By MELISSA N. WARREN / Review Appeal Staff Reporter
Jennifer Siliski (left) enters the Williamson County Criminal Justice Center in March with her attorney, Rebecca Byrd. (File Photo)
The animal cruelty case involving dog breeder Jennifer Siliski is one of the first on the docket for the official opening day of Williamson County’s new judicial center.
But Siliski, who allegedly tortured the same animals she sold out of her home kennel at 2235 Bowman Road, has yet another issue she must address at the courthouse tomorrow — a civil suit judgment from 2002 that determined Siliski sold a client a defective dog.
“My client, Maureen McSweeney, got a judgment in New York but could not collect because Siliski has no property there,” said Gerard Stranch, attorney at the Branstetter, Kilgore, Stranch and Jennings law firm in Nashville. “We domesticated it here, and my client is entitled to collect the damages now.”
McSweeney, who has never actually met Siliski, purchased a Maltese dog from the breeder in 2001. However, when McSweeney picked the dog up from the airport, it was in immediate need of medical attention. In that case, a New York court found Siliski guilty of shipping a faulty product and ordered a payment of nearly $4,000.
“Jennifer Siliski countersued me after that,” McSweeney said in a phone interview. “As an exhibit to the documents that she filed with the court, Siliski included a copy of her contract with my name forged on it. I never signed her contract ... she had sent me a copy with the sick puppy, but I never signed it. I still have the original contract here.”
McSweeney admitted there have been times when she thought of cutting her losses.
“But there are times when a person has to see the difficult thing through,” she said. “It’s never been about the money. It has always been about seeking justice for that poor, little, defenseless creature who Siliski has never even asked about.”
Stranch said that despite McSweeney’s years of battling Siliski, the fight will continue.
“Siliski’s lawyer (Joseph Rusnak) called me and accepted the settlement on May 12,” Stranch said. “Everything was kosher, but at 4:30 p.m. that Friday, Siliski called Rusnak and said she would not be abiding by terms of the settlement agreement. Rusnak told me Siliski had fired him and that she would be representing herself in court that following Monday.”
The judge who heard the case that Monday has set May 24 — tomorrow — as the day Siliski must file a brief setting out why she believes the New York court has no jurisdiction. Also, she must tell the judge if she will continue to represent herself or hire a lawyer, Stranch said. If she cannot afford to hire a lawyer and desire counsel, one will be appointed for her.
Siliski does already have an attorney in the criminal case being heard tomorrow. Rebecca Byrd, who actually owns a Siliski-bred Maltese, has represented Siliski since the Jan. 22 raid that resulted in the removal of some 230 animals. Since that time, Byrd has seen her client through the custody battle over Siliski’s four children as well as the ongoing criminal and fraud allegations against the breeder.
The saga has spanned the past four months, but has reached a much larger community than just Franklin. The Williamson County Review Appeal has received hundreds of letters, e-mails and phone calls from as far away as Brazil requesting more information on the case. Thirteen different state and federal agencies have become involved in the investigation, and entire Web sites have been dedicated to just this subject. Williamson County Animal Control (WCAC), the facility that took in the dogs and has cared for them since January, has been flooded with volunteers, money, blankets, food and dog toys, and more than 200 people applied to foster the dogs from this and surrounding counties.
Siliski herself has received a great deal of help, as well. Some nearby neighbors helped clean the “deplorable condition” of her home, scrubbing floors reportedly stained by feces and urine. Her four children were cared for by foster parents until March 9, and the Department of Children’s Services (DCS) has worked with her since then to ensure the children were receiving the proper care. And, Siliski’s fourth ex-husband, Alan Siliski, posted the required 10 percent of her bond once she was booked at the jail for the criminal charges.
With all the media attention and public awareness about the allegations, Siliski’s attorney worries that a suitable jury will not be found.
“We’re asking to move to another county within the district in hopes that my client will have more of a chance for a fair and impartial trial,” Byrd said. “It’s about finding jurors who haven’t heard so much about the case.”
That’s just one of the motions Byrd has filed.
“She has filed around 10 motions,” Assistant District Attorney Braden Boucek said. “The state filed a few routine motions, one opposing one of her motions for being untimely and one motion asking for an expedited trial.”
The assistant DA also said Byrd has subpoenaed 51 different people for tomorrow morning’s motion hearing. Byrd’s office did not return phone calls for comment.
Siliski’s indictment lists 30 counts of animal cruelty, two counts each for 15 canine and feline victims. All counts are Class A misdemeanors. There are two different theories for each victim — “Jennifer Siliski did fail unreasonably to provide food, water, care and shelter,” and “unlawfully did torture or maim a Maltese dog.”
Boucek said the maximum amount of time Siliski can receive is 11 months and 29 days for each of the 15 victims. That’s a possibility of 15 years.
The woman is also charged with one other Class A misdemeanor for possession of a controlled substance (Ketamine hydrochloride) a count that could add another 11 months and 29 days. Police discovered the substance in Siliski’s home during the raid.
“I look forward to lodging one of the first appearances in the new courthouse,” Boucek said. “I’m sure it will be a packed house.”
Timeline of Siliski Case FROM STAFF REPORTS In case there is any doubt about how the case of Siliski has unfolded, here’s a moment-by-moment look in the case that came to light at the beginning of 2004:
Jan. 22: Franklin Police raid Siliski’s home and find more than 200 Maltese dogs and puppies and 14 cats in cages stacked three-high.
Jan. 23: DCS removes Siliski’s four children, ages 10, 11, 13 and 15, and places them in foster care.
Jan. 24: Judge Lonnie Hoover finds that Siliski’s children were in fact living in “deplorable conditions” and orders them to continue in state’s custody.
Jan. 28: Investigation reveals that Siliski has used various names, both from real contacts and apparently made-up aliases. These names appear on her home and business registration forms, Web sites and previous court judgments. Siliski’s car, with the license plate MALTEZE, is registered in her 10-year-old daughter’s name.
Jan. 31: Task force forms to aid in investigation.
Feb. 1: The many volunteers at the WCAC facility gather for a training session. Overworked employees get a free massage.
Feb. 3: Youngest Siliski child is rushed to hospital after a fall at her foster home. The girl was born severely disabled and needs constant attention. Byrd argues that the foster family does not have the correct bed for the girl.
Feb. 4: The WCAC reports more than $45,000 in dog care costs.
Feb. 6: Siliski’s vet, Paul Vaden, admits he has performed a C-section every week for the last eight years on Siliski dogs.
Feb. 22: WCAC gets ultrasound machine and finds nearly 40 dogs to be pregnant.
Feb. 26: Consumer Affairs reports that complaints against Siliski have reached $100,000.
March 1: Custody trial continued with Judge Jane Franks to preside. Judges Lonnie Hoover and Al Nations recused themselves.
March 9: DCS and Siliski’s attorneys come to an agreement and children are returned home. That afternoon, however, Criminal Investigator John Brown serves a warrant for Siliski’s arrest on the criminal counts, hours after the grand jury had indicted her.
March 12: The Siliski dogs, and some 20 new pups, are moved to the old Battle Ground Academy complex. It’s reported the WCAC volunteers and donors have saved the county more than $50,000.
March 19: WCAC volunteers and staff squabble over whether or not the dogs should be fostered out to citizens. The dogs are the responsibility of the county and are still considered state’s evidence, even though they technically belong to Siliski.
March 21: PETA requests Siliski be psychologically evaluated and barred from any personal or professional contact with animals.
March 23: Judge Russ Heldman sets May 24 as Siliski discussion date.
April 19: Final day to apply for fostering a Maltese. Two hundred twelve people applied.
April 20: Byrd files a motion for a change in venue for her client’s trial.
