rescues ill, injured and orphaned native wildlife for release back to the wild. http://www.AnimalAdvocates.us
For more information:
http://www.animaladvocates.us
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
It amazes me how no matter what the outcome, as long as its not in Cummins favor, everyone is crooked and everyone else lied. Always? Really. So the defamation continues.....
Fort Worth, Texas, June 14, 2012 - Randy Turner with the firm, Bailey & Galyen, has again earned his name as the "Texas Super Lawyer" today for Bat World Sanctuary. Bat World Sanctuary, an international non-profit organization devoted to rescuing and rehabilitating bats, and its president, Amanda Lollar of Mineral Wells were awarded $6.1 million in damages by a Tarrant County district judge today in a defamation lawsuit. After a four-day trial the court found that Mary Cummins of Los Angeles, California had committed defamation against Amanda Lollar and had breached her internship contract with Bat World Sanctuary.
In 2010 Mary Cummins was accepted for an internship at Bat World Sanctuary in Mineral Wells. While at Bat World she became dissatisfied with the program and left the internship early. According to the plaintiffs she went back to California and began posting "horrific allegations of animal cruelty against Amanda Lollar on the internet." She accused Amanda Lollar of performing "illegal surgeries" on bats without anesthesia, possessing and distributing controlled substances without a DEA license, throwing dead bats in the trash, allowing interns to be repeatedly bitten by rabid bats, breeding bats illegally, giving human rabies vaccinations to interns, and neglecting her pet dogs. She filed reports of animal cruelty with numerous wildlife and conservation organizations as well as humane and animal welfare organizations. She also complained to a foundation that had been providing funding to Bat World but stopped doing so after receiving Cummins' complaint. She filed complaints with the Texas Department of Health, the Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners, Texas Parks and Wildlife, the Texas Attorney General, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the USDA, the Mineral Wells Police Department, the Mineral Wells Fire Department, the Palo Pinto District Attorney and other agencies. Every agency that investigated Bat World Sanctuary found Cummins complaints to be completely without merit. According to Eric Shupps, the plaintiff's expert on information technology, Cummins used "search engine optimization" and "Google bombs" to spread her defamation far and wide across the internet.
Judge William Brigham, who was the visiting judge in the 352nd District Court of Tarrant County, announced at the conclusion of the trial that Amanda Lollar is world-renowned and is to bats what Jane Goodall is to primates. He said that Mary Cummins' defamation of Amanda Lollar was "intentional, malicious, and egregious" and ordered her to pay $3.0 million in compensatory damages and $3.0 million in punitive damages. He also ordered her to pay $10,000 for breach of her contract with Bat World and $176,700 in attorney's fees.
"This judgment sends a powerful message to cyber-stalkers and others who use the internet to harass people or to harm their reputations. Innocent victims like Amanda Lollar often don't have the resources, expertise, or ability to defend themselves against such vicious internet attacks. Hopefully this judgment will make someone think twice before engaging in an internet smear campaign," said Turner.
About Randy Turner
Randy Turner has always been an advocate for animals. He has worked as a volunteer on wildlife conservation projects around the world, including orangutan rehabilitation in Borneo, Indonesia, elephant conservation in Kenya, and black rhino conservation in Zimbabwe. He has represented and served on the boards of directors of several animal welfare organizations. He is a volunteer attorney with the Animal Legal Defense Fund. A substantial portion of his law practice is devoted to representing people who help animals. Mr.Turner has never lost an animal rights case. He fought this case "pro-bono", another example of his true dedication to animals and those who rescue them.
See Judges ruling: http://www.batworld.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/6-14-bat-world-excerpt-2.pdf
For more information:
http://randyturnerwinsforbatworld.com/
Judge William Brigham, who was the visiting judge in the 352nd District Court of Tarrant County, announced at the conclusion of the trial that Amanda Lollar is world-renowned and is to bats what Jane Goodall is to primates. He said that Mary Cummins' defamation of Amanda Lollar was "intentional, malicious, and egregious" and ordered her to pay $3.0 million in compensatory damages and $3.0 million in punitive damages. He also ordered her to pay $10,000 for breach of her contract with Bat World and $176,700 in attorney's fees.
Lollar's attorney, Randy Turner with the firm, Bailey & Galyen, said "this judgment sends a powerful message to cyber-stalkers and others who use the internet to harass people or to harm their reputations. Innocent victims like Amanda Lollar often don't have the resources, expertise, or ability to defend themselves against such vicious internet attacks. Hopefully this judgment will make someone think twice before engaging in an internet smear campaign."
Ms. Lollar, who has authored both scientific and popular literature, plans to write a book about her personal nightmare regarding this case. She hopes to bring about changes in the legal system regarding internet harassment, because in most states there are no laws that protect the victims. This type of crime is on the rise and she would like to bring it to the forefront. Proceeds from the sale of the book will benefit Bat World Sanctuary.
Lollar's attorney, Randy Turner with the firm, Bailey & Galyen, said "this judgment sends a powerful message to cyber-stalkers and others who use the internet to harass people or to harm their reputations. Innocent victims like Amanda Lollar often don't have the resources, expertise, or ability to defend themselves against such vicious internet attacks. Hopefully this judgment will make someone think twice before engaging in an internet smear campaign."
Ms. Lollar, who has authored both scientific and popular literature, plans to write a book about her personal nightmare regarding this case. She hopes to bring about changes in the legal system regarding internet harassment, because in most states there are no laws that protect the victims. This type of crime is on the rise and she would like to bring it to the forefront. Proceeds from the sale of the book will benefit Bat World Sanctuary.
For more information:
http://www.batworldwins.org/
Mary Cummins has been exposed for the harm she is capable of inflicting on others. See this article for the actual story:
http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/06/15/4036067/bat-rescuer-awarded-61-million.html
http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/06/15/4036067/bat-rescuer-awarded-61-million.html
For more information:
http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/06/15/40...
Copied from Cummins' response to Star article.
1. I was never accused or convicted of "cyberstalking." I was sued for defamation and breach of contract only. Cyberstalking is a Federal crime. You just stated I committed a Federal crime. Please, remove that.
2. The videos were not "libelous." Libel is defamation that is printed. It cannot be a video. I posted the videos. They speak for themselves. Please rephrase it so it doesn't seem that the videos were libelous. The Judge never said that. No one ever said that.
3. I did not and they never proved that I used "robots to game Google." That is impossible. Google uses captcha. Robots can't get beyond captcha. See wikipedia. Their "expert" Shupps is not an expert. He's never been an expert in a court case before.
4. In court Plaintiff stated she gave human rabies vaccinations to humans. I asked her "so you gave the human rabies vaccination to Sarah Kennedy?" She said "Yes." I never said she injected it into people. She does possess the human rabies vaccination which is illegal. Only Doctors, Nurses, Pharmacists and Veterinarians may buy, receive and possess it.
5. Ms. Lollar never went to restaurants or movies before. She has always been a recluse. She never leaves her cave. She told me because people in town have hated her since 1995. I invited her out to restaurants while I was there and she said no. I saw her in court. She has not lost any weight. She has no problem making huge lies. She was crying in court. Minutes later in the hallway she's calling me names with a big smile on her face. She's a total actor.
6. All complaints were not dismissed. The Texas health dept gave her a huge list of instructions that she must follow. They told her to remove items on her website such as "bats don't carry rabies." Yes, they can carry rabies. It's irresponsible to state they don't carry rabies. She was also instructed to have people wear gloves.She did not follow their orders as you can see from her photos and videos.
7. When Bat World was being investigated, I said "they are being investigated." I dated every statement I made. The statement is still on my website but it has a date of when she was investigated.
8. The police report which I have did not state that the toddler stomped the bat. It's not in the city report or animal control report either. Lollar made that up. The incident occurred directly next door to her wild sanctuary on 115 N.E. 1st St. The toddler was at 113 N.E. 1st St. The report is in my website. That location is two blocks from Lollar's other building but is next door to where her wild bats are located. Newspaper article http://www.animaladvocates.us/batWorldLawsuit/rabidbattoddlera.jpg Lollar hired a lawyer who then threatened to sue the City if they did not find the report groundless. Here's the letter http://www.animaladvocates.us/batWorldLawsuit/Bat_World_Sanctuary_Threatens_To_Sue_City_Of_Mineral_Wells.pdf
9. I did not Google bomb. Check wiki. It's been impossible to Google bomb since 2007. They changed the algorithm.
10. Eric Shupps is not an expert on authorship. He's never testified as an expert in a trial or deposition. This was the first time he used this free beta software JGAAP for a client. The author of the software stated it has limitations and should not be used in a court of law. The author stated it is a closed system. You must give it the names of possible authors then it chooses the most likely. It does not identify the true author. It cannot be used with multiple authors for a document. The samples which they stated were samples of my writing were not 100% my writing. Some were other people's articles, some included huge passes of quotes from others. A few people edited my articles. Garbage in, garbage out.
11. I stupidly told Turner that as soon as I got the video of my deposition I was going to turn my attorney in for nodding off and Turner for touching my hand. Right after I said that, that portion of the video was destroyed. If nothing happened, why did they destroy the video? Judge ordered them to give me the video. Turner instantly responded with "well, a couple of hours of the second half of the wide angle view is missing." Lollar's husband took the video. Both videos were missing huge chunks. I had to file a motion to compel, he filed a protective order. If nothing was on the video, why did he fight turning it over?
12. The video I posted of Turner clearly shows him sleeping and staring inappropriately. I sent you a link. I'm sitting to the right of my video camera. You see him follow my crotch as I sit down. He would even stare inappropriately in court. Here's an email I sent to him telling him to knock it off. http://www.animaladvocates.us/batWorldLawsuit/email_randy_turner.pdf I have a lot more video of him acting inappropriately. I have video of my attorney yawning, nodding off. I'll post them.
I am currently suing Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary in Federal court in California for libel and defamation. Lollar stated that I was a "convicted criminal" when I have never been charged with a crime ever.
I am currently contesting the court order, requesting a new trial and appealing the decision. Plaintiffs can never collect anything from me as the order is in Texas. I am in California. They would have to come to California and sue me all over again.
1. I was never accused or convicted of "cyberstalking." I was sued for defamation and breach of contract only. Cyberstalking is a Federal crime. You just stated I committed a Federal crime. Please, remove that.
2. The videos were not "libelous." Libel is defamation that is printed. It cannot be a video. I posted the videos. They speak for themselves. Please rephrase it so it doesn't seem that the videos were libelous. The Judge never said that. No one ever said that.
3. I did not and they never proved that I used "robots to game Google." That is impossible. Google uses captcha. Robots can't get beyond captcha. See wikipedia. Their "expert" Shupps is not an expert. He's never been an expert in a court case before.
4. In court Plaintiff stated she gave human rabies vaccinations to humans. I asked her "so you gave the human rabies vaccination to Sarah Kennedy?" She said "Yes." I never said she injected it into people. She does possess the human rabies vaccination which is illegal. Only Doctors, Nurses, Pharmacists and Veterinarians may buy, receive and possess it.
5. Ms. Lollar never went to restaurants or movies before. She has always been a recluse. She never leaves her cave. She told me because people in town have hated her since 1995. I invited her out to restaurants while I was there and she said no. I saw her in court. She has not lost any weight. She has no problem making huge lies. She was crying in court. Minutes later in the hallway she's calling me names with a big smile on her face. She's a total actor.
6. All complaints were not dismissed. The Texas health dept gave her a huge list of instructions that she must follow. They told her to remove items on her website such as "bats don't carry rabies." Yes, they can carry rabies. It's irresponsible to state they don't carry rabies. She was also instructed to have people wear gloves.She did not follow their orders as you can see from her photos and videos.
7. When Bat World was being investigated, I said "they are being investigated." I dated every statement I made. The statement is still on my website but it has a date of when she was investigated.
8. The police report which I have did not state that the toddler stomped the bat. It's not in the city report or animal control report either. Lollar made that up. The incident occurred directly next door to her wild sanctuary on 115 N.E. 1st St. The toddler was at 113 N.E. 1st St. The report is in my website. That location is two blocks from Lollar's other building but is next door to where her wild bats are located. Newspaper article http://www.animaladvocates.us/batWorldLawsuit/rabidbattoddlera.jpg Lollar hired a lawyer who then threatened to sue the City if they did not find the report groundless. Here's the letter http://www.animaladvocates.us/batWorldLawsuit/Bat_World_Sanctuary_Threatens_To_Sue_City_Of_Mineral_Wells.pdf
9. I did not Google bomb. Check wiki. It's been impossible to Google bomb since 2007. They changed the algorithm.
10. Eric Shupps is not an expert on authorship. He's never testified as an expert in a trial or deposition. This was the first time he used this free beta software JGAAP for a client. The author of the software stated it has limitations and should not be used in a court of law. The author stated it is a closed system. You must give it the names of possible authors then it chooses the most likely. It does not identify the true author. It cannot be used with multiple authors for a document. The samples which they stated were samples of my writing were not 100% my writing. Some were other people's articles, some included huge passes of quotes from others. A few people edited my articles. Garbage in, garbage out.
11. I stupidly told Turner that as soon as I got the video of my deposition I was going to turn my attorney in for nodding off and Turner for touching my hand. Right after I said that, that portion of the video was destroyed. If nothing happened, why did they destroy the video? Judge ordered them to give me the video. Turner instantly responded with "well, a couple of hours of the second half of the wide angle view is missing." Lollar's husband took the video. Both videos were missing huge chunks. I had to file a motion to compel, he filed a protective order. If nothing was on the video, why did he fight turning it over?
12. The video I posted of Turner clearly shows him sleeping and staring inappropriately. I sent you a link. I'm sitting to the right of my video camera. You see him follow my crotch as I sit down. He would even stare inappropriately in court. Here's an email I sent to him telling him to knock it off. http://www.animaladvocates.us/batWorldLawsuit/email_randy_turner.pdf I have a lot more video of him acting inappropriately. I have video of my attorney yawning, nodding off. I'll post them.
I am currently suing Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary in Federal court in California for libel and defamation. Lollar stated that I was a "convicted criminal" when I have never been charged with a crime ever.
I am currently contesting the court order, requesting a new trial and appealing the decision. Plaintiffs can never collect anything from me as the order is in Texas. I am in California. They would have to come to California and sue me all over again.
For more information:
http://www.animaladvocates.us/mary_cummins...
People have been reporting Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary to the authorities for years. Every time she gets in trouble she finds a pro bono animal rights attorney to threaten to sue and sue people to quiet them.
For more information:
http://www.animaladvocates.us/batWorldLaws...
Mary Cummins Sues Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary
Animal activist and rescuer Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates filed suit against Amanda Lollar, Bat World Sanctuary and John Does 1-10 for defamation per se and interference with business relations, Case # CV11-08081 in California Federal Court on September 29, 2011.
Los Angeles, California (PRWEB) October 19, 2011
The complaint states that Amanda Lollar falsely posted on the Internet that Cummins "has a criminal record," "was convicted" of "theft of property, forged name on credit card," and "hacked into" Lollar's "email address" among other things. The complaint also states that Defendants emailed some of these same false allegations of criminal activity to government agencies such as the United States Department of Agriculture and the California Department of Fish & Game which control Cummins' permits.
Mary Cummins said "While I am a major proponent of freedom of speech, I am appalled that someone would try to destroy my reputation by falsely posting on the Internet that I am a 'convicted criminal.' I have never been charged with or convicted of any crime in my entire life."
The complaint states that defendants also posted on the Internet that Cummins commits "animal cruelty" and "tortures" animals. Mary Cummins said "I am very passionate about providing the absolute best care for animals. I went through the police and humane academy to become a Humane Officer so I could protect animals from abusers. For these people to make such false claims on the Internet is outrageous."
Cummins reported Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary to authorities for animal cruelty, animal neglect and violations of the health code.
The comments were posted in Yahoo, Facebook, Google Blogs, Indymedia and other websites. Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary are being represented by Stephen M. MacPhail of Bragg & Kuluva. The Judge is Honorable Dolly M. Gee. Case was filed in the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (Western Division - Los Angeles).
Mary Cummins is President of Animal Advocates a non-profit animal rescue organization in Los Angeles, California. Animal Advocates rescues ill, injured and orphaned native wildlife (coyotes, bobcats, foxes, raccoons, opossums, skunks, squirrels...bats) for release back to the wild. Full curriculum vitae of Mary Cummins.
For more information:
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/10/prwe...
Mary:
After reading many of the court documents and watching your 2011 deposition, in my opinion you have significant mental health issues.
If you actually believed that something harmful was happening at Bat World, a reasonable person report their concerns to the authorities and then allow those individuals to handle the situation. Clearly your behavior has gone far beyond that of a concerned citizen and is now a very personal vendetta. Asking for Ms. Lollar's father's address (in a nursing home, no less), for example, is just disgusting. Readers can view this on YouTube here: http://youtu.be/VYvA2dg0Yl0
It is absolutely clear from this video of your deposition of the Plaintiff in the case that you enjoyed those questions. I found the look on your face really (really) disturbing in this clip.
The court has already ruled: you were in the wrong. You defamed Bat World and its founder to the tune of $6.1million in damages. Now is the time to seek some professional mental health and move on. You also owe a great deal of money, Mary. In your deposition you indicated that you have several large judgements against you in addition to the massive judgement in Texas. I would therefore urge you to cease your current behavior, as well as your efforts for animals in LA County, and instead forcus on your own mental health and in trying to get and keep a real job.
My sense, after watching you being deposed (and your depositions of Ms. Lollar), as well as reading many of your writings, online is that you have a personality disorder coupled with high-functioning Aspergers Syndrome. These are not issues that you can manage on your own, Mary. You will need help and probably some medication to manage them. So please, do yourself a large favor and go see someone. There are free clinics in Los Angeles. The Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health, for example, has some wonderful resources. See http://dmh.lacounty.gov/wps/portal/dmh.
Best of luck,
OpinionIsProtectedSpeech
After reading many of the court documents and watching your 2011 deposition, in my opinion you have significant mental health issues.
If you actually believed that something harmful was happening at Bat World, a reasonable person report their concerns to the authorities and then allow those individuals to handle the situation. Clearly your behavior has gone far beyond that of a concerned citizen and is now a very personal vendetta. Asking for Ms. Lollar's father's address (in a nursing home, no less), for example, is just disgusting. Readers can view this on YouTube here: http://youtu.be/VYvA2dg0Yl0
It is absolutely clear from this video of your deposition of the Plaintiff in the case that you enjoyed those questions. I found the look on your face really (really) disturbing in this clip.
The court has already ruled: you were in the wrong. You defamed Bat World and its founder to the tune of $6.1million in damages. Now is the time to seek some professional mental health and move on. You also owe a great deal of money, Mary. In your deposition you indicated that you have several large judgements against you in addition to the massive judgement in Texas. I would therefore urge you to cease your current behavior, as well as your efforts for animals in LA County, and instead forcus on your own mental health and in trying to get and keep a real job.
My sense, after watching you being deposed (and your depositions of Ms. Lollar), as well as reading many of your writings, online is that you have a personality disorder coupled with high-functioning Aspergers Syndrome. These are not issues that you can manage on your own, Mary. You will need help and probably some medication to manage them. So please, do yourself a large favor and go see someone. There are free clinics in Los Angeles. The Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health, for example, has some wonderful resources. See http://dmh.lacounty.gov/wps/portal/dmh.
Best of luck,
OpinionIsProtectedSpeech
Mary:
You write: "Plaintiffs can never collect anything from me as the order is in Texas. I am in California. They would have to come to California and sue me all over again."
She would not have to sue you again in that she would not have to re-try the case in California. All she would need to do is file in California, asking that the California court uphold the Texas judgement. Unfortunately California is not a signatory of the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act, otherwise she would have even less to do here. Fortunately she has excellent lawyers in California and I am quite sure she could file in your state quite easily. Indeed, I would hope that she does.
Your reaction to the judgement is quite disturbing in my view and also demonstrates that you are not in the least remorseful for your actions. I am sure that the California judge will find these recent posts quite enlightening in determining whether or not to uphold the judgement against you.
Again, please Mary. Seek some professional help. With help I think you could have a much better and happier life.
OpinionIs ProtectedSpeech
You write: "Plaintiffs can never collect anything from me as the order is in Texas. I am in California. They would have to come to California and sue me all over again."
She would not have to sue you again in that she would not have to re-try the case in California. All she would need to do is file in California, asking that the California court uphold the Texas judgement. Unfortunately California is not a signatory of the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act, otherwise she would have even less to do here. Fortunately she has excellent lawyers in California and I am quite sure she could file in your state quite easily. Indeed, I would hope that she does.
Your reaction to the judgement is quite disturbing in my view and also demonstrates that you are not in the least remorseful for your actions. I am sure that the California judge will find these recent posts quite enlightening in determining whether or not to uphold the judgement against you.
Again, please Mary. Seek some professional help. With help I think you could have a much better and happier life.
OpinionIs ProtectedSpeech
Amanda Lollar admitted in her own deposition she did not go past the ninth grade. She admitted she had no formal training. She admitted she taught herself to do surgery on bats. Below is video from her deposition where she admits she is uneducated.
Amanda Lollar admits she performs c-sections, amputations and neuters bats.
"Barbara and I have both done c-sections, amputations, etc. I've also neutered a dozen or so free-tails. Most vets won't or don't want to work on bats. If you're lucky enough to have a vet who will supply you with isoflurane and show you the basics, you've got nothing to lose by trying. I don't think it takes a lot of nerve--just the realization of knowing that without surgical intervention the bat is going to die. If it dies while under anesthesia at least it had a more merciful death then it would have had otherwise. And hopefully you've learned something in the process--something that you may be able to use to save the next bat."
Her vet is Dr. Tad Jarrett in Mineral Wells. He admitted to giving her the drugs. He also admitted that Lollar trained him. Blind leading the blind. Amanda Lollar thinks she is Dr. Dolittle when she is actually Dr. Moreau. People have been complaining about her for years. In her 1994 manual she recommended freezing bats to death when that is illegal and inhumane. More information and evidence here http://www.animaladvocates.us/batworldlawsuit
For more information:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_lbjtXKdLY
Wow you sir are amazing. I believe you stated what everyone is thinking. Sadly I believe she will never seek the free help that is available.
Mary:
Please, no more of this. The case is over. You lost. The judge described Ms. Lollar as an expert. Indeed, if you believed that she was so inexperienced, why did you sign up for the internship? Clearly you believed that you could learn from her though I am sure you will now attempt to spin the story as though you were deep cover in some sort of investigation.
In her deposition Ms. Lollar admitted that she has no formal education so let us not pretend like you are announcing anything new. Further, lacking a formal education is not the same thing as being uneducated, Mary.
In your post you quote a source but do not cite it. As an educated person, as you claim to be, you should know that best practices means citing your sources. In addition, your so-called CV does not indicate what peer-reviewed journals you have published in (citing ones own blog posts or newsletter articles is not a list of published works, Mary) and a search of Google Scholar produces no journal articles in which you are the primary author. The same cannot be said for Ms. Lollar, who appears as the primary author on several items.
It is not at all unusual for vets to work with sanctuaries, Mary. It is not unusual for vets to work with such facilities to develop new protocols and processes, either. I would urge anyone with concerns to speak with reputable sanctuaries about this issue. It happens all the time, the goal being the very best care of animals.
In her deposition, a portion of which is available online [http://youtu.be/8XNvbtlT5pg], you ask Ms. Lollar:
Mary Cummins: "In that book did you recommend euthanasia by freezing bats?"
Ms. Lollar:"At the time, uh, that's what, uh, current, that's what the current research, um uh, recommended."
Mary Cummins: "Did you euthanize Mexican Free Tailed bats by freezing them?
Ms. Lollar: "I euthanized bats that were comatose--that were already unconscious--by freezing. As I said, that was the current recommended method of euthanasia for insectivorous bats until we discovered that Isoflorin was much more humane."
Mary Cummins: "You discovered Isoflorin..
[speaking over each other]
Ms. Lollar: "Bat World Sanctuary discovered.."
Mary Cummins: "[garbled] euthanasia?"
Ms. Lollar: "that Isoflorin was the most humane method to euthanizing insectivorous bats.
Mary Cummins: "When did you discover this?"
Ms. Lollar: "Don't remember exactly."
Mary Cummins: "You don't believe that people have been using Isoflorin to euthanize bats and other animals before that?"
Ms. Lollar: "Its been used. Yes, it has been used widely to euthanize other animals but not specifically Mexican Free Tailed bats. Before they used CO2, which is a horrific death for..."
Mary Cummins: [interrupts] "So you..."
Ms. Lollar: "...insectivorous bats."
Mary Cummins: "You are the first person to use Isoflorin to euthanize an insectivorous bat?"
Ms. Lollar: "I didn't say that. I said we are the ones who discovered that it was the most humane method. We are the ones that published that it was the most humane method. We have a position statement on that. We are the first ones to create a position statement on euthanizing insectivorous bats."
Bat World discovered a new method, a better method, of euthanasia for insectivorous bats and published it. This is standard behavior and good scholarship. She did the right thing here, Mary, and in my view your response to the facts is simply tragic. You have a $6.1million dollar judgement against you, in addition to additional judgements from other parties including the IRS. I would therefore again urge you to seek some professional mental health and focus on your own healing and wellness.
Best of luck,
OpinionIs ProtectedSpeech
Please, no more of this. The case is over. You lost. The judge described Ms. Lollar as an expert. Indeed, if you believed that she was so inexperienced, why did you sign up for the internship? Clearly you believed that you could learn from her though I am sure you will now attempt to spin the story as though you were deep cover in some sort of investigation.
In her deposition Ms. Lollar admitted that she has no formal education so let us not pretend like you are announcing anything new. Further, lacking a formal education is not the same thing as being uneducated, Mary.
In your post you quote a source but do not cite it. As an educated person, as you claim to be, you should know that best practices means citing your sources. In addition, your so-called CV does not indicate what peer-reviewed journals you have published in (citing ones own blog posts or newsletter articles is not a list of published works, Mary) and a search of Google Scholar produces no journal articles in which you are the primary author. The same cannot be said for Ms. Lollar, who appears as the primary author on several items.
It is not at all unusual for vets to work with sanctuaries, Mary. It is not unusual for vets to work with such facilities to develop new protocols and processes, either. I would urge anyone with concerns to speak with reputable sanctuaries about this issue. It happens all the time, the goal being the very best care of animals.
In her deposition, a portion of which is available online [http://youtu.be/8XNvbtlT5pg], you ask Ms. Lollar:
Mary Cummins: "In that book did you recommend euthanasia by freezing bats?"
Ms. Lollar:"At the time, uh, that's what, uh, current, that's what the current research, um uh, recommended."
Mary Cummins: "Did you euthanize Mexican Free Tailed bats by freezing them?
Ms. Lollar: "I euthanized bats that were comatose--that were already unconscious--by freezing. As I said, that was the current recommended method of euthanasia for insectivorous bats until we discovered that Isoflorin was much more humane."
Mary Cummins: "You discovered Isoflorin..
[speaking over each other]
Ms. Lollar: "Bat World Sanctuary discovered.."
Mary Cummins: "[garbled] euthanasia?"
Ms. Lollar: "that Isoflorin was the most humane method to euthanizing insectivorous bats.
Mary Cummins: "When did you discover this?"
Ms. Lollar: "Don't remember exactly."
Mary Cummins: "You don't believe that people have been using Isoflorin to euthanize bats and other animals before that?"
Ms. Lollar: "Its been used. Yes, it has been used widely to euthanize other animals but not specifically Mexican Free Tailed bats. Before they used CO2, which is a horrific death for..."
Mary Cummins: [interrupts] "So you..."
Ms. Lollar: "...insectivorous bats."
Mary Cummins: "You are the first person to use Isoflorin to euthanize an insectivorous bat?"
Ms. Lollar: "I didn't say that. I said we are the ones who discovered that it was the most humane method. We are the ones that published that it was the most humane method. We have a position statement on that. We are the first ones to create a position statement on euthanizing insectivorous bats."
Bat World discovered a new method, a better method, of euthanasia for insectivorous bats and published it. This is standard behavior and good scholarship. She did the right thing here, Mary, and in my view your response to the facts is simply tragic. You have a $6.1million dollar judgement against you, in addition to additional judgements from other parties including the IRS. I would therefore again urge you to seek some professional mental health and focus on your own healing and wellness.
Best of luck,
OpinionIs ProtectedSpeech
Motion for new trial
For more information:
http://www.animaladvocates.us/batworldlaws...
Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates Sues Amanda Lollar and Bat World Sanctuary
Animal activist and rescuer Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates filed suit against Amanda Lollar, Bat World Sanctuary and John Does 1-10 for defamation per se and interference with business relations, Case # CV11-08081 in California Federal Court on September 29, 2011.
Los Angeles, California (PRWEB) October 19, 2011
Animal activist and rescuer Mary Cummins President of Animal Advocates filed suit against Amanda Lollar, Bat World Sanctuary and John Does 1-10 for defamation per se and interference with business relations, Case # CV11-08081 in California Federal Court on September 29, 2011. The complaint states that Amanda Lollar falsely posted on the Internet that Cummins "has a criminal record," "was convicted" of "theft of property, forged name on credit card," and "hacked into" Lollar's "email address" among other things. The complaint also states that Defendants emailed some of these same false allegations of criminal activity to government agencies such as the United States Department of Agriculture and the California Department of Fish & Game which control Cummins' permits.
Mary Cummins said "While I am a major proponent of freedom of speech, I am appalled that someone would try to destroy my reputation by falsely posting on the Internet that I am a 'convicted criminal.' I have never been charged with or convicted of any crime in my entire life."
The complaint states that defendants also posted on the Internet that Cummins commits "animal cruelty" and "tortures" animals. Mary Cummins said "I am very passionate about providing the absolute best care for animals. I went through the police and humane academy to become a Humane Officer so I could protect animals from abusers. For these people to make such false claims on the Internet is outrageous." The comments were posted in Yahoo, Facebook, Google Blogs, Indymedia and other websites.
Mary Cummins is President of Animal Advocates a non-profit animal rescue organization in Los Angeles, California. Animal Advocates rescues ill, injured and orphaned native wildlife (coyotes, bobcats, foxes, raccoons, opossums, skunks, squirrels...bats) for release back to the wild.
For more information:
http://www.animaladvocates.us/mary_cummins...
A toddler was bitten on the cheek by a rabid bat directly next to Bat World Sanctuary in Mineral Wells, Texas. The "wild sanctuary" building located at 115 N.E. 1st St. holds a maternity colony of Mexican Free-tail bats. The child was bitten by a baby Mexican free-tail bat.
The mother of the child Megan Stone made a complaint against Bat World Sanctuary with the City. The bat most likely came from their sanctuary. Amanda Lollar who operates Bat World Sanctuary instantly hired Fort Worth, Texas lawyer Donald Feare. Feare sent a threatening letter to the City Manager Lance Howerton. Feare warned that if they don't find the complaint "groundless," there would be a "protracted legal battle" and "negative publicity" for the City. Even though City records show the City Manager agreed to order Lollar to "get the bats out of town," the City backed down.
Palo Pinto County released a rabies warning for the county after the incident. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department told residents to exclude bats from their buildings. Bat experts at Texas A & M and Bat Conservation International told the City that they should force Bat World to exclude the bats at the "wild sanctuary." Bat World Sanctuary did not exclude bats from their "wild sanctuary" building. Excluding bats entails blocking off their entrances into the building.
Between June 20 and October 16 of 1993, 23 dead and dying bats were collected from roosts in four adjacent buildings in downtown Mineral Wells, Texas by Amanda Lollar. 17 of the 23 bats tested positive for rabies. That is 72% of the dead and dying bats. These dead rabid bats were the subject of a journal article on rabies. Texas is noted as the bat rabies capitol of the US. From 1995 to 2009 six people died of rabies in Texas. They were all the bat strain of rabies. One in four people who died of rabies in the US in 2009 was in Texas.
Over the years there have been many complaints about the "wild sanctuary" building belonging to Bat World Sanctuary. It is a vacant building with no current occupancy permit because it is not up to code. The complaints range from building in disrepair, property is unsightly, building contains mounds of guano to the main complaint which is the smell.
30,000 bats have been roosting in this building for over 50 years. Their urine has soaked into the wood beams and walls destroying the building. The smell from the building fills the entire downtown area in the summer according to the health inspector. In a June 24, 2009 letter to Texas Parks and Wildlife Donna Robbins the City Health Inspector stated "the odor is so strong, that if you just walk by the building briefly, your clothing will smell like bat excrement, urine."
Donna Robbins thoroughly investigated the problems with the bats and contacted bat experts, Texas Parks and Wildlife, Center for Disease Control, Bat Conservation International and health department officials. They all stated that Lollar must exclude bats from the building and clean up the guano.
Word made its way to Lollar who responded with a letter to the City dated June 26, 2009. Lollar stated she already "removed approximately 6,000 lbs of guano." She said that she realizes that there is a "potential for bat/human contact." She will be moving the bats out of the building and into a soon to be built artificial cave outside of town. She stated that would be finished within two years which would be June 2011.
October 18, 2010 City Health Inspector Donna Robbins asked Lollar in email how the bat exclusion was going. Lollar replied that she planned to seal the building in December. Then she stated that her bats have "something white on their ears and various body parts." She stated "WNS has made it to Texas a year earlier than researchers expected." She continued, "it appears to be the beginning of the end."
The sanctuary only holds Mexican free-tail bats. Mexican free-tail bats do not get WNS because they do not hibernate in cold caves where the fungus thrives. They migrate to warmer climates. Lollar knows this but tried to play the sympathy card with the health inspector. From Bat Conservation International http://www.batcon.org/pdfs/whitenose/WNSCaveMyotisinOklahomaFINAL.pdf
Meanwhile Lollar is trying to raise money for day to day expenses. Instead of trying to raise money for a never-to-be-built artificial cave she now wants money for a never-to-be-built "assurance colony." June 2011 she stated that "Bat World Sanctuary can save bats (from WNS) through the development of captive assurance colonies. We are the only facility to successfully maintain a reproductive colony of insectivorous bats for two decades."
Lollar is merely a wildlife rehabilitator, not a scientist or researcher. Lollar does not even have a high school diploma let alone a college degree. She freely admits that she's never had any animal training whatsoever and learned everything through "trial and error" and the "school of life."
Her wildlife rehabilitation permit does not allow her to keep healthy bats or breed bats. Assurance colonies are made up of healthy bats that can breed and live unassisted. She was warned in May 2010 by Texas Parks and Wildlife that she cannot allow her bats to breed.
June 2011 and there are again 30,000 bats in the "wild sanctuary." Lollar never closed off the building as she promised the City. She is now asking for donations to care for the many babies and injured bats that she's picking up from the "wild sanctuary." Meanwhile complaints about the foul odor and guano on the streets continue to pour into the City. It is clear that she never intends to exclude bats from the building.
About rabies: Not all bats have rabies. The best way not to get rabies from a bat is to never touch a bat with your bare hands. If you see an ill, injured or orphaned bat, contact a wildlife rehabilitator or animal control. If you must pick it up, always wear gloves.
The mother of the child Megan Stone made a complaint against Bat World Sanctuary with the City. The bat most likely came from their sanctuary. Amanda Lollar who operates Bat World Sanctuary instantly hired Fort Worth, Texas lawyer Donald Feare. Feare sent a threatening letter to the City Manager Lance Howerton. Feare warned that if they don't find the complaint "groundless," there would be a "protracted legal battle" and "negative publicity" for the City. Even though City records show the City Manager agreed to order Lollar to "get the bats out of town," the City backed down.
Palo Pinto County released a rabies warning for the county after the incident. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department told residents to exclude bats from their buildings. Bat experts at Texas A & M and Bat Conservation International told the City that they should force Bat World to exclude the bats at the "wild sanctuary." Bat World Sanctuary did not exclude bats from their "wild sanctuary" building. Excluding bats entails blocking off their entrances into the building.
Between June 20 and October 16 of 1993, 23 dead and dying bats were collected from roosts in four adjacent buildings in downtown Mineral Wells, Texas by Amanda Lollar. 17 of the 23 bats tested positive for rabies. That is 72% of the dead and dying bats. These dead rabid bats were the subject of a journal article on rabies. Texas is noted as the bat rabies capitol of the US. From 1995 to 2009 six people died of rabies in Texas. They were all the bat strain of rabies. One in four people who died of rabies in the US in 2009 was in Texas.
Over the years there have been many complaints about the "wild sanctuary" building belonging to Bat World Sanctuary. It is a vacant building with no current occupancy permit because it is not up to code. The complaints range from building in disrepair, property is unsightly, building contains mounds of guano to the main complaint which is the smell.
30,000 bats have been roosting in this building for over 50 years. Their urine has soaked into the wood beams and walls destroying the building. The smell from the building fills the entire downtown area in the summer according to the health inspector. In a June 24, 2009 letter to Texas Parks and Wildlife Donna Robbins the City Health Inspector stated "the odor is so strong, that if you just walk by the building briefly, your clothing will smell like bat excrement, urine."
Donna Robbins thoroughly investigated the problems with the bats and contacted bat experts, Texas Parks and Wildlife, Center for Disease Control, Bat Conservation International and health department officials. They all stated that Lollar must exclude bats from the building and clean up the guano.
Word made its way to Lollar who responded with a letter to the City dated June 26, 2009. Lollar stated she already "removed approximately 6,000 lbs of guano." She said that she realizes that there is a "potential for bat/human contact." She will be moving the bats out of the building and into a soon to be built artificial cave outside of town. She stated that would be finished within two years which would be June 2011.
October 18, 2010 City Health Inspector Donna Robbins asked Lollar in email how the bat exclusion was going. Lollar replied that she planned to seal the building in December. Then she stated that her bats have "something white on their ears and various body parts." She stated "WNS has made it to Texas a year earlier than researchers expected." She continued, "it appears to be the beginning of the end."
The sanctuary only holds Mexican free-tail bats. Mexican free-tail bats do not get WNS because they do not hibernate in cold caves where the fungus thrives. They migrate to warmer climates. Lollar knows this but tried to play the sympathy card with the health inspector. From Bat Conservation International http://www.batcon.org/pdfs/whitenose/WNSCaveMyotisinOklahomaFINAL.pdf
Meanwhile Lollar is trying to raise money for day to day expenses. Instead of trying to raise money for a never-to-be-built artificial cave she now wants money for a never-to-be-built "assurance colony." June 2011 she stated that "Bat World Sanctuary can save bats (from WNS) through the development of captive assurance colonies. We are the only facility to successfully maintain a reproductive colony of insectivorous bats for two decades."
Lollar is merely a wildlife rehabilitator, not a scientist or researcher. Lollar does not even have a high school diploma let alone a college degree. She freely admits that she's never had any animal training whatsoever and learned everything through "trial and error" and the "school of life."
Her wildlife rehabilitation permit does not allow her to keep healthy bats or breed bats. Assurance colonies are made up of healthy bats that can breed and live unassisted. She was warned in May 2010 by Texas Parks and Wildlife that she cannot allow her bats to breed.
June 2011 and there are again 30,000 bats in the "wild sanctuary." Lollar never closed off the building as she promised the City. She is now asking for donations to care for the many babies and injured bats that she's picking up from the "wild sanctuary." Meanwhile complaints about the foul odor and guano on the streets continue to pour into the City. It is clear that she never intends to exclude bats from the building.
About rabies: Not all bats have rabies. The best way not to get rabies from a bat is to never touch a bat with your bare hands. If you see an ill, injured or orphaned bat, contact a wildlife rehabilitator or animal control. If you must pick it up, always wear gloves.
For more information:
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/06/1...
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$210.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network