Monday, 15 December 2008


Appalling behaviour by supposed animal welafre charity as they ignore mums cry for help and then prosecute her for alleged cruelty !

A MOTHER-OF-THREE who caused unnecessary suffering to her pet dog is facing a jail sentence.
Flea-infested collie Julie, had rotting teeth was humanely destroyed to end her misery.
Her owner, Nicola Bayford, 37, was warned that she could be locked up after Chelmsford magistrates saw photographs of the mange-covered dog.

When she appeared before the court on Monday, Bayford, of Witham, admitted causing unnecessary suffering to the dog on July 28. She was bailed for probation reports until January 5.
Magistrates imposed an interim order banning her from keeping or having responsibility for animals.
"She put Julie's bad health down to her being 16 years old and was faced with a choice – feed the kids or take the dog to a vet.
"They loved the dog and that it why she put up posters trying to find her," he said.
He said Bayford had asked the RSPCA, PDSA and Blue Cross animal charities for help but was told Witham did not come within their area and she got the same answer from an animal sanctuary.
After the hearing an RSPCA spokeswoman said: "An inspector took the dog to a vet to be put to sleep to end her suffering.
"The normal process would then be to put together a case file with a view to possible prosecution. In this case, because the inspector had a huge workload a file was not put together and the case was investigated by the local authority.
"The RSPCA is often passed information by the local authority and we investigate on their behalf. We are grateful that they were able to help on this occasion."


What really aggravates me about both the story and the above comments is that everyone is blaming Nicky for Neglect of Julie, but no one is picking up on the fact that she did actually ask for help from the PDSA, RSPCA and Blue Cross and they all refused to help her as she was not in their area and none of them gave her contact details of where she could get help in her area isn't this also neglect? Also the fact that the dog was 16 years old would say that it was looked after and loved wouldn't it and also the fact that posters were put up about a missing dog which lead the warden to Nicky, if Nicky neglected and didn't care about the dog would she have done this, and walked the streets to try and find her ? As Leigh said, none of you know Nicky or the family you are only judging on what a 100 or so words say in the paper. As for Charlottes comment, think you are the stupid woman as just because you had a 17 year old dog that looked completely healthy ,doesn't mean that every dog or animal is the same, I have seen plenty of dogs or cats with bad teeth and matted hair o fur and there is nothing wrong with them other than age, humans get wrinkles and aches and pains, and loose there teeth when they get old does that make them neglected? Gwen will reverse the same on you, were you in court for this case, you know Jack too. I am not denying the dog should have been seen by a vet, but again its not as though Nicky didn't try if she had as other people have comment, mistreated, abused or neglected her why would she bother trying to get help to get her seen, which by the way for all those people who have used mistreated and abused get you facts straight and read properly as neither of those words are used in the story, the case is about neglect! Also picking up on what Charlotte said your right about the family, but to the fact of don't you think that if the dog was a bad as what is being made out a member of the family or a friend would have done something about it? I personally don't think that she was left untreated on purpose, and Nicky should not be punished when she so obviously did care for that dog. As Alan said, look at your own lives, and get the facts before judging other peoples.
Sue, Witham

commented on 12-Dec-2008 20:51
Nikki is my sister & what ppl are saying about her is ridiculous. Do not believe what is written in the papers about her as it is not true, the papers always exagarate the truth so pls dont judge her.Nikki is a kind loving caring person & a wonderful mother who wouldnt hurt a fly but due to financial problems when her hubby left made money very tight. Julie was loved by all the family & was looked after as best she could over the 16 years that the family had her. Nikki also worked to help support her family so please dont judge her as none of you know her or the situation apart from what has been written. If any of you out there have a heart then think of what this is doing to her, her children & the family. We all support you Nikki @ this terrible time as we all love you.Thanks to Alan from Shenfield & T.H from Witham for your comments & support x
Emma, Witham

commented on 12-Dec-2008 12:31
Much as I love animals it seems to me that this woman does not deserve prison. She must have been at her wits end as to what to do, with no money, three children and no partner. Just leave her alone all you hysterical Hangers and Floggers out there who have not an ounce of charity among the lot of you. Look at your own lives first before judging her.
Alan, Shenfield

commented on 12-Dec-2008 11:32
I too know Nicky Bayford and her family circumstances. I don't know the full details of what happen to this poor dog only what the papers say and if that's true she should be punished but I dont think prison would be the answer. Nicky has 3 children none of whom have any contact with their father and to jail Nicky would only punish them because like the dog they are victims of a situation not of their making.
T. H., Witham

commented on 11-Dec-2008 18:35
Leigh, Please try to get Miss Bayford to phone The SHG, who help people having problems with the RSPCA, on 0844 700 66 90. You can see their website at Note that from the date of sentencing there is a time limit of 21 days in which to lodge an appeal.
You could also take a look at and
There is quite a lot of controversy over RSPCA prosecutions!
Nick, Birmingham

commented on 11-Dec-2008 09:44
this is a load of crap, i personally know miss bayford and the story printed couldnt be further from the truth, she is a loving, caring person who is incapable of such things. The whole family loved and cherised julie right to the very end, she was well looked after and cared for throught her 16 years, i can gaurentee that julie was not suffering at all and was just like any normal dog. the allegations are ridiculous and untrue, there are many of people out there that are guilty of much worse crimes but its the innocent that get labelled the justice system in this country is disgusting and by this false claim being made lives are being ruined, all i can say is dont judge until you know the REAL story
leigh, manchester

No comments: