On March 7, 2007, Burkart’s neighbor called the LaPorte Animal Control Center (“LACC”) because he had not seen Burkart’s horses for many months and because he did not see the usual pile of manure outside of the barn. Based on the nature of the complaint, Jane Bernard, an LACC employee who investigated complaints, requested that a police officer meet her at Burkart’s farm.
LaPorte County Deputy Sheriff Keith Waltz met Bernard at the farm. Deputy
Waltz knocked on the door of the house, but no one answered. He then saw footsteps in the snow leading to the barn, but did not see any footsteps coming back to the house.
Surmising that someone was in the barn, Deputy Waltz and Bernard walked to the barn and noticed that the door was not completely closed. Deputy Waltz knocked on the door, announced that he was from the Sheriff’s Department, and took a few steps into the barn.
As Deputy Waltz and Bernard entered the barn, they encountered an overwhelming smell of manure and horse urine. The smell was so strong that Deputy Waltz began to gag, and Bernard’s eyes began to burn.
Burkart’s daughter, who was inside the barn, approached Deputy Waltz and
Bernard, and Deputy Waltz explained the reason for their presence. Burkart’s daughter then called Burkart. During this time, Deputy Waltz and Bernard had been standing in animal waste that was three to five inches deep.
Bernard saw five horses covered in manure, and both saw that manure was splattered all over the walls in the horse stalls and that the horses were standing in manure and urine that was eight to twelve inches deep.
Bernard directed Deputy Waltz to step outside, and she informed him that a veterinarian was needed immediately.
Dr. Lyndsay Cross, a large animal veterinarian, arrived at Burkart’s barn and
attempted to approach the horses. However, she could not do so because of the depth of the urine-soaked manure. The horses were eventually removed from the stalls for examination, and Dr. Cross determined that the horses needed to be immediately from the farm because of their condition. The horses did not have a clean place to lie down and the water buckets contained a large amount of fecal material.
The following day, a warrant was issued, and the horses were transported to a
clean environment. Four of the five horses were moved to foster care after three weeks.
One horse, however, had to be euthanized because it was suffering. The horse, which could no longer stand, had an infection in the area of its penis. A necropsy was performed on the horse, and the veterinarian found that the most difficult part of the procedure was to cut through the layer of manure compressed against the horse’s skin.
The veterinarian discovered that the horse did not have thick abdominal muscles
compared to healthy horses, a condition caused by malnutrition.
Burkart was charged with 21 counts of animal cruelty, 16 felonies and five misdemeanor counts.
Burkart fought the charges - including claiming the "evidence garnered from entry into the barn was inadmissible" - all the way to a jury trial, in which she was found guilty. They also ordered her to be on probation for 30 months and to pay the shelter for the care provided to her animals, while they still belonged to her.
Burkart was charged with and convicted by a jury of five counts of abandonment
or neglect of the horses under Indiana Code section 35-46-3-7 (1987). The trial court subsequently imposed a sentence of six months’ incarceration on each conviction, with the sentences to be served consecutively. The trial court suspended each sentence to probation. The trial court also ordered Burkart to pay restitution to those who cared for the horses after their removal.
On appeal, Burkart claimed the punishment was unfair; that six months is the maximum sentence for a Class B Misdemeanor and she argued that the sentence should be reserved for the 'worst offender and the worst offense'.
Here, Burkart’s neglect resulted in the death of one horse and, absent intervention by the State, may have resulted in the death of the other horses. Without a doubt, Burkart’s neglect caused great pain to the horses, which was alleviated only because the horses were taken from Burkart. As indicated by the amount of urine and manure on the barn floor and the walls, the neglect of the horses was not momentary, but took place over a significant amount of time. Given the nature of the offenses and what it tells us about the nature of the offender, we cannot say that the sentence imposed by the trial court - which included the bestowal of probation rather than incarceration, was inappropriate.
Basically they told her to shut her mouth because she was sentenced to 900 days of incarceration, but the trial court suspended that and generously put her on probation for five years. She wasn't going to spend a single day in jail for the pain and suffering she caused these animals.
The above information is from the Court of Appeals decision.
She had been ordered to pay $11,932.32 in monthly installments of $198.88 (about $50/week or $7/day) to the animal shelter that had initially boarded and cared for Burkart's neglected horses.
Burkart was too busy to pay them anything apparently because she immediately filed an appeal, which was denied on November 16, 2010. Burkart then tried to appeal to the Indiana Supreme Court, which denied her, on January 28, 2011.
By now, LaPorte County was fed up and filed a petition to revoke her probation because she had not been making the payments like she was supposed to. In 41 months, she was to have paid about $8,200 - but had only paid $2,100.
Burkart tried to claim that her personal expenses were too much to allow her to pay the money she owed. She also tried to blame her attorney, who she claimed told her not to make any payments until all of her appeals had been exhausted.
The trial court announced: "When a person is under a restitution order they have a duty to make that order if they have the ability to do that, and that might mean a little adjustment in lifestyle. . . . I believe that you did have the ability to pay and chose not to and I’m finding that you did violate your probation in not making restitution. I am going to revoke your probation at this time."
Burkart was ordered to serve the previously suspended 900 days of her
sentence in the Indiana Department of Correction.
They made a mistake at this point, though, in not ordering her to be taking into custody immediately.
"I am not going to order you committed today because . . . if you want to take the opportunity to take an appeal I’m going to allow you that."
She knew she was facing 900 days in jail... she promptly skipped town (and the state).
The above information is from the Court of Appeals of Indiana revoking her probation
CURRENT ARREST INFO:
Full Name: Jane Marie Burkart
Last known address: 33969 Prairie Knolls Dr, New Carlisle IN 46592
Gender: Female
Birthdate: 05/26/1960
Height: 5'01"
Weight: 205 lbs
Hair Color: BRO
Eye Color: BLU
Arrest Age: 56
Date of arrest: 08/17/2016
Arresting Agency: La Porte County Sheriff, Michigan City, Indiana
Charges:
Related:
- November 16, 2010 Court of Appeals decision affirming her convictions and sentence
- April 18, 2013 Court of Appeals decision revoking probation
- Indiana: Convicted animal abuser Jane Burkart who did not serve her sentence is apprehended in California
- Indiana: Press release announcing capture of one of the top 10 fugitives of Indiana, convicted animal abuser Jane Burkart
