Penhallegon Page 62
MR. JACOB: So, Your Honor, at this point in time, I’m going to renew my objection to you of the characterization that Ms. Penhallegon made moments ago of the animal being chronically neglected. Not only does it call for a medical conclusion that I don’t believe she’s qualified to give, but also it calls for a legal conclusion that is outside of any witness’s purview and only in the sole province of Your Honor as fact finder to make.
Click Below for Full Trial Transcript
Q So now having assessed that animal, how would you
categorize him amongst the animals that you receive and care
for in Center Valley? Dogs?
MR. JACOB: And I’m going to object at this point
because I don’t think that there was a foundation for there
being a specific categorization system. I remember Counsel
asking earlier in direct testimony and not receiving an
answer.
THE COURT: I’m going to overrule.
MR. KENNEDY: For the record, I do believe I
received that answer.
BY MR. KENNEDY:
Q So how would you categorize him?
A Chronic neglect.
MR. JACOB: So I’m going to object to that
characterization again. And if the Court is inclined to say
the foundation has been laid, I’d like the opportunity to
voir dire the Witness.
THE COURT: You may, but I am overruling the
objection. But you may.
MR. JACOB: May I voir dire the Witness before you
make your final decision on that?
THE COURT: You may.
MR. JACOB: Thank you, Your Honor. So,
Ms. Penhallegon, you’re a vet tech, right?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
MR. JACOB: And that means you’re not a licensed
veterinarian, right?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
MR. JACOB: And there are certain rules that vet
techs have to abide by under the Washington Administrative
Code, right?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
MR. JACOB: And there are certain things that you
can’t do as a vet tech that a veterinarian would be able to
do, right?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
MR. JACOB: And so one of those things is you
cannot provide any sort of diagnosis of an animal, right?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
MR. JACOB: And that’s because you don’t have the
specialized training and experience to be able to make that
diagnosis under the law?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
MR. JACOB: And you also are not allowed to do
things like prescribe medication on your own, right?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
MR. JACOB: And your not allowed to take samples on
your own or analyze those samples or be able to indeed
testify to the results of those examples without direct
supervision of a veterinarian, right?
THE WITNESS: I can take samples, as long as the
doctor has ordered them.
MR. JACOB: So you don’t have to actually be
directly supervised in order for to take samples?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
MR. JACOB: But if you were to be asked to analyze
samples, that’s not something you can do as a veterinary
technician, right?
THE WITNESS: I do analyze samples and I give the
results to the doctor.
MR. JACOB: But as far as the actual conclusion
that you draw, that’s ultimately up to the vet, right?
THE WITNESS: The diagnosis is through the
veterinarian.
MR. JACOB: And your training and experience
doesn’t allow you to perform activities like surgery, for
instance?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
MR. JACOB: You’re not to initiate treatment
without prior instruction by a veterinarian, correct?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
MR. JACOB: And at the time that you’re testifying
about -- when you had your first contact with Moses on the
24th, you hadn’t done anything like take samples or analyze
those samples, right? Skin cytology, etc.
THE WITNESS: That was once the doctor showed up.
MR. JACOB: So you didn’t --
THE WITNESS: The only sample I drew before the
doctor got there was the lab work, which she had ordered.
MR. JACOB: So you didn’t know, for instance, at
that time, whether there was a chronic infection?
THE WITNESS: Correct to a point.
MR. JACOB: Okay. And certainly, as you testified,
you didn’t know Mr. Allmain at that point?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
MR. JACOB: And so you had no idea what he had or
hadn’t been doing to take care of his dog at that point in
time, right?
THE WITNESS: Correct.
MR. JACOB: So, Your Honor, at this point in time,
I’m going to renew my objection to you of the
characterization that Ms. Penhallegon made moments ago of the
animal being chronically neglected. Not only does it call
for a medical conclusion that I don’t believe she’s qualified
to give, but also it calls for a legal conclusion that is
outside of any witness’s purview and only in the sole
province of Your Honor as fact finder to make.
Click Below for Full Trial Transcript
