PAME ASHLEY LIAR, HYPOCRITE AND ANIMAL ABUSER

Dogsbite.org Member Slings Mud at Neighbors

By WhoIsColleen

Updated: April 4, 2014

Pame Ashley has told a number of variations to her story about the death of her dog Bleu.  WhoIsColleenLynn writers are dog lovers.  The thought of any dog suffering is disturbing to us.  We often hear from Dogsbite.org how if you are a pit bull owner you are irresponsible.  That roaming, loose dogs are problematic and dangerous.  We agree! We hear that dogs that are not spayed or neutered represents an irresponsible dog owner.  We agree!  We hear that dogs that are not micro-chipped states an owner is unconcerned with being identified, should their dog escape or injure someone. We agree!

However, when we hear that from Pame Ashley, we have to call a spade a spade, or more precisely.  A hypocrite.

WhoIsColleenLynn contacted Ashley’s neighbor, Darrell Smith, asking if he’d like a chance to tell his side of the story that Pame Ashley has apparently told on every forum she could tell/write it.  He agreed.

Smith and Ashley are neighbors from the small town Rainbow City AL. In March of 2012 an incident occurred between Smith’s dogs and Pame Ashley’s dog, Bleu. Sadly her dog did die but Smith claims the dog died from the injuries received because it wasn’t taken for treatment by a veterinarian.  The following is Smith’s account in his own words.

I had awoken from sleeping and let my two dogs out to relieve themselves because they are inside dogs. It was cold that morning so I was just gonna let them out and stand by the door, then let them back in. After opening the door and letting them out I heard them fighting at the back of the house. I slipped on my tennis shoes, a light jacket, then headed around the back of the house. I found my dogs and Pame Ashley’s dog fighting. One of my dogs is older and has hip problems, during the fight she must have twisted them because when I got to the back of the house she was laying down. My other dog and Pame’s dog continued to fight. Pame’s dog broke free and proceeded to run back towards the Ashley’s residence, across the dam of my father-in-laws pond which is just a short way through the woods. My dog chased after it Bleu. I picked up my other dog and took her into the house, then went after my other dog that had followed Bleu. As I crossed the dam on the pond I could hear them fighting just behind Pame’s barn. As I got to the far side of the pond within a hundred or so yards of the barn everything grew quiet, then my dog came walking through the woods toward me. I snapped a leash on her collar and led her home. Once there I checked her over.  She had the some cuts typical of a dog fight, mostly small lacerations to the face and head and a small tear in her ear. I gave her a bath and cleaned the wounds with soap and water and peroxide, them packed them full of antibiotic cream. All of this took place around 1:00pm.

Around 4:00-4:30ish Pame and her husband pulled into my in-laws driveway and proceeded to knock on his door. They were telling him about how they had found their dog bloodied and hiding under a camper, then demanded something be done about my dogs.  My father-in-law replied, “Those dogs don’t belong to me. You’ll need to talk to Darrell.” By this time I had already walked up on what was being said [since I just live right next door]. Pame’s husband began to tell me he had found their dog blood dried and torn to pieces, as he put it. I told him that the dogs did get in a fight. There wasn’t a lot of talking after that just Pame being obnoxious and demanding I have my dogs euthanized. The craziness of her antics continued for several minutes before I got a chance to say anything. When I did I simply said “Get me a copy of the vet bill and I’ll take care of it.”

She kept demanding I have the dogs put down because they were, as she put it, “Vicious Animals that didn’t deserve to live.”  I finally told her I’m not doing anything with my dogs unless there is a piece of paper with a judge’s signature on it. Pame’s husband spoke up and said “Well give you till tomorrow to decide what you’re gonna do.”

They got in their truck and left. The next morning Pame’s husband called me and told me their dog had died early that morning. He asked me to meet him at their rental house that sets within view of my house, across the pond and through the woods. When I met him he asked what my decision was about the dogs. I told him “I’m keeping them” he got angry, then started showing me places where the dogs had fought.  There was some blood on the wall of the barn, he then talked about how there was a “pack issue” between my dogs. The whole time not knowing it had only been one of my dogs. He insisted on euthanizing both dogs, or getting rid of them, period. As he put it, “I don’t care if you give them away, throw them off the river bridge, or shoot them, I want them damn dogs gone” I told him “Out of the question, “ABSOLUTELY not!” He got angry and said “I’ll spend every dime I got to make sure those dogs are gone where they can’t hurt anybody or any other animals.”  He then told me he’d see me in court, got in his truck and pulled away.

Several months later I received a letter in the mail from their attorney wanting my homeowners insurance company’s name and phone number so they could try to get them to pay for damages to the dog. I called their attorney’s office and told them I was not giving them that information, we’d just have to go to court. Eventually that’s what happened. Before our court date my attorney filed a motion for Pame to supply us with a copy of a vet bill to settle. A judge signed off on it for them to produce one. To this date, I haven’t seen one.

So court day rolls around, we argue our cases. In the end he ruled in Pame’s favor. The judges name Is Will Clay. I learned after our trail that Pame’s husband was a very close and personal friend with the former [deceased] Sheriff of Etowah County, and Sheriff had a long friendship with Judge Clay. I don’t know if that truly had any bearing on my case or not, but….go figure.

Pame was awarded $700 and some change. Till this day I, nor my attorney, have seen a vet bill. One thing that has always struck me as odd is the picture of that dog thrown in the back of that filthy truck. Look at it closely! Look at the mud caked on it’s face and head. Would a vet not have cleaned or washed all that off before trying to treat the animal in a proper sterile way?

Smith’s account of the events of the day that Pame Ashley became an anti-pit bull crusader appears an accurate account.  Certainly, his attorney did in fact file a request for disclosure from Ashley. WhoIsColleenLynn contacted the law offices of Dana L. Rice, who represented the Smith’s, requesting a copy of the document.
View pdf: darrell smith documents for pame ashley claims1

Interestingly, Smith’s attorney requested not only copies of the Veterinarian’s billing for treatment and service for Bleu, but a number of other items, including any social media posts, comments, etc.

This request was processed on February 7, 2013. As of this date, Rice nor Smith have received any response to that disclosure order.
View pdf: darrell smith documents for pame ashley claims2
Of course, the case has been decided and Ashley awarded monetary damages for the loss of her property, as a dog is identified by law, and apparently her pain and suffering.

But, remember in the beginning of this article? We mentioned that we agree with the ideology that a dog owner should be a responsible person, taking measures to ensure that a pet is protected from the dangers that await any loose, roaming, unsupervised dog.  Every professional organization considered expert in the field of animal care agree’s that not only is it responsible dog ownership, but it also increases community of safety.  Of course, Dogsbite.org doesn’t promote this for dogs owners, only pit bull owners apparently.

However, we aren’t sure if any neighbor, let alone a professional animal organization, would consider Pame a responsible dog owner based on her own account of events that have unfolded before the death of Bleu.

So, Pame has had a near menagerie of pets, even though none were trained, including Bleu.  Most apparently suffering the result of irresponsible ownership. And, what about that coonhound that bit a child in the face?  Pame didn’t insist that dog be destroyed.  Instead she made that a “stud” and allowed a biting dog to reproduce so that more dogs that may be inherently dangerous or unstable could be unleashed in neighboring communities.  Responsible? How about the excuse she makes on behalf of the dog?  Blaming a victim?

It goes without stating at this point that Pame harbors harsh feelings for the Smiths.  But she chooses to accuse them of causing her grief with her newest dog Sandy, when in reality no animal control officer is going to pick-up a dog that is in it’s own yard and not roaming loose — like, at a neighbors house…where one of Pame’s dogs has already roamed, causing a dog-fight….then ending up costing the Smith’s more than $700.

Responsible?  Allowing a female dog that is in heat to roam, even within your own yard, will not prevent other dogs that may roam loose in the community from breeding in Pame’s yard.  But, of course, by Pame’s own admission Sandy, while in heat, has been roaming beyond the perimeters of the Ashley’s property.  And, according to Alabama’s Code this is a violation of state law.  So, how would our readers imagine Pame would handle this problem?

Pame’s solution?  Let taxpayers foot the bill, and allow the dog to be at risk of being euthanized after SEVEN days, not 30 days before being considered adoptable, as Pame described.  Why would Pame send a relative to pick-up Sandy once she’s out of heat?  And, what training?  Didn’t Pame state they had never trained any of their dogs prior to these two dogs?  If Pame were a neighbor that had historically violated state law by permitting her dogs to roam free and without training, harboring one dog that had attacked a child, and then taken the Smiths to court without producing the demanded items for disclosure, it would stand to reason that anyone in the neighboring community would want to avoid having her dog(s) roam their property.   Certainly any neighbor may have called, especially on a bitch in heat.  But don’t think any Dogsbite.org memebers would attempt to speak reason with Pame.

Don’t worry Jaloney Caldwell.  We’ve reached out to your neighbors for an upcoming article.

But, back to Pame Ashley.  Pame has spread her spin of tales on a number of different articles, in Letters to the Editor of her local paper, shared it with potential new members, and even spoken of it at poorly attended events Arizona, California, and Georgia.  Never did she imagine she would have to be confronted with Smith’s version of the events apparently.  But when she had a Letter to the Gadsden Times published last month, that was exactly what occurred.  And soon, Pame and her alter-ego’s and fellow Dogsbite.org members were rallying troops on a number of their facebook pages.  Pleas for back up, support from those she has supported over her time attached to Dogsbite.  When Smith confronted her repeatedly about the infamous vet bill however, the comments disappeared.

Last week, a resident that opposed Ashley’s opinion had a letter published.  She could not help herself but to go onto the comment section once again.  And, once again, Darrell Smith confronted her.  Only this time, Pame appears to be making even wilder accusations about Smith.

Not only did Pame make these comments, but she again asked for support from fellow Dogsbite.org members.

One might believe that with all the coordinating effort that Pame would have been happy for the comments to remain, afterall, she claims she has the truth on her side.  But sources tell WhoIsColleenLynn this was not the case.  Pame is said to have been thankful the comments were removed.

Strangely, we received evidence that Pame has done her share of sharing private information about the Smith’s.

An anonymous source claims that Pame not only posted Mrs. Smith’s photo with the Smith’s dogs, but in fact stalked her neighbors facebook page so she could show what Facebook groups Mrs. Smith had joined via her own series of screenshots. This apparently indicated that the Smith’s were liars about the type of dogs they own.

Woe what a tangled web we weave…Pame immediately logged off from the counter-points made by Smith only to log into her Pittance account where she changed the name in effort to confuse Smith, after WhoIsColleenLynn published evidence that Pame is Pittance, and possibly to mislead the public should anyone from her area be reading these comments.  Unfortunately for Ashley, she was immediately detected by a number of the Dogsbite.org targets.

Shortly after this faux pas, the comments for this Letter to the Editor also disappeared.

Perhaps Pame was too aghast to consider logging into her Dava persona in effort to continue the premise that she, Pame, had support in hating pit bulls.

Of course, if we lived in Pame’s neighborhood, we’d be extremely concerned for the safety of any dog, but most especially a dog that Pame considers a pit bull type dog. Anyone that would make a test-drive with a stun gun may or may not choose to use it, right?

As if that testing weren’t enough, somehow on a stormy night two stray or roaming dogs managed to make it on to Pame’s enclosed porch area.  It appears an enclosed area, so how this occurred is not explained.  But what Pame does announce is her willingness to use the stun gun on them.  We should note here, that as cruel as this appears, Pame was within her right at this point to use said stun gun.

WhoIsColleenLynn has the video, but has chosen to hold it for a later date.  We couldn’t help but wonder however if Pame’s nephew would have any concern that she might use said stun gun on his pit bull at the next family outing.

Surely, this wouldn’t be the same nephew that Pame claimed in a response to article I of this series was attacked by a pit bull before Bleu was killed…..would it?