Current Conditions
76°F - M/SUNNY
Legal battle over Esh dog-law violations ends
Charges reduced to summary offenses
Intelligencer Journal
Jan 07, 2009 00:48 EST
Lancaster
By SUSAN E. LINDT, Staff Writer

The long legal battle over Daniel P. Esh's kennel violations was finally resolved Tuesday.

Esh, owner of Scarlet-Maple Farm Kennel, 68 Clearview Road, Ronks, originally faced three misdemeanor charges of housing more than 400 dogs and puppies in unsanitary conditions. The charges stemmed from November 2007 inspections by the state Bureau of Dog Law Enforcement.

Esh's attorney, Jeff Conrad, negotiated a deal with Assistant District Attorney Christine L. Wilson to lower the misdemeanor charges to summary offenses in exchange for Esh's guilty plea.

Esh pleaded guilty Tuesday before Lancaster County Judge James P. Cullen.

The deal means Esh faces only fines for each charge rather than steeper misdemeanor penalties of up to a year in prison and a $2,500 fine for each count.

The original charges were graded as more serious misdemeanor counts because Esh had been convicted of similar infractions within the previous year.

Wilson said the bureau is unlikely to renew Esh's license to operate a kennel for the new year. Without a kennel license, Esh must dismantle his large-scale breeding operation and reduce his dog stock to no more than 25.

"We amended the charges to summaries because his kennel license isn't going to be renewed," Wilson said. "Just based on that, I think this was a fair resolution. The main point is that he may not operate (a kennel) due to his prior charges."

Conrad said the status of Esh's 2009 license renewal is pending, and Bureau spokesman Chris Ryder confirmed Tuesday that Esh's renewal application was received, but a determination has not yet been issued to Esh.

State inspectors visited Esh's Leacock Township kennel Nov. 2 and Nov. 28, 2007.

In the kennel inspection reports, a warden noted that dog food was contaminated with mold, feces and debris, and dogs were housed in enclosures smeared with feces. Esh was also charged for allowing large amounts of feces to accumulate around cages.

State law requires dog food be free of contaminants, and that feces be cleared daily from in and around kennels.

Conrad said he was happy with the outcome of the charges.

"We were very pleased to get a resolution that didn't make Daniel Esh a criminal," Conrad said. "The misdemeanor charges were excessive. He was willing to admit to the summary violations and plead guilty."

The resolution certainly wasn't quick.

A September trial before Judge Howard F. Knisely was delayed a day because of a host of pretrial motions.

Then, about an hour into Esh's trial, Conrad requested and was granted a mistrial based on testimony from Bureau inspector Kristen Donmoyer, who inspected Esh's kennel.

Donmoyer said she filed charges against Esh based on what she saw at the kennel, "as well as Mr. Esh's admission of guilt that it had been more than one day" since he had cleaned the kennels.

Knisely ruled for the mistrial because Donmoyer's use of the word "guilt" could have influenced the jury's perception of Esh's actions.

Then Wilson raised an objection to Conrad's opening statement, in which he said Gov. Ed Rendell directed the bureau to hire a SWAT team of inspectors, including Donmoyer, with only one purpose: "to shut (Esh) down."

Wilson objected that Conrad told jurors Esh could lose his kennel license as a result of the trial's outcome. Attorneys are not allowed to mention to jurors the possible penalties that may result if a defendant is convicted.

Conrad maintained Tuesday that Rendell's directive for a Bureau crackdown on irresponsible breeders has resulted in excessive, subjective enforcement against good breeders.

"It almost seems as though they've gone so far that they've taken (enforcement) to the extreme," Conrad said. "Some (inspectors) will use bravado instead of tact. They'll come in and scream at kennel operators. A lot of (breeders) are Amish and they're like, 'Whoa, what am I supposed to do?' Are we out to get them or are we out to get them in compliance?"

Conrad said he welcomes cases like Esh's because breeders shouldn't be criminalized now that the state kennel regulations have been made more stringent.

"The government has changed the scrutiny with which they're giving these kennels nowadays," he said. "It's a fact that what was once OK is not OK now. (Esh) wants to comply. The state can make headway by educating (breeders). Punishment does not make headway."

Esh's father, John E. Esh, holds a kennel license to keep 251 or more dogs at Twin Maple Farm, also at 68 Clearview Road, Ronks.

The elder Esh also was cited after the November 2007 inspections with misdemeanor charges for unsanitary conditions and incomplete records of rabies vaccinations. Like his son, Esh was charged with more serious violations because of prior convictions, and, like his son, John Esh negotiated a deal to have the charges lowered to summary offenses when he pleaded guilty in February 2008.

E-mail: slindt@lnpnews.com


Recent Posts
Showing 5 most recent comments out of 16 total TalkBack comments about this article
View full comments | Comment on this article
QUOTE (reese @ May 3 2009, 01:36 PM)
You're denying what Esh's own lawyer stated in the article? "A lot of the breeders are Amish..."

Honestly Goldi, I think you'd defend an Amishman/woman of practically anything, simply because they were Amish. You would never extend that kind of latitude toward someone of any other religious persuasion. You're just as biased as people who are prejudiced against the Amish. Your bias clouds your judgement.


I don't think she was defending anyone, just asking again to keep the religious affiliation out of it.

Of course, I took Shoganai's "friend" post at face value, so...
twinmom
QUOTE (twinmom @ May 3 2009, 01:48 PM)
I don't think she was defending anyone, just asking again to keep the religious affiliation out of it.

Of course, I took Shoganai's "friend" post at face value, so...


Which would be difficult, because Mr. Esh's own lawyer played that card, but I see your point.
reese
QUOTE (reese @ May 3 2009, 12:36 PM)
You're denying what Esh's own lawyer stated in the article? "A lot of the breeders are Amish..."

Honestly Goldi, I think you'd defend an Amishman/woman of practically anything, simply because they were Amish. You would never extend that kind of latitude toward someone of any other religious persuasion. You're just as biased as people who are prejudiced against the Amish. Your bias clouds your judgement.


I do not defend abuse of animals. If the puppy millers were any other religion, religion wouldn't be a factor.

Goldilocks
QUOTE (Goldilocks @ May 3 2009, 12:33 PM)
Once again the issue gets side tracked, into stereotyping and attacking a religion.

Wrong again Goldie
You have been an apologist for the ugly acts of Mennonites and Amish on this site since you have been here-
You, maam, are a 'troll' as well
ben9030
QUOTE (ben9030 @ May 10 2009, 09:43 PM)
Wrong again Goldie
You have been an apologist for the ugly acts of Mennonites and Amish on this site since you have been here-
You, maam, are a 'troll' as well

Obviously it takes a troller to know one. As if this statement isn't trolling!

I'm with Goldie on this one the religion of the perp doesn't need to be added to the rants and ravings against this person. Arguments are more credible with out that added to them.

Same with the child killer out in CA. They kept adding Sunday School teacher to her description from the papers to the tv news reports. Why was that necessary? Are we to think that all SS teachers molest young children and stuff them into their luggage? So now we are to believe that all plain sects treat their animals cruelly? They don't you know. But you wouldn't know it by the rants and ravings of the anti-mill folks.
Beth
Top Ads