RSPCA WONT PROSECUTE PET KILLER

AS THE RSPCA VENDICTIVELY PROSECUTE PENSIONERS, THE DISABLED AND ANY UNLUCKY ANIMAL OWNER WHO FALLS FOUL OF THEM, THEY DECIDE NOT TO PROSECUTE NEIGHBOUR WHO KILLED A DOG WITH A GARDEN HOE !

DESPITE THEIR PROSECUTING PC JONATHAN BELL FOR PUTTING A CAT OUT OF ITS MISERY AFTER BEING FLATENED IN A ROAD ACCIDENT, ONE IS DELIBERATE THE OTHER AN ACT OF COMPASSION, WHAT'S GOING ON RSPCA ?

A woman has raised £1,600 to fund a private prosecution against a former neighbour she accuses of killing her pet dog.
Mother-of-three Tricia Wales claims a long-running series of disputes with Neville Hill culminated in her five-year-old border terrier Wurzel being killed and dumped on her land by him.
Mr Hill admitted that he hit Wurzel with a garden hoe after it trespassed on to his property but the RSPCA has decided not to prosecute him because the dog did not suffer undue pain.
Instead, Mrs Wales, 60, who lives in Yapton, near Arundel, has launched a private prosecution alleging criminal damage against Mr Hill.
She called on friends, relatives and villagers to raise enough money to fund the case, which will have its first hearing at Chichester Magistrates' Court on Friday.
She said: “I have had cheques from people I haven't even come across. People have been supportive of me as they are appalled at what has happened to Wurzel.
“Even if I hadn't raised the money, I would have remortgaged the house or done something to get enough money together to bring the prosecution.”
Mrs Wales, a freelance secretary, said she and her family were devastated by the death of Wurzel, who had to be put down because of the extent of its injuries.
The alleged incident happened in September last year after Mrs Wales visited the shops to buy potatoes for Sunday lunch, leaving Wurzel and her other two dogs in the house.
She said: “Hill said that my dogs got into his garden, that they were circling his hen coop and distressing his animals. There was a horrendous dog fight which culminated in him hitting Wurzel with a blunt instrument.”
A post-mortem examination found the dog had sustained a skull fracture as a result of being struck by a blunt object, Mrs Wales said.
She said: “I can't tell you how much I loved that dog. She was a puppy who was born in our house and I loved her, as I do all my dogs.”
Mrs Wales accepted she and Mr Hill had past disagreements as neighbours.
Mr Hill, who now lives in nearby Walberton and runs a garage door company in Portslade, said he did strike Wurzel with a garden hoe, that it was not his intention to kill the animal and that he reacted as a result of a series of incidents involving Mrs Wales.
He told how Mrs Wales' dogs trespassed on to his land, aggravating and attacking his elderly dog.
He said he picked up the garden hoe, struck Wurzel and then placed her on Mrs Wales' doorstep because she was not in at the time, not believing the animal to be seriously injured.
He said: “The dog wasn't dead when I put her on the doorstep. It was still breathing and I simply thought she was concussed. If I had thought she was seriously injured then I would have called a vet.
“If I had wanted to kill the dog, I would have used the sharp end of the garden hoe but I didn't. I didn't even aim a blow at the dog. It was just to scare her off my old dog.
“I did strike the fatal blow but (Mrs Wales) doesn't take responsibility for her dogs, it's as simple as that. It happened as a result of her dogs attacking my dog.”
Mr Hill said he intends to plead not guilty and added that since the incident he has moved from the property, selling it around £100,000 below its market value.
He said: “I believe justice will prevail.”
RSPCA inspector Becky Carter said that Mr Hill was interviewed as part of her inquiries but it was decided that they would not launch their own prosecution.
She said: “We follow the Animal Welfare Act 2006 which says that an animal has to suffer for us to prosecute. http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/4245628.Neighbour__killed_terrier_with_a_hoe__near_Arundel/

RSPCA PROSECUTE GRANDAD WHO ACCIDENTALY KILLED CAT

WOULD HE HAVE BEEN PROSECUTED FOR POISIONING RATS TOO ?

HOW MANY ANIMALS DO THE RSPCA KILL EVERY YEAR ?

A GRANDDAD has been ordered to pay almost £1,000 by a court after a cat died from eating poison he put out at his allotment to kill rats.
James Scarr, 61, left out the mixture in the hope of killing vermin at the site - but did not intend to kill the cat, a court heard.

Magistrates in Peterlee heard another allotment-holder found the black and white cat "in a state of collapse" just minutes before it died in front of him.

The stray cat had been seen regularly around the allotments over the previous 10 months and had recently given birth to a litter of kittens.

Denise Jackman, prosecuting on behalf of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), said the man noticed the cat with saliva on its face and front legs and rushed to its aid."At that point she died in front of him", Miss Jackman told Peterlee magistrates.

The gardener looked around the site, at Holm Hill allotments in Easington Colliery, and discovered the fish mixture.

The RSPCA and police became involved and inquiries led to Scarr.

An autopsy was carried out on the cat and a vet ruled that the substance had "interfered with the transmission of signals by the nervous system, resulting in paralysis, which affects the muscles used for breathing and the animal would have been unable to breath and asphyxiated". Miss Jackman asked justices to consider disqualifying Scarr from keeping animals.

Scarr, admitted causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal on April 13, last year.

Neil Bennett, mitigating, said there was a serious rat problem at the allotments and Scarr never intended to hurt the cat.

He added he pleaded guilty on the basis he was not aware of the risk that cats would stray onto the allotments.

Chairman of the magistrates' bench Keith King fined Scarr £350 with £590 costs and a £15 victim surcharge.Scarr was not disqualified from keeping animals.

After the hearing, Scarr said: "It's a relief that I can keep my dog and it has been a nightmare having this hanging over me."I have never hurt an animal in my life. I don't go out to intentionally hurt animals and I would never do it knowingly.

If I could go back in time I would take the stuff myself."

http://www.peterleemail.co.uk/news/Grandad-fined-after-poisonous-tuna.5103475.jp

WILDLIFE GROUPS FURY AS RSPCA SPEND MILLIONS ON PROSECUTIONS BUT KILL WILDLIFE

RSPCA CLAIM FUNDING CRISIS RESPONSIBLE FOR POLICY TO KILL WILDLIFE

Wildlife campaigners are really worried that RSPCA staff are being told to kill sick, injured, orphaned hedgehogs and all other wildlife. If they become ill, no matter how minor or easily treatable the illness or injury is, they will be automatically killed regardless, without even being fully or properly assessed. Even if just cold, hungry and underweight. What about those just waking up from hibernation? They are all just thin and weak, nothing else wrong with them. The big worry is that a member of public rings the RSPCA control centre. The call centre staff don't know that a different policy is now in place. They take the call, pass it to an ACO or inspector. The inspector or ACO report back to the Control Centre saying the call has been dealt with. The public won't know that "dealt with" means euthanised, instead of taking the animal to a vet or wildlife hospital for care and attention.
It is totally unacceptable to use Euthanasia because of a decrease in their funds.
We must all protest about this decision by the RSPCA. It is now even more important to tell as many people as you can to feed and look after hedgehogs in their garden. We need to keep them healthy. Once they become ill, that is the end of it. They will not be treated or saved any more.
Please spread the word, ask all your friends and family to support their local wildlife hospital and local carers.
Please do NOT ring RSPCA for wildlife.
Contact your local carer or wildlife centre
There is a discussion topic https://exchange.1and1.co.uk/owa/redir.aspx?C=152a8a8a7f294e63b6f80565289363fe&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.hedgehoghelp.co.uk%2findex.php%2ftopic%2c2671.0.html Regards,The The Hedgehog Forums Team.https://exchange.1and1.co.uk/owa/redir.aspx?C=152a8a8a7f294e63b6f80565289363fe&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.hedgehoghelp.co.uk%2findex.php

RSPCA RUN UP £120,000 COST AFTER RABBITS SEIZURE

ON THE SAME DAY WE LEARN THAT THE RSPCA ARE KILLING WILDLIFE INSTEAD OF TREATING THEM, WE FIND THEY SPEND £120,000 ON PROSECUTION CASE.

A COUPLE who cost the RSPCA more than £100,000 could be made to pay £10,000 after they failed to show up to their own appeal hearing.
Pete and Dawn Bundy were banned indefinitely from keeping rabbits after officers discovered 126 animals in filthy hutches, some infested with maggots.
Although the Bundys were ordered to pay £1,000 costs, the RSPCA was landed with a bill of about £120,000 for legal fees and housing the rabbits for 18 months.
Convicted Mr Bundy, 53, and his 48-year-old wife, were convicted under the Animal Welfare Act following a four-day hearing before a district judge in December, but lodged an appeal immediately after the case.
However the couple, who have since moved to Doncaster, failed to turn up to an appeal hearing before city magistrates and now face a £10,000 legal bill.
The prosecution followed the concern of neighbours, who contacted the RSPCA and environmental health officers in October 2007.
The officers took hours removing 73 specialist dwarf lop, German lop and silver fox and satin rabbits – worth about £3,000 – from the back yard of the couple’s house.
Recorder Paul Grumbar, who sat with two magistrates, was told that boarding fees and veterinary bills for the rabbits – now homed at kennels in Berkshire – stood at £100,000, and the prosecutions legal costs were about £20,000.
Christine Henson, appearing for the RSPCA, said that costs in bringing the appeal amounted to £10,000.
The Bundys will learn the extent of their bill after a breakdown of the prosecution’s costs has been submitted.

RSPCA FOUNDER RICHARD MARTIN WILL TURN IN HIS GRAVE

A CURFEW, A 2 YEAR BAN, COMMUNITY SERVICE, THEIR PET TAKEN AWAY AND A FINE, BECAUSE THEIR DOG HAD FLEAS !
WHILST MUGGERS, LOUTS AND HOOLIGANS JUST GET ASBO'S AND ABC'S,
WHATS HAPPENING WITH THIS COUNTRY ?

A mother and son from Conniburrow have been banned from keeping dogs for two years after causing unnecessary suffering to a German Shepherd. Twenty-one-year-old Daniel Ward and his mother Tracey, 40, were sentenced at Milton Keynes Magistrates Court on Friday.

Both pleaded guilty to failing to provide adequate veterinary care to their dog called Brody at an earlier hearing.

Janita Patel, prosecutor, said RSPCA Inspector Dave Braybrooke was called to their address on Tuesday, August 5 last year after receiving allegations in relation to the dog.

He found Brody suffering from a severe flea allergy.

The defendants, who chose to represent themselves, said they had bought products to treat the flea infection.Daniel Ward, said he had used shampoo that takes a month to work. "You can't say I did not try anything," he said. "I had just lost my job and could not afford to take him to the vet."His hair started coming back then went away again. I didn't want to lose him, he was my dog."

Chair of Magistrates Tim Jenn, sentencing the pair, said: "We accept you did make efforts to treat the dog but it was ineffective. You should have taken it to the vet; it was obvious because of the stress it caused."

Daniel Ward was sentenced to 80 hours of community service and must pay £1,233.74 of boarding fees and £600 towards court costs. An order was made for the dog to remain in the RSPCA's care.

Tracey Ward will serve a curfew for eight weeks, during which she must stay at home between 8pm and 7am, and must pay £300 of court costs.Both are disqualified from owning or keeping dogs for two years.

Insp. Braybrooke said: "It goes to show that if you get treatments for your dog that aren't working then you must by all accounts get the animal to the vet.

http://www.mk-news.co.uk/mknews/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=400873

ARROGANT RSPCA SUPRISED THAT SCOTS ANIMAL CHARITY CHALLENGES MISSAPROPRIATED DONATIONS

WELL DONE SPCA

A confrontational advertising campaign by the Scottish SPCA accusing its sister charity of stealing donors has attracted 1,000 new members to the charity.
The £100,000 web and newspaper campaign used the slogan “The RSPCA won’t save me” and was accompanied by claims that the Royal Society asks for Scottish donors’ money without helping animals north of the border.
The SPCA also accused the RSPCA of breaching Institute of Fundraising guidelines which require charities to be explicit about where they work.
The campaign provoked significant public reaction, and prompted the Institute of Fundraising Scotland to offer to facilitate a meeting. Spokesman Gregor McNie explained: “We wrote to the chief executives of both organisations offering to broker a meeting between them to discuss some of the concerns raised.
“Having since spoken to both parties, we understand that some level of agreement has been reached between the two on future working based on our guidance and they feel that, given this development, an Institute-brokered meeting would not be necessary at this time. We have all agreed that the door remain open to meet in the future if required and we continue to keep in close contact with both parties. We are very happy for all involved and affected by this, that such a significant step forward has been made.”
A spokesman from the RSPCA told PF: “We were extremely surprised by the campaign, mainly because we talk to our counterparts regularly and we go to enormous lengths to make sure our marketing does not go to Scotland.
“We did not think that charities should spend time and money and effort attacking other charities, especially in the current climate.”
The spokesman also refuted claims that the RSPCA has breached the Institute of Fundraising codes, saying the charity actually helped draw it up. He added: “We did not get into a media scrum with them (SPCA) because we did not think the public would respond well to that. We are hopeful the issue has been resolved.”
Scottish SPCA chief executive Stuart Earley said: “Our talks with the RSPCA are ongoing and we are awaiting a reply as to how any advertising it places in Scotland will make it explicitly clear to the Scottish public that any donations will only help animals in England and Wales.
“We have been overwhelmed by the positive response to the awareness-raising campaign we launched recently, with over a thousand new members joining the Society.”

http://www.professionalfundraising.co.uk/home/content.php?id=1692&pg=2&cat=49

RSPCA SPEND £ MILLIONS PROSECUTING HORSE TRADER WHO'S STOCK HAD A WORM INFECTION

RSPCA VICTIMISE HORSE TRADER, WHY ? PUBLICITY !

11 greulling weeks dragged through the court system because his horses had worms !

SHAME ON YOU RSPCA !

AND YOU TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE WHOLE FAMILY !

WHO ARE THE ANIMALS ?

A SENIOR vet told a court today horses found dead at a south Bucks farm could have died in “one of the largest recorded outbreaks” of a worm infestation.
John Parker, the former chairman of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, said the owner of Spindles Farm in Hyde Heath was “not aware of the gravity” of an infection affecting his livestock.
But he also told Bicester Magistrates' Court he was unable to prove his theory as it was several months before the idea came to him.
Mr Parker said he believed the horses could have died from a condition called cyathostomiasis – an infestation of worms.
Robert Seabrook QC, prosecuting, suggested it was “impossible” for so many animals to die in such a short space of time.
He asked Mr Parker: “Can you have sudden death from acute cyathostomiasis without a preceding tell tale disability – clinical signs that would be apparent to the keeper?”
Mr Parker said this was possible, adding they could have died within 48 hours of contracting the disease.
He said if this was the case it would be “one of the largest outbreaks ever recorded” if properly documented.
But he added: “I am giving the hypothesis that's what killed the animals, but we cannot prove that because unfortunately evidence has gone.”
Mr Parker said the possibility of cyathostomiasis did not cross his mind until after he had compiled his initial report on his findings.
Mr Seabrook suggested Mr Parker “did not have any personal knowledge or experience” of cyathostomiasis.
The vet disagreed, but added he “did not know what yardstick” to measure his findings against. He said he had seen two outbreaks of the condition.
Mr Seabrook said Mr Parker had been “swotting up” on his knowledge of the disease and he had contacted another vet from Shrewsbury to ask about it.
Mr Parker agreed he sought advice from the vet: “I sought his confirmation whether his experience of sudden death was the same as mine, which was so.”
He said he had spoken to him “three or four times”, but added they were good friends and he had never contacted him specifically with the intention of talking about the trial.
Mr Parker told the court evidence from vets and RSPCA inspectors heard already had been “exaggerated” and “overstated”.
He looked at photographs taken by the RSPCA at the farm, owned by 45-year-old James Gray.
Referring to evidence from vet Katie Robinson, Mr Parker told the court: “Neglect and cruelty may well not have contributed to everything that she saw.
“I realised whatever happened there may be outside Mr Gray's control. Unfortunately, although he wormed his horses, he didn't know the gravity and complexity of the potential situation.”
Mr Seabrook asked the vet if he would be “cautious” about challenging Miss Robinson's evidence.
Mr Parker said he would not, but added he did not contest her remarks the animals were “in urgent need of attention”, that people “normally asked for help” before horses ended up in the condition they were found and they would die unless they received attention.
He said: “If Mr Gray was a reasonable dealer he would give them enough food to keep their weight up over the winter, but not to put a great deal of flesh on them.”
Mr Seabrook said Mr Parker had not mentioned cyathostomiasis anywhere in his report on the findings – which amounted to 73 pages.
The vet replied: “My remit until April 4 was not to do with diagnosis. It was to see some horses and see how healthy they were.”

http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/news/4198883.Vet__animals__could_have_died_from_large_worm_infestation_/

RSPCA WORKERS HUSBAND KILLS BUDGIE, BY THROWING IT AT A WALL

DRUNKEN RSPCA WORKER PRESENT WHILST BUDGIE KILLED !

Boozed-up bird batterer costs his wife her RSCA job - after CHUCKING his son's budgie to death!

BUDGIE batterer Brian McGregor killed his teenage son's pet by CHUCKING it repeatedly at a wall, after a drinking binge, a court heard.
Rotherham Magistrates were told that the helpless bird suffered multiple injuries at the hands of 53-year-old McGregor... whose wife worked in the RSPCA's CRUELTY department!McGregor was seen by an unnamed witness, throwing the budgie several times at the wall – because he felt it needed to be put down, and wanted to end its suffering.


The shocked eyewitness called the RSPCA to the house at Coronation Road, Rawmarsh, at 9.25pm on July 24 last year, said prosecutor Karen Tunnacliffe.


She said that after the attack – carried out while his 15-year-old son, who cared for the bird, was away on a camping trip – McGregor calmly put the budgie back into its cage.


Ms Tunnacliffe added that McGregor and his wife – who worked in a call centre handling cruelty reports for the RSPCA – were both intoxicated when the society's inspector arrived.


The budgie was taken away to be examined by a vet who said the suffering caused to the pet prior to its death would have been "immense".


McGregor was questioned by officers the following day, and explained that he would not have thrown the bird had he been sober.


He told the court that the bird had become very ill and added: "It was not feeding and the bird hated human activity, it could not fly and to be honest I thought I was doing it a bit of a favour."A bird breeder told me the best thing would be to throw it at the wall."He went on: "Just for the record I threw it once against the wall, the breeze blew its feathers so just to make sure I threw it again."


McGregor said that his wife was not involved in the attack, but said she had suffered some distress as she had subsequently been sacked from her job.


He pleaded guilty to two charges of causing unnecessary suffering to the budgie and failing to meet the needs of the same bird.


Magistrates adjourned the case until March 20 while court reports are compiled.Inspector Helen Griffiths, who led the investigation, said outside court: "This was a totally unnecessary act."There are evidently much more humane ways to euthanase a bird in distress than throwing it against a wall

RSPCA PROSECUTION JAILS FRAIL 84 YEAR OLD PENSIONER

YET ANOTHER PERSECUTED PENSIONER;

RSPCA, YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED, WHO IS BEING CRUEL NOW ! ARENT YOU SUPPOSED TO BE THERE TO HELP ?

CALL YOURSELF A CHARITY !

A HORSE show judge has been jailed for four months.
Monica Hope Hewitt, 84, pleaded guilty to 13 counts of causing unnecessary suffering to the animals at her home in Roston, near Ashbourne.
Hewitt's daughter, 56-year-old Monica Mary Hewitt, of Rocester, pleaded guilty to 15 counts of causing unnecessary suffering in relation the incident and was given a four-month sentence, suspended for 12 months.
A video played in court, showed an RSPCA raid on Hewitt's property in Squashly Bank, on March 14 last year.
It showed ponies that had been shut in stables and barns. One animal had hooves that had grown to 26 inches long and had "curled up like Aladdin's slippers".
A horse coat had been tied so tightly around another pony that when vets tried to remove it, it took away some of the animal's skin.
Speaking after the sentence, Helen Briggs, from the RSPCA, said: "We are pleased with the outcome.
During the raid, RSPCA inspectors asked the pensioner if she kept any more animals apart from horses and ponies.
Hewitt, who has been a judge for the Welsh Pony and Cob Club since 1990, showed them into her house where four Jack Russell terriers were found shut in pet carrying cases.
John Young, for Hewitt, told the court neither Hewitt nor her daughter had realised the animals' situation had become as bad as it had.
He said: "We do not have a situation where they acted maliciously towards the animals."
Hewitt senior was sentenced to concurrent terms of four months for each of the 13 counts against her. She was banned from keeping animals for life.
Her daughter was given four months, suspended for 12, for each of her 15 counts, ordered to undertake 200 hours' unpaid work and given a community order for 12 months.

http://www.thisisderbyshire.co.uk/news/Horse-judge-jailed-shocking-neglect-animals/article-734829-detail/article.html