Sifford trial pushed back until July

Friday, March 21, 2008
By COREY NOLES Statesman Staff Writer

BLOOMFIELD -- A Stoddard County man accused of felony dog fighting appeared in court again last week to have his case set for trial.

The case against 29-year-old Jamie Sifford of Dudley has been re-set for trial before Judge Stephen Sharp on Monday, July 7.

Sifford faces 18 charges of the Class D felony of dog fighting, three counts of the Class C felony of Possession of a controlled substance and one Class A misdemeanor Possession of drug paraphernalia.

If convicted, he could face a maximum sentence of 94 years if found guilty of all charges and depending on whether the sentences would run consecutively or concurrent.

There is one charge for each dog determined to have been fought at some point.

The Oct. 21 raid on Sifford's residence was a cooperative effort of the Stoddard County Sheriff's Dept., the SEMO Drug Task Force, the Missouri State Highway Patrol and the Missouri Humane Society.

Investigators recovered a large amount of evidence consistent with dog fighting including weights, treadmills, a bloody mat covering the floor of what was believed to be the ring where dogs were fought and breaker bars used to pry one dog's jaws from another.

In February, the Humane Society of Missouri was granted custody of 22 of the dogs seized in the raid and they have now begun adopting them out to qualified individuals.

Currently, the remaining dogs are being housed at the Missouri Humane Society Headquarters on Macklind Avenue in St. Louis while they await adoption. For the time being, the dogs are considered evidence.

Look for more on this story in future editions of The Daily Statesman.

cnoles@dailystatesman.com

Comments

Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on dailystatesman.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

They don't need to keep the remaining dogs in cages as evidence. All they need are close up photos of injuries and statements from veterinarians.

I would sure be interested to know how many of the 22 have been adopted out to folks who will take good care of them.

If Sifford is still in jail I would think it's time for bail for now. 94 years is a ridiculous figure. He should serve some time and then do public service by educating people or working at the shelter. I think that the prosecutor has already gotten his attention. I believe he needs to receive a harsh punishment but don't go overboard....3-5 years may be enough.

-- Posted by Bearcat72 on Sat, Mar 22, 2008, at 10:25 AM

Yes he is still in jail. I agree that it is ridiculous that they won't set him a bond. I agree with you

-- Posted by youcandlebox on Sun, Mar 23, 2008, at 5:20 PM

Agree 72....punishment can be harsh enough and fit the crime. He needs to take responsibility and pay for this one, and actually for the last one also since he violated probation. Then I would think he could be a contributor to society.

Still amazing how many people got on here acting like he was raising these dogs as pets! I don't know of many that need a trial to figure that one out.

Now we got women biting women in the area....This dog fighting thing is obviously out of hand.

-- Posted by shannonhoon on Mon, Mar 24, 2008, at 2:10 PM

shannnonhoon-you dont know if he was fighting dogs so you don't know if they were or were not pets

-- Posted by youcandlebox on Mon, Mar 24, 2008, at 4:56 PM

youcandlebox...if he was not fighting dogs, then just what WAS he doing? Maybe he was doing experiments on dog bites so that he could contribute his knowledge to veterinarians. Come on, get real and stop acting like a lawyer who would try anything to "explain away" the obvious.

-- Posted by Bearcat72 on Mon, Mar 24, 2008, at 6:24 PM

Bearcat72: Quit acting like YOU know the facts when YOU weren't there

-- Posted by youcandlebox on Mon, Mar 24, 2008, at 10:52 PM

To all of you ingrates who do not know Jamie, Let me tell you first hand that I do know this loving ,caring family man adn so i can say with god as my witness that Jamie was not fighting dogs. These dogs were his pets just as were his goats, chickens, pigs and the many other animals he had. He was very attatached to his dogs just as i was my 113 cats at one time but i wasn't fighting them. You people need to open your eyes and have a little belief in mankind. Not everybody is guilty just because they are arrested in stoddard county. I will stand behind Jamie as long as i am living and breathing. How is it that 5 of the dog charges are for new born lab mixed puppies as well as the momma dog who was nursing? Ask the prosecutor if you dont believe me, and there was 2 other whelped mommas included in the charges which he couldn't have possibly been fighting, and to top it off, the took a neighbors dog with Jamies just because it was at his house where it had been chasing his chickens so he had put it in the kennel next to the house until the neighbor could pick it up after he got off work on the farm. Get the facts on hte situation before you pass judgement. You may contact me as i do know the truth and the truth is not as it has been written in this paper.

-- Posted by denene on Sun, Apr 13, 2008, at 11:14 PM

sifford would love nothing more than to assist in helping working with animals, as his life long dream has always been to be a vet. a dream come true.

-- Posted by dudley on Sat, Jul 5, 2008, at 6:12 PM