Veterinary Council of NZ to Disclose Names: Don’t Get Excited. It’s Not What It Sounds Like.
Jordan Kelly • 19 May 2026

And So the Game Goes On . . .

Above:  To the courageous anonymous insider (made obvious by your other inclusions) who again emailed me with your now-regular jeering missive yesterday . . . this time to to tell me that my "articles are getting repetitive" : I've repeated the publication of the above photograph of Harry at Massey especially for you. To remind you of your handiwork.


This morning Liam Shields (Deputy Registrar i.e. CEO still thinks Harry's case is beneath him) wrote saying the Veterinary Council of New Zealand (VCNZ) intends to disclose the identities of the "registered veterinarians" involved in Massey University's "Companion Animal Hospital's" “treatment” and “care” of my dog, Harry. (Gotta love what they call “treatment” and “care” . . . the “treatment” and “care” that ensured he never left alive . . . because he was never intended to). 


In my previous (May 6) email to Mr Shields, I had pre-empted the two likely strategy options Massey and the Veterinary Council would choose between in order to ensure – in their full-blown, drawn-out collusion with Massey’s management – that no-one is ever held accountable for the atrocities committed upon, and resultant demise of, my precious little Harry.


I had put it to Mr Shields that they intended one of the two following strategies.


From my May 6 email:


"Are you planning some stunt whereby:


"a) You tell me you have the names - but with nil intention to disclose them to me - and then conduct a secret squirrel "investigation" of these undisclosed individuals, before returning a "not guilty" verdict?


"OR


"b) Given that you absolutely could, if you wanted to, obtain and disclose ALL the names of every staff member and other individual who handled or was involved in Harry's case, but that you have specifically self-limited that in your email . . . are you going to make the totally predictable manouevre of siphoning off as many as possible of the wrongdoings from licensed staff and attributing them over to unnamed, non-licensed staff so that you can then “investigate” the licensed personnel only and then say that all (or as many as you could move off to) the practices in question were the decisions or actions of the non-licensed staff? And that, thus I need to take these matters up with Massey? Which is exactly what you know I’ve been trying to do since your entire collusive circular stone-walling Massey/VCNZ/Massey/VCNZ/Massey/VCNZ gyration strategy began?"


It would appear the Veterinary Council of New Zealand and Massey University and its veterinary "hospital" have decided they're going with Strategy (b).


As I pointed out, either strategy would render it incredibly easy for VCNZ and Massey to engineer a “nil findings” outcome.


The "registered veterinarians only" is the mechanism that - most especially in a "teaching" facility where multiple students, interns and unqualified, inexperienced personnel (or worse) are handling or making life or death decisions for people's (private patient) pets - can be readily deployed to ensure that the worst actors walk free . . . both those licensed practitioners whose involvements got magically shifted across to "non-licensed" staff, and/or the decisions and actions of non-licensed staff  whose actions and outcomes aren't subject to any regulatory or disciplinary body whatsoever to start with.


If you think this is me being overly cynical, no. It’s not. It’s clearly what McLachlan, Shields and co. intend to do. And here’s how it has been masterminded to work:


Here’s the offer Shields made in a sort of cloaked way in his email previous to mine . . . but that he's backed out of since reading my response and realising I was wise to his and Massey’s combined intentions.


His offer had been:


"It may be helpful to note that, where a formal complaint is made, our committees have legal powers to require information necessary to advance their investigation or reach a decision."


In my responding email I had graciously accepted:


"Great, Mr Shields. Then since you know that I have multiple times across now five months requested key information (like the names of ALL involved staff) . . . and since your ‘committees have legal powers to require’ these - then you can obtain these very easily for me."


But today, he wrote this:


“We’re not able to facilitate a personal information request on your behalf. You can contact Massey University directly about your Privacy Act request. That is the appropriate avenue to access personal information held by Massey University.”


So, switched-on readers will see clearly that, if you put those two “strategic” items together, they equal Strategy (b).


Now let’s move to Shields’s next paragraph:
 

“I mentioned a Complaints Assessment Committee (“CAC”) (sic) powers under the Veterinarian’s Act because the CAC will typically request relevant clinical records during its investigation. The purpose of obtaining this information is to assist the CACs (sic) decision-making.”


That sounds innocent and reasonable. But here’s the problem. In the main, he’s talking about the “Clinical Summary” document that I prised out of Massey originally, after its release had been the subject of a further delay (i.e. it had been caught belatedly by their Legal and Governance Department after someone at the Companion Animal “Hospital” almost released it to me without the editing and hygienising that the legal counsel found necessary . . . and goodness knows, it’s easy to tell that the undoctored version was already problematic enough for them).


This “Clinical Summary” has had every name and every position title redacted. Great. Big. Black. Boxes. Over every one of them.


So unless Massey “un-redacts" the numerous entries throughout every single page and puts the names and job titles back in, then who’s going to decide who did what in terms of the formal complaint I need to make to VCNZ for each name they finally release?
 
The answer to that is (drum roll) . . . the VCNZ Complaints Assessment Committee (CAC), of course! (The one featuring none other than
Professor Jenny Weston herself — Academic Director of Massey University's Veterinary Teaching Program and ex officio member of the VCNZ Council — who sits on the body that reviews all CAC decisions, including any decision on complaints about Massey University, the institution whose veterinary academic program she directs . . . who also previously co-authored the 2019 New Zealand Veterinary Journal study that documented VCNZ's own 67.2% dismissal rate and 1.5% uphold rate over 24 years.)


And so we circle back to Strategy (b).


It’s on the one hand elegant, but on the other hand transparent and devious:


The Clinical Summary contains NO NAMES, NO ROLE TITLES, and thus NO ability for me to see who did what with regard to Harry’s  . . . err . . . “treatment” and “care”; those who intentionally and catastrophically and repeatedly overdosed him, those who disconnected him from his IV fluids for use in student demonstrations and video productions, those who abusively “handled” him during those “activities”, the name of the “neurologist” who “examined” Harry in a collapsed and near-comatose state and in that catastrophically sedated state diagnosed him as “demented” which then became the foundational element in the falsified “neurological” diagnosis and “terminal” prognosis and the plan to deceive me into the apparent and non-negotiable need (with no second opinion allowed for) for his immediate “euthanasia”.  and those who supported “Dr” Steffi Jalava in this despicable ruse.


With those fundamental and complete set of identity, role and action redactions firmly maintained, who gets to decide who to apportion those decisions and actions to?
 
The Veterinary Council of New Zealand. The same
“leadership” team who were colluding with Massey University, through its “Dean” of the Veterinary “School”, Jon Huxley, on how my complaints would be handled . . . or, more to the point, preferably, never handled.


As you can see from the below exchange:


From: "Jon Huxley" <J.Huxley@massey.ac.nz>
Sent: 1/30/2026 3:16:00 AM
To: "Iain McLachlan" <iain@vetcouncil.org.nz>, "liam@vetcouncil.org.nz" <liam@vetcouncil.org.nz>, "Seton
Butler" <seton@vetcouncil.org.nz>
Subject: Jordan Kelly - Allegations regarding VTH care


Kia ora koutou,


I am writing regarding recent correspondence from Ms Jordan Kelly, in which she has made a number of serious
allegations about the care provided by the Veterinary Teaching Hospital in Tāwharau ora – School of Veterinary
Science at Massey University.


The School categorically refutes all of the allegations she has raised. Earlier this afternoon I advised Ms Kelly
directly that, should she wish to pursue her concerns, the appropriate pathway is through the Veterinary Council of
New Zealand, as the statutory body responsible for regulating the veterinary profession. She has now been
formally directed to engage with VCNZ if she wishes to take the matter further.


Given the nature of her communications and the pattern of escalation, the Veterinary Teaching Hospital has
declined to provide any future veterinary services to Ms Kelly. The matter has also been referred to the University’s
legal counsel, to ensure our position is clear and appropriately documented should further action become
necessary.


I appreciate that you will have received her messages, and I am sorry that you have been drawn into what is, at its
heart, a wholly unfounded complaint. Should you wish to discuss the matter, or require any clarification about the
circumstances, please feel free to get in touch with me directly.


Ngā mihi,
Jon
Jon Huxley
Head of School
Tāwharau Ora – School of Veterinary Science
Massey University │ Private Bag 11222, Palmerston North │ 4100 │ New Zealand │
│ │ www.massey.ac.nz/school-vetscience/
Pronouns: He / Him


As you can see, VCNZ Chief Executive Officer Iain McLachlan was prompt in taking up "Jon's" offer for Shields to call "Jon" for the official version:

Subject: Re: Jordan Kelly - Allegations regarding VTH care
Date: Friday, 30 January 2026 at 4:27:31 PM  Iain McLachlan
To: Huxley, Jon
CC: Liam Shields, Seton Butler

Thanks Jon. I suspect Liam and his team will be in touch.


Ngā mihi
Iain McLachlan
He | Him
Kaiwhakahaere Matua me Pouroki | CEO & Registrar
Te Kaunihera Rata Kararehe o Aotearoa | Veterinary Council of New Zealand
Level 6, Midland Chambers, 45 Johnston Street, Wellington 6011 | New Zealand
P 04 473 9600 | DDI 04 894 3705 | W www.vetcouncil.org.nz


Notably, despite my earlier Privacy Act information-release request, McLachlan's acceptance of "Jon's" kind invitation, has only just surfaced. I know exactly why. But I'll keep that up my sleeve for now.


Interesting to note that I also asked for what came next by way of communication between McLachlan, Shields, Butler and Co. and Massey's Jon Huxley and his legal team . . . but have never received any answer.


Can you just imagine how damning that subsequent communication would be. Because we’re not just talking emails. We’re talking the whole gamut of communication vehicles. Over the ensuing five months.


Readers . . . are you starting to see the depth of the collusion and the determination of Massey and the Veterinary Council of New Zealand to absolutely ensure a “nothing to see here” outcome?

Other News, Reviews & Commentary

by Jordan Kelly • 26 September 2026
The Ministry of Education Charlatans Ain't Got Nuthin' on Massey's Director of 'Governance and Assurance'
by Jordan Kelly • 22 September 2026
'Student Education': The Happy, Perfectly Viable Little Dog (& Paying Client's Pet) These Cretins Tortured, Overdosed, Killed & Lied About Having Done So THREE MONTHS IN WAITING FOR A RESPONSE FROM JON 'WHOLLY UNFOUNDED' HUXLEY AND MISSING-IN-ACTION VICE-CHANCELLOR PIERRE VENTER.
by Jordan Kelly • 9 September 2026
And A Reminder to Massey: I Will Continue Exposing the Dark Underbelly of Your Despicable Institution Until Every Pet Owner in New Zealand Is Warned & Every Potential Student Is Made Aware of Precisely What You 'Teach' _______________________________________________________________
by Jordan Kelly • 9 September 2026
Weak, Collusive or Both? MPI 'Investigators' Had A 342-Page Dossier of Hard Evidence (& Hundreds of Other Documents) FOR MONTHS . . . And Suddenly Handed It Off to the Demonstrably Collusive Vet Council, with One Weak-Willed Sentence and No Explanation. So . . . What Happened, Mr Director General?
by Jordan Kelly • 9 September 2026
MORAL INJURY OR EQUALLY EVIL? Massey Vet Students on December 1: Were You Deceived . . . or Participants In the Deception? (PART ONE) UPDATE 9.9.26 (For any intending student, parent funding a student, or careers advisor, wanting to ensure quality and ethical veterinary education, here's your warning): The Massey "neurologist" and veterinary "educator"who apparently (or conveniently) can't tell a "demented" dog from a catastrophically (contraindicated) sedative-overdosed dog, has been named: "Dr" Anita Shea. Shea's apparent (or convenient) inability to discern between a "sedated" dog and a "demented" dog, with said dog on a table in front of her, greatly assisted fellow "educator" " Dr" Steffi Jalava in her prolonged and intensive coercion of the owner for Harry's immediate (and as it later transpired, totally without cause) destruction, following Jalava's utilisation of him as a live teaching prop and as student "educational" video content . The author (and owner of the precious NON-"demented" little papillon who was sent to a totally unnecessary death based on Shea's "diagnostic skills" and collusion with Jalava) vehemently urges ALL young persons seeking an ethical and competent education in veterinary science, to look elsewhere for your studies.
by Jordan Kelly • 8 September 2026
UPDATE 8.9.26: The Massey "neurologist" who apparently (or conveniently) can't tell a "demented" dog from a catastrophically (contraindicated) sedative-overdosed dog, has been named: She is "Dr" Anita Shea. Shea's apparent inability to discern the distinction between "sedated" and "demented" with said dog on a table in front of her, greatly assisted "Dr" Steffi Jalava in her prolonged and intensive coercion of the owner for Harry's immediate (and as it later transpired, totally without cause) destruction. The author (and owner of the precious NON-"demented" little papillon who was sent to a totally unnecessary death based on Shea's "diagnostic skills") vehemently urges all pet owners to avoid any contact with this "clinician" - who, in the author's opinion is incomprehensibly incompetent, or utterly monstrous. Or perhaps, both. THIRD UPDATE: Since the original January 16 publication of this article, and despite Massey's ongoing efforts to obscure the identities of those involved, the day shift clinician who delivered the fraudulent diagnosis and administered the lethal injection has been identified by her full name: Dr Steffi Maja Jalava. She is far from the only person culpable for the torture, fraud, and fully unnecessary termination of Harry's life . However, Jalava's completely false "terminal" "neurological" "diagnosis" and "prognosis" delivered throughout two hours of aggressive coercion — after "teaching" staff had finished their unauthorised and unspeakably cruel utilisation of Harry in student activities and filming — were the grounds on which I was duped into signing a "euthanasia" "consent" form . . . and worse still, participating therefore in the wrongful killing of my own deeply beloved dog. The identities of the night shift veterinarian and ICU staff responsible for the overnight overdosing described in this article — the repeated, catastrophic levels of contraindicated administration of Gabapentin and Prevomax to a renally-compromised patient between approximately midnight and 9am on December 1, 2025 — remain unknown and actively withheld by Massey. If you were on duty in Massey's Companion Animal Hospital ICU on the night of November 30 into December 1, 2025, or if you have knowledge of who was, this investigation would like to hear from you. UPDATE TO READERS: Since writing this article, my continuing research has indicated that Harry was likely not only simply sedated (and massively so) for the sake of the ICU staff's convenience, but also to facilitate a multiplicity of training procedures to be conducted upon him - with the intention that the fronting clinician, "Steffi", would present him as requiring urgent "euthanasia" through a sudden natural decline in his condition. Unfortunately, for Massey management and personnel, I have not only my own memory of him standing strongly on his back legs in his ICU cage at midnight and reaching through the door for comfort, but also now a video of him actively "circling" on the ICU floor, just hours before he was presented to me in a flacid, semi-comatose state with no viable explanation other than some supposedly nature decline. UPDATE TO THE UPDATE : The above indications have not only since been confirmed , but what actually happened to Harry was far worse, and constituted much more than gross malpractice. My latest findings move the entire matter squarely into the category of malfeasance - both at the clinical level and at the highest levels of Massey's management. The Reckless Practice of 'Convenience Sedation' & the True Cost of Clinical Apathy
by Jordan Kelly • 8 September 2026
8.9.26 UPDATE: The Massey "neurologist" who apparently (or conveniently) can't tell a "demented" dog from a catastrophically (contraindicated) sedative-overdosed dog, has been named: She is "Dr" Anita Shea. Shea's apparent inability to discern the distinction between "sedated" and "demented" with said dog on a table in front of her, greatly assisted "Dr" Steffi Jalava in her prolonged and intensive coercion of the owner for Harry's immediate (and as it later transpired, totally without cause) destruction. The author (and owner of the precious NON-"demented" little papillon who was sent to a totally unnecessary death based on Shea's "diagnostic skills") vehemently urges all pet owners to avoid any contact with this "clinician" - who, in the author's opinion is incomprehensibly incompetent, or utterly monstrous. Or perhaps, both. UPDATE: Since the original January 31 publication of this article, and despite Massey's ongoing efforts to obscure the identities of those involved , the clinician who delivered the fraudulent diagnosis and administered the lethal injection has been identified by her full name: Dr Steffi Maja Jalava. She is far from the only person culpable for the torture, fraud, and fully unnecessary termination of Harry's life . However, Jalava's completely false "terminal" "neurological" "diagnosis" and "prognosis" delivered throughout two hours of aggressive coercion - after " teaching" staff had finished their unauthorised and unspeakably cruel utilisation of Harry in student activities and filming - were the grounds on which I was duped into signing a "euthanasia" "consent" form . . . and worse still, participating therefore in the wrongful killing of my own deeply beloved dog . From Lethal Incompetence and Malpractice . . . to Withholding of Life-Saving Corrective Action in Favour of Utilisation As A Teaching Aid . . . to A Fraudulent Diagnosis . . . to A Coerced 'Euthanasia' to Destroy the Evidence . . . to Management Malfeasance At the Highest Levels
by Jordan Kelly • 8 September 2026
An Expert Contributed Commentary UPDATE 8.9.26: The Massey "neurologist" who apparently (or conveniently) can't tell a "demented" dog from a catastrophically (contraindicated) sedative-overdosed dog, has been named: She is "Dr" Anita Shea. Shea's apparent (or convenient) inability to discern between a "sedated" dog and a "demented" dog, with said dog on a table in front of her, greatly assisted " Dr" Steffi Jalava in her prolonged and intensive coercion of the owner for Harry's immediate (and as it later transpired, totally without cause) destruction, following Jalava's utilisation of him as a live teaching prop and as student "educational" video content . The author (and owner of the precious NON-"demented" little papillon who was sent to a totally unnecessary death based on Shea's "diagnostic skills" and collusion with Jalava) vehemently urges ALL pet owners to avoid any contact with these "clinicians" - who, in the author's opinion are incomprehensibly incompetent but worse and even more so, utterly monstrous.
by Jordan Kelly • 8 September 2026
Readers following the coverage of my attempts to get to the bottom of what happened to my beloved little papillon, Harry, with whom I was extraordinarily closely bonded, will know that: (A) The rot in Massey University’s Companion Animal “Hospital” (CAH) runs deep. (B) Honesty and transparency is not their policy. Denial, dismissal, stonewalling, legal threats and intimidation are. (C) Animals aren’t safe there, with cruelty embedded in “care”, and your property (as your pet legally is) not considered your property at all, as far as Massey, its CAH staff and management are concerned. Your pet is theirs ; to do with as they please, according to their mindset and their modus operandi. And if that involves catastrophic levels of unauthorised, contraindicated, convenience sedation to facilitate their use of your pet in monetised student video collections (including on private cell phones, and to which you will be given no access), this too, according to Massey, is its own God-given right and “best practice” Standard Operating Procedure. (D) “Informed Consent” has a very different meaning in the Massey playbook to that which is generally deemed its accepted definition. (E) “Accountability” is a foreign concept and not one with which they have any intention of becoming acquainted. (F) Laws – including those governing animal welfare, property conversion and more – are not only optional, in Massey’s case, they simply don’t apply. In fact, they appear blissfully ignorant of them according to my (and Harry's) experience. You know all that. You’ve read about it here , here , here , here , here , here , here , here and in most of my other now 30+ articles covering the numerous different sub-atrocities within the overall atrocity that was the demise and disposal of my precious little Harry. Actually, "atrocious" doesn't come anywhere near to being an adequate adjective. Despite having been a professional writer since I was 16 and having upwards of 25 published books under my belt, I don't actually have an adjective that's adequate for the pure evil that was perpetrated upon Harry . . . and, by extension, me . There is not one word or one phrase that can sufficiently convey the depth and breadth of the sheer, unadulterated wickedness that festers without restraint within the walls of Massey University's Companion Animal "Hospital". What you, my readers (or those of you not on Massey's massive legal team payroll) didn’t yet know – because I didn’t yet know – is that record and evidence tampering (which, for any other New Zealand citizen would attract jail time of up to 10 years under the Crimes Act 1961 Section 258 (Altering document with intent to deceive) or Section 260 (Falsifying registers) , and/or a $10,000 fine under the Privacy Act Section 212(2)(b) - appears also to be included in the “we’re exempt” culture of Massey and its veterinary “hospital” staff. Note to Readers: The above laws aren't some hypothetical, bottom-drawer, dusty old legal tracts in archaic library textbooks. They're real, "living" laws that apply to every individual in our country. And today, they are being made to apply to Dr Stephanie Rigg and her "colleagues" who falsified Harry's records to create a cover-up of what they did to him . . . and to me. I will, duly, see Dr Rigg and her associates in Court. Dissecting the Cover-Up: Massey’s Metadata of Deception But back to what readers do know for a moment: You’ll know that I’ve been in the battle of battles for the past two months to extract Harry’s full records (or anything approaching them) from Massey’s Legal and Governance department. HOWEVER . . . there was one thing I hadn’t known how to decipher that they actually had finally drip-fed to me. It was File Name: Patient Change Log (Field-Level Audit) . I’ve been learning a lot about veterinary science, record-keeping, and law in general lately. Not because I wanted to. But because if you want to figure out how deep the rot really runs at Massey, you kind of have to. So I’ve learned a bit about how to decipher clinical metadata. Just e nough to realise that this Patient Change Log (Field-Level Audit) is exactly where the digital fingerprints of a cover-up are hiding. Despite the fact that this document has as much redacted as it shows (probably more), with ALL staff names and positions blacked out, for example -I still found four distinct “smoking gun” entries in these otherwise heavily-redacted metadata logs. BIG. FAT. SMOKING. GUNS. that amounted to one undeniable overall conclusion: This document isn’t a clinical record so much as it’s a literal crime scene . There were already so many dodgy inconsistencies in the few items I'd managed to pull out of Massey to that point (as I've documented in various of my preceding articles). But this document is where, undeniably, the bodies are buried. You just need to know which clod of dirt to look under. Hidden in Plain Sight . . . In A Little Thing Called the Metadata (That the Average Pet Owner Wouldn't Even Know Existed ) There are four hidden but key findings demonstrating that the entire timeline of Harry’s “experience” in that hellhole were was orchestrated, and the sudden "neurological event/decline" exit strategy planned for him were a total fabrication. And that fabrication had a start time. (For this start time we will initially revert our focus back to Massey's previously-supplied "Clinical Summary" (in all its dodginess) . . . We will then lead from the immediately below into the afore-mentioned "Patient Change Log (Field-Level Audit)". Bear with me. I promise not to let this get boring). Well, one of two start times. Either: (1) The 8.38am disconnection of his (with, by-then, the TWO 750% overdoses of the renally contraindicated convenience sedative with which the "crying dog"-sensitive ICU staff had plied him overnight) now life-essential IV fluids (8.5 hours into the prescribed 24-hour protocol that they charged me for). And/or: (2) When the day shift ICU "vet" arrived at 9am and decided a THIRD 750% overdose would be a strategic way do deal with a clearly already massively overdosed little 3.8kg, 15-year-old, dehydrated dog. Now WHY would any vet take such a decision? Well, for legal purposes, of course (remembering that the Venerable Dean Jon Huxley and the obviously not- so-new-broom Vice-Chancellor Pierre Venter, have all the money in the public purse to pay their top-tier external legal counsel . . . and by gum, there are enough of the buggers, if this site's analytics are anything to be guided by), I will precede the following by stating that these are my conclusions, made on the basis of the collation and evaluation of the information before me. That said, what I know of my readers is this: You are no intellectual slouches. Feel free to let me know if you can come up with any other conclusion from the information (complete with now numerous "receipts") that I have thus far presented, most especially here and here , and most tellingly of all, in today's expose. R emember, though, I held the ultimate evidence in my arms at 6pm on December 1 . . . and, some 45 minutes later, I let them take it (safely, for them) away from me, just like Harry's (the literal body of evidence) life had just been taken from him. Little Numerals that Tell A BIG Story The plan for Harry's manufactured exit is not so much written into the records, as it is revealed by the tampering with the logs. They lay bare the lead vet’s apparent plan that his life would come to an abrupt end by the pre-scheduled time of (well, they couldn't quite get consistency in the logs regarding the exact minute, but by the absolute latest time of) 17:00 hours i.e. 5pm . . . assumedly, the end of the day shift on December 1. Just in time to mark him "Deceased" and seal off the records of this catastrophically overdosed patient, before the next shift came on, saw his records, and someone started asking the immediately necessary, and certainly appropriate, questions. And those questions would (0R SHOULD ) have included , but would certainly not have been limited to: How long has this dog been in this state? Why hasn't any rescue and remediation protocol been undertaken? Why was he given yet ANOTHER administration of 50mg of Gabapentin at 09:00 hours after the preceding two during night shift? Why is he disconnected from his IV fluids? Who approved that and why? (And if they knew he'd starred in a multi-video student film festival that morning): Was he taken out of his cage and handled in this state? When did he last drink? Was he given any food before he entered this near-comatose state? Does the owner know of the overdoses and the state he's in? Have you filled in an incident report? Have any emergency specialists been called in for advice? and, no doubt, many more questions. OR . . . maybe not. It depends if the rot in that ICU is fully immersive, or if it's concentrated on Dr Stephanie Rigg's day shift and the ICU shift staff of the preceding (November 30) night. But none of those questions could be asked and none of that could happen. The day shift - led by "Dr" Rigg ("Steffi") - wasn't about to let it happen. Thus, the pre-timestamped, just before end-of-shift, Time of Death entered into the "Euthanasia Authorisation" form that they had all queued up for me long before I ever arrived at that Godforsaken facility that fated December 1 afternoon.
by Jordan Kelly • 8 September 2026
UPDATE 8.9.26: The Massey "neurologist" who apparently (or conveniently) can't tell a "demented" dog from a catastrophically (contraindicated) sedative-overdosed dog, has been named: She is "Dr" Anita Shea. Shea's apparent inability to discern between a "sedated" dog and a "demented" dog, with said dog on a table in front of her, greatly assisted "Dr" Steffi Jalava in her prolonged and intensive coercion of the owner for Harry's immediate (and as it later transpired, totally without cause) destruction, following Jalava's utilisation of him as a live teaching prop and as student "educational" video content. The author (and owner of the precious NON-"demented" little papillon who was sent to a totally unnecessary death based on Shea's "diagnostic skills" and collusion with Jalava) vehemently urges ALL pet owners to avoid any contact with these "clinicians" - who, in the author's opinion are incomprehensibly incompetent but worse and even more so, utterly monstrous. UPDATE: Since the original February 15 publication of this article, and despite Massey's ongoing efforts to obscure the identities of those involved , the clinician who delivered the fraudulent diagnosis and administered the lethal injection has been identified by her full name: Dr Steffi Maja Jalava . She is far from the only person culpable for the torture, fraud, and fully unnecessary termination of Harry's life . However, Jalava's completely false "terminal" "neurological" "diagnosis" and "prognosis" delivered throughout two hours of aggressive coercion - after " teaching" staff had finished their unauthorised and unspeakably cruel utilisation of Harry in student activities and filming - were the grounds on which I was duped into signing a "euthanasia" "consent" form . . . and worse still, participating therefore in the wrongful killing of my own deeply beloved dog . My investigation to uncover the names of the ICU staff who, on the night of November 30 , began the catastrophic repeated sedative cocktail overdosing , will continue. As will my endeavours to determine - what I believe is the near-certainty of the fact and the identities of whom administered - the undocumented continuance of the sedation prior to my arrival and the plan to present Harry falsely to me as having suffered some sudden "neurological" event or decline . . . so that I would sign the form for his immediate "euthanasia" . This Is What Happens When Massey Thinks THEY Own Your Dog & Can Do With Him As They Please (You Just Pay the Invoice) At This Appalling, Unaccountable Veterinary House of Horrors (LATEST PROOF OF 'LAB RAT' TREATMENT HERE )
Show More