UPDATED WITH LETTERS TO CLINIC DIRECTORS: Warning to Vets Referring to Massey . . . And Pet Owners At Risk from Their Referrals
Jordan Kelly • 17 July 2026

The Multiple Hidden Liabilities in Every Massey Referral:  What Vets and Pet Owners Need to Know

UPDATE:  In addition to this advisory article to vets, the Principals and Directors of 26 individual veterinary practices across the lower North Island were sent an alert letter directly. The text of this letter and the list of its recipients are published at the bottom of this article.


This article serves as an advisory regarding the risks associated with admitting companion animals to the Massey University Companion Animal Hospital Intensive Care Unit (ICU) for overnight or extended stays.


It outlines specific vulnerabilities in patient care, drug administrations, owner-unauthorised invasive, hands-on utilisation of pets for student teaching activities, and - for referring vets, specifically - it details the downstream legal and insurance liabilities for the primary veterinary practices that refer clients to this facility.


The Core Risks in Massey's Companion Animal Hospital ICU Policies & Practices

When an animal is referred to an institutional ICU for extended or overnight monitoring, clients expect a continuous, high standard of professional oversight.


However, documented systemic issues at Massey University's Companion Animal Hospital (which it must be remembered is also otherwise known as its Veterinary Teaching Hospital) present significant hazards:




The Transfer of Legal and Insurance Liability


Many primary care veterinarians operate under the assumption that once a patient is transferred to a tertiary facility like Massey, their own legal liability terminates. This is a critical misconception.


  • The Duty to Warn:  A referring veterinarian has a professional obligation to understand the operational realities of the facilities they recommend. If a primary vet fails to warn a client of documented risks, and an incident subsequently occurs, the primary vet can be held contributorily liable.



This is not a hypothetical risk sitting somewhere in legal theory. It's the practical reality facing every clinic that continues to send clients' animals into an environment where the drug administration trail can vanish, where consent can be bypassed, and where the institution's own documented response to scrutiny has been to threaten the people who ask questions and seek accountability.


Bypassing the VCNZ: Direct Insurer Correspondence


When disputes arise, the standard advice is to lodge a complaint with the Veterinary Council of New Zealand (VCNZ).


However, data and documented evidence indicate this pathway is highly ineffective for consumers:


  • 1.5 Percent Prosecution Rate:  A peer-reviewed study published in the New Zealand Veterinary Journal in 2019 found that of 1218 complaints and notifications received by the VCNZ between 1992 and 2016, 818 — i.e. 67.2 percent — were not investigated or were dismissed outright. Only 18 complaints — 1.5 percent of the total — were upheld on the basis of technical competency concerns. To be clear, that is a grand total of just 18 complaints upheld across 24 years.



  • Inadequate Penalties:  In the rare instances where a complaint is upheld, the outcomes are overwhelmingly limited to minor "training recommendations" rather than substantive disciplinary action or licence suspension.


Options for Owners


If an incident occurs and the referring veterinarian refuses to address the complaint or take responsibility for the referral outcome, owners might want to consider bypassing the Veterinary Council of New Zealand entirely.


My own personal opinion, based on my own, drawn-out, intentionally ineffectual and still-in-progress experience with the VCNZ, is that this is an entirely captured agency, predominantly by Massey but also by way of its loyalties to the broader veterinary sector — which, it should be remembered, in New Zealand, is largely loyalty-beholden to Massey as most vets' own alma mater.


The VCNZ's modus operandi, in the clear demonstration of my own case with the tragic outcome of my own beloved pet, is to delay, obstruct, frustrate, and hope to exhaust a pet owner-complainant's will, with a view to either actively obstruct or ensure the dismissal of a complaint, or to naturally burn-out the complainant in order to achieve the ultimate fading away of the complaint. The VCNZ's own woeful - in fact, beyond negligible - prosecution rate provide clear, stark testament to this.


Thus, what an aggrieved pet owner might want to consider as an alternative first and most immediate step, is to identify the primary veterinarian's professional liability insurer and open correspondence directly with them. Insurers evaluate risk purely on financial exposure and strict liability, making them far more responsive to unmanaged practice risks than a compromised regulatory board.


Conclusion:  Deconstructing Traditional Trust & Naivete


The historical model of unquestioning, naive trust in the veterinary industry leaves companion animals highly vulnerable - and worse still, at the most vulnerable moments in their life cycles.


Pet owners must take active responsibility for investigating where their animals are being sent and under what specific conditions they will be held overnight and during the course of any period of stay when the owner will not be present with them.


When facing a referral, owners  should directly and explicitly notify their primary veterinarian that they understand the legal and insurance consequences available to them  should the referral facility  fail to meet baseline standards of competent care or convert their companion animal - which remains their legal private property - for unauthorised use as an institutional educational, film production, or commercial resource.

IMPORTANT NOTE TO PET OWNERS: 

Under New Zealand's Animal Welfare Act 1999, companion animals are recognised as sentient beings, and in civil/property law, they remain the legal property and chattels of their owners.


Converting private property for unauthorised commercial use (like student training or film production, as you will see here having been the case with the author's own pet, Harry, a blind papillon obviously offering Massey's Dr Steffi Jalava and Dr Anita Shea additional student interest teaching value vis a vis his blindness, which veterinary codes of practice should have ensured, as a disability, resulted in greater care, not training utilisation) without consent is an actionable legal violation.

Go here, for the full story (with regular updates) of the intentional, repeated, catastrophic levels of overdosing with an unnecessary, contraindicated, convenience sedative; his covert conversion to University utilisation as a live teaching specimen; and the fabricated diagnosis manufactured by Drs Shea and Jalava to support Jalava's aggressive coercion of Harry's owner (by plan, misrepresenting his undisclosed sedated state as a sudden "neurological decline") to achieve immediate, in-situ for the later-discovered-to-be completely unnecessary termination of his life.


Harry's owner, the author of this advisory article, has been subject to all the acts (and more) outlined herein - with the quest for accountability ongoing and being strenuously resisted by Massey's management, with the Veterinary Council of New Zealand in full and active support of Massey's obstruction and perversion of natural justice.


WARNING ALERT LETTERS SENT AS FOLLOWS (READERS - RECIPIENTS LIST FIRST, THEN LETTER):


Animates Vetcare Paraparaumu; Cahill Animal Hospital, Palmerston North; CareVets Kāpiti; CareVets Napier; VetsOne Hastings; Central Vet Hospital, Wellington; Central Vets, Palmerston North; The Cottage Veterinary Clinic, Clive; Crofton Downs Veterinary Clinic, Wellington; Energy Vets Taranaki, New Plymouth; New Plymouth Vet Group; Vets4Pets New Plymouth; First Vets Whanganui; Wanganui Veterinary Services; Hokowhitu Veterinary Clinic, Palmerston North; Pet Doctors Palmerston North; Horowhenua Vets, Levin; Kāpiti Emergency Vets, Ōtaki; Levin Vets, Levin; Ruapehu Vet Services, Ohakune; South Taranaki Vets, Hāwera; Taihape Veterinary Services; Taradale Veterinary Hospital, Napier; Taupō Veterinary Centre; Vetora Taupō; Totally Vets, Feilding.


18 June 2026

 

Dear Principal/s and Directors,

 

FORMAL NOTICE: Serious Clinical, Ethical, Administrative & Managerial Issues Impacting Pets Admitted to Massey University’s Companion Animal Hospital ICU

 

I write to advise you of multiple issues and vulnerabilities of which you must be made aware when referring your clients’ pets to Massey.


These are laid out in the enclosed Media Release and associated list of published Questions, so far remaining unanswered by the University’s Vice-Chancellor, Pierre Venter, and its Dean & Head of the School of Veterinary Science, Jon Huxley.


By this notice, you are hereby legally culpable if your clients’ animals – or your clients themselves – are the subject of the nature of outcomes, the victims of conduct, or the target of behaviours as have been clearly itemised and laid out in these two documents, and the extensive coverage on the two platforms on which they have been published.


Controlled Drug Register-unrecordable administrations of sedatives, (until advised otherwise by Massey) non-attendance by any licensed veterinarian during overnight shifts, unauthorised conversion of private pets to teaching stock, false diagnoses and coerced life terminations on the basis of these, fraudulent billing practices, and posthumous record manipulations, represent a clear and present danger to your own clients’ pets and by extension, also to your clients at the human level.


Further, you will note the citing of Privacy Act breaches vis a vis the use of a deceased patient’s clinical records to taunt the owner i.e. specifically, the author of this letter, and who has been the subject of the issues listed above – and additional matters as listed in the 60+ items of detailed published coverage on the public platforms listed in the signature block of this letter.


It should be noted that individuals openly and without restraint – by themselves, by practice management, or by Massey’s leadership – demonstrating this level of erratic, unprofessional behaviour are the exact same hands left unsupervised with your clients’ vulnerable animals overnight, to handle and monitor them, and with apparently carte blanche self-authority to dose with their choice of pharmaceuticals, including administering heavy sedation.


A culture that lacks baseline clinical and ethical discipline means that any animal you refer to Massey’s ICU is at direct risk of unmonitored neglect, undocumented, cowboy clinical decisions, and covert conversion by the University as a live teaching resource.


Assuming you take your clients’ data privacy and client confidentiality seriously, it should be of considerable concern to you that Massey has zero control over data security and allows its own clients’ private information to be handled with no safety guards and utilised by the inhabitants of such an unhinged environment – noting that the handling of this data is directly reflective of the handling and demise, in the case of the author, of the highly valued and pre-Massey viable pet to which it pertained.


You are urged to investigate, calculate, mitigate, and advise your own clients of, the risk to pets when being referred to the Massey University Companion Animal Hospital.

 

Sincerely,

 

Jordan Kelly

Editor-in-Chief, The Customer & The Constituent NZ  www.thecustomer.co.nz

Executive Director, International Institute for Improvement in Veterinary Ethics (IIIVE)  www.iiive.org

Masterton 5810, New Zealand

 

Enclosures: Media Release (15 June 2026) / ‘Questions’ Article (11 June 2026)

Other News, Reviews & Commentary

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 )
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. UPDATE: Since the original January 21 publication of this article, and despite Massey's ongoing efforts to obscure the identities of those involved , the clinician who peddled Shea's fraudulent diagnosis, and who "administered" the lethal injection (ripping the cap off the syringe with her teeth, such is her way) has been identified by her full name: Dr Steffi Maja Jalava . She is far from the only person culpable for the torture, the fraud, and the fully unnecessary termination of Harry's life . However, Jalava's peddling of Shea's completely false "terminal" "neurological" "diagnosis" and "prognosis" delivered throughout two hours of aggressive coercion - after she and Shea had finished their unauthorised and unspeakably cruel utilisation of Harry in student activities and filming - was the fraudulent basis upon 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 is the now-certainty of the fact and the identities of whom administered - the undocumented continuance of the sedation prior to my arrival in order to facilitate 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" . Off-the-Charts Evil: New Zealand's Veterinary House of Horrors . . A Pet Parent's Victim Impact Statement
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 17 publication of this article, and despite Massey's ongoing efforts to obscure the identities of those involved , the clinician who promoted 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, the fraud, and the fully unnecessary termination of Harry's life . However, Jalava's promotion of the 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 in order to facilitate 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" . The falsification of clinical records designed to bury this evidence — including the December 3 data scrub and the manipulation of Harry's Patient Change Log — is the subject of Police Report OR-2484821N. Harry WAS A Marked Dog. I Had Hoped Massey Vet Staff Couldn't Have Been Any More Wicked Than They'd Already Been Caught Out Being. But YES , Actually, They COULD .
Show More