LAS VEGAS (KLAS) – Crying in her mom’s kitchen, the unique proprietor of a Las Vegas canine recounted the second she was advised Lucy, her 11-year-old Chihuahua, wouldn’t be returned. Nonetheless, a Henderson animal rescue defended their actions amid a social media firestorm.
On Apr. 26, Regina Lukens, a Las Vegas resident, stated she was getting ready a bowl of meals for Lucy, her companion since a pet, when she realized one thing felt odd.
“I just looked, and she wasn’t there,” she stated. “It was like, seven maybe 10 minutes, and she was gone.”
Lukens couldn’t work out how Lucy acquired out of her house and claimed somebody should have picked the canine up and drove away.
On Nov. 2, Lucy arrived at The Animal Basis as a stray, and was instantly checked for a microchip—fortunately, she had one.
For the following three days, The Animal Basis workers tried to contact Lukens by way of cellphone and electronic mail, from info listed on the microchip, to let her know Lucy was protected.
“Three phone calls and three emails during the required 72-hour legal hold, plus an additional day,” Kelsey Pizzi, an Animal Basis spokesperson, advised 8 Information Now. “We received no response.”
After the authorized maintain lapsed, Lucy was transferred on Nov. 7 to a Henderson-based animal rescue, and the canine’s info was handed alongside.
On Nov. 14, Lukens found the missed emails and calls from the Animal Basis and reached out to seek out out the place Lucy went and tips on how to get better her canine—however legally she didn’t personal her anymore.
“They couldn’t tell me who, nothing,” Lukens stated. “I got on the internet and I searched—my kids helped me do it—we found her at Bobbie’s rescue.”
Crying in her mom’s kitchen, the unique proprietor of a Las Vegas canine recounted the second she was advised Lucy, her 11-year-old Chihuahua, wouldn’t be returned. Nonetheless, a Henderson animal rescue defended their actions amid a social media firestorm. (Regina Lukens)
Bobbie Smith, proprietor of Animal Angel Rescue Basis, advised 8 Information Now in a Thursday cellphone interview she was contacted by Lukens, however stated Lucy was already adopted—a declare Lukens disputes.
“At the appointment she contacted me, and she was very upset,” Smith stated.
One name, two views
The main points within the preliminary cellphone name Lukens positioned to Smith is a query of perspective. Smith claimed she defined to Lukens in full the main points from the Animal Basis how Lucy got here into her possession and that she was adopted.
“I can’t say anymore,” Smith stated. “The way they have treated us. I have cease and desist orders on them. I am happy to go to court.”
Lukens claimed after explaining she had paperwork, receipts, and images proving she owned Lucy, Smith stated she nonetheless had the canine however refused at hand her over out of concern for the canine’s welfare.
“I said, may I adopt her tomorrow,” Lukens stated. “She said, ‘I’ll ask the questions.’”
Lucy had suffered from being away for seven months, was a senior canine, had points with one dangerous tooth, and was just lately concerned in an incident with a stray canine in Lukens’s yard. The considerations allegedly drove Smith to an unconvinced stance of Lucy’s assured welfare with Lukens.
“[Lukens] didn’t keep her safe and she didn’t pay attention to her,” Smith stated. “The dogs are the most important.”
Each Smith and Lukens’s statements to eight Information Now had been in battle with whether or not Lucy was on the Henderson-based rescue throughout the name or was already adopted.
“[Smith] made it sound like Lucy was in her possession and that she had spent $1,000 on the dog,” Lukens stated. “The website pretty well made it clear that she was going to put her up for adoption the next day.”
When the decision ended, Lukens determined she wouldn’t surrender her effort to show she may handle Lucy, as she had for 11 years, and took to social media to elucidate the scenario to others.
“It just got ugly”
Lukens stated she was unfamiliar with tips on how to use completely different social media platforms and rapidly wrote a Fb submit, asking for assist.
“Despite what Bobbie and her organization claim I have receipts proving my ownership and the quality of care she received in my possession,” Lukens wrote.
Inside just a few days, Lukens’s posts gained traction, garnering the eye of some on-line teams that started to allegedly name Smith and ask for extra info. A number of social media posts indicating posts and feedback started to turn out to be extra aggressive and pointed—some demanding Lucy’s return.
“I have been harassed, and defamed, and slandered,” Smith stated. “It has been unreal and it has been ongoing and they don’t understand.”
Smith claimed the rising ferment began to make her really feel unsafe and known as into query the standing of her animal rescue—claiming the police got here to her house.
“Unfounded accusations are running rampant,” Smith wrote in a Fb submit. “They are so bad that I’ve had police at my house with the accusation of stealing dogs.”
A number of people reached out to eight Information Now asking for extra details about what occurred to Lucy and why the rescue wouldn’t give her again to an proprietor who had proof.
“I don’t want to put a bad tarnish on her name,” Lukens stated. “I just want my dog.”
