“Dogtor Doolittle” Indicted: The Rise and Fall of Austin Mendoza’s Dog Training Scheme

A Dog’s Instinct Never Lies

Human beings have long looked to dogs as companions, protectors, and family. There is a reason we call a dog man’s best friend: they sense our moods, protect our children, and offer unconditional love. And when a dog bristles at a stranger, we often take it as a telling sign of that person’s true character.

In American culture, the inability to like dogs—or worse, to harm them—is not just unusual; it’s unsettling. Compassion toward animals is a natural extension of our humanity. So when stories began to surface about a young New Jersey man marketing himself as “Dogtor Doolittle,” yielding miracle results in dog training, many dog owners were eager to believe. But behind the veneer of cute social media clips and boastful confidence, prosecutors have exposed a dark reality of animal abuse, fraud, and exploitation.

The Man Behind the Persona

Austin Mendoza, 32, of Perth Amboy, New Jersey, built his reputation quickly. Beginning during The Pandemic, Mendoza branded himself as “Dogtor Doolittle,” a professional dog trainer capable of curing even the most difficult canine behaviors. His pitch was irresistible to desperate pet parents struggling with aggression, anxiety, or housebreaking issues.

On Instagram and TikTok, Mendoza’s feed was a carousel of dogs obeying commands, staged “before-and-after” transformations, and testimonials that seemed to prove his methods worked. His confidence—and sometimes arrogance—convinced clients he had authority.

His programs came at a steep cost: two – twelve week boarding packages priced between $2,500 and $10,000 per dog. For many families, that was a small fortune, but one they were willing to pay if it meant their beloved pet would be happier and better behaved.

But prosecutors allege it was all a smokescreen. Mendoza had no certifications, no veterinary background, and no formal animal behavior training. Instead, investigators say, he fabricated diagnoses, used cruel training methods, was aggressive with the animals and his employees, and housed animals in appalling conditions.

The Arrest

In the summer of 2025, after years of mounting complaints, federal authorities moved in. Following a multi-agency investigation, Mendoza was arrested, booked, and charged. He has since posted bail and is awaiting a court date. Because his clients and alleged victims span multiple states, the case has been taken up at the federal level.

According to court documents, Mendoza faces charges including:

• Animal Cruelty (18 U.S.C. § 48) – for the documented abuse of boarded dogs.
• Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343) – for soliciting payments under false pretenses via electronic communications.
• Conspiracy to Commit Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 371)
• Deceptive Business Practices under New Jersey law
• Interstate Transportation of Stolen Property (18 U.S.C. § 2314) – related to alleged extortion of animals used as leverage in disputes.

Mendoza has pleaded not guilty. And, as the justice system reminds us, he remains innocent until proven guilty…

A Pattern of Abuse

The allegations against “Dogtor Doolittle” are both shocking and consistent. Five individuals—former clients, an employee, and a townswoman —spoke to me, and all corroborated a pattern of abuse and deception. Their names have been protected where appropriate.

The E-Collar: A Tool of Torture

Central to Mendoza’s alleged practices was the mandatory use of electronic collars—or “e-collars.” Marketed as advanced training tools, e-collars deliver an electric shock to a dog’s neck at varying intensities. Mendoza required his clients to purchase them, insisting they were crucial to his program.

But experts dispute that claim. Research consistently shows that e-collars offer no advantage over positive reinforcement training. Instead, they risk burns, chronic stress, fear-based behaviors, and, in some cases, aggression. Humane societies worldwide have called for their ban.

“Austin told me he was only using the lowest setting,” one client explained. “But when I got my Shih Tzu back, he had burnt fur around his neck. He wasn’t the same dog anymore. He looked and acted broken. We later found out our dog was caged with bigger, more aggressive dogs, he was probably terrified. It came as no surprise later when we learned about Austin’s reputation with aggressive dogs. Of course, he made no mention of this when we’d first consulted with him. He knew we were desperate and smelled our wallets. Our dog is so damaged, that man had no idea what he was doing, he shouldn’t be allowed to be around animals.”

This testimony aligns with reports from other owners whose dogs returned with burns or open wounds caused by the devices.

Testimony: Neighborhood Nightmare

“I lived near the diabolical doggy daycare for months,” the resident recalled. “I saw it all. Dogs were kept in cages, sometimes ten or more at a time, out in the yard or in the basement. You could sometimes see the cages were stacked when the windows were open, and the dogs would be barking relentlessly. They’d sit for hours with no water, their own waste piling up, I have timestamped photos. He had chickens running around too, which isn’t even legal here. And those poor dogs… I’ll never forget their cries.”

The woman provided videos of roosters crowing at dawn, photographs of dogs pacing in cramped cages, and documentation of foul odors emanating from the property. For a residential zone like Perth Amboy, the spectacle was alarming; and a violation of zoning ordinances, which cap the number of dogs per residence.

Testimony: Virgil

One of the victims, referred to here as Virgil, shared their story.

“When I picked my dog up, he wasn’t the same. He had lost so much weight—my vet said he was malnourished and severely dehydrated. His anxiety was worse than ever. The vet was so concerned she actually called animal control.”

The medical records corroborated Virgil’s claims, noting weight loss, dehydration, and heightened anxiety following the boarding period.

Testimony: Shih Tzu Owner, NJ

“He put the e-collar on my boyfriend at the lowest setting just to show us it wasn’t harmful. He actually focused his entire pitch on my boyfriend, he was very dismissive of me for the entire time my dog was in his care, it was a little misogynistic. But when our dog came back, he had burns on his neck. He was dehydrated, miserable. Austin had lied to us. That collar was set way higher. Our dog was traumatized by this collar, he’s completely different now from the dog we relinquished to Austin.”

Testimony: Joe S., Shih Tzu Owner, NY

Another owner, also of a small breed, described even more gruesome injuries.

“I dropped my Shih Tzu off at what I thought was a safe spa in Old Bridge. Austin had partnered with them, or so he claimed. A week later, I was told to pick my dog up in Newark. He gave me some excuse about flooding. When I took my dog to the vet, they found a hole in his neck under his fur from the e-collar. Austin even deleted my Google review after I posted it.”

This client provided screenshots of deleted reviews and social media videos showing Mendoza transporting multiple dogs in a U-Haul truck after a falling-out with the Old Bridge facility.

Testimony: The Former Employee

Perhaps the most damning testimony came from a former employee who worked under Mendoza for several months.

“Austin ran his business like a circus, he had the whole Tiger King complex. He cycled through employees because nobody lasted long. He preyed on vulnerable people who loved dogs but didn’t know any better. I spoke up when I saw him hurting the animals. He didn’t care. He told us to focus on the money. It reminded me of Tiger King—chaotic, exploitative, and cruel.”

This employee’s account highlights the toxic workplace environment and systemic exploitation, extending beyond clients to staff.

The Fast Cat Incident

Mendoza’s downfall accelerated in May 2025 at the Fast Cat event in Freehold, New Jersey, sanctioned by the American Kennel Club. There, he allegedly entered an aggressive dog under false pretenses. During the competition, the dog attacked a judge. Witnesses say Mendoza not only defended the dog’s actions but also became combative when asked to leave.

He was subsequently banned from future AKC events. Later that night, he took to social media, ranting that the dog was justified in attacking the judge.

Fraudulent Image

Mendoza’s online reputation management was as aggressive as his training methods. Reviews reveal a suspicious pattern: negative posts disappeared, while positive ones surged in clusters, suggesting he purchased fake testimonials.

National organizations, veterinarians, and professional trainers have since distanced themselves. Several confirmed they had either been directly harmed by Mendoza’s practices or had heard of him through the dog training grapevine.

Extortion Allegations

Perhaps the most chilling allegation involves Mendoza’s ex-girlfriend, a vice principal in Edison, NJ. When their relationship ended, witnesses claim Mendoza retaliated by holding her dog hostage, and demanding $20,000 for its return. Ring doorbell footage captured parts of the viscous confrontation.

The Bigger Picture: Trust Betrayed

For many pet owners, their dogs are family. Entrusting them to a professional requires enormous faith. The allegations against Mendoza strike at that bond. Families who scraped together thousands now feel duped. More importantly, their dogs—innocent, trusting creatures—may carry lifelong scars.

Animal welfare advocates argue the case underscores a need for stricter regulation in the pet services industry. Unlike human healthcare, anyone can call themselves a “trainer,” regardless of background or expertise.

What Comes Next

As Mendoza awaits trial, the community watches closely. If convicted, he could face years in federal prison, restitution to victims, and a lifetime ban from animal ownership or related businesses.

For now, his social media pages remain mostly silent, his once-boastful posts overshadowed by a growing tide of outrage. According to sources, he’s paused his dog-boarding operation, but is still selling training courses.

Conclusion: Choosing Compassion

The story of “Dogtor Doolittle” is more than a cautionary tale about one man. It is a reminder that compassion, transparency, and science—not fear and coercion—must guide how we treat animals. Dogs are not machines to be shocked into obedience; they are sentient beings who trust us with their lives.

Austin Mendoza may claim innocence until his day in court, but for the families who say their dogs came back broken, the employee who tried to speak up, and the woman who still remembers the dogs’ cries, the damage has already been done.

Links: