The Illusion of Rescue: 35 Dogs Seized from Facility in Cruelty Investigation

Las Vegas Animal Cruelty Investigation Leads to 35 Dogs Seized and Arrests

People do not hesitate when they hand their dog over to a place like this. They do not stop and question whether the person taking the leash is capable of causing harm. They assume the opposite. That assumption is what these operations depend on. It is trust, and once that trust is broken, everything beneath it starts to crumble.

What has come out of Las Vegas is not just another animal cruelty case. It is something far more serious because of where it occurred. Working Dogs of Nevada presented itself as a rescue and training facility, a place where animals would be rehabilitated and handled with care. According to investigators and witnesses, that image does not match what was happening inside.

The investigation began in early March 2026, but the events that triggered it started earlier. A kennel technician named Kerrigan Toms worked at the facility for just two days in February before she says she was fired for recording what she saw. What she described is not just a disagreement over “training style”. It is something far more disturbing and sinister.

“It was horrific in there, it really was,” Toms said.

She did not leave empty-handed. She left with video.

That video became the foundation of the criminal investigation.

According to Toms, one of the dogs she recorded had four collars on at the same time, including two shock collars and a prong collar. In the footage, the dog can be seen being dragged across the floor. At one point, the trainer appears to kick toward the animal.

“Seeing the use of the shock collars and the way the dog was screaming because he was being shocked and being drug across the floor, it was a horrible thing to witness,” she told Fox 5 KVVU-TV.

That is not training. There is no legitimate framework that justifies that level of force. It is torture. No credible professional standard allows an animal to be restrained, shocked, and dragged while in visible distress. And this was not some isolated lapse in judgment. Kerrigan Toms had been employed at Working Dogs of Nevada for just two days when she witnessed and recorded this conduct. Two days. That matters.

Because when someone walks into a new workplace and immediately encounters behavior like this, the question is not whether something went wrong in a single moment. The question is how long it has been happening and who, if anyone, is willing to stop it. In that position, who do you trust? Who do you report it to when the conduct appears normalized rather than exceptional?

There may have been policies prohibiting employees from filming, especially on the clock. That is irrelevant here. In this instance, she did the right thing. When the conduct crosses into abuse, documentation becomes necessary. Silence only protects the behavior.

Whether or not this was formally the “culture” of the workplace, perception becomes reality very quickly. To a new employee, this did not look like a mistake. It looked like something accepted. And when abuse reaches this level, it is entirely reasonable for someone to fear speaking up. People who are willing to harm animals like this do not inspire confidence that they will respond rationally to being challenged.

The fact that this was a facility entrusted with the care and training of animals, and that she was terminated after documenting what she saw, raises a serious question. Either management was aware of what was happening, or they were so detached from their own operation that they failed to recognize the risk to both animals and employees. Neither explanation is acceptable.

What is clear is this: expecting a new employee to confront or report this kind of conduct without fear of retaliation is unrealistic. Dismissing that reality is not just naive. It is willfully shallow.

Over the following weeks, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police reviewed the videos along with surveillance footage and veterinary evaluations. Investigators say what they found was consistent with abuse. According to police, trainer John Johnstone repeatedly used shock collars, yanked dogs by their leashes with enough force to lift them off the ground, and in at least one instance swung a dog by its leash while the animal was already in distress.

Investigators identified at least four dogs by name, Jeb, Dottie, Astro and Turbo. These were not abstract claims. These were individual animals reacting to fear, abuse and pain in real time, reactions that authorities say were visible in the footage and later supported by veterinary findings.

On April 1, 2026, the investigation reached a critical point. Authorities executed a search warrant at the facility, shut down operations, and removed thirty five dogs from the property. John Johnstone, 38, and Tabitha Berube, 32, were arrested the same day.

Thirty five animals taken from a place that claimed to protect them is not a minor detail. It is a signal that something inside that environment was deeply wrong.

Johnstone now faces four felony counts related to animal cruelty, including allegations tied to willful torture. Berube is facing a charge connected to animal cruelty for failing to intervene. Being present while this kind of conduct takes place and choosing not to act is not a passive role. It allows the abuse to continue.

The following day, April 2, 2026, Johnstone was transferred out of local custody after an immigration detainer issued by federal authorities was honored. He was taken into custody by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. According to the Department of Homeland Security, he is alleged to be in the United States illegally and is a citizen of the United Kingdom.

The dogs removed from the facility were taken to the Animal Foundation, which was already dealing with overcrowding. Officials say the strain was compounded by a separate, unrelated animal cruelty investigation that brought in an additional fifteen dogs. While more than fifty dogs were taken in across both cases, thirty five are tied directly to the Working Dogs of Nevada facility.

Staff now face the difficult task of evaluating both the physical and behavioral condition of the animals. Abuse does not end when the immediate situation stops. It often leaves lasting effects that require time, patience, and in some cases may never fully reverse.

In the immediate aftermath, a family member of Tabitha Berube publicly defended her, pointing to her history of caring for animals and taking in dogs that would otherwise have been euthanized. Statements like this are common in cases involving allegations of abuse. They rely on character and perception. They do not address documented evidence, and they do not explain why dozens of dogs had to be removed from a facility that was supposed to help them.

The impact of the case extended beyond those directly charged. The Jason Heigl Foundation, which had previously used the facility on a fee for service basis, ended its relationship immediately. The organization also clarified that it was not a partner or sponsor, despite claims that suggested otherwise.

Both defendants have posted bond, and a court hearing is scheduled for April 29, 2026. However, Johnstone remains in federal custody under immigration authorities, adding another layer to how the case will move forward.

There is a tendency to reduce cases like this to a single person. One individual, one failure, one incident. That explanation is easy, but it ignores the reality of how behavior like this continues long enough to be recorded and reported. It requires an environment where it is either ignored or allowed.

What is being alleged here is not just cruelty. It is cruelty carried out inside a system built on trust. People brought their animals to this facility believing they were doing the right thing. They believed their dogs would be safer.

If the allegations are proven, that belief was wrong.

That is what makes this case matter. Not just what happened, but where it happened. A rescue and training facility is supposed to be a solution. When it becomes a source of harm, the problem extends beyond the individuals involved.

It becomes a failure of the system itself.