KAILUA-KONA — A rescue organization formed to ship dogs to mainland shelters is suing the Hawaii Island Humane Society and several other defendants, claiming the society stole credit for the air shipment of dogs off-island early last year, and that several individuals associated with the society conspired to smear the rescue organization.
KAILUA-KONA — A rescue organization formed to ship dogs to mainland shelters is suing the Hawaii Island Humane Society and several other defendants, claiming the society stole credit for the air shipment of dogs off-island early last year, and that several individuals associated with the society conspired to smear the rescue organization.
The lawsuit is based on what appears to be a series of emails detailing how a Humane Society board member, its executive director and several others close to the society shot emails back and forth, brainstorming ways to discredit the rescue organization Big Island Dog Rescue, taint that organization’s business connections and turn public opinion against the group.
But this one is far from simple.
Explosive though the emails might seem, they are complete fabrication, say the society’s attorney and one individual named in the suit. The society is launching its own counter claim and its lawyer said a disciplinary complaint will be filed against the opposing attorneys.
Big Island Dog Rescue filed the suit for damages against HIHS in Third Circuit Court on Friday, alleging interference for business advantage, appropriation, invasion of privacy and other charges, according to a copy supplied by BIDR board chairman Thad Smith on Saturday. Named as defendants are HIHS, the society’s executive director Donna Whitaker, veterinarian and HIHS board member Elizabeth Jose, Deborah Baker and Kathy Kim Peters.
Whoever wrote them, the emails detail bare-knuckle tactics for taking taking down a competitor.
“We will get slaughtered if we battle this out in the media with the facts,” reads an email which appears to have Baker’s name and email address at the top and Whitaker, Jose and Peters as recipients. “Bluntly, the fact is HIHS did kill these animals BIDR offered to save. … After working with the cost benefit analysis of working with BIDR, the conclusion is eliminating the euthanasia rate in 1.5 years will create a vacuum and no product to justify the county contract which would be detrimental if BIDR eliminated the euthanasia rate. Therefore we will create a character assassination.”
Other lines from the same email:
“Get a group together, start another whisper campaign questioning BIDR keep HIHS’s name out of it, we need to shield them. … BIDR will fall much easier when we befriend the other groups.”
Another email, apparently from Jose to Whitaker, Baker and Peters, reads as follows:
“I can help drum up some support from both the Vet community and some pawns to help spread the whisper campaign.”
All of it is fiction, Nakoa said.
“It is yet another attempt by BIDR to smear the Humane Society,” Nakoa said on Saturday. “All of those emails are completely fabricated. They were never drafted by anyone associated with the Humane Society.”
The law requires attorneys to conduct due diligence to make sure the supporting claims within a lawsuit are valid, Nakoa said.
“That obviously didn’t happen here,” she said.
A complaint will be filed with the Office of Disciplinary Council, she said.
Baker emphatically denied the validity of the emails.
“Attached to your email to Hawaii Island Humane Society advising of this lawsuit were several documents designed to look like authentic email correspondence, some of which were attributed to me. Let me state very clearly that I did not write these emails and they have been fabricated by someone unknown to me,” Baker wrote in an email to the newspaper. “I cannot begin to understand why someone would deliberately lie and attempt to assassinate my character. Frankly, I am offended, shocked, disgusted and mad as hell that a person or persons would knowingly attack my character and integrity with falsehoods. In response, I will be taking appropriate legal action.”
But BIDR stands by its claims.
Tasi Autele, founder of BIDR, said he has no idea how to fabricate an email, and that the documents were leaked to him by a whistleblower before Autele passed them on to his own attorneys. In an email, Smith said HIHS has been “both egregious and conspiratorial in their attempts to shut down and discredit our nonprofit operation and silence our Executive Director Tasi Autele.”
HIHS employed “nefarious tactics as demonstrated by the attached emails that are evidence in this case provided by an anonymous source having access to them,” Smith wrote to the newspaper. “This evidence as well as many other items that we have gathered or have been provided to us over the last 18 months speak directly to the ill intent and actions HIHS management, BOD’s member, PR firm and HIHS agents have undertaken. The attached emails provided to us were the final impetus for us to file the lawsuit against HIHS in an attempt to stop the ongoing damage their willful actions have continued to cause.”
The lawsuit was drafted by Hilo attorney Damir Kouliev, but will be handled by Oregon attorney Geordie Duckler of The Animal Law Practice, said Smith, also an Oregon resident.
Whitaker referred questions to Nakoa. HIHS board president Adam Atwood did not respond to an email and could not be reached by phone on Saturday.
In addition to the claims, the suit alleges HIHS exploited a partnership with BIDR that allowed the Humane Society to keep a positive public image and a donation flow. Specifically, HIHS showcased BIDR’s off-island shipping of the dogs during its March 2015 “Tropical Paws” fundraiser. But instead of sharing credit or acknowledging that the airlift was both created and implemented by BIDR, the society instead edited any reference to the rescue organization and presented the shipments as solely an HIHS program, the lawsuit claims.
“The corporate defendant had carefully manipulated, edited and physically altered and culled the projected images so as to remove all visual references to plaintiff or to plaintiff’s work and efforts,” the suit reads.
That led to damages to BIDR’s relationships with the community, donors, airlines and other businesses, making it impossible for the rescue organization to complete its own program, the rescue claims.
BIDR shipped 81 dogs to mainland “no-kill” shelters in its first four months of operation starting early last year, under a partnership with HIHS in which BIDR handled the shipments using animals adopted from the society at a much-reduced fee.
The HIHS began to work against BIDR with last minute schedule changes, failures to communicate and increased fees, according to the suit.
In July, the Humane Society suspended adoptions to the rescue organizations until a contract was created spelling out legal responsibilities, animal treatment and reporting on the status of animals shipped to the mainland. BIDR declined to sign the agreement once it was drafted.