Couple face stalking, trespassing charges in cat spat

Neighbors feud over roving feline

Cat Fight! CAT Fight! CAT FIGHT!!!!!

A yearlong feline fracas in Bartlett has led to the arrest of an elderly couple and their daugh- ter and son-in-law on an array of charges, including stalking, trespassing and vandalism — all in a battle over keeping their cat out of a neighbor’s yard.

The cat conniption has led to shouting, threats and numerous visits by family members to City Hall and police headquarters claiming they didn’t have to control their cat. Authorities say the neighbors were not the aggressors in the tabby tantrums that appar- ently began when the cat in question “urinated on and destroyed the victim’s patio furniture,” according to court documents.

“They just wouldn’t quit,” Insp. Steve Todd, head of the Bartlett police investigative services division, said of the suspects, adding that the stalking charge is because the situation accelerated recently and because the length of time it has continued.

Mary Jane Gullett, 82, and her husband, Clifton, 84, of 2680 Charles Bryan Road, along with their daughter, Janet Davis, 55, and son-in-law, Bruce Davis, 58, both of Memphis, face charges of stalking and conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor (stalking). Everyone but Mary Jane Gullett also is charged with criminal trespass and vandalism, according to affidavits in the case.

city events, including Board of Mayor and Aldermen work sessions.

At various times during the dispute, they have gone to the Police Department and City Hall to plead their case.

At one point, they were cited by Animal Services for not confining the cat and paid a $25 fine, plus court costs in May.

The city has a law barring residents from letting animals — from dogs and cats to hares, goats, hogs and ducks — run free.

Neighbors Tony and Lori Harrington moved next door to the Gulletts about a year ago.

At one point, Tony Harrington was bitten by the cat. The Gulletts’ insurance company paid $1,639 in medical bills.

Tony Harrington declined to comment on the case, referring questions to police documents in the case.

Mary Jane Gullett initially agreed by telephone to talk about the matter at her home, but did not answer the door. In addition to the charges by Animal Services, the detective division all the way up the line to Lt. Patrick Cici tried to rectify the dispute with no success, even though he warned the Gulletts not to have any further contact with the Harringtons.

Mary Jane Gullett is accused of threatening to burn down the Harrington house and other intimidating actions, according to the affidavit.

She even filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau regarding Harrington’s lawn business.

She said Harrington was paid $1,700 by the insurance company for yard work that was never performed and she was seeking a refund.

Police determined there was never a contract and “(Mary Jane Gullett) was trying to obtain money paid to the victim for the previous cat bite.”

The Harringtons have resorted to video surveillance. A sign on the window facing the Gulletts’ house states that security cameras are operating.