z

i =
? s -
* r k n
q
4 o E
E; ! #
t d x Q
6
F
I
2
a
J
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
I I
L2
13
T4
15
L6
T7
18
1 r \
I Y
20
2T
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
f,aiuLchnie_ffiffi
J&ffi
$sa$ffi
b
AFFIDAVIT oF TEDD E. NrcKERSot{ ,{,r*l4
A fi rfl / il
_ t_Y/luvtjMJ,L
IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR SEARCH
I, Tedd Nickerson, declare and state as follows:
1. I am now and at all times mentioned herein have been an Animal Control
Supervisor for the City of Palm Springs. The facts set forth herein are known to me
personally,
or have been determined by my review of the City of Palrn Springs' file in this
matter, and if called as a witness I could and would testiS competently thereto.
2. My duties as Animal Control Supervisor include the enforcement of all local
laws conceming animal control and animal cruelty. My duties also include the inspection of
buildings and properties for compliance with the City Municipal Code, and I make
determinations as to whether ionditions of buildings or properties
constitute Municipal Code
violations. I have over thirty years experience in enforcing various state and local codes,
specifically concerning animals and animal-related conditions that may affect the public
safety.
3.
'
This Affidavit is in support of the search and seizure of approximately twenty
to t[trty dogs in the possession ofRichard Paul Rutgard for violations ofPenal Code sections
597(b)[person subjecting animals to needless suffering], 597 .1(a)
[failure
to properly care for
animalsl, and the Palm springs Zoning code section 92:01.02
[impermissible
kennel use].
4. On or about April 20, 2012, the City received complaints about unsanitary
aninibl conditions at the property located at , in the City of
palm
Springs
i
('Property'),
which is a R-l-D property that is not zoned for kennel use, that had generated
I
noxious odors that has affected the neighborhood. I investigated the incident fi.rther with the
I
I
complainant and observed that the Property contained mrmerous piles of animal feces that
I
I
have not been cleaned or removed.
r
5. On or about June 2,2012,I responded to the Property, to recheck the amount
I
I
of feces. While there, I saw that there were excessive amounts of animal feces and waste in
I
the front andbackyards ofthe Property
I
6. On or about Algust 2,2012, I responded to call to the Property conceming a
I
I
dog that had been impaled on a wrought iron fence and had to take the animal for firther
I
so4o77.t a -,{-) |
uc>l
Really? As an
animal control
officer, it seems
very strange
that he is
responsible for
enforcing
building codes.
What do the
city Code
Enforcement
officers do? Do
they do animal
control too?
Veterinary
records do not
support this
statement, but it
sounds more
dramatic than the
truth.
See below for important
information about the contents of
this affidavit and the omission of
crucial facts.
Intentional
overstatement
of facts.
Animal control
had been to
Rutgard's
house enough
to know how
many dogs he
really had.
On September 27, 2012, Nickerson advised Rutgard to get a conditional use permit for a kennel. See
animal control report from that date.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
t 2
13
T4
15
T6
I 7
18
1 c |
L 7
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LbW
\oL/0b
7. On August 4,2072, the City issued an administrative citation to the Owner of
August 4, 2012, ard requested that the owner correct violations of the PaLm Springs
Municipal Code at the Property, by October 6, 2012. A true and correct copy of the
administrative citation is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
8. On Sepember 14,2012, the City sent the Owner a letter requesting consent to
inspect the Property to veriff whether any progress has been made in remedying the
unsanitary animal conditions at the Property.
9. On September 27,2012,I inspected the Property and observed approximately
twenty animals located at the Property. I noticed that the Property was cleaned, but
contained approximately twenty bags of feces that were yet to be removed.
10. On January 6, 2013, Animal Control Director Leslie Tisdale responded to a
complaint conceming dogs escaping the Froperty and that the dogs were harassing
neighbors. While there, Leslie Tisdale and other Palm Springs Police officers observed that
several dogs belonging to Richard Paul Rutgard were seriously injured. As a result, Richard
Rutgard was cited under Penal Code section 597.1(a). A true and cbrrect copy of the police
report is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
I l. On January 10, 2013, the Palm Springs Police Departrnent was called to the
scene of a veterinarian's offrce for suspected animal cruelty. A narrative report was written
of tliis incident concerning the dog, who was attacked by other dogs at the property and
suffered injuries. A true and correct copy is attached hereto as Exhibit C.
12. On January 12,2013,I served Richard Paul Rutgard a Notice of Intent to Seize
all dogs within his possession, pursuant to Penal Code section 597.1(g). A true and correct
copy is attached hereto as Exhibit D.
13. I am informed by Richard Rutgard that he owns a warehouse at
in the City of Palm Springs, and suspect that he may be housing animals at that
location.
14.
Rutgard has
904077.1
Based on my visits with veterinarians, I am informed and believed that Richard
injured animals that are being treated at a veterinary hospital locatbd at 4299
This was NOT mentioned on the
notice issued to Rutgard on that
date. This is the first mention of 20
bags of feces.
Apparently 2
dogs constitutes
"several" for
purposes of
overstating
"facts" to obtain
a warrant.
Once again, it's
just "a
veterinarian's
office". They
don't mention
Dr. Kunz,
President of the
Friends of the
PS Animal
Shelter, which
participated in
the raid on
Rutgard's
house.
Note the date. The "rescue", which was done with Friends of the Palm Springs Animal
Shelter, was 12 days later. Is it coincidence that the veterinarian who reported this
suspected cruelty is the President of the Friends of the Palm Springs Animal Shelter?
Note: Nickerson doesn't provide any evidence whatsoever to support his suspicion. He had no legitimate reason to
believe this, but it made the situation sound worse, so why not include it?
H
t
2
3
A
+
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
t 2
13
t 4
l 5
I 6
17
1 8
1 n
I Y
20
2L
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
{_&t/
r0ucryr"
East Ramon Road, in the city of Palm springs, and at a veterinary hospital located at 46920
Jefferson Avenue, in tlle City of Indio.
15. . On January 16,2013, an administrative hearing was conducted at the
palm
Springs Police Department pursuant to the notice referenced as Exhibit D. At the hearing,
Richard Paul Rutgard admitted that at least two dogs have died while in his possession, and
at least five dogs have needed vetertnarian treatrnent for wounds related to dog bites.
16. After hearing and reviewing the evidence, Hearing Officer Fick upheld the
city's determination that the dogs should be seized. A true and correct copy of the Hearing
Officer's Order is attached hereto as Exhibit E.
17. Because there is probable cause to find a violation ofPenal Code sections 597b
and 597.1(a), and because the hearing officer has upheld the City's determination that the
anirnals should be seized pursuant to Penal code 597.1(9), I request that the court issue a
search warrant under Penal code sections l52a@)@) and. 1525, authorizing the city ofpalm
springs and its agents, including any police officers, any persons from the Animal Rescue
Corps, and any veterinarians, to enter into and onto the interior and tfie exterior of the
proQ:rty
located at in the City of Palm Springs, the exterior and interior
of the property located at , the veterinary hospital located at 4299 East
Ramon Road, in the city of Palm Springs, and the veterinary hospital located, at 46920
Jefferson Avenue, in the City of Indio, as may be necessary to seize the animals within the
possession
or control of Richard P. Rutgard.
I declare under penalty
of pe{ury
under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed this d8 day of January
,
2013 in
. California.
9A4077.r
rfl/
This is VCA Palm Springs, where Dr. Kunz is the Medical Director.
Coincidence?
This is another VCA facility.
Where is the
administrative
record from the
hearing to
support that
statement? Oh,
that's right.
There isn't one.
How convenient.
WHY WOULD A
POLICE
DEPARTMENT
AND ITS ANIMAL
CONTROL
OFFICERS SEEK
AUTHORIZATION
FOR A PRIVATE
ORGANIZATION
TO ENTER
PROPERTY???
*** NOTE: THERE ARE SEVERAL MISSTATEMENTS IN THIS AFFIDAVIT. MORE
IMPORTANTLY, NICKERSON INTENTIONALLY OMITS A CRUCIAL FACT -- THAT
RUTGARD HAD TRIED TO RELINQUISH 9 DOGS TO THE SHELTER 2 DAYS BEFORE
THIS AFFIDAVIT WAS WRITTEN, BUT HE WAS TOLD HE COULDN'T!! WOULD A
JUDGE HAVE ISSUED A SEARCH WARRANT FOR THE SEIZURE OF PROPERTY THAT
THE OWNER WAS NOT PERMITTED TO TURN OVER TO THE CITY VOLUNTARILY???
This is very misleading. The two dogs were very
young puppies that were taken immediately for
treatment. One died on the way to the vet and other
died at the vet, who could not determine the cause
of death, but suspected tainted jerky treats.