Boy and Dog Praying
By JustCool on Dec 13, 2007 in Cool Pets & Animals, Cool Pictures
"Dear Lord: Thank you for bringing me to Timmy’s house…
and not to Michael Vick’s — AMEN!"
Technorati Tags: boy praying, dog praying, michael vick
Click a Star to Rate This Cool Post:
(23 votes, average: 4.48 out of 5)
Loading ...
Karen Fasenmyer | Feb 2, 2008 | Reply
Hi this is my son!! I can’t believe how many times this pic has been posted in different sights.
JustCool | Feb 2, 2008 | Reply
Karen,
We have had a few people write to us asking where we got the picture. It was emailed to us and we searched all over to see if we could find where it originated… no luck. But since you were willing to provide your name, I assume it is truly yours. It’s a great picture.
Karen Fasenmyer | Feb 20, 2008 | Reply
Thank you, I have been amazed by the number of times now I have seen this photo circulated. I have also had to copyright the photo because of false claims to it. The dog has left us and the boy is grown. I wish people would not claim one of our memories. I thank all who have appreciated the photo for just being great to look at. These two were very close!
Thanks Again
Karen
Scott | Aug 10, 2008 | Reply
Karen,
I too passed it along once I received it (minus the caption). But I just love the dog’s facial expression. I’m going to save it as a screen saver. Peace.
Jennifer O'Hara | Aug 18, 2008 | Reply
This picture is of my nephew, and it was only taken a few years ago (which can be proven by a couple of things in the picture which have only been available for a few years). This Karen lady has been going to websites claiming this picture, and even sent an email to my sister telling her to stop trying to claim it. Of course when my sister contacted her, she never responded, but I don’t think she will try to claim it anymore. The only thing she was right about is that it has shown up everywhere! It started out as a simple Christmas card picture, and we can’t believe how far it has spread!
Judy | Sep 16, 2008 | Reply
Karen,
This picture is not of your son! I know the boy in this picture, His mother is a good friend of mine and her name IS NOT KAREN!!
This was on a Christmas card sent us.
Judy | Sep 18, 2008 | Reply
JustCool,
Don’t believe Karen. This is not her son. I know who this boy is and his mother is a good friend of mine. This was on a Christmas Card sent to us a few years ago. The boy is still young and the dog very much alive! Think about it. If this was really her picture, why would she wait 14 years and her son grown up to post it. I don’t know about you but if I had a photo of my boy like that, I’d be sharing it RIGHT AWAY, not years later
Rick | Oct 21, 2008 | Reply
um…why argue over who’s kid it is? How about being thankful for the smile the Lord blesses you with when you see it? After all, aren’t all blessings from Him? So why should we claim ownership and argue over something that was given to us freely?
Bob | Oct 23, 2008 | Reply
‘shopped… the shadows and reflections are all wrong.
Anne M. Hartnett | Nov 17, 2008 | Reply
Rick
My friends took this picture and submitted it to a site and it went everywhere…they gave this picture freely but the other people who are claiming ownership have told other sites to remove this picture..This is their child if it was your child you would find it just as upsetting.
There is a bit more to this story but the parents are good people
and they took this picture as a christmas card on a digital camara it was not photo shopped. They are in the process of copy writing the photo
and it seems ashamed that they would have to do so
JustCool | Nov 17, 2008 | Reply
@Anne – the plot thickens. It’s a great picture, too bad it has brought out the worst in some.
Milena | Jan 9, 2009 | Reply
Hello, I have one asks to Karen, I have also seen this photo on another site, and now here. Are you Armenian? And do you come from Germany? if yes,then you are definitely this person who is registered with this picture on the site “odnoklas…” if not,then ther is definitely another with this picture registered.
Marcelo Rodriguez | Jan 14, 2009 | Reply
The picture is correct (not photoshopped)and it is Karen’s child. I know so because I’ve been married to her for 11 years and James is my stepson. He will be 18 in April of this year. The picture was taken by Karen’s dad in December of 1997 with a digital camera and we don’t know how it got on the web because we didn’t put it there. I had to be grandpa, but he’s up there in years and simply can’t remember. It is upsetting that people lie about the picture but we just don’t care anymore. BTW, the room where the pic was taken is still exactly as it was then and we’ll take a picture with James in it next time we go visit my in-laws. The dog’s name was Lightning and he was very close with my son and Granpa, and they still talk about him even after his passing many years ago. Good luck and enjoy.
JustCool | Jan 14, 2009 | Reply
@Marcelo – by all means, please send us the picture when you get it.
Mike Lang | Jan 15, 2009 | Reply
This picture is NOT 11 years old. The computer monitor in the background is a flat screen LCD which was not common until around 2000-2001. Also the mouse is a Logitech mouse from around the same time period. Can we put this to rest now?
Karen | Jan 20, 2009 | Reply
Its not true This is my son James you people are horrible. I dont care what these other people say we know the truth and we will soon see whos right and I hope this jessebears lady is ready.
Karen | Jan 20, 2009 | Reply
I responded more than once get your facts together
Karen | Jan 20, 2009 | Reply
We never knew it was on the web until a friend of James saw it in out home and told us it was on the net we had no notion of posting our child all over the www
Mike Lang | Jan 22, 2009 | Reply
Wow, Karen! I don’t know what to say. Cute picture but not your son.
Karen | Jan 26, 2009 | Reply
O.K Mike so you say it is my son and I cant wait to put this to rest. I only want him to own his own moments. These other people have been trying to profit. So again we’ll see.
Judy | Jan 27, 2009 | Reply
Well Mike, I’m glad someone actually sees this person as the true liar that she is!!
This picture could not have been taken when her son, who’s 17, was that small. This was taken with a digital camera – I don’t believe they were as easy to get 17 years ago as they are now. I have a son just a little older and the only kinds of cameras around were 35MM or disposable ones. This is a cropped version of the original photo taken and put on a Christmas card which was sent the same year it was taken. Even if you scanned it, to put on the internet, a photo almost 15 YEARS OLD would not come out as clear showing bright colors
Karen | Jan 28, 2009 | Reply
Photoshop!
Karen | Jan 28, 2009 | Reply
ok people keep it up
Judy | Jan 29, 2009 | Reply
Karen,
What does it take to convince you that this is not your photo that’s over 11 years old! There are things in the photo that were not around 11 years ago! Read Mike’s posting on 1-15-09. And take his advice as well PUT IT TO REST!!
Karen | Apr 2, 2009 | Reply
To Just Cool
As I have stated many times. I do not mind the sharing of this photo. But I did in fact mind people with false accusations and claims to what I believe was to profit in some manner. Please contact me via the email given and I will supply you with the copyright number. Thank you,
Karen and James.
Marcelo Rodriguez | Apr 2, 2009 | Reply
Ok Judy. You can quit your blabbing.
This picture is owned by Karen Fasenmyer and protected under US Congress Copyright Law. Any unauthorized use and claim of ownership by other than Karen Fasenmyer will be considered a violation of copyright laws.
I think this will put it to rest. Now, who’s the big, fat liar?
Kevin | Apr 8, 2009 | Reply
@Marcelo I would say Karen is just mistaken, hopefully she’s not a liar, but I don’t know her.
How ironic is it that you claim it to be a violation of copyright, when it isn’t even Karen Fasenmyer’s to claim as her own? The REAL owners of this picture, meaning the people who brought this child into the world, are NOT trying to profit from it. Never have been.
Marcelo, also, please get the story straight, Karen claims the image was photoshopped to show items that weren’t available when she claims it was taken, but you claim it wasn’t ‘shopped. Which one is it?
(for the record, it was edited, it was cropped. Do you or Karen have the full original? I have a copy of it. It’s a bit bigger than this one.)
Lastly, this picture is a digital image, not a scan. It was taken later than Karen Fasenmyer claims it was. Oh, and another little tidbit to clarify, Karen originally claimed it was a 35mm image that was scanned as she had the original negatives. Now, according to Marcelo it is a digital image.
Marcelo is right about it being digital, just wrong about where it was taken, who it was taken of, who the dog is, who took it, when it was taken. One out of five Marcelo.
It’s sad that such a great picture is causing such problems.
Kevin | Apr 9, 2009 | Reply
A Rodesian Ridgeback? Are you serious?
For the apparently canine impaired, here’s a helpful link, cuz I’m all about being helpful.
http://www.ehow.com/how_4450203_identify-rodesian-ridgeback.html
Note the ears and lack of, well, a ridge.
If you require further help with your canine identifying needs, please visit the American Kennel Club, http://www.akc.org
May I suggest this link, which helps to identify a bloodhound, like the one in the picture above. Again, note the ears. Though the dog in the picture was only a few years old when the picture was taken. You should see him now. And you can, because he’s still alive.
http://www.akc.org/breeds/bloodhound/
Karen | Apr 10, 2009 | Reply
Kevin,
I never claimed Photoshop! That comment was made with sarcasm!!! And if you would like to be helpful google rodesian ridgebacks and click images, not search. You’ll see plenty of examples of different ears sizes. Maybe you still don’t get it, but WE (Marcelo and I) ARE the parents of the child AND ALSO the owners of the copyright of this picture.
Everyone that has something to say always brings stupid stuff as “proof” such as “it is a friend of a friend” or “it is my cousin’s neighbor”, instead of a fact.
FACT is I OWN the copyrights of this picture, which is of MY FAMILY property and that is the only thing it matters. Other than that, we’re talking about internet CSI warriors and posers.
Marcelo | Apr 11, 2009 | Reply
Allright, Kevin O’Hara. You want to get stupid? let’s go.
We’re requesting the removal of the picture on this administrator, as we own the picture. You also have it posted on your “fleurb” site, and we’re requesting you remove it as well.
Follow this link if you’d like to see the copyright registration:
http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?Search_Arg=Fasenmyer+karen&Search_Code=NALL&PID=s16FequAAlokH54Gf8sS5ZMydQg&SEQ=20090411090747&CNT=25&HIST=1
We’ll be contacting a lawyer this following week to initiate legal action against anyone posting the picture without proper authorization, and we are holding unauthorized users of this picture financially responsible for any costs, including but not limited to Attorney, Court and/or other legal fees we incur while pursuing this matter.
You, Kevin O’Hara, are a moron. And I will give you quite a bit of headaches for your stupidity.
{note: Just Cool does not know Kevin O’Hara, Karen, Marcelo or anyone else commenting on this picture. This picture was in the public domain long before there was any copyright filed. We will remove it only if requested by an attorney. Personally I think the fact that you would be bullying us or anyone else to remove such a wonderful picture is just childish.}
Kevin | Apr 11, 2009 | Reply
As a final note, with apologies to Just Cool.
Marcelo, you haven’t really looked at the picture have you? I mean really looked at it?
I invite anyone reading this page to click the link in my name to compare what you see there with what you see here. I also invite this issue to be settled once and for all, and no, running back to the “we own the copyright, so there” argument doesn’t settle anything.
The distortion in the picture is a watermark, I tried to keep it to a reasonable level so as not to loose any of the detail.
As a final word, I do apologize, both to Karen and Marcello for any condescending words in my posts. I did let my heart get the best of me. You are after all talking about a picture of my nephew. If the situation was reversed, I think you could understand my feelings.
To Just Cool, if you feel it appropriate to remove my previous post I understand. I really just want the truth about my nephew’s picture to be known. It used to be so nice to see it on a co-worker’s desktop, or on one of these sites with all the added captions. I hope it stays up on your site. It really is a wonderful picture.
Namaste.
Karen | Apr 12, 2009 | Reply
To Just Cool
I started this feed back in February of 08′.
I never asked for it to be removed and was proud that my son was able to share this and feel good!
I felt very sad as all of this has escalated out of control.
Not until people made hurtful comments toward my son did this even get to an argueing state.
And we ( Karen and Marcelo ) have only defended what we felt to be right. We do not want to bully you, but after so much debate we felt that this forum was just a place for these people to continue and it was not worth the time. However to keep the integrity of the memory we felt it necessary to take it to the library of congress and file. If you go over the posts you will see the derogatory attitudes have been through attack not defense.It is the responsibility of just cool to respond in a manner that is binding by the law. I am not threatening you and I invite you to contact me, look it up in the copyright catalog or what ever you seem fit, but the fact is that the copyright is there. I would like you to contact me directly.If someone else was to have to contact you there would be fees involved and that is not something anyone wants; please read the laws of copyright.
And as for Kevin, there are to many programs that can watermark and if this was digital as you say and then printed anyone could create that,also the situation is reversed that is why we have been so persistent on this fact and its not our nephew its our son! I would really like to put this to rest and move on all we ever started to say with this photo was how amazing it was how many times it had been around the web!
Thank you to all that have enjoyed.
Kevin | Apr 12, 2009 | Reply
Just to clarify, I said I put the watermark there to protect the larger image. The program used is Paint Shop Pro. No other edits were done except cropping it down to that size. I wasn’t saying that the image was genuine because of the watermark, I’m saying the image is genuine because it is not the same image that you find all over the web and was cropped from the original which isn’t in your possession. I honestly hope you do the right thing Karen, this has gone on long enough. Anyone who views the larger original can see the truth anyway.
Namaste
Becky | May 6, 2009 | Reply
I found these 2 posts on guzer.com:
http://www.guzer.com/pictures/boy_dog_pray.php
Karen Jan 20, 2009 7:43 AM 0
This is my son James! He wrote on this board because he was excited about it.I am the one making claims to this photo. He is 17 the dog is dead my mother still has the room set up like this and the photo that you see I have the original The reason it looks ;like digital is because it was scanned leave it alone I wish I knew who posted this first I would sue you!
kandm Jan 28, 2009 6:26 AM 0
I’m not trying to scare you! And if you read my post I said to the person that originally posted it! And I didn’t shove it in a drawer it was in a frame in my parents home! I didn’t need to share it with all the world these are our private moments!
And this post was on petopia.com:
http://thestarryeye.typepad.com/pets/2009/01/photo-of-dog-praying-with-young-boy.html
Posted by: thestarryeye | January 17, 2009 at 06:54 AM
“I will share with you the origin of the photo: Many years ago, my family went thru some tough times and our (then) only child, James, stayed living with grandma and grandpa for a few months. My in-laws had a dog, named Lightning (his name was given to him after he showed up one night at their door during a very intense summer storm in North Florida and no one ever claimed him), and this dog loved my son. A few days before Christmas of 2005, my father in law took James to bed and he said his prayers like any other night, and when the dog sat by him, James told him to say prayers with him. To their surprise, Lightning just put his pawn on the bed and my father in law took this picture. Timing was perfect!
Years went by and the picture ended up in our box full of other memories, until about 2 years ago. We decided to get it out along with many others, to frame and hand. At that time, a friend of James (then 15 or 16) was at the house. He say the picture and said “where did you get the pic, James?”. My son replied “that was me with my grandpa’s dog!” and his friend was the one that told us how unbelievable popular this picture is.”
And from the comments here:
Marcelo Rodriguez | Jan 14, 2009 | Reply
“The picture is correct (not photoshopped)and it is Karen’s child. I know so because I’ve been married to her for 11 years and James is my stepson. He will be 18 in April of this year. The picture was taken by Karen’s dad in December of 1997 with a digital camera and we don’t know how it got on the web because we didn’t put it there. I had to be grandpa, but he’s up there in years and simply can’t remember.”
I have to wonder…was the pic stored in a box or framed at the grandparents all these years? Was it taken digitally or not? Is this really a pic of a 14 year old (which is how old the son would have been in 2005)? Or was it taken in 1997? Why does the story keep getting changed? And Kevin, I can’t find the pic your talking about any where on your website.
Jennifer OHara | May 9, 2009 | Reply
Becky,
Thank you for helping point out all Karen and Marcelo’s discrepancies. You don’t understand how sick my sister is over these people not only claiming her son’s picture, but trying to make money off it and threatening to sue people for using it!
Kevin had accidentally moved the picture off his site while redesigning it, but he put it back on. Feel free to go back and take a look at it.
Andrew | May 14, 2009 | Reply
The mere fact that a registration is on record with the Copyright Office, does not mean that the facts Karen purports are true. I have it on authority, that the photographer also is in the process of making a registration. That registration was sent in last year. Karen’s registration shows as January of this year. Because of problems with the Copyright Office’s new registration system, claims sent in by paper take longer to process than claims sent theough their new e-service. However, the effective date of a registration is the determined from the date they received the registration. So, if the photographer sent their application to the Copyright Office last year, even though Karen has her registration already completed, the photographer’s registration will have an earlier effective date of registration. The Copyright Office, as an office of record, often puts adverse claims on record. Ultimately, a court decides who the copyright owner is in a dispute, not the Copyright Office.
Brandt | Jan 27, 2010 | Reply
This picture is of james and lightning(dog’s name). I do not know who is claiming otherwise nor do i care. the picture was taken by his grandfather whose name is tom at their house in jacksonville, fl. i am this boy’s uncle and can verify the authenticity of this since i watched the boy grow up and the dog finally pass away. the dog by the way is a rhodesian ridgeback and was the best guarddog you could ask for. the boy is now 18 and no longer lives with his mother. i would be more than happy to answer any reasonable questions about the picture.the truth is that if karen made mistakes answering questions it was probably due to anger and the fact that her father really took the pic, but i have to state that this pic is truly her son.
Karen | Feb 1, 2010 | Reply
Thank You Brandt.
And you are right,I was angry! We still have the copyright!
K
Christine | Mar 20, 2010 | Reply
I saw the original picture of Kevin’s website. I also read two different claims from the lying source (Karen&marcelo, supposedly married) saying that the picture was taken in 1997 and 2005. If it’s 1997, the flat screen is definitely a no-no. If it’s 2005, then the boy should be about 14 yrs old and the boy in the picture looks like he’s not even 10 yrs old. The audacity of these people amaze me.. The first time I saw this picture online, I thought it was so sweet.. now that I know the drama behind this picture, I only feel bad for the true parents of this child. May God give them strength and encouragement amidst this legal issue. Most of us believe that the dog is floyd and not “lightening.”
Karen and Marcelo’s claim is so obviously ridiculous that Im starting to think that they might actually have been lied to by the grandparents of their child (so called James who is older than 19 yrs now). Either that or they must really went psycho and began to believe in their own lies themselves.
The only thing I believe of Karen and Marcelo is that Karen may have copyrighted this photo (though it is not theirs). I pray that God reveals the truth and bring justice once and for all for the parents of this child and dog.
Please pray for this family.
Kevin O'Hara | Apr 13, 2010 | Reply
Christine, there’s more than that as far as mistakes to their claims regarding 1997 or 2005, or whatever year it is claimed.
And K…you may currently still have the copyright… but let me know when you get the original full image, like the one I have. I’ll check back here periodically to see if you’ve found it in your box o’memories or on a relative’s digital camera, whichever the case may be.
Brandt, see above, and ask her if she can produce the original, not the one on This is Cool. The FULL image. Check my site and see a larger image, one that she doesn’t have.
Oh and by the way, the still alive Floyd, the bloodhound, says hi.
And yes, please do pray for this family.
Jennifer O'Hara | Apr 14, 2010 | Reply
Christine, I told my sister (the boy in the picture’s mother) about your comment, and she said to tell you thank you for praying for her. This whole thing has bothered her so much that she doesn’t even like to talk about it, which is why myself and my husband have been speaking up for her. I agree with you that Karen and Marcelo must not be in their right minds, because who tries to claim someone else’s photo, and threatens to sue the actual owner? Karen copyrighted the pic, but my sister has the first copyright. The date Karen picked out of the hat the day she copyrighted it was 1995, the actual year the picture was taken is 2005, and the boy was only 3 years old (hence the sippy cup on the table). Please feel free to see the group “boy and dog praying” on facebook for more pictures of Jesse, who is now almost 8 and a picture of Floyd, who is a bloodhound, not a rhodesian ridgeback. Thank you again for speaking up, I do tell my sister about posts like yours, it makes her feel better to know that people can see through Karen and Marcelo.
Lynn | Jun 25, 2010 | Reply
The child looks like James, but it’s not Lightning. Lightning was a Rodesian Ridgeback & he was dark blonde. The dog in the picture is a blood hound.I know, because I was, at that time a good friend of the grandparents.
Bob | Nov 2, 2010 | Reply
I have to wonder if it belongs to either of you two. Can’t either of you post some pictures of the dog and boy to prove it easily enough? Sheesh!!!
JenO | Jan 24, 2011 | Reply
Bob, you obviously didn’t read my comment on April 14, 2010. facebook group “boy and dog praying”
LynS | Dec 24, 2011 | Reply
I realize these are old posts but if the owner is still reading them and if the dog is still alive could you post a current picture of the boy and the dog together or other older pictures of them together. That would most definitely prove who the owner really is. I convert photos to make them look like they are hand painted. This would be a perfect picture to paint and re-sale. I am looking for the real owner to see if they are willing to partner with me in this opportunity. Thanks.
thomas kremer | Jan 7, 2012 | Reply
i am a ordained minister of 8yrs i love prayer very much and think that every parent should teach there children to pray at a early age .i really enjoy this picture and think it is cool and neater then a new pair of sneakers.this is truely a mans best friend,or should i say childs best friend i really love this picture maybe the dogs praying for a big fat juicey steak .all together that is a strong love between child and pet and a message to us all that anybody and anyone and anything can pray..
Jacque williams | Jun 10, 2012 | Reply
Just thought I would let you know that picture was part of pastors sermon this morning. It was about is taking time for prayed. Thank you for sharing your photo
josh | Aug 3, 2012 | Reply
The Wierd Thing Is…
This Dude Looks just Like Me!
Judith Payne | Feb 25, 2013 | Reply
Hi Karen. I have just finished writing a book entitled “Prescription for Peace”. Could I have permission to use this picture on one of the pages of my book. I would like to use it along with the words “Be thankful” Thank you so much.