Rosemark responds

[Elle]

Isn't it odd to you that you are the only person that supports your thinking? You are acting like we're all teamed up, which we're not. I just care about a little dog. I did not insist that you were involved with SOS, I asked you because I thought you were Exquisite Biewer Golddust Yorkshire Terrier Puppy Breeder Home, Biewers. But now that we know you are not. I am sorry for thinking you would be a person involved with a group like SOS rescue. I should not have assumed. I've seen your posts.

Originally Posted by golddust

First of all get your facts straight ...I have no idea what SOS rescue is and I have no idea who the other person you refer to asking if I know her? Please do not speak about me if you do not know me and refrain from giving information in a public forum that is untrue. Do not expect me to have anything, and you do not know wither or not I have sympathy. As for below the belt...what ohters are doing on here using peoples legal names and kennel names is below the belt and unethical. This is not the forum to be doing such a thing. People should be careful writing things about others if they do not have all the facts or know the person they are speaking about they could find themselves in a legal situation they may not want to be in. You clearly do not know me nor do you have your facts straight. With that said I think you owe me an apology regarding incorrect information being posted. THIS IS A PUBLIC FORUM. We all should treat each other with respect and consideration, not talking about people and posting things that are not true or are half truths

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by golddust

I think before you post things for the world to see you should have your facts straight. Are you sure of what you say?

It appears you are unaware of who most of us are and our connection with Marshall and his breeder Rosanne. Most of us are personal friends, belong to the same Regional and National Club. So, yes we do have our facts straight. Marshall's situation is near and dear to our hearts. Yes, we do have our facts straight.

This thread is only about getting Marshall back.

[jencar98]

Originally Posted by golddust

I am just wondering. All of you such as Elle ,Mardelin ,Manolos Mom and others that felt the need to talk about Crestwing and Diane and Stephanie do you know them all personally? Not do you know one of them, I would like to know if you know each person you decided to write about?

I am familiar with Roseanne and thought she would never be involved in selling an intact dog to Crestwing

Are you sure of all you facts and statements? If you don't could you please enlighten me as why you felt you had the right to write the things you did?

The facts are really quite simple.....Crestwing now has a dog that she shouldn't have. The chain of responsibility is easy enough to follow....so yes, I think it's pretty clear what was done and by whom.

I can say I dont know them but I think it is wrong to run around on a public forum speaking about people and disrespecting there character. I ask how would you feel if this was being done to you. All because one person was happy about owning Marshall. DO you think if she wanted to hide it she would have come on YT and posted it. If she was a bad person and she thought she had done something unethic do you believe she would have posted about it? Could it just be possible that she was happy about it and wanted others to be happy for her? Maybe she wanted to share her joy.

It is our responsibility to speak out against unethical breeding, back door acquisition of dogs, and those that perpetuate these practices.

I have no doubt Sue is thrilled to have acquired Marshall and ....you're probably right about her thinking she had done nothing wrong, otherwise....why would she have posted so proudly? But it would be her responsibility to know these things as a breeder....so ignorance is no excuse!


If you thought she did not go about it in the best way, any or all of you could have sent her a private message on YT . You did not have to do what you did in such a public way. Also you could have written to each other about it privately. I think it would be nice to say you are sorry to Crestwing and the others that you slammed.

I think it is good to keep this out in the open and not in private messages.....others will read this thread and will learn about the acquisition of show dogs and how Not to go about it. This might also help others learn about why show breeders are usually so careful in placing their dogs.


What I will say to Crestwing is I am happy for you and I am happy that Marshall gives you so much joy. I also think it is commendable Crestwing and the other ladies talked so poorly about regarding Marshall, I must say you are just that true LADIES. It appears as others on here could take a lesson from Crestwing, Diane,and Stephanie.


OMG....I can not even believe you've posted the above.......take a lesson from one of those 3...???.....I think NOT! Why?? So there could be more unethical dog people out there???

Its funny that all this talk about poor Marshall being treated so poorly....facts are he is a furry baby... however some of you treat humans badly as we can see by what has been written by some of you... so maybe we should wonder how you treat your furry babies, if you don't even know how to treat a fellow human being. Do you think only furry babies have feelings do you think these ladies you felt the need to talk about as you did, do not have feelings?

If those "ladies" you are defending had thought one minute about Marshall's well-being and doing the right thing.....none of this would have ever started up, now would it?

I am sorry if Crestwing (Sue) got duped by Stephanie and Diane, but as a breeder she should know.....now, Sue needs to do the right thing!

I appreciate your apology to me. But no, I have no apology to any of these ladies involved with rehoming Marshall.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by jencar98

I am sorry if Crestwing (Sue) got duped by Stephanie and Diane, but as a breeder she should know.....now, Sue needs to do the right thing!

I appreciate your apology to me. But no, I have no apology to any of these ladies involved with rehoming Marshall.

Let me say the Crestwing was not duped, you can do a bit of research and find out what she is about. The dog was sold to one person for their niece, the niece turned Marshall over to Stephanie.....they are friends.

[Elle]

I agree!!!!!

Originally Posted by jencar98

I am sorry if Crestwing (Sue) got duped by Stephanie and Diane, but as a breeder she should know.....now, Sue needs to do the right thing!

I appreciate your apology to me. But no, I have no apology to any of these ladies involved with rehoming Marshall.

[jencar98]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

Let me say the Crestwing was not duped, you can do a bit of research and find out what she is about. The dog was sold to one person for their niece, the niece turned Marshall over to Stephanie.....they are friends.

I didn't really think she was duped, Mary....but still can not get over the fact that Sue so proudly posted about getting Marshal....she had to have known something wasn't quite right with this.....Or, by posting....was she rubbing Roseanne's face in it (purposely)...so to speak?

[lingenieuse]

She is proud because she owns a good yorkie that produces beautiful puppies,a dog that under normal circumstances she would not have been able to buy from a YTCA breeder.

[Elle]

You can't buy a dog like this in any ethical situation. They aren't sold. To obtain a dog like this, you earn them!!!! They can't be bought. This is my issue. He's not a stuffed animal. Marshal is a living being. This is killing me.

[jencar98]

Originally Posted by Elle

You can't buy a dog like this in any ethical situation. They aren't sold. To obtain a dog like this, you earn them!!!! They can't be bought. This is my issue. He's not a stuffed animal. Marshal is a living being. This is killing me.

I am sick for Marshall and for Roseanne....I can only imagine the horror for them.

[Brooklynn]

I happen to know Roseanne and Diane personally....I do not know the other two.
Ethics is Ethics...plain and simple

Donna

[golddust]

Originally Posted by yorkiekist

I think its funny that you just admitted that you dont know any of the people involved but have the gall to tell everyone that posted on here to get their facts straight, and almost in a threatening way. Maybe the other posters have their facts straight. You seem threatened by this. Why?

Wither I know or don't know some or all of people involved is not the point, that no one seems to get. I was trying to maybe make people realize what they are writing on the internet. As for threating I was in no way threatening Anyone. Fact: when you say or write information that may not have all correct information that you can back up with prove the person providing (verbally or written) misinformation can legally be held responsible.

[golddust]

Originally Posted by yorkiekist

I think its funny that you just admitted that you dont know any of the people involved but have the gall to tell everyone that posted on here to get their facts straight, and almost in a threatening way. Maybe the other posters have their facts straight. You seem threatened by this. Why?

Wither I know or don't know some or all of people involved is not the point, that no one seems to get. I was trying to maybe make people realize what they are writing on the internet. As for threating I was in no way threatening Anyone. Fact: when you say or write information that may not have all correct information that you can back up with prove the person providing (verbally or written) misinformation can legally be held responsible.

[puppylove11]

Did Rosemark have a contract with who originally purchased Marshall? If so why did she not include in the contract a clause which would of protected Marshall? For example Marshall could only be rehomed back to her or if she was unable to take Marshall back he would have to be altered before being rehomed! Even if we do not agree with the home Marshall has ended up in the fault does not lay with Crestwing. I do not care who you purchase from or who you sell to, we all need to make sure our dogs are protected. Which means you have to do what is necessary to protect them, which means you may end up in a court of law. I know for a fact a breeder which has a clause in her contract which states if the contract is not followed she will sue for $5,000.00 and I do know she has won in court! Sorry but I do feel Rosemark should of better protected her dog!

[manolos mom]

Originally Posted by golddust

Wither I know or don't know some or all of people involved is not the point, that no one seems to get. I was trying to maybe make people realize what they are writing on the internet. As for threating I was in no way threatening Anyone. Fact: when you say or write information that may not have all correct information that you can back up with prove the person providing (verbally or written) misinformation can legally be held responsible.

Let me tell you something, the only thing you or anyone needs to do is 'fact' pull up her website. REDFLAG.....Plain and simple. Explain if maybe I am reading it wrong.

[yorkiekist]

Originally Posted by golddust

Wither I know or don't know some or all of people involved is not the point, that no one seems to get. I was trying to maybe make people realize what they are writing on the internet. As for threating I was in no way threatening Anyone. Fact: when you say or write information that may not have all correct information that you can back up with prove the person providing (verbally or written) misinformation can legally be held responsible.

OK, I think that everyone got your point as it was stated soooo many times. The horrible and sad part of this is that the dog ended up in an un-ethical breeder home, ie, one that purposely breeds for color faults, amoung other issues. And he got into that home because of no contract or co-ownership on the original breeders part. Crestwing should step up to the plate and give the dog back to the original breeder. But, then again, we are talking about ethics.