Loyalhanna horse case has happy conclusion
At least three horses seized last year from two Loyalhanna women are ready for adoption now that court cases have been resolved.
Second Chance Equine Association President Bryce LeJeune said he was glad to see the eight-month process end after one of the women dropped her appeal last week.
“We're just thankful that it's over,” LeJeune said.
Eight horses and two dogs were seized May 10 from the Loyalhanna home of Stephanie Baker, 22.
Baker and Stacia Bee, 35, were cited for animal cruelty after investigators said they found the animals in poor health. Both women maintain they properly cared for the animals.
With Baker forgoing a court hearing Tuesday by earlier dropping a summary appeal, all of the animals have been relinquished and can find new homes.
LeJeune said at least three horses — one of Baker's and two of Bee's — need adoptive homes. All of the horses are in foster homes, and some of the foster parents plan to adopt the horses, he said.
Scott Downs of Hempfield has been fostering a 2 1⁄2-year-old horse for the past two months. The friendly, smart horse that he has named “Franklin” will be up for adoption.
“He was the only one left that wasn't fostered out,” Downs said.
Both women were found guilty in summary trials before Washington Township District Judge Jason Buczak during the summer.
Both appealed. But Bee withdrew her appeal in December and Baker did the same Thursday.
A great Dane seized from the property has been adopted by a family that was fostering it, said Janet Dillon, an officer with the Humane Society of Westmoreland County.
Bee was ordered to pay $4,603 in restitution and Baker was ordered to pay $4,148 in restitution, court records show.
Renatta Signorini is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 724-837-5374 or rsignorini @tribweb.com.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.