RESCUE IT, GET MEDIA COVERAGE, KILL IT; HOW THE RSPCA OPERATE

A DEER which was rescued from the womb of its mother after she was hit and killed by a car has been put down.

The animal was rescued in May and was initially cared for by staff at the RSPCA Stapeley Grange Wildlife Centre near Nantwich.
Staff at the wildlife centre hand-fed him goat's milk before he was weaned on to solid food.
A month later he was taken to another wildlife centre at East Winch in Norfolk.
He was allowed to roam in numerous paddocks so he could graze on vegetation similar to what he would need in the wild.
But when the deer was released into the wild on October 20, he was unable to cope.
RSPCA staff caught him and put him down.
"He wasn't behaving how wild animals do," said RSPCA spokeswoman Kayta Mira.
"He was too tame. He was running up to cars and there were dogs he wasn't running away from."
But the British Deer Society has condemned the actions of the RSPCA.
Spokesman David Kenyon said it was irresponsible to bring up a deer and then expect it to go back into the wild.
http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/news/Sad-end-real-life-Bambi/article-2810564-detail/article.html

COMMENTS

After reading this story I'm changing my will. I'm 4 euros, staffs



I've stopped giving to the RSPCA and PDSA because of their double standards. This is a terrible outcome, Shame on you RSPCA you'll not get another penny out of me or any of my family. up'anelyduck, 'anley

I stopped donating cash to this organisation because of these very policies, it seems to be more of a get off the street and kill it organisation. 3 experiences dealing with this bunch of clowns were eye opening. First was when I reported from work that an allotment owner in Fenton was actually training his fighting pit bull by hanging a live chicken just out of reach for it to jump at, got told it was not a problem of cruelty and was our responsibility.

Second was a song thrush that had its foot caught in a trap, took to Stapeley they said thank you there was nothing they could do and it would be humanely destroyed, just asked were they not going to take a look, only we had dressed the wound and kept the bird alive for several days already, it was destroyed.

And finally all those rescued dogs and cats that if not found a home in a VERY short time period, or who are too ill or aged are all destroyed.

So a fawn in distress etc and releasedand then recaptured, how much admin time would it have taken to find it a home? Still we must rest assured that some Inspector of the RSPCA who is not a veggie will be dining well no doubt. Lazarus, North Staffs


HOW DISGUSTING THAT THIS SHOULD HAPPEN, BUT I AM NOT SURPRISED THE R.S.P.C.A. IS NOT ALL THAT PEOPLE BELIEVE IT TO BE , THEY JUST TURNED IT OUT TO DIE.NOT A LOT OF CARE WENT IN TO IT. SHEILA, LONGTON

A few years ago the RSPCA prosecuted a local police officer because he killed a cat which had been badly injured in a collision with a car. He said he'd done this to put the cat out of its misery. Thankfully common sense prevailed and he was acquitted.

So how can the same RSPCA justify this barbarism?


That's the last time I put money into one of their collection boxes. J, Staffs

Of course he couldn't cope being young & hand-reared, but given time to re-adapt, who knows.

Other than that, the only decent thing would've been re-homing to a safari park or animal sanctuary. Shameful. Ivan, Staffs

I agree with previous comments. RSPCA should hang their heads in shame. There would of been plenty of other options to choose from instead of putting a healthy animal down. Absolute disgrace!!!!! How can the RSPCA claim to care for animals? SHAME ON YOU!!!!!!!! A, Stoke

This article has compleatley changed my views on the RSPCA this is disgusting. it pretty obvious to anyone that if you hand reer an animal that should be in the wild, it would not take to the wild...its wrong on a huge scale that this animal has been put down. i think the RSPCA are at a huge fault on this and after reading this i would hope to god none of my own animals ever have to have anything to do with the RSPCA whoever it was that made this decision should have all authority to take an animals life removed i could name places off the top of my head that would hapilly take a healthy young offspring on and it would have a perfectly good life. this is shocking and disgracefull of the RSPCA. shocked, Stoke On Trent

"He wasn't behaving as wild animals do" said RSPCA spokeswoman Kayta Mira.

That's because he wasn't a wild animal, he'd been reared by humans from birth. Chucking a tame animal out into the wild and expecting it to behave as a wild animal is as bad as capturing a wild animal and expecting it to behave like a domestic pet.

The RSPCA raised this animal and had a duty of care to maintain it in the state that they had raised it to. Friends of mine did the same with a red deer fawn, she is happy now roaming the farm with other farm animals and horses and interacting with the people she has always known. There are plenty of people out there who would have been capable of looking after that animal. The RSPCA is getting as bad as PETA who "euthanase" (what a nice word) nearly all the animals entrusted to them for safekeeping. Sarah, Surrey

I can't believe I'm reading this!..... A healthy animal was put down, that is absolutely disgusting. You're telling me you couldn't find a home for it?? You kept this animal alive when he lost his mum, you must have known that by hand rearing it, it would not be able to go in the wild again, so why did you bother rearing the poor thing just to kill it anyway?????!!!!!!!!!!!!! Animal Lover, Staffs

Call yourselves animal lovers you are just sick If the deer couldnt of survived in the wild you should of found another home for him/her im sure there are plenty of zoo`s that would have gladly taken the poor deer in! Doctor Death.., The Cross..

Shame on you RSPCA. There must have been a better option than killing a healthy animal. Another sanctury, petting zoo, anything would have been better than death. Disgraceful! Stan, Burslem

RSPCA BULLY DEFENCE VETS

That increasingly odd organisation, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, stands accused this week of bullying any vet who dares to appear in court as an expert witness for the defence in cases of cruelty.
Evidence presented to a conference organised by the British Veterinary Forensic & Law Association alleges that the RSPCA has taken to intimidating vets who oppose it by filing repeated complaints about them to the Law Society, attempting to have them banned from testifying on grounds of bias and generally trying to discredit their reputations. One vet has suggested that the organisation's vast wealth has allowed it "to act as a self-appointed vigilante group... Anyone who tries to defend people against the RSPCA now risks professional complaints".
Those who choose to work as vets are not, as a whole, defenders of cruelty. These claims confirm the impression that the RSPCA has recently allowed its officials' enthusiasms for animal rights, laudable in themselves, to tip dangerously into excess, bullying and fanaticism.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/terence-blacker/terence-blacker-the-emptiness-of-institutional-caring-2116299.html

RSPCA BULLIES VETS IN CRUELTY CASES

It has targeted vets who have given expert testimony on behalf of defendants prosecuted by the RSPCA for animal cruelty

Jonathan Leake, Environment Editor Published: 24 October 2010

The RSPCA has an income of about £110m a year, mostly from legacies and donations The RSPCA faces accusations that it is bullying and intimidating vets after lodging complaints with their professional body.
It has targeted vets who have given expert testimony on behalf of defendants prosecuted by the RSPCA for animal cruelty. The vets include a former president of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS).
Such complaints against expert veterinary witnesses are unprecedented by the RSPCA. The charity says the move is justified, partly because the vets concerned are well known expert witnesses who often appear on behalf of defendants, but mainly because expert evidence has been criticised in court hearings by judges.
This week, however, a conference organised by the British Veterinary Forensic & Law Association will hear vets and lawyers raise concerns over what they see as deliberate attempts by the RSPCA to deter vets from testifying for defendants.
Jonathan Rich, a barrister whose specialities include defending people charged with welfare offences, has been attacked in the past by animal rights activists.
He said: “Animal cruelty cases often turn on the advice provided by independent vets. It is vital vets should not be deterred by the threat of complaints to the RCVS or other legal tactics.
“The RSPCA’s behaviour risks creating an environment where people accused of animal welfare offences will not be able to get a proper defence.”
Bill Cartmell, a vet from Fareham, Hampshire, is one of those being investigated by the RCVS. He said: “Anyone who tries to defend people against the RSPCA now risks professional complaints. In one case where I was an expert witness the RSPCA instructed its solicitors to write to the courts before the hearing to say that I should not be allowed to testify because I was biased.
“They have no right to determine who stands as an expert witness; they are just a charity. The reality is that they are very rich and are effectively using their money to act as a self-appointed vigilante group.”
Colin Vogel, 64, a vet in Fakenham, Norfolk, who will be among the speakers at this week’s meeting, has testified in more than 100 cases, mostly for people facing prosecution for cruelty by the RSPCA.
He said: “In my case, the RSPCA have lodged complaints about me with the Law Society, where I am an accredited expert witness, and also with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and with the Society of Expert Witnesses.
“All those complaints were rejected but I have used the Data Protection Act to see their files on me, which appear to show that they are trying to gather evidence for further complaints.”
John Parker, RCVS president in 2005, appeared for the defence in the trial of a man accused of cruelty to horses. He said: “I am over 70 years old now and this case has been hanging over me for more than two years.”
Madeleine Forsyth, a vet from North Yorkshire who gave expert testimony for the defence in the same case, will describe this week how she faces a rare “wasted costs” application that could force her to pay an estimated £15,000. She said: “I have given evidence in a number of cases and the RSPCA does not like that.”
The RCVS said it could not comment on active cases. However, Harvey Locke, president of the British Veterinary Association (BVA) said a number of members had raised concerns about the RSPCA’s “potential discrediting of expert witnesses”.
The BVA confirmed that it had held a private meeting with the RSPCA last November to raise its concerns and would shortly be meeting the RCVS to discuss the matter again.
The RSPCA has an income of about £110m a year, mostly from legacies and donations. Critics suggest its “enthusiasm” for court cases is because they generate publicity that helps maintain its income.
David Bowles, director of communications at the RSPCA, rejects such claims. He said: “We carry out 138,000 investigations a year but last year only prosecuted about 1,000 people, which is a very small proportion.
“We have made complaints about some vets, but, regarding those who had appeared as expert witnesses, our complaint was linked to courtroom criticisms of their testimony.”
Hamish Rogers, the RSPCA’s case manager, said: “There are a few vets who earn their living appearing as expert witnesses for defendants, and they keep appearing time and again, and sometimes it is necessary to explore their credibility.”

RSPCA GIVEN PERMISSION TO SELL SEIZED PETS BEFORE PROSECUTION

THE RSPCA has been given permission to sell more than 20 dogs at the centre of an animal cruelty case in Paignton.

HEAD OF RSPCA PROSECUTIONS SALLY CASE

The order was granted on Tuesday by Newton Abbot magistrates who heard that owner James Noon, 57, of Blagdon Road, Paignton, has pleaded not guilty to 26 charges of causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal and 13 counts of failing to ensure the needs of an animal were met.
His son Hamish Noon, 26, also of Blagdon Road, Paignton is accused of 23 counts of causing unnecessary suffering to an animal and one offence of possessing cannabis. He denies all the charges.
The court heard that 14 dogs were seized in February and a further 12 were taken at a later date. It has cost the RSPCA £15,000 to care for the animals.
Speaking outside court James Noon said he had been keeping dogs for 40 years and would be found not guilty of the charges.
During the hearing, in an outburst from the dock, James Noon said: "I love my dogs and I have done nothing wrong. I want to keep my dogs. I do care about my dogs."
Defending the Noon's Clive Rees said: "These dogs are evidence, as long as they are evidence I do not see how the police can get rid of them. They can put them into RSPCA custody but I cannot see how the evidence can be given away to a third party while the case is ongoing.
"Mr Noon has kept dogs for 40 years and there had not been a problem before. He does not want to pass them over."
He also said the application would 'deprive' James Noon of ownership of the dogs before he has been convicted of any offence.

PROSECUTOR SEWELL

Prosecutor Philip Sewell said the dogs were checked over by a vet before they were seized. But Mr Rees said a different vet had visited the premises five days before the dogs were taken and on that occasion none of them were seized.
Granting the application for the dogs to be passed into the ownership of the RSPCA and sold, chairman of the bench Dave Thompson said: "The welfare of the animals has to come first. We will grant the application because there is an option by which you can appeal."
James and Hamish Noon will appear at Newton Abbot magistrates court to answer the animal cruelty charges on February 1.
http://www.thisissouthdevon.co.uk/news/Animal-charity-allowed-sell-cruelty-case-dogs/article-2761299-detail/article.html

RIDICULOUS RSPCA PROSECUTION FAILS

Another RSPCA attempt to criminalise an ordinary law-abiding person has failed,

A case that not only failed the evidential test, but would also have failed any reasonable person's public interest test.

BUT STILL GENERATES PUBLICITY FOR THE RSPCA.

"ITS CHEAPER TO PROSECUTE THAN ADVERTISE"

A PUB landlady has been cleared of animal cruelty charges.
The RSPCA prosecuted Dawn Walker after a pet rabbit was savaged to death by a Staffordshire Bull Terrier when both animals were left in her care.
But after hearing that the 37-year-old has done everything she could to protect the rabbit, JPs found her not guilty.
Gateshead magistrates heard that the animals belonged to Ms Walker’s grown-up daughter who was living temporarily with her in a flat above the Gloucester pub on High West Street, Gateshead, which she manages.
The rabbit and dog were bought when they were six-months-old and had grown up together.
She said they had played together without any problems.
But she said she never left them alone. She would either chain up the dog or put the rabbit in its hutch.
The animal charity, however, claimed that Ms Walker had been negligent by placing the ginger and white rabbit on a balcony roof alone with the dog, an act that resulted in its death.
A woman living in a flat that overlooks the pub alerted the RSPCA when she saw the dog with the rabbit in its mouth.
The first Ms Walker knew about the incident was when an RSPCA official knocked on her door.
The rabbit was found badly injured and was so traumatised that it died later.
There was no evidence of any puncture marks but it had suffered internal injuries from being thrown around.
Ms Walker said: “I had to go downstairs to the pub. The rabbit had gone into its hutch so I shut the hutch door.
“I don’t know if it chewed its way out.
“There was evidence that the inside of the hutch had been chewed so I think this is how it got out.”
She added: “I have always been adamant that I did everything I could to look after the rabbit and the dog and was very shocked to be taken to court. I am delighted that my name has been cleared but I am very sad for the demise of the rabbit.”
Since the incident in January, her daughter is now living away from the pub and has taken the dog with her.
Ms Walker’s solicitor, Michael Foley, said: “She was saddened and shocked by what happened. She did everything she could to look after the animals and there was no evidence that the animals had been neglected. This was an unfortunate one-off incident.”
Ms Walker had denied failing to meet the needs of the pet to be housed apart from a predator species resulting in its death and causing unnecessary suffering to a rabbit.
She was cleared on both charges.

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north-east-news/evening-chronicle-news/2010/10/15/pub-landlady-cleared-in-animal-cruelty-case-72703-27478222/

MENTALLY ILL LADY JAILED AS RESULT OF RSPCA PROSECUTION

THE CPS WOULDNT PROSECUTE A MENTALLY ILL DEFENDANT, BUT THE BIGOTED RSPCA WILL



PROSECUTOR CHARLOTTE MITCHELL



A WOMAN has been jailed for four weeks and banned from keeping animals for five years.

The chairman of the magistrates at Cheltenham told Margary Wright she had caused unnecessary suffering to the cats over a long period of time.

"There is no other way to deal with this than to send you to prison for four weeks."
Cheltenham Magistrates Court heard that all the cats had been seized, but that Wright was appealing in the crown court to have them returned.
Charlotte Mitchell, prosecuting for the RSPCA, said Wright's treatment of the cats had come to light after she sold three of them for £500.
"Their new owner had serious concerns about their welfare," As a result of this, Wright's home was raided by RSPCA officers and a vet, backed up by police.
Defending, Stuart Ramshaw said that at the time of the offences Wright was suffering from a great deal of stress.
"She had been diagnosed with a severe anxiety disorder and was suffering from panic attacks," he said.
"This arose from an earlier period when she suffered racial harassment in her neighbourhood.
He said Wright's state of mind, as outlined in the probation report, meant she was not a suitable candidate for custody.
He suggested that a ban on keeping animals would be a considerable punishment for her together with a conditional discharge.
But the bench disagreed and as well as handing down the prison sentence, chairman Mr Johnson banned Wright from keeping any animals for five years.
Speaking after sentence, RSPCA inspector Phil Mann said: "Taking a case to court is the last resort for the RSPCA but in this case we were left with no other option.
"The defendant was not willing to take our offers of help or advice, she would not allow us onto her property and she failed to comply with the law.

http://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/8444356.Woman_jailed_for_causing_suffering_to_cats/

The CPS tends not to prosecute disabled people, unless the seriousness or other circumstances of the case demand it. Its code for Crown Prosecutors states: “A prosecution is less likely to be needed if [it] is likely to have a bad effect on the victim’s physical or mental health, always bearing in mind the seriousness of the offence; the defendant is elderly, or is, or was at the time of the offence, suffering from mental or physical ill health, unless the offence is serious or there is a real possibility that it may be repeated… Crown prosecutors must balance the desirability of diverting a defendant who is suffering from significant mental or physical ill health with the need to safeguard the general public.” Despite the RSPCA’s claim that it “might not prosecute” in the case of a “defendant suffering from significant mental or physical ill health”,
http://www.disabilitynow.org.uk/living/features/hounded

NO JUSTICE AT THE RSPCA

A WILDLIFE campaigner has been ordered to appear in court over the drowning of a grey squirrel.

Morpeth Red Squirrels Chairman Norris Atthey has been charged with causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal, namely a grey squirrel, by drowning it.

The RSPCA has confirmed that it issued a summons to Mr Atthey yesterday morning to appear at South East Northumberland Magistrates Court in Bedlington next month to answer the charge under the Animal Welfare Act.

The action follows a report in the Herald on August 12 in which Mr Atthey described killing a grey squirrel and challenged the RSPCA to prosecute him.
Mr Atthey, 66, of Ulgham, has confirmed that he has received the summons and is receiving specialist legal advice.
He has been ordered to appear at the court at noon on Monday, November 8.
http://www.morpethherald.co.uk/news/local-news/morpeth_squirrel_killer_is_arrested_1_1536967

WE ACCUSE THE RSPCA OF BLATANTLY DISREGARDING THE CPS FULL CODE TEST!

In 1951, Sir Hartley Shawcross, who was then Attorney General, made the classic statement on public interest:

"It has never been the rule in this country - I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution". He added that there should be a prosecution: "wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest" (House of Commons Debates, Volume 483, 29 January 1951). This approach has been endorsed by Attorneys General ever since.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/code_for_crown_prosecutors/codetest.html


EXTRACT FROM 19 AUG 10;  HOW CAN A CHARITY HAVE A PENSIONER ARRESTED?

A WILDLFIE campaigner who challenged the RSPCA to prosecute him for drowning a grey squirrel has been arrested.

Norris Atthey, 66, was arrested by police at his home in Ulgham  after refusing to take part in a voluntary interview with an RSPCA inspector.
He was taken into custody for questioning on suspicion of causing unnecessary suffering to an animal.
Mr Atthey was contacted by the RSPCA and refused to co-operate with their enquiries.
An officer returned to his home on Wednesday morning and Mr Atthey handed over a written statement, but refused to speak to the official.
Assistance was then requested from police to arrest him.
A Northumbria Police spokesman said: "Police were called to assist an RSPCA officer at an address in Ulgham at around 10.45am.
"Officers arrested a 66-year-old man at the address for causing unnecessary suffering to an animal".
http://www.morpethherald.co.uk/news/local-news/morpeth_squirrel_killer_is_arrested_1_1536967

WHY HAVE THE RSPCA NEVER PROSECUTED A FREEDOM FOODS ACCREDITED SUPPLIER?

An investigation by Sky News and Viva has uncovered evidence suggesting Britain's largest egg producer is contravening strict guidelines on animal welfare.

The RSPCA said it would be suspending the farms from the Freedom Food scheme

Noble Foods own hen farms accredited to the RSPCA Freedom Food scheme, designed to offer particularly high standards of welfare for farm animals.

But footage obtained by Sky News and Viva from two farms in Fife, Scotland, suggests the guidelines are being breached.
An employee for Noble Foods was covertly filmed revealing electric wires are used to control the hens, who are also encouraged to remain indoors until 80% of them are laying.
The Happy Egg website projects the image of a playground for its hens
Another worker admitted at least one barn was infested with red mite, a parasite that causes skin irritations.
On a second visit to the farm, investigators filmed dozens of birds which had lost feathers due to disease and being pecked by other hens.
For their Happy Egg brand, Noble Foods portrays an image of welfare standards beyond the requirements of the Freedom Food scheme.
The investigation into The Happy Egg Company shows a very different picture - one of disease, incarceration, short lives and electric shocks.
The company's website states hens are given activities to enhance their natural surroundings such as "an adventure playground and sandpit".
Yet on two separate visits to the farm Sky News discovered muddy surroundings and a water-logged sandpit.
Two separate visits uncovered poor welfare conditions
A Noble Foods worker was recorded admitting the farm had problems with soil drainage and conditions for the hens were different to those officially portrayed.
Justine Kerswell from Viva, told Sky News: "Contented hens pecking at the ground and enjoying a dust bathe in the sun - that's most people's view of free range egg production.
As soon as we were made aware of the video footage the company instigated an internal enquiry.
A statement from Noble Foods.
"Viva And Sky News' investigation into The Happy Egg Company shows a very different picture - one of disease, incarceration, short lives and electric shocks."
In a statement, Noble Foods said: "We take the treatment of our hens extremely seriously.
"As soon as we were made aware of the video footage the company instigated an internal enquiry.
"Last night, at our request, both farms involved were audited by RSPCA Freedom Food inspectors and both were given very positive reports.
"We will continue to work with RSPCA Freedom Foods to ensure the highest possible welfare standards across our farms."
The RSPCA told Sky News they take any potential breach of welfare standards very seriously and would be suspending the farms in question from the Freedom Food scheme pending their own investigation.
Noble Foods supplies Happy Eggs to supermarkets including Asda, Morrisons, Sainsbury's and Ocado.
Sainsbury's welcomed the RSPCA investigation while Ocado have announced they will de-list Happy Eggs from their range as a precautionary measure.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Sky-News-Egg-Investigation-Hen-Evidence-Suggests-Noble-Foods-Is-Breaching-Animal-Welfare-Guidelines/Article/201010115753484?lpos=UK_News_News_Your_Way_Region_9&lid=NewsYourWay_ARTICLE_15753484_Sky_N
http://rspcainjustice.blogspot.com/2010/09/6000-salmon-killed-at-rspca-approved.htmlews_Egg_Investigation_Hen_Evidence_Suggests_Noble_Foods_Is_Breaching_Animal_Welfare_Guidelines
http://rspcainjustice.blogspot.com/2009/02/rspca-chefs-patronising-towards.html

RSPCA TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW?

http://www.rspca.org.uk/media/news/story/-/article/EM_EuthanasiaStatement_Sep10

As a result we have decided that our non-veterinary staff will no longer use these types of drugs.

However, RSPCA vets at animal centres and hospitals will continue to have access to pentobarbitone sodium (PBS) for euthanasia purposes.
We have been in close correspondence with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons on this and have been looking to update our euthanasia procedures in line with current legislation.

WHY HAVE RSPCA INSPECTORS PREVIOUSLY BEEN ALLOWED TO ADMINISTER CONTROLLED DRUGS?

WHO HAS SUPPLIED THESE CONTROLLED DRUGS TO THE RSPCA?

WHY HAVE THE POLICE TAKEN NO ACTION?

WHY HAVE THE RCVS TURNED A BLIND EYE?

RSPCA FAILED PROSECUTORS TAKE 3 MONTHS TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDER

WHY NO CONTEMPT OF COURT RULING AGAINST THE RSPCA?

CONGRATULATIONS MR O'NEILL WE HOPE YOU TAKE ACTION AGAINST THE RSPCA FOR DAMAGES

A HORSE breeder on Anglesey was finally reunited with his animals after a three year ordeal fighting to clear his name after an RSPCA neglect prosecution.

When the trial finally concluded, the magistrates acquitted Mr O’Neill of all charges, saying he could leave the court with “an untarnished reputation”. Such stories should be brought to the attention of all those generous folk who still provide the RSPCA with an income of £115 million a year in donations, without realising what a change has come over that once admirable organisation – and how much of its activity, according to critics, is now devoted to prosecuting innocent animal owners in order to generate the publicity that keeps those donations rolling in.

Michael O’Neill, of Rainbow Farm, Pentraeth, saw trained harness racing horse Mickey-Bob, and Barney taken by officers from the animal charity in 2007 after being found in a poorly condition.
This started years of hell for the respected breeder as he was dragged through the courts, with proceedings delayed further after he had a stroke in Holyhead Magistrates Court in 2009.
In July this year he was finally cleared of all neglect charges and the RSPCA were told to promptly return his horses.
It has taken nearly three months to comply with the order but yesterday the horses arrived back on Anglesey.
Mr O’Neill, in his 50s, said the three year fight has cost him thousands of pounds and lost the potential of racing Mickey-Bob, who was bred from a top class racing father.
He said: “All that potential has now been lost and I feel very bitter and disappointed. If the horses had been returned promptly I could have covered a couple of my own mares with Mickey-Bob but it is too late in the year now.”
Mr O’Neill won the case at Caernarfon Magistrates Court after the court accepted that abscesses on their throats were caused by a bacterial infection called strangles, and not neglect.
They had been bought in August 2007 for around £10,000.
Zoe McKenna, of Rhoscefnhir, who was accused alongside him, also had charges against her dropped at an earlier date.
He said: “For three years my life has been on hold, no one wanted to know me and my business as a horse dealer came to a halt.
“Mickey-Bob was over the worst of the strangles when he was seized and the recovery is quite rapid, he would have been race fit for the 2008 season but now we will never know. I feel cheated and that Mickey-Bob has been robbed of a career that he was bred and trained for.”
Mr O’Neill, who is originally from Ireland, is the fifth generation of horse breeder in his family.
http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/2010/10/04/anglesey-horse-breeder-reunited-with-his-animals-55578-27394204/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7932214/RSPCA-End-this-cruelty-to-animal-owners.html