From: black@che.serum.kodak.com (Robert Black (x37236))
Subject: Re: PETA in hot water
Organization: Clinical Products Division, Eastman Kodak Company
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:40:17 GMT

In article <mhulsey-181292095016@fatrat.fcs.uga.edu> mhulsey@hestia.fcs.uga.edu (Martin Hulsey) writes:
>In article <BzFF52.9B3@wpg.com>, russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) wrote:
>> 

[...]

> > > Gerone apparently accepts Pacheco's account of events.  I do not.  I do
> > > agree that the incident has heightened awareness on both sides of the
> > > issue.
> > 
> > Do you think you're better informed on such matters than the director
> > of the Delta Regional Primate Center?   In deference to your proof-by-
> > credentials line of reasoning, are your credentials better than
> > Gerone's?   Have you had any hands-on experience with the Silver
> > Spring Monkeys, BTW?   
> 
> I am not aware of Gerone's credentials, nor are they relevant.  He offered
> his opinion and I offered mine.

This is not a question of credentials.  Gerone's role as head of the
Delta Regional Primate Center permitted him to actually spend time with
the monkeys, since they were in his possession for a while.  And in no
sense can Gerone be perceived as an apologist for PETA. 

> 
> > > There was a deterioration of animal care in Taub's lab in the three-week
> > > period prior to the police raid, but I question that Taub was at fault.
> > 
> > Who was at fault, Martin?
> 
> First, I would blame the animal caretakers who suddenly and mysteriously
> stopped coming to work.  Second, I would blame Pacheco, who noted these
> conditions in detail yet did absolutely nothing to correct them.  Remember
> the "water dish" analogy that you have repeatedly ignored.

Re: the claim that the animal caretakers "suddenly and mysteriously
stopped coming to work"

From Pacheco's sworn testimony - Cross (trial transcript, p. 154):

     Q	In the normal course of events, once a day these animal caretakers
	would come in and take these fecal trays, pull them out and empty
	them, wouldn't they?

     A	They wouldn't.  They didn't come in very often.  But when they
	did come in that was part of their job.


From Pacheco's sworn testimony - Cross (trial transcript, p. 164):

     Q	Now isn't it a fact that after Dr. Taub went on vacation and
	was gone, during the period of time you were bringing people 
	in the lab, that Amir Schwartz and Bob Osborn, the two animal
	caretakers, missed seven days in late August and early September
	from work out of 16?

     A	Well, I would have to check my log to see what I had written
	down.  But no one had been fed or the cages hadn't been cleaned.
	But that was their regular attendance record for the whole four 
	months I was there.

	They --

     Q	How do you know that?

     A	Because I could, again, I would see the same old bandage in the
	fecal tray night after night after night,  And sometimes I would
	come in and the monkeys were extremely hungry, extremely agitated
	from not being fed for a number of days.

     Q	If I were to tell you that the caretakers had missed almost no
	time prior to Dr. Taub going on vacation, that would surprise
	you, wouldn't it?

     A	I would say it is an absolute lie.

[...]


> > > When Taub left for a three-week vacation in 1981, he thought that his
> > > laboratory and animals were in good hands.  After all, in addition to the
> > > normal staff of two animal caretakers, there was Alex Pacheco.  Pacheco
> > > falsely represented himself as a person interested in learning about
> > > research.  Taub's only fault was trusting Pacheco.

Pacheco's testimony supports the view that the caretakers were not doing
their job right along and that there was absolutely no reason for Taub
not to notice it. 

> > 
> > So you say.  Have you got any proof?
> 
> When Pacheco applied for a position in Taub's lab in May of 1981, he told
> Taub that he "thought that he wanted to become a laboratory scientist."  He
> did not tell Taub that he was president of PETA (CFAAR Newsletter, op.
> cit., p. 3).  

If you're correct (and I don't know if you are or not), is it really that
bad to go undercover to expose criminal behavior which might not otherwise
see the light of day?

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Message-ID: <mhulsey-181292095016@fatrat.fcs.uga.edu>

> > 
> > From article <mhulsey-171292145858@fatrat.fcs.uga.edu>, by mhulsey@hestia.fcs.uga.edu (Martin Hulsey):
> > > In article <BzDGnL.18F@wpg.com>, russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) wrote:

[...]

> > According to an article on the Taub affair published by the 
> > _Washington Post_, the conviction was overturned on a jurisdictional 
> > technicality.  Can you corroborate your claims to the contrary without 
> > resorting to the bombastic handwaving demonstrations that you often 
> > employ to prove your points?  
> 
> The _Washington Post_ apparently relied on PETA for information rather than
> reading the opinion of the Appeals Court.  As I have said, the
> "jurisdictional technicality" was not the whole story.  My claim is
> corroborated by the reference that I gave.  Check it out.

Are you talking about the CFAAR reference?  What was the source for CFAAR's
information?

[...]

> Pacheco ... allegedly noted
> substandard conditions of animal care in detail during Taub's presence, yet
> did not report them to Taub.  He reported that the procedures in Taub's
> laboratory were "cruel," but never once questioned the procedures during
> his five month tenure at Taub's laboratory.  He noted substandard
> conditions of animal care in detail during Taub's vacation in 1981, yet did
> absolutely nothing to correct them.
> 

Pacheco's sworn testimony - Cross (trial transcript p. 152):

     Q	Why didn't you go to see Dr. Taub if you thought something was
	amiss early on?

     A	Well, it was, in the beginning I was in the colony room, which
	was the filthiest, with Dr. Taub on a number of times.  And the
	conditions were so outrageous that, and he was just there with
	me.  Everybody saw everything.  There wasn't any way you could 
	miss it.  So me pointing it out to him was like, there would be
	no point in it.


I have copies of some of the pictures that were introduced as evidence
and I find them to be very damning.  IMO there is no way that the IBR
lab could be said to have been run in accordance with any kind of
reasonable standards. 
---
Robert Black 
black@serum.kodak.com  - The ONLY email address that MIGHT work.
These views are not necessarily the views of my employers.