Authorities find animals, squalid conditions in Farmington NH house

FARMINGTON, N.H. --State officials removed an eight-year-old girl from her home after police found squalid conditions and dozens of animals, including a 5-foot alligator living in a bathtub.

Police said the Division of Children, Youth and Family took the girl from her home on Wednesday, citing unsanitary conditions.

Acting on a tip, police searched the house of Harold Roy III and Dorina Roy. They found dogs, cats, guinea pigs and numerous reptiles, including pythons, boa constrictors, iguanas, geckos and three alligators. Police also found more than 100 rats and mice housed in cages. They were kept to feed the snakes living in the numerous aquariums.

"They had stuff I've never even heard of before," said Police Chief Scott Roberge.

While the animals were well cared for, Roberge said the human living conditions were filthy.

"Quite honestly, the odor was so overbearing, officers went in three to four minutes at a time and had to come out," he said.

"You could tell they truly cared about their animals," he said. "To leave a child in that was certainly my concern."

The Roys were not charged with any crime. None of the animals were illegal to possess and none appeared mistreated.

Dorinna Roy said no one in the family had every been harmed by the pets. "My husband just really related to reptiles very well and he thought he was helping them," she said.

The Roys have agreed to give up their animals, except for one dog, and were ordered to scour their home before being allowed back. They and their 18-year-old son were staying in a hotel room. Authorities said the girl would likely be returned after the house is cleaned.

Link

There are several things about this article that bother me.

Originally Posted by Clay Davenport

police found squalid conditions and dozens of animals, including a 5-foot alligator living in a bathtub. They found dogs, cats, guinea pigs and numerous reptiles, including pythons, boa constrictors, iguanas, geckos and three alligators. Police also found more than 100 rats and mice housed in cages. They were kept to feed the snakes living in the numerous aquariums. "They had stuff I've never even heard of before," said Police Chief Scott Roberge.

I take it the authorities don't like exotic animals.

Originally Posted by Clay Davenport

While the animals were well cared for, Roberge said the human living conditions were filthy. "Quite honestly, the odor was so overbearing, officers went in three to four minutes at a time and had to come out," he said.

If the animals were not the source of the odor, what in the world was???

Originally Posted by Clay Davenport

"You could tell they truly cared about their animals," he said. "To leave a child in that was certainly my concern."

According to this article, the animals had nothing to do with the squalid conditions of the home.

Originally Posted by Clay Davenport

The Roys were not charged with any crime. None of the animals were illegal to possess and none appeared mistreated. Dorinna Roy said no one in the family had every been harmed by the pets. "My husband just really related to reptiles very well and he thought he was helping them," she said.

They had to get rid of their animals and clean their house yet they weren't charged with a crime??? Sounds fishy to me. I bet these "authorities" are afraid of snakes.

Originally Posted by Clay Davenport

The Roys have agreed to give up their animals, except for one dog, and were ordered to scour their home before being allowed back. They and their 18-year-old son were staying in a hotel room. Authorities said the girl would likely be returned after the house is cleaned.

Why??? Why do they have to give up their legal animals? According to this report the animals were well cared for. It was the human living conditions that made the house stink. If the house was covered in animal feces and stank from animal feces, the daughter would not be allowed to return. Yet according to this article the house is stunk up, not by animals, but by the very humans living there and as soon as the house is cleaned, she will be returned to them. But they can't have their animals. Sounds like a typical 'the authorities are afraid of having exotic animals in their town so they figure out a way to make them go away'. That's what this sounds like to me.

Here is a clip of another story about this incident. It sounds like perhaps cats and/or dogs were the source of the uncleanliness, it sounds like the first story left out some info:



Acting on a tip, Farmington police said they found squalor in the home, including animal feces and urine on kitchen and bedroom floors.

"The living conditions were not suitable for a child, and the town took action," Chief Scott Roberge said.

The Farmington health officer issued an order deeming the home uninhabitable and calling for it to be cleaned up. The parents and their 18-year-old son are in a hotel room.

"Quite honestly, the odor was so overbearing, officers went in three to four minutes at a time and had to come out," Roberge said.

It is legal to own alligators and exotic reptiles in New Hampshire, and McCurley said the animals were in very good condition.

"He's been treating them very well," McCurley said. "The guy loves his animals."

A state spokesperson said the daughter will likely be returned once the home has been cleaned up. The family has signed over all of the animals to a local shelter and the reptile specialist. It has been allowed to keep one dog.

In case anyone didn't know, McCurley is Kev from NERD.

I still don't understand why they had to get rid of their LEGAL, WELL-CARED FOR ANIMALS. If the stench and squalor was from dog & cat feces, why let them keep a dog?

It still smacks of the "authorities" being afraid of snakes, alligators, rats . . i.e. exotic animals in general.

It's not right. How is it legal to make them get rid of animals they said were legal in the first place? But hey, it's the "authorities" and we all know what these morons say goes, now don't we? They're probably scared the little girl is gonna get eaten by a snake or the alligator or a snake or the 'gator is gonna get loose and go on a killing rampage all over NH.

I think it was more a situation where the people got neglected so that the animals had a good life. It never said that they were forced to turn over the animals. I think that they agreed that it would just be a better situation for themselves to give the animals to good hands; after all, in the report I saw it said that the man had rescued most of the animals. If Kev came to my house and promised all my rescues a good home, I'd let him have them too, especially if my living conditions were deplorable.

Originally Posted by Karen Hulvey

I still don't understand why they had to get rid of their LEGAL, WELL-CARED FOR ANIMALS. If the stench and squalor was from dog & cat feces, why let them keep a dog?

It still smacks of the "authorities" being afraid of snakes, alligators, rats . . i.e. exotic animals in general.

It's not right. How is it legal to make them get rid of animals they said were legal in the first place? But hey, it's the "authorities" and we all know what these morons say goes, now don't we? They're probably scared the little girl is gonna get eaten by a snake or the alligator or a snake or the 'gator is gonna get loose and go on a killing rampage all over NH.

Karen,

I agree with you 100%. There is something we are not being told in this story. People don't just get rid of a houseful of critters they love.

Just a guess on my part, perhaps the DA made an agreement not to charge them with whatever if they gave up their critters. It had to be some kind of pressure put on them for this to happen, something we are not being told.

Originally Posted by BoaMan Jon

I think it was more a situation where the people got neglected so that the animals had a good life. It never said that they were forced to turn over the animals. I think that they agreed that it would just be a better situation for themselves to give the animals to good hands; after all, in the report I saw it said that the man had rescued most of the animals.

THe article plainly says "they were ALLOWED TO KEEP ONE DOG". One would assume this would mean they were NOT allowed to keep the others. In other words....they were forced to give them up.

If Kev came to my house and promised all my rescues a good home, I'd let him have them too, especially if my living conditions were deplorable.

If "Kev" or anyone else came to my house and promised all of my animals a good life, I'd tell him where to stick it. I care about my animals, and if I had done nothing wrong, I would fight for them. If the animals were well cared for, clean, and legal....no one has ANY right to take them away.

I find it ironic that they can keep one of the animals(dog) that was the cause of the mess, yet the clean ones were given up. I wonder what the "agreement" was, that they were given such an option. I agree, there is a BIG part of the story missing.

Who wants to put money on it that the dog they are keeping is a pitbull and will eventually bite someone?

There is something not being reported here.