Future of seized dogs rests with court

Odegaard makes

court appearance

By KURT NESBITT

Journal Staff Writer

NEW ULM -- Now that media attention has subsided somewhat, authorities are determining the fate of 85 dogs and the two people who housed them on their farm in southwestern Brown County.

The dogs were seized last Tuesday morning in what defense attorney Cecil Naatz called "a media circus."

The seizure was the result of an investigation into animal abuse complaints by the Brown County Sheriff's Department and legal action taken by the Minnesota Federation of Humane Societies.

Assistant Brown County Attorney Jared Peterson said the raid stemmed from the original gross misdemeanor charges that were filed against Amelia Mae Odegaard, 53, of rural Sanborn, in March. Peterson explained later that reports and veterinarians' examinations of the dogs could be the basis for a new set of criminal charges against Odegaard.

"They could range from a misdemeanor to a felony," Peterson said Monday.

Odegaard appeared in Brown County District Court Monday morning for a pre-trial hearing. At that hearing, Naatz asked Judge Terry Dempsey for an evidentiary hearing, saying he plans to challenge law enforcement's entrance onto Odegaard's property.

Naatz also raised issue with having Brown County District Judge John R. Rodenberg hear the case. Naatz said Rodenberg was a Brown County attorney at the time Odegaard faced similar charges in 1987. In that case, Odegaard voluntarily gave up the animals on her property.

Dempsey said he thought Rodenberg should answer the question himself and refused to address it during Monday's hearing.

Dempsey later allowed Odegaard to go free without bail. One of the conditions of her release was that she not have any animals in her possession or in her care unless her efforts to petition for the return of the dogs is successful.

Odegaard's efforts to petition will be a separate, civil case from the criminal charges currently pending against her.

A ruling made on July 31 by Watonwan District Court Judge Allison Krehbiel Baskfield -- just one day after the dogs were taken from Odegaard's rural Sanborn hobby farm -- said the court won't take any action on the issue of release and ruled that Odegaard and Davis post a $6,500 bond to get the dogs back.

The ruling was made after Naatz challenged the searches of Odegaard's farm by law enforcement and animal protection officials.

Naatz filed an order for the release of the dogs just one day before Baskfield's ruling. In that order, he challenged the March search of the property by Brown County Deputy Sheriff Larry Wall, saying Wall did not have permission to search the property. Subsequently, neither did Timothy Shields, the head of the MFHS, nor did the Brown County Sheriff's Department when it seized the dogs that same day. Naatz said officials "tried to correct an illegal entry by waiting four months and trying a legal entry."

But Baskfield denied the order a day later, saying that Wall went to the farm in response to animal neglect complaints and had both Odegaard's and Davis' permission to search and videotape the dogs while they were on the farm. Therefore, Baskfield wrote, both the March and July searches -- and the seizure -- were legitimate because authorities had the right to search the property.

Naatz said he thinks Baskfield "took (Wall's) word for it" when she made the ruling, adding that Odegaard said Wall never had her permission to search the farm.

"Millie Odegaard has been unfairly vilified by the media," Naatz said Monday evening. "She is not a woman that took dogs in to torture them. She took them in to take care of them. Without her, these dogs would've been starved, shot or hit by cars."

The evidentiary hearing is set for Oct. 2 at 2 p.m. in New Ulm.