Shawnee, OK: Victorious Removal of the Gas Box – The End of a One-Year Campaign.



 Who:  Dawn Gambrell, (405) 481-9705, Michael Rhoades (405) 921-4052 and Kate Riviello (845) 856-7366.

What:  Removal of Gas Box from the Shawnee Animal Control facility.

NoKill-NewYork.Org in conjunction with advocate representatives in Shawnee, Oklahoma,  have announced that after a year of advocacy there, working closely with the Shawnee Police Department, the gas box will now be removed.

In October 2015, Riviello released a video presentation on Facebook:

(link to page:

regarding a proposal to end gassing at Shawnee Animal Shelter.  In that presentation, requests that the administrator of the department be relieved, that two animal control officers could be transferred, a veterinarian could perform “euthanasia by injection”, along with suggestions for longer hours and funding for more comprehensive spay and neuter were presented to the public.  Most all of the suggestions outlined in her video were implemented.  After Gambrell appeared before the City Council with a discussion about the video-proposal October 2015, the City Manager, Mr. Erickson, announced that gassing would end by February 29, 2016 and a veterinarian would be brought on board.

When the administrator left Shawnee Animal Shelter in February 2016, the local police department took over the duties installing Major Taylor to oversee operations.  Since March 1, 2016, Taylor states regretfully that about 10 feral cats and one injured dog in the middle of the night were gassed, but systematic gassing of animals had ceased since that time.

On September 20, 2016, Chief Wilson and Major Taylor announced to Riviello of that they are now prepared to go forward in removing the gas box completely.   A local Trap, Neuter, Release (TNR) program was discussed and will be implemented for roaming cats.  The police department is also looking forward to expanding the number of kennels in the facility.  An event to cover its actual physical removal is pending. blurb

International Protest Against Kill Pounds & Breed Specific Legislation 9/16/16 – 9/17/16 #sleepoutforanimals



Activities to Protest New York Animal Care and Control in New York and Nationwide Locations will Highlight Criminal Complaints Against Animal Control Facilities.

The media is invited to these events, where there will be interview, photo and broadcast opportunities with rally leaders.

WHO: Kate Riviello, President,; (845) 856-7366

WHAT: Sixth International Protest Against Kill Pounds & Breed Specific Legislation

WHEN: September 16 & 17, 2016 (Sleep-out locations 9/16 8pm to 9/17 2pm); see location list below for sleep-out locations or specific dates.

WHERE:  At these participating locations; details about these locations’ violations against animals are noted at the end of advisory.  Phone numbers noted are for local protest contacts in these cities.

  • 9/16/-9/17: New York Animal Care & Control – 110th Street & First Avenue, NY, NY; sleep-out location.
  • 9/16, 7-10 pm: Maricopa County Animal Control, 2500 S. 27th Avenue (just south of Durango), Phoenix, AZ;  9/17, 7-10 pm: 2630 West Rio Salado Parkway, Phoenix, AZ, (480) 888 5019.
  • 9/16-9/17: Des Moines, Iowa State Capital – Repeal BSL, sleep-out location (515) 897-2155.
  • 9/16-9/17: San Antonio Animal Control, 4710 State Highway 151, San Antonio, TX, sleep-out location (903) 618-0431.

Kate Riviello, founder of NoKill-NewYork.Org, a leading voice for animal rights and activism in the New York metro area, continues her protest campaign against New York Animal Care and Control (operated under the auspices of the Department of Health in cooperation with the Mayors Alliance President Jane Hoffman). At the New York rally, Riviello will reveal over 20 criminal complaints with allegations of felony animal abuse, misdemeanor animal negligence, as well as conversion of grant dollars, conspiracy and racketeering. The group will sleep outside on September 16, 2017 in continuing protest. Plans include producing a 90-minute documentary on the event from video footage that will be captured at the locations and submitted to a major film festival for distribution.

  • One complaint alleges that hundreds of cats are missing and presumed dead; two cat rescue organizations are unable to account for the current disposition of hundreds of cats that were pulled from the shelter’s “death row” with tens of thousands of grant dollars dispensed.
  • In at least three other criminal complaints, it is alleged that three dogs were wrongfully killed by the rescues and veterinarians with felony charges filed.
  • In dozens of criminal complaints, lack of veterinary care is alleged for each animal for which the complaints were filed.
  • In another complaint, a dog named Popeye was wrongfully killed. He was fraudulently advertised for a specific adoption fee which was raised when the adopter arrived. When the adopter did not have the higher fee requested upon arrival, the dog was killed.

Complaints against these shelters/locations:

  • Maricopa Animal Control in Arizona, which has one of the highest kill rates of cats and dogs in the country;
  • San Antonio Animal Control in Texas, where the high kill rate persists and a stray dog named Faith was just murdered, even after the family was informed that the microchip was present and to come retrieve their dog (lawsuit pending);
  • and Des Moines, Iowa, at the state capital, where Breed Specific Legislation is rampant throughout the state. The contracted facility, Animal Rescue League in Des Moines, has admitted to killing 10,000 dogs and cats per year.

At all locations, activists will wear red, chant, hold signs, and host press conferences regarding specific stories about certain dogs and cats. Activists everywhere will be contacting elected officials in these areas in the weeks leading up to the protest.

NoKill-NewYork.Org welcomes anyone anywhere to proceed to their local high-kill animal control facility and protest on these days (wearing red) and to make a video and send to to include in the documentary.

For New York area information, call (845) 856-7366; for local contacts in other cities, call the numbers listed above.

UPDATE 9/16/16:  Unfortunately Miami, Chicago and Indianapolis are cancelled.  However, the above four locations are poised to host.


First Animal Rights Protest at a Residence in New Jersey History



*First Animal Rights Protest at a Residence in New Jersey History.

*Saturday, July 16, 2016, 2-4pm.

*Hosted by Kate Riviello, President, No Kill New York, Inc. (

*Home of Christine Dinga, 646 Oakdene Street, Ridgefield, NJ.

 Ridgefield, New Jersey, has been the center of a contentious ongoing battle for over a year to institute Trap, Neuter, Release/Return/Retain for community roaming cats.  Dinga has been an antagonist to legislation proposed by Mayor Suarez, as well as rescue activist Valerie Osteen Kane, who lives next door to Dinga.  Legislation was eventually passed that removed the wording “colonies” with the word “sanctuary” so that cats that are trapped would be placed inside a fenced-in area that has been designated by the boro. 

 There continues to be a ban in place on feeding community cats and Dinga continues to trap cats in her backyard and calls animal control when those cats belong to privately managed colonies.  The boro of Ridgefield has not acted to prevent Dinga from trapping cats nor have they lifted the ban on feeding cats on one’s own property.

 Kate Riviello has been an outspoken animal rights activist in New Jersey, recently having spoken at West Orange and Wayne against the feeding bans for cats which were subsequently modified.  She also recently spoke at the city of Maplewood on behalf of a dog in which she expounded upon rights for animals that are equivalent to children.

 Riviello states that Dinga has filed a false claim of harassment against her for asking, “Why do you hate cats so much?” in the boro of Ridgefield town hall.  Dinga claims that she was “walking after” her allegedly video evidence proves otherwise and the matter is still in court.  According to Osteen-Kane, the neighbor, Dinga has filed numerous false police complaints against her as well.

 Riviello, a paralegal, states that she is prepared to file a lawsuit pro se against the boro of Ridgefield for banning the feeding of community cats and removing the wording of “colonies” from their recently passed legislation.  She states that the only reason the lawsuit would be delayed is lack of funding.

The animal rights protest will occur in front of Dinga’s house with activists wearing red, chanting, holding signs, and videotaping the event for social media.  Please call (845) 856-7366 for further information or write to


Here is the video at city council meeting of Dinga in which she filed harassment against Riviello:

Media Alert: #JusticeforHoney, Queens, NY 4/27/16




 **:  #justiceforhoney – Protest and Demonstration for a Chihuahua Named Honey,

       Brutally Murdered by Carlos Hernandez.

**   April 27, 2016, Wednesday morning, 8:30-9:30am.

**   Court – 125-01 Queens Blvd, Kew Gardens, NY, Courthouse Steps.

**   Kate Riviello, NoKill-NewYork.Org and Karem Belalcazar, Honey’s Guardian.

 As reported widely, including the Daily News and the NY Post, Carlos Hernandez brutally murdered a little Chihuahua named Honey by fatally bashing the little tiny dog’s head to the floor.   

 The group, with Honey’s guardian, will protest and demonstrate on the courthouse steps that Hernandez should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law in NY state.  Riviello quoted the law 353a that aggravated cruelty to animals includes that, for no justifiable purpose, he intentionally killed a companion animal and that that action was meant to cause extreme physical pain and was carried out in a depraved and sadistic manner.  Riviello and Belalcazar contend that Hernandez is a danger to the public and should be prosecuted as a felon as proscribed by law, not only to serve actual jail time but to be included on the new FBI database of animal abusers.

 The protesters will wear red, chant, produce a video, and carry signs that state, “Justice for Honey” for one hour before court session begins and then they will proceed into the courtroom to hear the first hearing on this matter.

Protest & Demand Full Prosecution for the Murder of Sully Dog



*Protest & Demand for Strict Jail Sentence Prosecution of Jennifer Caruso (formerly Cook)

*April 19, 2016, 12:30 to 1:30 pm

*Central Municipal Court, 71 Hudson Street, Hackensack, NJ

*Hosted by Chrissy Russo-Waller of The Greater Swiss Mountain Dog Rescue &

 Kate Riviello of NoKill-NewYork.Org

 Judge Louis Dinice will preside over the hearing of Jennifer Caruso (formerly Cook) in the starvation death of the dog named Sully, a Swiss Mountain Dog, with assistant district attorney William Miller. 

 The animal rights group, NoKill-NewYork.Org, along with the Greater Swiss Mountain Dog Rescue, is demanding prosecution that fits the violation of the law and no plea be entertained in this case.   Sully was starved and dehydrated to death in which Caruso abandoned the dog to die with depraved indifference to his suffering.  The animal groups hold that there can be no excuse to have left the dog to die in such cruel fashion at 442 Crest Drive, Northvale, NJ. 

 “The District Attorney of Bergen County, Gurbir Grewal,along with ADA Miller, must set a precedent that animal abuse will not be tolerated and will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” said Riviello.

 The protesters will stand outside the court house holding signs, chanting, and wearing red.  They will also be videotaping a documentary and welcome citizens to come with their statements.  They will also proceed into the courtroom at 1:30pm for the hearing.  The animal groups can be reached at (845) 856-7366.


Media Alert: Protest at Home of June Wiggins-Hercules to Demand An Arrest


EVENT: Protest and Demonstration at the Home of June Wiggins-Hercules of Crown Heights, Brooklyn, NY to Demand that She Be Arrested for Animal Cruelty for Two Dogs Left Out in Blizzard.

DATE: January 29, 2016, starting Friday evening 8pm.

WHO: NoKill-NewYork.Org, host, phone (845) 856-7366, Kate Riviello, President.

WHERE: Home of June Wiggins-Hercules 1035 President Street, Crown Heights, Brooklyn, NY.

Last year, as reported in The NY Post, Kate Riviello of filed a lawsuit against the NYPD for not enforcing animal cruelty law for a dog named Jake left outside all winter in Staten Island. That lawsuit was tossed out in Superior Court for “lack of standing” with the judge stating that the activists did not personally suffer. Riviello contends that common sense should have prevailed and the perpetrators of leaving dogs outside to freeze in the winters of NY should be arrested.

According to precedent setting case law in NY state, a doghouse should have insulation, be off the ground, have a flap and the dog should have a constant source of water 24/7. Since Wiggins-Hercules was found in violation with the senior dogs howling into the night and a neighbor videotaping for evidence, the group contends that she should be arrested. Riviello states that it is a misdemeanor to allow a dog to suffer in extreme inclement weather so as to sustain physical injury and extreme stress.

The group will stand outside of the house and hold signs, wear red, chant, and videotape an educational video with the contemplation of a lawsuit to be filed against the NYPD.

UPDATE 2/3/16:  We will be posting the video of the protest where we slept outside this house for ten hours in 24-27 degrees at night.  We have activists on the lookout at 3am when neighbors state that they hear the dog howling every night.  Most importantly, we are going forward with the lawsuit to have Wiggins arrested and the remaining dog seized.

The Case of Blue Dog: Shawnee, OK – Extortion, Civil Rights Violations, Veterinary Malpractice & Kangaroo Court


Shawnee, OK

THE FOLLOWING is my testimony to the court regarding the charge of
1) I am a single mom with two children, a dog, a cat and a ferret. My dog’s name is Blue and is mostly white in color. He is about 40 pounds and has always been sweet and gentle with my children, other dogs, my cat and he is afraid of my ferret.
2) On January 11, 2016, I proceeded to leave my home at about 830am and later in the day about noon I would receive a phone call that there was a break-in at home.
3) My dog Blue got outside reportedly about 11am and started down the block toward Main Street which is only five houses from my house. Obviously my dog got loose from extenuating circumstances that were beyond my control and I should NOT be cited for LOOSE DOG for which I was not cited.
4) Trevor and Teddy, according to Teddy, who should be here in this courtroom to submit their own eyewitness testimony saw my dog loose and running. He was probably scared and confused. Then they lost sight of the dog for a few minutes.
5) Trevor and Teddy, according to Teddy, then witnessed the fact that Blue my dog was in a physical altercation with a husky who was with a man. It is completely unknown to me whether the husky was on a leash.
6) Trevor and Teddy, according to Teddy, did witness the man hitting my dog over the head with a firearm to ostensibly separate them.
7) Trevor and Teddy, according to Teddy, did NOT witness the man getting bit by either dog. They saw blood on his hand however it was unclear if that was from a bite from a dog or from Blue’s own blood since he was hitting Blue over the head with a firearm causing bleeding.
8) To my knowledge, this man was NOT cited for loose dog or for vicious dog. I was blocked by the court clerk to subpoena this man or to know his identity or to know any of the evidence that was set forth against me for claiming that my dog was vicious when he is not.
9) Trevor and Teddy, according to Teddy, now states that the dogs were separated and that Blue approached them in a friendly manner without growling, barking, snarling or any such vicious display whatsoever.
10) In my opinion, my dog might have approached the man and husky to seek refuge and comfort since my dog is a gentle dog known to get along with other dogs, cats and even small animals such as my ferret, as well as my small children.
11) My dog has never bit anyone and has never had a behavior issue in his life of 2.5 years approximately.
12) At this point, animal control was called and my dog Blue was taken to the animal control facility in Shawnee.



1) I received a phone call from the animal control officer that if I did not produce $500, they would gas to death my dog and decapitate him to test for rabies. They did not give me an opportunity to call my veterinarian to check on my dog’s rabies status before informing me that they would do this to my dog.
2) When I called my vet, it became known that my dog IS UP-TO-DATE ON RABIES WITH A THREE YEAR VACCINATION.
3) The animal control facility ACO continued to threaten the life of my dog since he believed that the dog was not “up to code in Shawnee” by having a YEARLY rabies vaccination, even though my dog was UP-TO-DATE WITH A THREE YEAR VACCINATION.
4) I made a fundraiser for the $500 and it was raised but could not be accessed until a couple days because it was via the internet. However, I was able to raise about $200 and my vet agreed to “quarantine” the dog even though legally and medically the dog did NOT need to be quarantined neither at the vet nor at the animal control facility because the dog is current on a three year rabies vaccination.
5) My vet has stated that even though the dog is current on rabies with a three year rabies vaccination that he would give the dog an additional rabies vaccination just to be in compliance with the Shawnee code that allegedly states that a dog needs a rabies vaccination every year but consider the following:

A. RABIES SHAWNEE CODE: Code 1986, Section 5-146-c: “…….any dog that is over the age of four months and that has not been vaccinated against rabies within the preceding 12 months……”. I believe this has been interpreted incorrectly in that NOT BEEN VACCINATED is precluded by the three year rabies vaccination. Clearly it would be veterinary malpractice to vaccinate a dog EVERY YEAR WHEN THEY ARE COVERED BY A THREE YEAR VACCINATION. So I believe then that my dog is being illegally held in a “quarantine” that is unnecessary by common law since he was up-to-date on his three year rabies vaccination. Therefore my dog should be immediately released from my vet’s office to my care to my home.

6) Therefore if it has been the policy of Chris Thomas the administrator to demand sums of cash from the public (threatening felony animal cruelty on companion animals held illegally at the animal control facility) for vaccinating an animal for rabies EVERY SINGLE YEAR, this would constitute extortion and “forcing” veterinarians to commit malpractice. Even if a dog was not current on rabies, the animal control facility would be legally responsible for placing a dog into quarantine and billing the citizen later, not threatening death with a demand of cash, i.e., extortion. Consider the following:
Oklahoma Statutes Citationized
Title 21. Crimes and Punishments
Chapter 60 – Extortion and Blackmail
Section 1482 – Extortion Induced by Threats
Cite as: O.S. §, __ __
Fear such as will constitute extortion, may be induced by a threat, either:
1st. To do an unlawful injury to the person or property of the individual threatened, or to any relative of his or member of his family; or,
2nd. To accuse him, or any relative of his or member of his family, of any crime; or,
3rd. To expose, or impute to him, or them, any deformity or disgrace; or,
4th. To expose any secret affecting him or them.
Oklahoma Uniform Jury Instructions
Oklahoma Jury Instructions- Criminal
Chapter 5
Section OUJI-CR 5-33 – Threat Defined
Cite as: O.S. §, __ __

OUJI-CR 5-33
A person has been threatened when that person has been put in fear of:
[unlawful injury to his/her person/property]
[unlawful personal injury to his/her relatives/(family members)]
[unlawful injury to the property of a relative/(family member)]
7) Due to clear definition of extortion in the state of Oklahoma, the city of Shawnee and specifically Chris Thomas, Administrator, and his animal control officer are criminally subject to the laws of extortion as well as liable in a civil court violating my civil rights.


Sec. 5-3. – Vicious animals. Modified
No persons shall own or harbor any vicious animal within the city, unless the same is kept upon private premises of such person and securely locked within a sufficient enclosure to prevent any possible means of escape. For a secure enclosure to be sufficient, it must be constructed with four sides, a top, a bottom and a locked gate of sufficient materials, not including soil, to prevent any possible means of escape. Any vicious animal running at large on the streets or alleys, or other public ways, of the city shall be immediately removed and impounded, or terminated when deemed necessary by the animal control officer to protect public safety when the situation warrants, regardless of whether or not such animal has a collar and tag or muzzle. Any leash, tether, chain, rope or other device used to control a vicious animal when an animal is taken off personal property shall not exceed six feet in length without such animal being constituted running at large. Other officers of the law may likewise, when deemed necessary to protect the public safety, remove, impound or terminate a vicious animal when the situation warrants.
A vicious animal or a dangerous animal is defined as any animal that:
Because of its physical nature, is capable of inflicting serious physical harm or death to human beings and would constitute a danger to human life or property;
Has behaved in such a manner that the owner knows or should reasonably know that the animal has tendencies to attack or to bite human beings or other animals;
Commits an unprovoked attack on a person or animal on private or public property; or
Threatens to attack or terrorizes a person in such a manner that personal safety is in jeopardy and when, in the opinion of the animal control officer or other officer of the law, such animal poses a personal or public threat following a complaint filed by the affected person with the city animal control division or police department.
a. My dog has never been aggressive or vicious or has ever in the past displayed any such behavior as previously stated.
b. The ordinance clearly defines a vicious animal as “….capable of inflicting serious physical harm……or would constitute a danger…..” which my dog Blue could never be capable of doing not ever in the past or in stated incident of January 11, 2016.
c. As the owner of said dog, I am testifying with 100% confidence that my dog has never been engaged in a dog fight or has ever displayed any aggression whatsoever. Furthermore, my veterinarian submits a testimony of dog’s gentle temperament.

d. Regarding the incident of when my dog got loose on January 11, 2016, the dog was loose due to extenuating circumstances of my home being broken into and my dog becoming understandably confused to the point that he was scared and looking for me and my children for comfort. My dog is neutered so he would not have been running to mate.
e. Regarding the incident of my dog involved in an altercation with another dog, the husky, it is
8b. Therefore there is no proof that my dog bit any person and there is no proof that my dog acted with provocation as that is not in my dog’s nature to do so. If there was proof of a bite to the man that was hitting my dog over the head with a firearm, then the teeth of both dogs would have to be considered in that bite injury and the DNA of the saliva tested from the bite wounds, if there was a bite, which no proof of a bite has been submitted to me.
1) REGARDING DOG LOOSE AND AT LARGE: My dog Blue got loose due to extenuating circumstances beyond my control regarding my house being broken into and not through my own negligence.
2) REGARDING RABIES UP-TO-DATE, “QUARANTINE”: My dog was up-to-date legally and by veterinary standards with a three-year rabies vaccination and as soon as that was discovered, the dog should have been immediately released to my custody and should be immediately released to my custody now.
3) REGARDING ILLEGAL PRACTICES: If the law is not clear to the common individual that a three-year rabies vaccination is legally binding from a veterinary practice definition, then it should be amended. But I am reading the ordinance that clearly states that if the dog is “vaccinated within the last 12 months” meaning that if the dog is UP TO DATE then said ordinance has been construed illiterately to be construed that a dog should be a victim of veterinary malpractice and citizens should be extorted for cash with threat of death of their animals by said ordinance to vaccinate their dogs EVERY YEAR (even though covered by a three year rabies vax which is legally binding from a veterinary standard and by common law) which would constitute abuse of said animal, that is to say veterinary malpractice.

A. There is no proof whatsoever that my dog provoked an incident of physical altercation.
B. There is no proof whatsoever that my dog bit the man with the husky dog.
C. There IS proof that my dog was loose and was in a physical altercation with a dog but that was most probably and logically initiated by the husky dog since my dog would not initiate same as proven by his temperament history and his temperament as witnessed by Teddy.
D. In addition, there IS proof that my dog is a gentle dog by witnesses at these scene of the incident even after my dog was bit by the husky with proven wounds and even after being beat about the head with a firearm.
I am therefore requesting that the charge of “vicious dog” be dropped entirely and my dog returned to me immediately.

Shawnee, OK

I was assisted in the preparation of this document by
Kate Riviello, President,



1) Colleen was blocked from reading this brief in her defense by the City’s Attorney M.A. Karns and Judge Wiley.  She requested to read her statement several times and the City Attorney and Judge Wiley kept concurring with each other that she was presenting “hearsay” and was not able to get even a couple sentences read. 

2) Colleen had a notarized copy of the above statement together with a signed statement from her veterinarian that the dog Blue was gentle and not in any way aggressive.  She was not permitted to submit her statement nor was she permitted to submit this additional testimony since the vet was not there to testify as to its authenticity. 

3) The City Attorney stated that she had seen the video of Colleen and Blue at the vet office and ordered that the dog be confined in his kennel and be unable to be walked at all out of the confines of the kennel. 

4) Colleen was not afforded copies of any of the evidence set forth against her even though she requested from the Court Clerk the ability to subpoena the “man with the husky.”  The Court Clerk advised her (yes legally advised her which is irregular) that she could not subpoena the City’s witness.  When in court, she stated that she was not provided copies of evidence against her and the City Attorney asked, “Did you ask for it?”  What was sought in particular was medical evidence of a bite to the “man with the husky.”  As it turns out the man with the husky testified that he sustained only some sort of “cut” to his finger. 

5) Right there and then in the City of Shawnee’s court, Blue dog was sentenced to death.  The City Attorney in her benevolence (sarcastic dripping) stated that the dog could be killed at the vet’s office and not be gassed. 

And that was it.  Adjourned.  Sine die.  Or so they thought.  In fact if we have our way it will be the first day on the path of the end of their careers.  An appeal is being prepared and filed.  An attorney is being retained.  A press conference will be called upon filing.  Because the City of Shawnee will kill Blue dog over our dead bodies.