KILLING HARRY . . . The Gabapentin Gamble That Didn't Pay Off & the Cover-Up That Necessitated Death
NOTE: This article was originally published on
The Customer & The Constituent NZ
(thecustomer.co.nz) and is republished here on IIIVE as part of the ongoing documentation of
Case 1: Massey University's Abuse & Killing of Harry Kelly.
UPDATE: Since the original January 31 publication of this article on
The Customer & The Constituent NZ, and despite Massey's ongoing efforts to obscure the identities of those involved, the clinician who delivered the fraudulent diagnosis and administered the lethal injection has been identified by her full name: Dr Steffi Maja Jalava.
She is far from the only person culpable for the torture, the fraud, and the fully unnecessary termination of Harry's life.
However, Jalava's completely false "terminal" "neurological" "diagnosis" and "prognosis" delivered throughout two hours of aggressive coercion - after "teaching" staff had finished their unauthorised and unspeakably cruel utilisation of Harry in student activities and filming - were the grounds on which the author, IIIVE's Founder & Executive Director, Jordan Kelly, was duped into signing a "euthanasia" "consent" form . . . and worse still, participating therefore in the wrongful killing of her own deeply beloved dog.
From Lethal Incompetence and Malpractice . . . to Withholding of Life-Saving Corrective Action in Favour of Utilisation As A Teaching Aid . . . to A Fraudulent Diagnosis . . . to A Coerced 'Euthanasia' to Destroy the Evidence . . . to Management Malfeasance At the Highest Levels
ABOVE: EXHIBIT A: THE FILM SET . . . Conversion of my “property” for teaching resources: Unauthorised Conversion of Property & Breach of Bailment (Common Law); Illegal Manipulation for Teaching (Animal Welfare Act 1999, S83) One of the images of Harry being utilised by Massey as a training tool and film prop, in his by-then intentionally engineered state of pharmacological collapse. He was intentionally disconnected from the urgent 24-hour rehydration protocol (the only treatment for which he was admitted and for which I paid in full) to facilitate the many unspeakably cruel student activities and their cell phones filming of this little distressed blind dog for Massey's profit (while they charged me for his ICU "care" i.e. even for hours beyond their killing of him.) Other equally disturbing images can be seen here: PROOF Massey Vet, Teaching & ICU Staff INTENDED Harry to Die & Were Actively Facilitating It . . . & the VCNZ Has A MASSIVE Conflict of Interest.
When a veterinary hospital of "teaching" status takes a full suite of blood samples from a senior patient with a known renal condition, they are establishing an updated baseline of truth. Those samples are the clinical map. Or they are meant to be.
In the case of Harry, those samples were drawn well before I left the building. The hospital knew his history; they knew his age; and they knew they were looking for the specific metrics of his renal (kidney) function.
Yet, while those tubes of blood were either still being processed, or worse still with the results actually in their hands, Massey’s Companion Animal Hospital personnel engaged in a display of professional recklessness that defies the Veterinary Code of Conduct: They administered Gabapentin. They administered a collective volume that represented between a 400% and 600% overdose for Harry's weight and size. Then they potentiated it with a further pharmaceutical.
The Recklessness of the ‘Blind' Dose
Gabapentin is a drug that relies almost entirely on the kidneys to be cleared from the body. In a patient with renal impairment – a condition their established records clearly showed he had with an updated status that very night – the drug does not exit the system. It accumulates. It moves from a sedative to a toxin.
By administering this drug before checking the results of the bloods they had just drawn, or worse still after actually being in possession of them, Massey personnel engaged in a clinical "blind-fire". They did so wlfully. And they did so recklessly. They ignored the co-morbidity they were actively testing for, creating a state of toxicity in a senior dog who had no way to clear the chemical from his system.
And worse still, they did it for their own convenience.
Sedatives in this category should only ever be administered (a) to alleviate pain, or (b) in preparation for surgery. Neither applied to Harry. What DID apply, is that this little blind dog had just been taken from his owner’s arms and deposited in a cold steel cage in (to him) a terrifying environment, and with two ICU staff who paid him nil attention; they were too engaged in their social discussion and their fascination over a new-born kitten.
My attempts to draw Harry’s need for human comfort to their attention were summarily ignored; instead I was shunted out of the ICU. And he was drugged.
The Multiplier Effect: Lethal Potentiation
And it didn't stop with a single drug or even a single dose.
Knowing that Harry’s system was already struggling to process the Gabapentin, personnel then administered a secondary sedative. In clinical pharmacology, this is known as Potentiation. When you combine two central nervous system (CNS) depressants, the second drug doesn't just add to the first – it multiplies the effect.
In a dog with compromised kidneys, this combination acts as a chemical straitjacket.
By "stacking" these drugs (as it is referred to), Massey personnel didn't just sedate Harry; they effectively shut down his ability to manifest normal neurological responses. They didn't just "relax" him; they induced a profound pharmacological collapse.
The ‘The Neurological Decline’ Deception
When I returned to the hospital, I was not met with an admission of this compounded drug reaction.
Instead, I was presented with a fabricated narrative: "He is in neurological decline."
This is where clinical negligence transforms into Clinical Malpractice and the height of ethically-deprived deception.
- The Clinical Reality: A senior dog is given a toxic "stack" of drugs his body cannot process, resulting in predictable ataxia, sedation, and collapse.
- The Institutional Cover-Up: The personnel (headed by ICU vet, “Steffi”) re-frame the symptoms of their own repeated, catastrophic contraindicated pharmacological overdosing of Harry as a natural (and yet, somehow, sudden) "neurological decline". It should be noted that Harry was standing vertically, balancing expertly on his hind legs, and with fully extended front legs through the grid of his ICU cage (where he had been admitted due to dehydration) as he cried in vain distress for staff's attention, just prior to midnight the night before.
By labeling his drug-induced state as "neurological", Massey personnel shifted the blame from their own recklessness to Harry’s biology. They used the symptoms they createdto justify the "inevitability" of the euthanasia they were about to coerce.
The Demand for Metadata
I am currently in a stand-off with Massey University's Legal and Governance department who - despite being under full Privacy Act 2020 obligation - are thus far refusing to release the following digital metadata:
- The Timestamp of the Blood Draw.
- The Timestamp of the Blood Results (when they hit the internal system).
- The Timestamp of the Gabapentin Administration.
- The Timestamp of the Secondary Potentiating Drug.
If the results were available and ignored, it is malpractice. If the drugs were given before the results were checked, it is reckless.
But presenting the resulting collapse as a somehow natural yet sudden "neurological decline" is a calculated deception designed to shield the hospital from the consequences of their own incompetence.
And – between a phone call and a consulting room hard-core pressure session – spending upwards of two hours in an endeavour to coerce Harry’s owner (me) into signing “euthanisation” consent forms to destroy the evidence in the form of Harry himself, is nothing short of the most evil brand of clinical deception imaginable.
