Ashley Caspillo-SakaraGT4/Sakara *Possible Buyer Beware!*

Originally Posted by amercnwmn

Just for clarification, since Ashley is having a hard time keeping up with her lies:

Angel's thread listing the Jamp:

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...76&postcount=1


May 11th: Ashley then posts: (last post)
http://raskbb.com/sybilsden/viewtopi...fbb983c8e8887a

Sorry, got a little hung up there...





May 13th Angel STILL had the Jamp, because he posted on his above thread he was willing to let her go for $100.

She was then SHIPPED TO ASHLEY FREE (Ashley paid shipping). So we can assume the snake was shipped out approximately around the 17th-ish (being a Monday)..Give or take.

She then lists it FOR SALE for $300 on May 23rd:
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...&postcount=515



WOW he bred 3 more times in 10 days?! He's holding some sorta record there.

Incidentally, this is the SAME Jamp on June 28th she claims had HORRIBLE mouth rot & an RI that she "didn't notice at first", because she "didn't examine him when he came in"

http://www.constrictors.com/forums/s...orgeous-Jampea



My point,
*She CLEARLY LIED about this studly snake's breeding experience
*She LIED about it's health in her ad
*AND SHE LIED about it's temperment in her ad since she claimed the reason she was selling it was because it was not as tame as advertised.

She got a snake AROUND the week of the 17th of May 2010, she LISTED it for SALE for a $300 profit (she'd only paid shipping) and the snake was reported to have had severe mouth rot & RI upon arrival. How could it have POSSIBLY bred 3 more times AND recovered from that??

The lies are overwhelming..

There is NO way that snake was healthy when that ad was listed for sale.

It's obvious to me, looking at the timing, that the snake got sick a while after she had it and she didn't want to admit it so she said it came from a bad home. I would bet it was still healthy when she posted the sale ad (she was flipping the snake only). I'm guessing that it's the same with Ruby and the baby she lost - every sickness that happens in her care is all of a sudden attributed to horrible care from the previous owner because she can't admit that something is seriously wrong with her collection. They sure sound immune-compromised to me...

I've been keeping snakes for over 15 yrs and have still lost less snakes than her. It should be an EXTREMELY rare occurrence if they are healthy and being kept appropriately.

I just think that I need to put this out here for those advising/suggesting that Elizabeth not to ship the animal back.

All other things aside (moral issues), if she is refunded she has no legal right to keep the animal. The same way Elizabeth can go after the Caspers, they can go after her if she keeps the animal.

I see no legal way out of the dilemma, and I am no happier than anyone else at the though of a possible IBD compromised animal being transported out in the public. HOWEVER, remember this: the animal has not yet been determined to harbor the disease, thus Elizabeth currently does not have a leg to stand on in the legal sense.

Originally Posted by hboyles66

I have made Mr. Dean aware of this thread but I alos know that since the BCL death his or any animals I am aware of that he gave away, or whatever it was he did with them, have had any issues. There have been no post of his animals dying. Should Mr. Dean kill all the animals he has or that he gave away to friends. That is a hard on to decipher because Ashley has said the original report could have been wrong and she didn't QT the BCL correctly. Leads me to believe IBD has been in Ashley's collection before the BCL arrived he was just the first to go. Anyone agree?

I completely agree. With the way she was snatching up snakes off of CL and from other various unknown places before she got the BCL, I had no doubt in my mind that something nasty was brewing in her collection for quite some time.

Confirmed IBD, stunted snakes, starved snakes, RIs, mites, rare infections, several deaths... aaaaand the list goes on.

Originally Posted by amercnwmn

Yeah..the proven breeder 5 times (3 extra breedings in less than 10 days..) got me..
All the men reading this should be envious.

LMFAO!!! TOO RIGHT!

Originally Posted by DavidBeard

Heres a word of advice for those in our hobby who are attention-whores and wanna-be's:

When you tell the truth, you don't have to remember what your story is.

I couldn't agree MORE!!! LMMFGDSOBAO!!!!

Originally Posted by crotalusadamanteus

Exactly! I was a horrible liar as a teen, but fortunately, I figured out early on I wasn't very good at remembering my stories, so I just quit telling them. Life has been a lot better ever since that time.

Well being that she's 25 years old she obviously hasn't mentally grown out of her teens, yet...

Originally Posted by deborahbroadus

I just think that I need to put this out here for those advising/suggesting that Elizabeth not to ship the animal back.

All other things aside (moral issues), if she is refunded she has no legal right to keep the animal. The same way Elizabeth can go after the Caspers, they can go after her if she keeps the animal.

I see no legal way out of the dilemma, and I am no happier than anyone else at the though of a possible IBD compromised animal being transported out in the public. HOWEVER, remember this: the animal has not yet been determined to harbor the disease, thus Elizabeth currently does not have a leg to stand on in the legal sense.

My issue with the boa being returned is that they will try to sell it again, Deb.

I understand the animal has not yet been determined to harbor the disease, but the problem is, right now, it cannot be confirmed to either have or not have it.

Under normal circumstances, yes ... return the animal if you are getting a refund, but because of the health risk it poses, I do not think so. Legal aspect or not.

Originally Posted by April Homich

I've been keeping snakes for over 15 yrs and have still lost less snakes than her. It should be an EXTREMELY rare occurrence if they are healthy and being kept appropriately.

I completely and wholeheartedly agree.

Originally Posted by ShadowAceD

My issue with the boa being returned is that they will try to sell it again, Deb.

I understand the animal has not yet been determined to harbor the disease, but the problem is, right now, it cannot be confirmed to either have or not have it.

Under normal circumstances, yes ... return the animal if you are getting a refund, but because of the health risk it poses, I do not think so. Legal aspect or not.

I agree.

You know what, though ... let me rephrase that.

Deb, you are correct. I do understand that.

However, Ashely and Ryan should not be interested in getting the animal back.

I hope that makes more sense.