Fort Worth Vet Indicted for Creepy Dog Blood-Harvesting Scheme

Categories: Animal Welfare

MillardTierce.jpg
Millard "Lou" Tierce is the Fort Worth veterinarian who was allegedly harvesting blood from dogs he was supposed to euthanize until his office was raided earlier this year.

Tierce, whose vet license was suspended last week, was initially arrested on a charge of animal cruelty. Somehow, though, a misdemeanor, as animal cruelty is classified under Texas law, didn't seem sufficient for so grotesque a crime. Which may explain why, when Tierce was indicted today, prosecutors had secured two additional charges: misapplication of fiduciary property and theft between $1,500 and $20,000, both state jail felonies.

The animal-cruelty charge is fairly cut and dry. The two stiffer charges are rather curious and hinge on a question that's never really been settled under Texas law: How much is a dog worth?

Usually, the matter comes up when trying to figure out how to prosecute cases in which pets are snatched as bait for fighting dogs, says Skip Trimble, a Dallas attorney and animal welfare advocate. In the absence of a law specifically addressing pet theft -- something Trimble and others have unsuccessfully pressed the Legislature to do -- such crimes have to be prosecuted the same way as ordinary theft cases, in which the punishment range is based entirely on the value of the property stolen.

"Therein lies the problem," Trimble says. Without tangible proof that their animal was worth more than $50, not based on emotional value but on a cold-eyed assessment of market value, pet theft is generally treated as class C misdemeanor -- basically a traffic ticket. "If they'd gone to the pet store pay $250 to adopt it that's one thing, but most of the time they don't have the receipts to do it."

The piece of property in question here is Sid, a 170-pound Leonberger belonging to Jamie and Marian Harris. Last year, Tierce told the family the dog had a degenerative spinal defect and would have to be killed. Earlier this year, they learned he was still alive, allegedly so that Tierce could harvest its blood. The Tarrant County District Attorney's Office has declined to comment on the case, and the family's attorney hasn't returned a phone call, so it's hard to tell how prosecutors and a grand jury assessed Sid as being worth $1,500 to $20,000. But even if they can prove the dollar value, Trimble says there's another potential wrinkle: If the Harrises gave Tierce the OK to kill Sid, then does that amount to legal admission that he had no value?

The misapplication of fiduciary property also seems like another tricky one, if only because it's typically reserved for sticky-fingered estate executors and the like rather than misbehaving vets. No matter. The indictment is quite eloquent, saying that Tierce:

... on or about the 23rd day of April, 2014, did then and there intentionally or knowingly misapply property, to-wit: a dog, of the value of $1,500 or more, but less than $20,000, that the said defendant held as a fiduciary or as a person acting as a fiduciary, but not as a commercial bailee, contrary to an agreement under which the said defendant held the property, or in a manner than involved substantial risk of loss to the owner of said property.

In any case, the wheels of justice are turning. The terrible irony is that they wouldn't be if Tierce had just killed the dog like he said he was going to.

Send your story tips to the author, Eric Nicholson.


Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
39 comments
nkl0605
nkl0605

I took my dog to him years ago based on the glowing reviews I had received from others who used him as their vet.  I immediately took a dislike to him and thought him to be rather mean in how he treated my dog and did not regard him as venerate, as a commenter below suggests he was/is.  What he is being accused of doesn't surprise me in the least.  I'm upset over the fact that his staff knew what was going on for years and never reported it.

Mr.Grumpy
Mr.Grumpy

Well now Dr. T can work as a department store santa for the next two months. 

ivyhall
ivyhall

The problem resides with one of Tierce's disgruntled recent employees who,it seems, in weasel like fashion--after being discharged- figured out that the old (once highly venerated in the community) Doc was "a little past it" and Sid's owners( who were OK with Sid being put down several months ago reportedly because "he smelled and was constipated,etc"), now due to the " sainted-fired- ex employee whistleblower" have found a way to sue the old Doc for millions because of their new found love and veneration for the once disposable Sid. A lot of people here turn my stomach including the state Vet Board but it is not particularly the old Doc who saved a good many helpless animals in his career.

MattL11
MattL11

This is so typically Fort Worth.  

JackJett
JackJett

The bottom line for most people who appreciate the unconditional love of a dog and where many consider them a member of the family, the laws for animal abuse are far too lax.  And Texas is not even the most lenient. Due to the lack of communication, it is confusing enough when your dog is ill but mix in a freaking vet who thinks he is a scientist is simply cruel.  It is only a matter of time before we start to see an increase in most states based on the argument that animal abusers often turn into hard core criminals.  


I assume there will be a civil case and part of any money from that should go to increase the animal abuse laws. 

gm0622
gm0622

How much did the vet charge for canine infusions? And how many did he preform?

That would make the difference between misdemeanor and felony.

TheRuddSki
TheRuddSki topcommenter

For the contrarian angle, how about the dogs saved with the blood? It might just be a sustainable, renewable resource.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

I always thought this was (in addition to the obvious cruelty charges) more a conversion case than anything else, which is essentially the same thing as misapplication of fiduciary property.  Glad to see the state coming up with charges that actually fit.  

DrBombay
DrBombay

@ivyhall  I was wondering if Team Tierce would show up even after all this. It is clear you must have some direct connection with this shit for brains liar.   When a pal/relative does something like this it reflects poorly of you to stick with them and even more to flag wave for him. 

If it were not for the "weasel" there would be even more animals suffering and doing so with intense pain with degenerative disease.   It is easy to see why someone would be disgruntled working for someone who charges owners to abuse their dog.  NO one PUTS DOWN a dog because it "smelled and was constipated.  Do you realize what an ignorant lie that is.  If that were the case and the attitude of the family they probably would have shot it and NOT taken it to a vet.  


What turns my stomach and would on most dog lovers is you blaming the Vet Board in place of your pal.   And I hope that "weasel" brings to light ALL EMPLOYEES of this demented shit so they can be sued for the maximum in a civil case and never be allowed to work around animals, nor be around them and that goes for you.  If you have such little respect for these animals and support them being in pain and all the lies surrounding their health, then you too should stay away.


In the early stages people like you were calling the victims liars.  Now you admit they are telling the truth but are just being weak minded and should be appreciative that they had to suffer in his hellhole that sounds like one huge shit filled toilet.  Have you started a group yet to help support your hero?  Are you going to raise funds for his defense and call on Ted Nugent, Michael Vick, The Chuckabee Family and other vile animal abusers who are not currently in prison where they belong having their blood harvested. 

wcvemail
wcvemail

@ivyhall


Before I even clicked on the Comments link, I thought that the 12-count was very light considering the "Doc's an angel, you are all idiots" swarm that infested these pages when this story first broke. Where are your ilk? They were sorta entertaining.

ivyhall
ivyhall

@MattL11 Yeah tell me about it --especially after the next ectomorphic Clay Jenkins "photo-op"

wcvemail
wcvemail

@TheRuddSki


It was for the Aztecs, who bred a plumper version of the modern Chihuahua, and not for the purpose of wearing rhinestone collars.

And for extra credit: How do you know when Korean dinner is ready? It quits barking.

TheRuddSki
TheRuddSki topcommenter

@monogodo

How do they determine value, query area Korean restaurants?

ivyhall
ivyhall

@everlastingphelps The state NEVER comes up with"charges that actually fit" anything but the agenda of keeping their useless little bureaucratic jobs in Austin.

TheRuddSki
TheRuddSki topcommenter

@DrBombay

Ted Nugent? Say what?

ivyhall
ivyhall

@DrBombay wcvemail Well, lets see.  The innocent "victims" according to some more in depth articles containing a few more facts than you two would like to digest , abandoned the dog" Sid" to be killed --euthanized by the vet, apparently because he(the dog) became an inconvenience. 

The  "innocent" employee, reportedly was totally OK with the alleged cruelty which the employee evidently witnessed and passively participated in for months --while being paid--before reporting the fact that the abandoned dog was still alive, ONLY after the "innocent " whistle blower employee was fired. (then the employee developed a moral steak--hmmm)  So I guess if we are to follow your profanity laden train of thought--the "victims"would all have to sue themselves because they all participated in this sad episode.  Meanwhile "Sid's" erstwhile owners lost no time suing for a large amount of money, because the now beloved dog they discarded was still alive,and presumably--because only a large sum of money could ever salve their "innocent " victim wounds.(funny how that always seeems to be the case)  I don't have a dog in this hunt, so to speak, but I wouldn't believe your sainted "innocent" victims under any circumstances.  If that drives you to a nasty little temper tantrum who cares? Have a nice day, now!

DrBombay
DrBombay

@wcvemail @ivyhall  They are currently at their day job sucking the scum off the bottom of toilets, then they must go home and abuse their dogs, then they will find time to explain how Dr.Mengele was conducting some vital experiments that could have stopped Ebola from entering Dallas.


everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

Oh, there is fraud, far, FAR out the ass, but that a civil matter, not criminal.

everlastingphelps
everlastingphelps topcommenter

In all fairness, they are not mutually exclusive. This is one of the rare instances where their agenda actually DOES align with justice.

It's not like they are anti-justice, they just don't give a shit about justice one way or the other.

DrBombay
DrBombay

@ivyhall @everlastingphelps  Seems like a few employees of Dr.Shit 4 Brains were trying to keep their useless little job and ever the Shitmaster himself fought for his right to charge people for forcing their dogs to writhe in pain.

wcvemail
wcvemail

@ivyhall


Oh, I'm always open to digest facts. What are the "more in depth articles" you reference? 

andypandy
andypandy

@ivyhall  If my memory serves me correctly I seem to remember that they agreed to have the dog put down due to a degenerative spinal condition diagnosed by Tierce.  I also seem to remember that the limp that Dr. Tierce said was the result of the degenerative spinal condition was caused by the dog being thrown off of the table.  I further seem to recall that the dog that Dr. Tierce saved was found covered in feces, (which would seem to suggest that constipation was not an issue) matted, and hadn't left a cage in close to a year.  So lets recall--they agreed to have Sid put down based upon what Tierce said to cover up abuse he himself or an employee caused.  Further, instead of euthanizing the dog he decided to torture it for roughly a year.  And yet you defend these actions while demonizing the owners who believed him and agreed to his idea of what should be done?

ColonelAngus
ColonelAngus

@everlastingphelps  Agreed, civil fraud is a given.  But back to the criminal side - I don't have access to the texts you have access to, so here is Wiki's take on it.


"The requisite elements of perhaps most general form of criminal fraud, theft by false pretense, are the intentional deception of a victim by false representation or pretense with the intent of persuading the victim to part with property and with the victim parting with property in reliance on the representation or pretense and with the perpetrator intending to keep the property from the victim.[6]"


And so, the victims parted with property (both the dog and presumably the money they paid to have him put down) based on the perp's false assurances that he would euthanize the dog.  The perp took both properties, yet did not perform.  Again, how is this not a case of criminal fraud?  Is it specific to Texas law?  I am no lawyer, just a curious dude.


Thanks.

ivyhall
ivyhall

@wcvemail For what it's worth why don't you read the original complaint and subsequent findings in fact.

ivyhall
ivyhall

@andypandy @ivyhall FYI developmental spinal canal stenosis (narrowing) is a fairly common and usually accurate diagnosis when an adult dog spontaneously  starts and continues  to limp. It is statistically  common in general and especially prevalent in certain breeds.Your premise that the owner brought a healthy dog to the vet and the vet "threw the dog off the table" doesn't seem logical.  I find it curious that that the owners elected to acquire a large rare breed dog (Leonberger) which can reach a weight of 170 lbs,evidently, then blame inconvenient  consequences of pet ownership on others. (Sid deserves better). Furthermore if you are in a vet's office that smells like feces or is otherwise unclean, why would you stay, much less make significant treatment decisions for your reportedly "beloved" pet? The diagnosis of spinal canal stenosis does not require immediate euthanization. Euthanization is a choice.  The apparent  varying accounts of the dog's inconvenience to the owners' lifestyle are in a  way irrelevant, except to note that "inconvenience" apparently is a frequently referenced issue.  The owners also maintained,BTW, that the dog was "dehydrated" when rescued which severely conflicts with the on going "blood harvest" story . (Dehydrated dogs have poorly distended veins and little venous access for repeated blood draws).  I find more than a few reasons to be skeptical, which is not the same as "defending" the vet.  More than one local vet has told me that Tierce has had, prior to this sordid episode, a long and respected career.  Did his practice degenerate in the past years?  I don't know and either do you.  The state Vet Board should have standards and procedures in place to assure the public  that if a  licensed vet is impaired due to age,illness or drug use, that the vet is removed from active practice, but since these failures are repeated in the operations of several  state professional boards in Texas, one can conclude the board(s) seem relatively "inefficient"--to put it nicely.

wcvemail
wcvemail

@ivyhall @wcvemail

So there are NOT any "more in depth articles" as you claimed, or at least, none that refute this article. I just learned something about you.

ivyhall
ivyhall

@wcvemail What gave you the idea that I was trying to "refute" this article?  If you are too set in your hastily formed  opinions  to read the entire complaint and susequent findings that's too bad..And for what its worth, some of those you sneer at as being " supporters" were folks who had anecdotal episodes of great care by the vet for their pets over the years.  Maybe you in your infinite wisdom know ALL about them too...Have a nice day!

wcvemail
wcvemail

@ivyhall @wcvemail


Yeah, yeah, let me summarize your tl;dr -- "I'm so right, you all are so wrong for even commenting, read the internet and you'll see. If you're not going to read the internet for yourself, then you're obviously stupid."

No, ivy, you haven't helped your cause nor educated open-minded people like me with this holier-than-thou, "there are lots of references but I'm not going to post even one" sanctimony.

Pity -- you had a couple of good comments on other topics.

ivyhall
ivyhall

@wcvemail Well let's see.  According to YOU-- little or  no burden of proof is necessary to accuse a fellow human being of a lifetime of grisly and sordid acts against society.And in fact, according to you  and "Dr. Bombay" anyone who is skeptical about destroying this old  man, in sensationalist local media print  based upon flimsy partially factual  commentary is obviously evil, employed by the perpetrator or is deserving of being called profane names.  If you scraped the layers of encrusted cultism off of your frontal cortex, you might even be able to form some independent lucid thoughts about this matter.  And BTW--I actually respect your point of view in most  other topics--so there.

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...