Southern California Pit Bull Rescue

Let’s Clear Up a Common Misconception

Many people continue to ask why we don’t simply file complaints with the Riverside Department of Animal Services regarding the actions of the Haven Pet Center.

The answer is simple:

The Riverside Department of Animal Services has absolutely no authority over the Haven Pet Center.

The Haven Pet Center is operated by the Ramona Humane Society, an independent nonprofit organization. It is not managed, supervised, or controlled by Riverside County Animal Services. Riverside County Animal Services cannot discipline Haven employees, cannot terminate Haven staff, cannot reverse Haven’s decisions, and cannot conduct enforcement actions against Haven on our behalf.

That’s like filing a complaint against one company and expecting an entirely different company to punish them.

The appropriate agencies for investigating potential criminal conduct are law enforcement agencies, not Riverside County Animal Services. That is why concerns regarding the killings of Cinnamon, Georgia, and others were brought to the Riverside Sheriff’s Department.

Unfortunately, despite being provided evidence and witness information, meaningful accountability has yet to occur.

The next time someone says, “Just call Riverside Animal Services,” understand that they have no authority over the Haven Pet Center. None.

The issue has never been about not knowing where to report concerns. The issue has always been whether those with the authority to investigate are willing to do so.

Some of you just can’t be this stupid. But, apparently you are.

We will continue to seek accountability for Cinnamon, Georgia, Cora, and every other animal that deserved better.

Animal shelters should never be above the law.

The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department actually told us they would not pursue charges against the CEO and Animal Control Officer from the Haven Pet Center because the statements they made were not under oath.

Let that sink in.

Not because the statements were true.

Not because the evidence supported them.

Not because there was no conflicting evidence.

But because they claimed the statements were not made under oath.

Since when is being under oath a requirement for accountability?

We provided evidence disputing the claims used to justify the killing of Cinnamon. We provided evidence that records were altered after her death. We provided evidence that the narrative changed multiple times. Yet rather than thoroughly investigate those discrepancies, the Sheriff’s Department chose to dismiss them.

If a person knowingly provides false information to justify the killing of a dog, should that simply be ignored because they weren’t sitting in a courtroom with their hand raised?

Imagine applying that standard to every criminal investigation. How many cases would be closed if law enforcement decided false statements only matter when made under oath?

Cinnamon was killed. Georgia was killed. Cora was killed. Families, volunteers, and rescuers deserved a real investigation. Instead, we were given excuses.

Animal shelters and their employees should not be above the law. When evidence raises serious questions, law enforcement should follow the facts wherever they lead—not look for reasons to avoid doing their job.

We will continue fighting for accountability because Cinnamon mattered. Georgia mattered. Cora mattered. And the truth matters.