|
Menu Foods' filthy habits threaten the public health. A picture is worth a thousand words.
These are scans of actual photos Menu Foods filed in Federal District Court in RE PET FOOD PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION Case Number MDL 1850. The notes and arrows are mine. Warehouse photo 1: Intentional destruction of evidence. Warehouse photo 2: Menu's rat infested warehouse. Warehouse photo 3: Hiding the evidence in unmarked boxes. Warehouse photo 4: More intentional destruction of evidence. Warehouse photo 5: The craft of making bad look worse. Warehouse photo 6: More crafty photos. Warehouse photo 7: And more intentional destruction of evidence. Warehouse photo 8: How to hide easily identifiable evidence among the mess. Warehouse photo 9: And yet more artfully arranged messes.A> Warehouse photo 10: Bust it open and let the mold roll in. Warehouse photo 11: Menu Foods opens a shelter for rats in New Jersey. Warehouse photo 12: It's a lot of work balancing those boxes long enough to get the sought after effect. Warehouse photo 13: Intentional destruction of evidence. Warehouse photo 14: More cooked photography. Warehouse photo 15: Are those deadly mycotoxin producing molds? Don't clean up the mess, take a picture!. |
Menu Foods threatening the public health is nothing new, but on this round Menu gives it an interesting twist. View the photos at the left to see the slovenly manner in which Menu Foods maintains its warehouses. As amazing as it may seem, three out of three courts agree Menu Foods' wanton spoliation of evidence, which is relevant to pending civil actions and criminal investigations, should be condoned, and Menu Foods should be allowed to destroy key evidence.
In Federal District Court, at Camden, New Jersey, Menu Foods filed this unopposed motion.The motion provides for preservation of representative samples of all evidence held by Menu Foods, except for that pictured in the photos to the left. In that pile of evidence is proof the products it produced prior to the recall period contained deadly toxins and other unapproved additives such as cyanuric acid and acetaminophen. It is the evidence that Menu Foods is determined to keep out of the hands of plaintiffs and criminal investigators at all costs. On page 17 of its 2007 year end financial statement , Menu Foods openly acknowledges there are civil and criminal actions pending and, there is potentially more of the same may be on the way, stating: "Lawsuits have been initiated against the Fund and certain of its subsidiaries in the United States and in Canada, which seek to recover damages on behalf of the named plaintiffs and a purported class of pet owners. Furthermore, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is conducting an investigation into the situation. The United States Attorney for the Western District of Missouri, based in Kansas City has informed Menu that it is the target of a criminal investigation for possible violations of the U.S. federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. It is possible that additional actions or investigations may arise in the future." Now, let's turn to Title 18 of the US Code, Part I , Chapter 73, 1519: "Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both." Now maybe I'm missing something here, but I am baffled at the notion that so far, three civil courts have granted Menu Foods permission to commit a Federal felony, normally good for a couple of decades behind bars. And why should this be okay? According to Menu Foods, it is because its food storage facilities are maintained is such a filthy, rat infested, disgusting, disease infested condition that it threatens the public health. In Menu Foods' own words: "Some of the Unorganized Inventory is damaged and is leaking, creating a risk of infestation and creating health and safety risks to the public." And again here: "The Unorganized Inventory is highly susceptible to damage and breakage and is creating, and/or has the potential to create, public and health safety risks." Under Washington State rules of professional practice, RCP 3.4, which mirrors its Federal counterpart, a lawyer shall not: "unlawfully obstruct another party's access to evidence or unlawfully alter, destroy or conceal a document or other material having potential evidentiary value. A lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to do any such act" Even in the Federal class action, with plans approved to preserve samples of recalled pet food, there are some interesting omissions. On December 11, 2007, in Federal District Court, Menu Foods filed a 64 page inventory, purportedly listing all melamine gravy style pet food produced between November 8, 2006 and March 15, 2007, and how much of each production date for each flavor it is holding for plaintiffs. In many cases, this document shows entire production days are missing from the body of evidence Menu Foods calls "organized inventory", but, that is not as interesting as what is not listed for December 7, 2006, on page 12 of this document. On October 12, 2007, in a lab report ordered by Pet Food Products Safety Alliance, a composite of three flavors of recalled pet food tested positive for melamine and acetaminophen. Among the three unopened samples tested at the lab was a pouch of "Mixed Grill in Gravy", produced on December 7, 2006. Now, go back to the above list showing everything Menu Foods produced on December 7, 2006. The Mixed Grill is not there. This is especially interesting considering Menu Foods claims to have had a sample of this food tested. From Menu Foods site: "Earlier this year, an individual suggested that acetaminophen was present in certain products manufactured by Menu when a single private laboratory purported to find acetaminophen in products he had tested. Those suggestions and the results of that single laboratory were refuted at the time by tests conducted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The California Animal Health and Food Safety Laboratory at the University of California Davis (“UC Davis”) also found no traces of acetaminophen in the products at issue in tests commissioned by Menu. The acetaminophen claims were re-cycled in October 2007 when that same private laboratory purported to find acetaminophen in another Menu-produced product that was part of the pet food recall in March 2007. Despite the previous findings and with the goal of alleviating any remaining public concern, Menu commissioned UC Davis to perform tests on the products that were the subject of the new claim. As with the prior tests conducted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and UC Davis, the most recent tests by UC Davis also found no traces of acetaminophen." So, what exactly has Menu Foods been testing? And, what kind of samples has it been providing to the FDA? According to documents filed in three courts, it doesn't have any inventory of this item, or a way to identify the location of any of the samples it provided to the FDA, because, this unrecalled inventory has been mutilated and randomized beyond recognition in its rat infested warehouses. The pet food I had tested, which showed positive for acetaminophen, was manufactured on April 24, 2006, or 11 months before the recall was announced. The cyanuric acid positive sample was manufactured on September 7, 2006, two full months prior to Menu Foods' first production run of melamine gravy style pet food. No grain or gluten is listed as an ingredient in either of the varieties I had tested. 8 months of production separate the two known acetaminophen positive samples, which are responsible for the deaths of pets in two different homes. In its filthy, rat infested warehouses, Menu Foods holds the evidence that would show these were not isolated events. Additionally, this body of evidence holds the key to the source of the second part of a two part toxin, cyanuric acid, which when mixed with melamine is deadly to pets. So far, three different courts have told me I cannot have access to this body of evidence before it is destroyed, under any circumstances. Incredible as it may seem, two of those courts have approved the imposition of penalties against me for opposing the criminal destruction of this body of evidence before samples may be obtained for testing. The fight continues and the justice we learned about as children is school seems to be much different than that practiced in America today. In the mean time, take a few minutes to view the photos at the left and ask yourself if you would ever consider buying pet food for your beloved pets, from a company that, by its own admission, maintains its food storage facilities in that kind of condition. Threatening the public health is just business as usual for the folks at Menu Foods. |
