Tony Passes Physical

After a couple years of people alleging Tony was sick somehow, and had arthritics, atrophied muscles, cracked paws, malnutrition, dehydration, emaciation, and various other maladies, so-called animal rights activists have been a dealt a serious blow to their powers of observation, veterinary knowledge, and truthfulness. Tony's owner chose to have a complete physical done by an experienced veterinarian. See video below.





From video description on Youtube:

"Tony Gets A Full Physical To Counter Activists Claims That He Is Sick. Tony Is Not Sick!!! Tony Passes With Flying Colors. Blood and Fecal Samples Taken For Testing Came Back Good. Ears Checked. Teeth Cleaned. Dr. Shannon Gonsoulin Recommends Keeping Tony On 20 lbs Of Feline Diet To Gain Some Weight and Vitamin Supplements As Tony Ages."

"Free" Tony Supporter Reveals Herself

A well known supporter of and friend of Tony's owner is a man called Joe Exotic. He owns a zoo/sanctuary in Oklahoma. He does a weekly show called Out and Wild on a website called Outonline. It is a hosted show with a streaming video chat via Skype. Recently, the show hosted Sky Williamson, a vocal advocate for "freeing" Tony from the place he lives now so he can be "rehomed" somewhere more to her liking.

Joe said at the beginning of the show that it had been agreed there would be no personal attacks nor profanity. This lasted about two seconds. "Someone" was in the chatroom as a 'guest' and immediately called me a "cyber-stalker". Then Sky later said on air that she couldn't say too much because her "cyber-stalker was on here". So I wonder who that 'guest' was? This same 'guest' needled me throughout the show. As far as the anti-profanity agreement, she said the F word at one point.

Joe also said at the beginning that as far as he knew, she had not said anything bad about him on the internet. Wrong. According to one of her sites, Joe is an animal abuser and hypocrite, and he 'had better watch his back'. This is just one example; much more of this claptrap has been posted elsewhere, mainly on Facebook.

As far as the show itself, first I must enter a little constructive criticism for Joe and his friends. PeTA, the ALDF, BCR, Sky W., and other animal rights groups and animal rights activists are not one big group that conspire together. They all have different agendas and methods, and commonly fight one another. What one group did years ago means nothing to what another group does now. This cannot be overstressed. So in my opinion a lot of info Joe presented was irrelevant to Sky or to the ALDF. BCR's past involvement has become passive, but I must admit I found it shocking that their controlling members have been killing sharks and boiling lobsters. Respect for animal life is a prerequisite for taking care of animals, and some important people at BCR obviously do not.

Regardless, Sky's arguments left much to be desired by the animal rights crowd. She offered no evidence whatsoever; no constructive arguments. She made claims of law violations from many years ago. When Joe said they were no longer in violation, she claimed to have documents to prove otherwise. She would not say what the documents said exactly, nor even hold them up to the camera. Before long, she went on a yelling tirade about the USDA. She also made an issue about the fact that there is blacktop near the tiger cage. Then the hay issue was brought up. I know for a fact that she is the one that put the hay there. She may have meant well at the time, trying to keep the tiger warm, though a Siberian tiger is adapted to Siberian temperatures one would think. Joe explained that hay can be toxic for tigers, so that may be why the truck stop employees did not take the mystery hay and toss it into the enclosure.

Meanwhile, "Guest" threatened to sick some 'detective' on me. I guess she thinks that I am in fear of some 'detective' she has in her pocket. I am not. 

In conclusion I would like to advise the animal rights activists to publicly disown her in mass, or they will never get anywhere with this cause, as evidenced so far. 

(Note: I had the video embedded here, but it has been removed from Youtube by the Out Online show for as yet unknown reasons.)

Documents Reveal Truth

The court documents in this case show some interesting items. On one page it states that the tiger is not the legal property of the alleged owner. Also note that the state issued the permit to the person who owns the business, not the business itself. This is the fatal flaw that allowed the ALDF attorneys to utilize an extreme technicality and push this suit to where it is now. It appears this technicality could possibly result in the truck stop having to move its tiger out of the state. This would mean two things.

First, it means that the truck stop's lawyers can drag their feet later in moving him. A federal permit is required to move dangerous animals across state lines. Dealing with feds is always slow. So how long will this take after their December deadline is up? Anyone's guess...

Secondly, these documents clearly indicate that the non-renewal of the permit is due to a technicality--- NOT due to the allegations of animal abuse. So the allegations of activists are as yet unsubstantiated in a court of law. The activists may assume, presume, and hope otherwise, but it just does not appear to be so. Their hype remains dubious at best, and most likely is a pack of lies.

It is also clear from reading these documents that the ALDF is  splitting hairs, even  from a legal standpoint. That are claiming that Mr. Sandlin, who has had possession of Tony since 1988, does not own Tony and never has. They also claim that Mr. Sandlin, as owner of his business, has no right to hold the permit from the state to keep a tiger; only the business itself can hold the permit, not its owner. They also claim that their lawyers suffered monetary damages from driving to the truck stop to look at this tiger, and "aesthetic" damages from worrying about its care. Further, they claim their lawyers suffered as taxpayers because state resources were used to inspect the tiger's facilities. Further, they claim repeatedly that neither the truck stop as a business entity nor Mr. Sandlin as an individual, have any right to be involved in this case.

The state and the truck stop's lawyer have launched some impressive legal counterattacks though. They say that a legally obtained piece of property is your property, and have shown that various local, state, and federal level permits have made the continued possession of this tiger legal at all times. The differences between who lives where and where the animal is at has already been determined by the state, including in court. The monetary damages of driving to look at the tiger are frivolous, the aesthetic damages unproven as well as inadmissable by federal precedent, and the taxpayer claim is non-applicable. Denying the truck stop and its owner involvement in the case also smacks of infringement of the federal and state rights to due process.

The initial partial win by the ALDF had been overturned, but a new trial was scheduled and has passed. The ALDF won. Now, the truck stop has filed a complaint with the ACLU alleging rights violations. I doubt that goes anywhere. Their supporters have ratcheted up the allegations and blaming, and created a page to gather at which alleges collusion of all their supposed enemies. However true it all is, it will not undo the last judgment. Unless a last minute legal action is filed very soon, the tiger will be kicked out of the state. 

A motion has now been filed against the last judgment, and is open for now. 

See subpage at right for legal documents of this case.

Other updates will be posted here.

More Info

Today I learned that there is yet more than is commonly spoken of regarding this. Does Tony have any toys or anything to do? See first video embedded below. Note how he growls at and walks backwards from toys. He is playing and having fun despite cameras. See him playing here too.

In second video see another tiger enjoying a pool as small as or perhaps smaller than Tony's.

Other videos, even ones made by the activists, clearly show that Tony is not skinny at all, or otherwise unhealthy or unhappy.










Still awaiting rebuttals from activists on numerous points. I only seek the truth...

Tony's Owner Finally Strikes Back

Now that the ALDF has succeeded in preventing the state from renewing the permit to keep Tony next year, its owner has finally spoken out. He had two videos made. They are worth watching, as they are pretty damning to the animal activists' claims. The author of this blog is personally glad he left the cause when he did, as the claims of other activists became more and more absurd as time went on. All of their lies are well-debunked in the new videos. Surely this site and its owner will be a new target of lies and hate for posting "the other side's" views. But that is the problem with them : closed-mindedness. The self-proclaimed warriors of truth and justice (animal rights activists) never want to hear any one else's side of anything: just shout them down, lie about them, and harass, harass, harass...

One video was reset to private but the other remains publicly accessible. Here is the video, like it or not:

Delays monkey wrench original goal

Now that a 'major animal rights group' has jumped in and sued, and further, won their suit to not have the permit renewed to allow this tiger to be kept in LA, everyone thinks the picture is so rosy. But is it? It turns out the lawsuit is not based upon animal treatment, but upon a technicality regarding permit issuance by the state. The truck stop is not in the lawsuit, and the court will not let the truck stop have any involvement in the case. Someone has even created a petition for this.

Sandlin could easily get new lawyers, or his current lawyers could just do some thinking. Here are a few things that they may think of, and have most likely already advised him of:

-they can sue separately.  based upon the fact that this case does involve them and they have a right to be involved.there must be a precedent for this.
-Sandlin can give Tony to his his dad in Texas.
-Sandlin can simply move to another state with no laws about exotic animals, which is most states.
-the new lawsuit could easily take up more time than the remainder of this tiger's natural lifespan (about two years). sue the ALDF and the state.
-Sandlin can place said tiger in any place he wants anywhere in the country, and surely will not put it into the place the activists want or expect him to. he has already stated this.
-after all this time, Sandlin has no reason to give it all up now, and it is highly unlikely he will.
-he could even have this elderly animal put to sleep. to him, it may be preferable to having his 'pet' taken away. although this is hard to imagine, if it does occur the blood will be on the liars' hands, not the owner's.

Sandlin has time to sue, and grounds to, thanks to a self-proclaimed activist who has delayed this entire process for years now. Talk about counterproductive monkey-wrenching. As I have said before: 'know who you follow'...