
|
Los Angeles City Guides
|
Article History Bel Air, Md. (Map, News) - Donna Bell couldn’t turn away desperate animals.
So she took them in and kept taking them in, until she had more than 100 cats and dogs sick and dying in her two adjacent Harford County homes.
A judge on Thursday found Bell, a 60-year-old former operator of an animal rescue organization, not criminally responsible because she has obsessive-compulsive disorder.
“There was a disconnect between her good intentions and her ability to say no,” said Leonard Shapiro, Bell’s attorney. “She was afraid that if she didn’t take the animals in, they would die. ... Unfortunately, that’s what happened in the end.”
Bell had been charged with animal cruelty in May 2006 after police responding to complaints of a strong odor emanating from the two houses found 70 dogs, four cats and 44 carcasses, caged and uncaged.
Piles of animal waste stood nearly 3 feet deep in places.
District Judge John Dunnigan committed Bell to the care of Maryland’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and ordered that she be taken to Spring Grove Hospital in Catonsville.
There, she will stay for at least the next several weeks to undergo further evaluation until the state determines what kind of treatment she needs for OCD, which can manifest itself in hoarding.
“You will be in the hands of the doctors there,” Dunnigan told Bell. “Be sure that you follow everything that they recommend. ... I don’t know what to say, other than what I read was horrific, to say the least.”
Beyond replying “yes,” Bell did not speak.
Shapiro said the case exemplified someone not responsible for crimes because of mental illness.
The verdict angered many in the Bel Air courtroom. Some shot Bell dirty looks, cursed under their breath and berated Shapiro as he left the court.
But others said Bell had suffered already in realizing the harm she had done to the animals she most wanted to save.
“What she did was horrible, but I don’t think she had a choice,” said Dianne Nowicki, who worked with Bell to adopt animals through PetSmart. “I have a lot of warm fuzzies for Donna because she was doing a lot of good in that area before.”
But Debbie Pineda, a former volunteer at the Humane Society of Harford County, called for a stiffer penalty. “I’m pleased that Donna is getting the help she needs, but I believed there should have been some other punishment,” she said.
msantoni@baltimoreexaminer.com
Not ranked |
EMAIL ME THIS STORY |
ARTICLE HISTORY |
Sports
Business |
Real Estate Family Movies and Books Venues, Sports and Music Concerts, Artists and Tickets Be Inspired - Quotes and Stories |
Comments from Examiner Readers
4:29 PM MST on Sat., Sep. 1, 2007 re: "Judge orders animal hoarder to undergo psychiatric evaluation"
Report as inappropriate
4:56 PM MST on Wed., Aug. 29, 2007
re: "Judge orders animal hoarder to undergo psychiatric evaluation"
Report as inappropriate
3:25 PM MST on Wed., Aug. 29, 2007
re: "Judge orders animal hoarder to undergo psychiatric evaluation"
Report as inappropriate
7:39 AM MST on Wed., Aug. 29, 2007
re: "Judge orders animal hoarder to undergo psychiatric evaluation"
Report as inappropriate
4:17 PM MST on Wed., Aug. 22, 2007
re: "Animal hoarder to get psychiatric evaluation"
Report as inappropriate
4:48 PM MST on Tue., Aug. 21, 2007
re: "Judge orders animal hoarder to undergo psychiatric evaluation"
Report as inappropriate
9:04 AM MST on Tue., Aug. 21, 2007
re: "Judge orders animal hoarder to undergo psychiatric evaluation"
Report as inappropriate
9:22 PM MST on Fri., Aug. 17, 2007
re: "Animal hoarder to get psychiatric evaluation"
Report as inappropriate
11:16 PM MST on Thu., Aug. 16, 2007
re: "Animal hoarder to get psychiatric evaluation"
Report as inappropriate
4:19 PM MST on Thu., Aug. 16, 2007
re: "Animal hoarder to get psychiatric evaluation"
Report as inappropriate
2:39 PM MST on Wed., Jul. 18, 2007
re: "Alleged Harford County hoarder’s trial delayed"
Report as inappropriate
10:59 AM MST on Wed., Jul. 18, 2007
re: "Alleged Harford County hoarder’s trial delayed"
Report as inappropriate
9:02 AM MST on Wed., Jul. 18, 2007
re: "Alleged Harford County hoarder’s trial delayed"
Report as inappropriate
11:24 AM MST on Sat., Jun. 30, 2007
re: "Alleged Harford County hoarder’s trial delayed"
Report as inappropriate
10:28 AM MST on Sat., Jun. 30, 2007
re: "Alleged Harford County hoarder’s trial delayed"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader said:
NO one EVER paid Donna Bell money to board animals their cat or dog !!!! Quite the opposite was true. Her board bills were huge --- thousands and thousands of dollars. In fact. she paid board to one of the vocal people who villified Donna. Remember the slogan "BELL BEHIND BARS".
156 agree | 151 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
JAZZBUD said:
To continue; the public should be reimbursed for the monies donated specifically for these animals and not used as intended.This effort was 100%volunteer,donations of bedding,food,anything imagineable was DONATED.Some financial responsibility should be on you for the 50lb bags of top end dog food put in your and Doug Rae's car.Or the medical supplies which are DONATED and mysteriously "disappear",or the purebred Boxer puppy which was taken from the shelter and given to your Mother,or the services of staff to oversee your personal dogs and clean up after them while on duty,need more?We got it.Oh yeah,why is your car [which you were driving with a suspended license]parked out back by the clinic door,more than once,on your days off?Anything to do with your 'free"clinics in Va?We cant even get you to come all the way down to the shelter when you are being paid to be there.
143 agree | 160 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
JAZZBUD said:
To answer post of Aug. 21st 9:04am Just because you read from the HSUS manifest and convince the board of dolts everything you tell them is gospel does not mean anyone else would resort to these tactics.As for family,other rescues and kennels covering for her,do you mean like the Board of Dolts covers for you?You were very aware of the situation also,why did you kennel animals w/Donna.The judgement of whether or not she will be banned from having animals,that will be the call of the professionals whose care she has been and continues to be under. Now,about the restitution part,why don't you reimburse the people who left there thinking they had adopted a healthy pet only to be faced w/huge medical bills for that animal?The people of not only Harford County but even outside this state donated tens of thousands of dollars for the care and well being of these animals.Where is that money?It WAS NOT spent on the Whiteford Dogs.These animals did not recieve even basic medical care.
158 agree | 140 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
There were enough donations to cover the dogs. Most groups/rescues did not know what was going on there. You can't make that judgement. If we follow your line of thinking then HC had to know ahead of time also. Or were they the only innocents?
161 agree | 121 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
From what I understand, most of her dogs were completely unwanted - usually abandoned at veterinary offices because their owners didn't want to pay medical bills for terminal illness or crippling injuries. Bizarrely enough, she actually had a good working relationship with her vet - they were flatly shocked by the conditions at Whiteford - so it wasn't unreasonable for them to let her take otherwise unwanted dogs and try to place them in homes. She had a pretty good reputation for being able to do that. It wasn't like people were just handing her dogs with full awareness of what was going to happen to them. Most of the people she got her dogs from had no reason to believe she was mistreating them in any way. A soldier even paid to board his cats with her long-term on the recommendation of several people. I'm not defending her actions AT ALL, but most of the people she got her dogs from were not to blame for what she did to them.
205 agree | 169 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I doubt that she read about OCD in order to convince the judge of anything since hoarders don't acknowledge that they have a problem. I do agree that others including family and those supplying her with animals have some responsibility in this. And yes, hoarder's should never have another animal or even work with animals. That would be like giving an alchoholic just one drink.
159 agree | 133 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
OK, so she read enough to convince a judge that she had OCD.Looks like she will get away with what the did to these helpless animals.Why didn't her family report it to the authourities?Why didn't the other kennels stop supplying her the dogs her with dogs?Are't they equally resopnsible?They knew what was going on.Now that that part of the responsibility has been excused,shouldn't the final judgement that still can be passed be that she will NEVER be able to own,or be in posession of an animal for the rest of her life.At least then no future animals can be tortured at her hands again. It should be also ordered that Animal Control can do a suprise check at any home she owns at any time day or night for as long as she lives.She should also have to pay restitution to the HSHC building fund for the costs equal to the amount of the donated food, medical bills, grooming services, electric and housing that were donated by the public.Some financial responsibility on her part should be due.
174 agree | 172 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Hoarding is one way in which OCD is manifested. OCD is not a trendy mental disorder. It's real. It could be any of us. I researched the condition and was surprised at what I learned. A lot of my perceptions of the condition were completely wrong. This is not to say that I condone what hoarders do, but I think before we comment on the topic we should become informed.
162 agree | 170 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
It's very sad. 100's of animals suffered and died at the hands of this woman and she gets away with it by associating her criminal behavior with OCD. Imagine what other crimes can be justified/excused using this ploy? Just imagine! When is this society going to demand accountability for one's behavior and stop allowing trendy mental disorders to excuse criminal behavior? If Drs. feel she would benefit from psyc. counseling fine, but she should still pay for her acts of neglect and cruelty by means of criminal punishment. The court should also be damn certain that she isn't allowed to own or have in her possession another living creature for as long as she lives. This case will set a standard in our court system (for getting off on animal cruelty charges) instead of an example of what will happen to you if you engage in this sort of behavior. Hoarders of our county and state, you have just been shown how to continue your criminal activity and get away with it, congrats and Hoard On!
192 agree | 187 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
What does abortion issues have to do with animal hoarding? Please stick to the subject at hand.
179 agree | 185 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Well for those of you opposed to a womans right to choose what happens to her own body, then I recommend you comment on an article actually RELATING to abortion.
188 agree | 185 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I couldn't agree more. It seems that animals have more rights than an unborn child. I love animals too, but we need to protect the most vulnerable in our society also which include all of the babies who are denied their right to life.
203 agree | 186 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
What a ridiculous comparison! Which battle are you trying to fight here?? Abortion and animal hoarding....as the saying goes you are comparing apples to oranges.
183 agree | 205 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
What do you expect from a society that kills unborn babies? Hey, come to think of it, abortion supporters shouldn't care one whit about what an owner chooses to do with his animal. After all, it's the owner's choice.
180 agree | 180 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader in Towson, MD said:
Let's look at how we, as a society, treat our pet dogs and cats. It's reported that vast amounts of money are spent annually by Americans on our pets, so we must be a very humane society--taking real good care of our animals, right? Why then are there so many dogs and cats--millions upon millions annually--finding themselves through no fault of their own with a death sentence? Could it be that we aren't aware that something as simple as having our pets spayed or neutered would prevent so many dogs and cats from winding up in kill-shelters in need of rescue? Do we do not know that when we purchase our pet from a store or breeder that we are supporting the nightmarish horrors of the mill industry? I hate to admit it, but I can understand why an animal rescue worker would become overwhelmed and snap. We teach our children helpful phrases like "Stop, Drop and Roll" maybe we could add a few others like "Don't Litter--Spay & Neuter" & "Don't Shop--Adopt." What do you thin
208 agree | 180 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree