Tucson couple pleads guilty in dogfighting case

According to information, Bailey and now others will testify in the Patricks' trial.

 

I am ashamed of how quickly all of you turn on someone. You do not take a moment to consider the possibilities just say he is guilty.

I know the facts of this case pretty well and on Tuesday night Raided2 called me to tell me new information about the case and that because of that they were considering a plea.

As far as the porn goes a 17 year old teenage boy downloaded it. Is that hard to beleive? The man had to plea because under Arizona law his "letting" his minor son download poor with under aged people in it constitutes child endangerment or whatever he plead to. . . so he was technically guilty although he did not know the kid had downloaded it. . . I for one hope no one ever looks on my parents computer because i bet my bother downloaded some illegal shit before he turned 18.

This entire time he has not intended to plea because he is innocent. They have faced losing their children and home on multiple occasions and their dogs were killed against judges orders. However they believed that the justice system would not do them wrong.

Unfortunately the prosecution tampered with evidence trying to make Raided2 look worse. They "lost" permits he had so he could be charged with Animal cruelty because tethering is illegal where he lives unless you have a permit.

Vet papers were changed at the last minute to indicate scarring of dogs that was not previously indicated and they thought surely this would not be allowed.

Then new evidence was brought in the last minutes of court on Tuesday which although it did not prove anything was something their lawyer believed would ruin them in court and advised them to plea.

They expressed to me they did not want to plea but that the judge was sick of this case and would not hear any more motions by either side, making it impossible to motion to exclude the new evidence.

Every step of the way they have communicated to me what has happened and I truly beleive they were cornered into this by the illegal and just plain wrong tactics that the pima county sheriff utilized alongside the HSUS.

They wanted to sue the HSUS for their dogs lives. . . but now they have lost that. . .

I am sure they only took the pleas because of the fact that their home and children were at stake. With the new evidence it could have gone either way and if it went the wrong way it would have been a lot to lose for something you never did.

I know its disappointing to see this. . . especially if you had been rooting for them. but I firmly beleive that these are good people and they did not do this.

Also, if you read it they didn't plea to fighting any dogs. but to breeding with intent.

If they do end up turning on anyone believe me I will be SHOCKED and very pissed. But, I truly do not think they will do that.

I think that in the dog community there is a lot of mistrust and often times this is why the HSUS has such an easy time picking people off and taking them down, lack of support from the community they thought they could trust. I am not saying that happened here but I think that just believing what is written by a reporter is wrong.

They also say that the HSUS helps save dogs. .. do you beleive that too?

 

I certainly did not say they are guilty.....THEY admitted guilt. Therefore, they are guilty of the charges admitted.

Well, if the prosecutor had such a "good case", why did they offer a plea deal? Hmmm.

Now, do not be too shocked WHEN they testify against innocent people. Snitching (another word for lying) is part of the usual plea bargains. I hope to be wrong about them becoming witnesses for the prosecutor.

Now, i just hope Pat and Melanie win their case DESPITE Raided2's decision and the implications surrounding it.

 

I was not only referring to you. . but again I say you can plea to lesser charges in order to save your home and keep your children and not be guilty.

many people have done it in the past and will continue to do it. . . the prosecution has been offering plea deals since the beginning all of which were rejected until new evidence which could have gone either way.

but both sides could easily worry that it would not go their way hence offering the deal and their taking the deal.

 

its easy to see why some people are pissed about this, but calling someone a snitch when you dont know if thats the case is taking it a little far. i dont know about you but where i come from that term is not recieved lightly and would not be taken well when thrown around unfounded.

 

StopBSL, This is what I read:

Verdin admitted he owned 14 pit bulls he intended to use a fighting exhibitions.

So what does that mean in your eyes?


StopBSL statement: Also, if you read it they didn't plea to fighting any dogs. but to breeding with intent.

I don't think the quote from the article has anything to do with breeding at all.

 

I am ashamed that raided got on here talkin all of that stuff this is something else:mad:.

Oh yeah some of you on here are talk from both sides of yorur mouthes.:confused:

 

That's the truth. LOL

 

if you read between the lines they're are alot of those:rolleyes:

where ya been?

 

sounds to me like the state needs witnesses,,,for a bigger fish, i'd be careful either way,, cuz you never trust anyone like that

 

That's right!

I been working,LOL. How are you and the family?

 

that's really sad to hear Pat and Emily are in bad situation now.

 

we are doing Okay,,, like everyone else is,,,, this economy is strangling everyone,,,, you know how that is,,, they get you coming and going,, glad to see a fimilar face around here sometimes,,,i'm here i just don't say much

 

to me it means they took a misdemeanor plea in order to keep their home because even if they won the trial they were facing separate charges on not having the dogs licensed which would have equaled 10 grand they do not have thanks to his wife losing her job.

sorry about the breeding that was a previous plea they were offered. . . they took attempted dog fighting, which unless you are caught in the process of setting up a box i do not see how that even is a plea to anything.

what the state wanted was to ensure they did not lose. so they made sure rudy and his family would walk away with no home and no money even if they won the case.

 

..obviously that did not work for them , instead they admitted to having intentions of fighting those 14 dogs.

child porn, come on ..and to put it on his son... Im sorry I could be wrong and I hope I am but this RAIDED2 has let us down thus far.

Cutt-

 

IMO, He needs to come on the board and explain it himself.

 

Im sure the only reason he agreed to plea guilty is because of the plea bargain they gave him( 2 years probation and its dropped to a misdemeanor) come on you guys cant blame him for accepting that after all his family has been put through. he probably just wanted it to be Over. they would have dragged out the case , he and his wife had already lost theyre jobs they probably couldnt afford a long trial and this was the easy way out.(not neccecarily the right way out but the easy) and if he accepts that decicion and wants everything over for his family i cant blame him for that.

 

^not trying to be a prick, but things certainly dont add up at all in this situation.

 

I agree. I knew a family in a similar situation. The father was completely innocent, but it would have been too risky to not take the plea bargain.

How do we know what really happened? I am not trying to defend anyone here, but I am not going to point my finger at anyone either.

 

Woops, didn't see the second page.

Thanks StopBSL for your input.