By MELISSA N. WARREN / Review Appeal Staff Reporter

The credibility of state witnesses continued to be tested by defense attorneys in the third day of Jennifer Siliski’s surprisingly slow animal cruelty trial, but the number of spectators remained steady despite the lagging pace.

“Several times I’ve heard audible gasps in the courtroom,” Judge R.E. Lee Davies said during a jury break. “If it happens again, I’ll have no choice but to clear the whole courtroom.”

The most audible of protests — sighs and murmurs from the many volunteers who have cared for the 241 animals since a Jan. 22 raid on Siliski’s home kennel — came when defense attorney Rebecca Byrd cross-examined Dr. Paula Schruerer.

“You’ve made quite a bit of money from caring for the animals, haven’t you?” the attorney asked the vet. “Have you retained clients from the volunteers who brought you their dogs?”

Schruerer said she had both made and lost money because of services rendered since the January seizure, citing her bill to the county for $8,922.51. Her actual total was nearly $15,000, but she discounted that price in order to not burden taxpayers, she said.

Following Schruerer’s testimony of the conditions in the home, the numerous illnesses found in the animals, the subsequent medical treatment and her opinion that the dogs had been sick for several weeks before they were found, the state called Williamson County Animal Control (WCAC) officer Vinissa Bailey.

“The floor was slick with urine and feces,” the officer said. “Some dripped on me from the pans [when they were moved].”

The Animal Control officer stated that when she walked into the home at 2235 Bowman Road, it smelled like she had “stuck [my] head in a 5-gallon bucket of ammonia.” According to her testimony, Bailey was one of the officers responsible for taking inventory of the animals and cages that night, even though she had worked a nine-hour day shift prior to arriving at the site and swore under oath to the perfection of her records.

Defense attorney Kenneth J. Sanney had a softer, but equally aggressive, approach as Byrd when trying to point out discrepancies in those records.

During earlier testimony, Bailey had stated that a dog named “Grandma” had two adult cage mates when found at the home. According to her list, though, that dog actually was in a cage with several puppies, and Bailey had to admit that she had been confused by Sanney’s question.

“You’ve been here from 8 a.m. until 2 p.m. today with a lunch break and you made a mistake in your testimony, did you not?” Sanney grilled the officer. “Yet you are certain you didn’t make any mistake that night ... after working nine hours during the day and then working 12 hours that night?”

Bailey did get a chance to explain why she misspoke, making the jury laugh when she said “this is stressful up here and y’all are making me nervous.”

Sanney also pointed out that Animal Control officers made more than 118 trips through the back door during freezing temperatures, and it might have been those cold conditions that contributed to the alleged ill health of the animals.

The next witness, Brian Adams with the Tennessee Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), was called out-of-turn by the defense, as the industrial hygiene compliance officer has a conference out of town next week. Sanney asked Adams to give the level of ammonia — an indicator of odor — found in the Siliski home that night.

“Nine parts per million,” Adams said. “In the workplace, 35 parts per million or higher is acceptable ... the percent of error is 15 (percent) to 20 percent.”

While that number is acceptable, the cross-examination by Assistant District Attorney Braden Boucek was damning.

“Is it fair to say this is the most noxious-smelling workplace you’ve ever been in?” he asked.

Adams, who has never used his OSHA-issued respiratory mask before, admitted that he did retrieve that mask from his truck after initially entering the Siliski home.

“I gagged and my eyes were watering,” the compliance officer said with a head shake. “I didn’t expect to have to use the mask.”

The final testimony of the day was Dr. Mary Fooshee, the WCAC veterinarian who has treated the animals since the raid. She also said that it appeared the animals had been neglected for weeks, and in some cases, years.

In a blow to the prosecution, the judge ruled that Fooshee could not testify in front of the jury about a certain tattoo gun — a device the D.A.’s office believes was used by Siliski to make the eyes and noses of the dogs appear more “pure breed” perfect. Fooshee told the court that she had been looking for medical supplies in Siliski’s drawers when she found both the tattoo gun and a controlled substance, Ketamine. A case regarding that Ketamine charge is set to be heard at a later date, although those charges may change now that the judge has ruled to suppress that evidence.

Court will reconvene at 8:30 a.m. Tuesday, perhaps in the old courthouse, Davies advised jurors.



Staff Reporter Melissa N. Warren can be contacted at melissa@reviewappeal.com.

More...Hollybelle Maltese Scandal