WHAT THE PUBLIC THINK OF THE RSPCA LUNATIC FRINGE CHARITY

MORE INTERESTED IN PUBLICITY THAN ANIMAL WELFARE OR EDUCATION!

Some moron from the R.S.P.C.A. tries to make a name for himself
Inspector Graham Hammond

whataboutthat says...
8:59am Tue 9 Oct 12

I can't believe this. This misguided woman makes a mistake and the animal police prosecute her. Two years conditional discharge - what a travesty. Why did the magistrates not simply throw this one out?
Shame on the RSPCA for wasting my money on the courts' time and for needlessly persecuting this woman. Inspector Hammond - makes him sound right good and proper!

I can't believe this. This misguided woman makes a mistake and the animal police prosecute her. Two years conditional discharge - what a travesty. Why did the magistrates not simply throw this one out? Shame on the RSPCA for wasting my money on the courts' time and for needlessly persecuting this woman. Inspector Hammond - makes him sound right good and proper!whataboutthat

muscliffman says...
9:09am Tue 9 Oct 12

There was absolutely no ill intent so why prosecute?
Making a mistake is not a criminal offence and I am sure the loss of the poor cat through your own stupidity is a big enough price to pay.
Unless something is not being told here it may be time to reconsider my regular RSPCA donation, this is not what I intended it to be used for.

There was absolutely no ill intent so why prosecute? Making a mistake is not a criminal offence and I am sure the loss of the poor cat through your own stupidity is a big enough price to pay. Unless something is not being told here it may be time to reconsider my regular RSPCA donation, this is not what I intended it to be used for.muscliffman

 Bohochic72 says...
9:16am Tue 9 Oct 12

Why prosecute when, as it was reported, there was no cruelty intended? There are so many mistreated animals out there whose owners get off - chase them rather than someone who tried to help an injured pet and made a mistake. Obviously she was an easy target to keep the conviction figures up.
@muscliffman - I make my donation to PDSA as more of it goes to actual pet care.

Why prosecute when, as it was reported, there was no cruelty intended? There are so many mistreated animals out there whose owners get off - chase them rather than someone who tried to help an injured pet and made a mistake. Obviously she was an easy target to keep the conviction figures up. @muscliffman - I make my donation to PDSA as more of it goes to actual pet care.Bohochic72

 a.g.o.g. says...
9:16am Tue 9 Oct 12

whataboutthat wrote:
I can't believe this. This misguided woman makes a mistake and the animal police prosecute her. Two years conditional discharge - what a travesty. Why did the magistrates not simply throw this one out? Shame on the RSPCA for wasting my money on the courts' time and for needlessly persecuting this woman. Inspector Hammond - makes him sound right good and proper!

Jobsworths! Did they also perform a post mortem to be sure that it was the paracetamol that caused the cats death and not trauma caused by whatever had happened to cause it to limp? Many cats by instinct manage to run from a car collision to then die later in solitude.
Whatever, well intended actions to reduce any animals agonies or ills do not deserve this kind of Pantomime performance.

[quote][p][bold]whataboutthat[/bold] wrote: I can't believe this. This misguided woman makes a mistake and the animal police prosecute her. Two years conditional discharge - what a travesty. Why did the magistrates not simply throw this one out? Shame on the RSPCA for wasting my money on the courts' time and for needlessly persecuting this woman. Inspector Hammond - makes him sound right good and proper![/p][/quote]Jobsworths! Did they also perform a post mortem to be sure that it was the paracetamol that caused the cats death and not trauma caused by whatever had happened to cause it to limp? Many cats by instinct manage to run from a car collision to then die later in solitude. Whatever, well intended actions to reduce any animals agonies or ills do not deserve this kind of Pantomime performance.a.g.o.g.

 Jim_Springbourne says...
9:20am Tue 9 Oct 12

I am a cat lover and cannot agree with this prosecution.
The poor lady accidentally killed her cat through ignorance and will have suffered enough grief - I know if I did such a thing, I would not be able to forgive myself. Why compound things with a needless, pointless prosecution that was not in the public interest. She should have been given an absolute discharge, and the RSPCA a rocket for bringing the case in the first place.

I am a cat lover and cannot agree with this prosecution. The poor lady accidentally killed her cat through ignorance and will have suffered enough grief - I know if I did such a thing, I would not be able to forgive myself. Why compound things with a needless, pointless prosecution that was not in the public interest. She should have been given an absolute discharge, and the RSPCA a rocket for bringing the case in the first place.Jim_Springbourne

  afcb-mark says...
9:20am Tue 9 Oct 12

I actually feel quite sorry for her. She didn't intentionally poison the cat rather thought she was helping it. A bit silly but not malicious. What next, lock someone up who gives a dog chocolate as that is poisonous to dogs and could kill them, but how many people know that.

I actually feel quite sorry for her. She didn't intentionally poison the cat rather thought she was helping it. A bit silly but not malicious. What next, lock someone up who gives a dog chocolate as that is poisonous to dogs and could kill them, but how many people know that.afcb-mark

 Your reporter in spain says...
9:25am Tue 9 Oct 12

Ridiculous ,we can all make mistakes even when trying to do the best for our animals - that prosecution was completely unnecessary
With the cost of vets being so high it's hardly surprising people will try their own remedy

Ridiculous ,we can all make mistakes even when trying to do the best for our animals - that prosecution was completely unnecessary With the cost of vets being so high it's hardly surprising people will try their own remedyYour reporter in spain

  rayc says...
9:29am Tue 9 Oct 12

Typical of the UK. Graham Hammond should take a long hard look at himself and ponder on why he is so malicious.

Typical of the UK. Graham Hammond should take a long hard look at himself and ponder on why he is so malicious.rayc

 Morrigan says...
9:31am Tue 9 Oct 12

As a cat owner, I am fully aware of the dangers of paracetamol - but I would bet most people are not.

There may be more to this story than is printed here, but as it stands I would definitely say the RSPCA should not have taken this to court. It does not appear to have been done with intent to harm the cat and I expect the poor woman has been through enough knowing she caused the death of her own cat.

People who deliberately hurt animals and mistreat them get off more lightly than this lady. What a waste of time and money - the RSPCA being "holier-than-thou" big time ........ but when I called them a couple of years ago after I found an abandoned pet rabbit they refused to help in any way and I had to take it to the PDSA, who kindly took it in.

The RSPCA should have taken the case as a unfortunate incident and used it to educate people - not prosecute them.

As a cat owner, I am fully aware of the dangers of paracetamol - but I would bet most people are not. There may be more to this story than is printed here, but as it stands I would definitely say the RSPCA should not have taken this to court. It does not appear to have been done with intent to harm the cat and I expect the poor woman has been through enough knowing she caused the death of her own cat. People who deliberately hurt animals and mistreat them get off more lightly than this lady. What a waste of time and money - the RSPCA being "holier-than-thou" big time ........ but when I called them a couple of years ago after I found an abandoned pet rabbit they refused to help in any way and I had to take it to the PDSA, who kindly took it in. The RSPCA should have taken the case as a unfortunate incident and used it to educate people - not prosecute them.Morrigan

 Buddles says...
9:31am Tue 9 Oct 12

I agree with all of you.
On the outside it looks like "death by misadventure" to use a human inquest term.
Unless there is something we haven't been told this is just a tragic outcome. As an ex vet nurse it was quite common for cat owners to ask if paracetamol was OK for cats....the answer was always an emphatic "no" due to its toxicity in cats.
Yes a quick phone call or a trip to the PDSA would have prevented this but involving the RSPCA as a case of deliberate suffering, I fail to see this unless we haven't been told the full story.

I agree with all of you. On the outside it looks like "death by misadventure" to use a human inquest term. Unless there is something we haven't been told this is just a tragic outcome. As an ex vet nurse it was quite common for cat owners to ask if paracetamol was OK for cats....the answer was always an emphatic "no" due to its toxicity in cats. Yes a quick phone call or a trip to the PDSA would have prevented this but involving the RSPCA as a case of deliberate suffering, I fail to see this unless we haven't been told the full story.Buddles

 rayc says...
9:34am Tue 9 Oct 12

I wonder if she had not "admitted causing unnecessary suffering and failure to protect the cat from suffering" and instead pleaded Not Guilty what the outcome would have been. Even if the Magistrate had found her guilty I wonder if on appeal whether a higher court, presided over by a judge, would have done so?

I wonder if she had not "admitted causing unnecessary suffering and failure to protect the cat from suffering" and instead pleaded Not Guilty what the outcome would have been. Even if the Magistrate had found her guilty I wonder if on appeal whether a higher court, presided over by a judge, would have done so?rayc

 sussexcherry says...
9:44am Tue 9 Oct 12

Misguided yes, deliberate no. The lady concerned must be devastated at losing her cat, when all she was trying to do was to help it, and it goes without saying that the poor cat must have suffered terribly. This lady is only 43, she is not a 'doddering old dear' as the phrase goes, so she should have been more responsible and as Buddles says above, at least made a quick phone call to a vet. Personally, I can't stand cats, but if this highlights the dangers of Paracetomol to them then it is a good outcome,and maybe will stop it occuring again. I agree with other posters the the sentence is disproportionate.

Misguided yes, deliberate no. The lady concerned must be devastated at losing her cat, when all she was trying to do was to help it, and it goes without saying that the poor cat must have suffered terribly. This lady is only 43, she is not a 'doddering old dear' as the phrase goes, so she should have been more responsible and as Buddles says above, at least made a quick phone call to a vet. Personally, I can't stand cats, but if this highlights the dangers of Paracetomol to them then it is a good outcome,and maybe will stop it occuring again. I agree with other posters the the sentence is disproportionate.sussexcherry

summerchild says...
10:06am Tue 9 Oct 12

The PDSA will only help if you're on benefits so if she wasn't they would have been no use at all.
I stopped supporting the RSPCA years ago after reading about a pensioner who was prosecuted for his dog being too fat !!! Seems at times, that the RSPCA is only after prosecuting the easy options, shame on you Graham Hammond and shame on the RSPCA.

The PDSA will only help if you're on benefits so if she wasn't they would have been no use at all. I stopped supporting the RSPCA years ago after reading about a pensioner who was prosecuted for his dog being too fat !!! Seems at times, that the RSPCA is only after prosecuting the easy options, shame on you Graham Hammond and shame on the RSPCA.summerchild

 

Dog friendly 1 says...
11:45am Tue 9 Oct 12

I agree that the sentence handed out was rather heavy handed compared to other wilful cruelty cases we read about in the Echo.
I also agree that the lady should have known better than to feed her cat (or any animal) human medicine BUT there are lots of people who still think its ok to give their cat/dog whatever animal human medicine to take the pressure off high vet bills.
Do also be aware that unless they have changed their policy, the RSPCA no longer take in unwanted or stray dogs, ONLY cruelty cases. If you leave your dog with them or hand in a stray (thats if they accept it), I believe they now have a policy to PTS the animal. I stopped supporting them years ago. Stick to your local rescue centres or PDSA centre or Blue Cross centre. Sadly I think the RSPCA have got "too big for their boots" and the compassion for animal welfare is now not at the top of their agenda as it used to be; they appear to be too corporate now.

I agree that the sentence handed out was rather heavy handed compared to other wilful cruelty cases we read about in the Echo. I also agree that the lady should have known better than to feed her cat (or any animal) human medicine BUT there are lots of people who still think its ok to give their cat/dog whatever animal human medicine to take the pressure off high vet bills. Do also be aware that unless they have changed their policy, the RSPCA no longer take in unwanted or stray dogs, ONLY cruelty cases. If you leave your dog with them or hand in a stray (thats if they accept it), I believe they now have a policy to PTS the animal. I stopped supporting them years ago. Stick to your local rescue centres or PDSA centre or Blue Cross centre. Sadly I think the RSPCA have got "too big for their boots" and the compassion for animal welfare is now not at the top of their agenda as it used to be; they appear to be too corporate now.Dog friendly 1

 elite50 says...
11:49am Tue 9 Oct 12

The hatred and vitriol being aimed at this woman by the lunatic fringe is quite frankly unbelievable!
Look at the facts.
She tried to do the right thing by the cat.
She made a mistake.
Some moron from the R.S.P.C.A. tries to make a name for himself .
The woman gets convicted.
She should have let the thing just die.
Some of you people need a reality check.
This story is about a sick CAT.
The woman was pretty naive, just about eveyone knows that if you want to kill the pesky cat from next door you just put 2 aspirin in a bowl of milk.
She knows now.

The hatred and vitriol being aimed at this woman by the lunatic fringe is quite frankly unbelievable! Look at the facts. She tried to do the right thing by the cat. She made a mistake. Some moron from the R.S.P.C.A. tries to make a name for himself . The woman gets convicted. She should have let the thing just die. Some of you people need a reality check. This story is about a sick CAT. The woman was pretty naive, just about eveyone knows that if you want to kill the pesky cat from next door you just put 2 aspirin in a bowl of milk. She knows now.elite50

 BROCKSDAD says...
11:54am Tue 9 Oct 12

Another easy target for the rspca, you would think with the £13 million they get every year they could do more to support people and their pets rather than prosecute.

Another easy target for the rspca, you would think with the £13 million they get every year they could do more to support people and their pets rather than prosecute.BROCKSDAD

 sername is already in use says...
12:14pm Tue 9 Oct 12

What a disgraceful decision by the RSPCA, I wont be giving them any of my hard earned again.

What a disgraceful decision by the RSPCA, I wont be giving them any of my hard earned again.username is already in useleagalbrief says...
12:44pm Tue 9 Oct 12

The RSPCA are a farce of a charity anybody supporting this cause beware, many times i have heard the same old story of animals in need of rescue being turned away at their hard hearted door, they are very very choosey, many a smaller amimal rescue picks up the peices, they are self serving and have their own interests at heart not the animals they suppose to support. this prosection is a disgrace and a farce, there are plenty of wilful cruelty to animals they turn a blind eye to, RSPCA hang your sorry heads in shame you are no better than scum.

The RSPCA are a farce of a charity anybody supporting this cause beware, many times i have heard the same old story of animals in need of rescue being turned away at their hard hearted door, they are very very choosey, many a smaller amimal rescue picks up the peices, they are self serving and have their own interests at heart not the animals they suppose to support. this prosection is a disgrace and a farce, there are plenty of wilful cruelty to animals they turn a blind eye to, RSPCA hang your sorry heads in shame you are no better than scum.leagalbrief

 live-and-let-live says...
12:48pm Tue 9 Oct 12

a disgusting travesty. this woman was trying her best. she did nothing malicious. i hope she reads these comments and realises we are on her side.

a disgusting travesty. this woman was trying her best. she did nothing malicious. i hope she reads these comments and realises we are on her side.live-and-let-live

 Bathsheba says...
12:56pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Nothing like an animal story to split the pack. I'm also disgusted that the RSPCA chose to pursue this easy target whilst they don't bother with the hard stuff. They're rolling in money but you try to get them to help you when you have a problem. The PDSA is also quoted but as someone has said the PDSA only helps those on benefits, it's not some animal angel service. It's those who struggle on without state support that need financial help from massive vets fees. I feel sorry for the woman.

Nothing like an animal story to split the pack. I'm also disgusted that the RSPCA chose to pursue this easy target whilst they don't bother with the hard stuff. They're rolling in money but you try to get them to help you when you have a problem. The PDSA is also quoted but as someone has said the PDSA only helps those on benefits, it's not some animal angel service. It's those who struggle on without state support that need financial help from massive vets fees. I feel sorry for the woman.Bathsheba

 Matthew_Y says...
1:11pm Tue 9 Oct 12

I am incensed by the RSPCA’s conduct in this matter; Educate the lady – Yes, but prosecute NO! Go after those that maliciously mistreat animals instead. Still, I’ve learned a very valuable lesson here, and I urge other readers to follow suit. Don’t give your charitable donations to the RSPCA to squander, give them to PDSA instead.

I am incensed by the RSPCA’s conduct in this matter; Educate the lady – Yes, but prosecute NO! Go after those that maliciously mistreat animals instead. Still, I’ve learned a very valuable lesson here, and I urge other readers to follow suit. Don’t give your charitable donations to the RSPCA to squander, give them to PDSA instead.Matthew_YPablo23 says...
1:14pm Tue 9 Oct 12

I suspect the driving force behind taking her to court was to get the case as much publicity as possible, therefore making others aware of the dangers of giving human drugs to animals, and the correct facilities available.

I didn't know paracetamol was poisonous to cats, so I for one learnt something.
Not that I would have risked given one to a cat anyway to be fair but still.

I suspect the driving force behind taking her to court was to get the case as much publicity as possible, therefore making others aware of the dangers of giving human drugs to animals, and the correct facilities available. I didn't know paracetamol was poisonous to cats, so I for one learnt something. Not that I would have risked given one to a cat anyway to be fair but still.Pablo23

 KLH says...
1:19pm Tue 9 Oct 12

I stopped donating years ago. And I told an RSPCA chugger in the Square exactly what I thought of them when I saw him charging towards me, board in hand licking his chops....

Wasn't expecting that matey boy were you. Won't give them a penny, I would contact any organisation about a sick animal but them.

I stopped donating years ago. And I told an RSPCA chugger in the Square exactly what I thought of them when I saw him charging towards me, board in hand licking his chops.... Wasn't expecting that matey boy were you. Won't give them a penny, I would contact any organisation about a sick animal but them.KLH

DAISY3073 says...
2:22pm Tue 9 Oct 12

To all the people saying she should have known better, my dogs have recently had kennel cough and the vet's advice was to give them a children's version of Benalyn twice a day to ease the symptoms. When they told me that I was stunned as didn't realise you could give animals human medicine so it's clearly not a well known fact that cats can't have paracetamol products.

The woman shouldn't have been prosecuted, yes she needs educating about this but then obviously so do a lot of people, and yes she should have taken the cat to the vets. I expect the fact that she accidentally killed her poor cat is punishment enough.

To all the people saying she should have known better, my dogs have recently had kennel cough and the vet's advice was to give them a children's version of Benalyn twice a day to ease the symptoms. When they told me that I was stunned as didn't realise you could give animals human medicine so it's clearly not a well known fact that cats can't have paracetamol products. The woman shouldn't have been prosecuted, yes she needs educating about this but then obviously so do a lot of people, and yes she should have taken the cat to the vets. I expect the fact that she accidentally killed her poor cat is punishment enough.DAISY3073

 Maisie says...
2:22pm Tue 9 Oct 12

How ironic that minutes after I read this article a chap collecting on behalf of the RSPCA knocked on my door telling me my "neighbours" were helping and could he count on my support. I told him I'd just read this article, disagreed with what they had done and for that reason I wouldn't be pledging any money to them.

How ironic that minutes after I read this article a chap collecting on behalf of the RSPCA knocked on my door telling me my "neighbours" were helping and could he count on my support. I told him I'd just read this article, disagreed with what they had done and for that reason I wouldn't be pledging any money to them.Maisie

  H2o-hara says...
2:25pm Tue 9 Oct 12

whataboutthat wrote:
I can't believe this. This misguided woman makes a mistake and the animal police prosecute her. Two years conditional discharge - what a travesty. Why did the magistrates not simply throw this one out?
Shame on the RSPCA for wasting my money on the courts' time and for needlessly persecuting this woman. Inspector Hammond - makes him sound right good and proper!

I agree when you consider those idiots who take their dogs for a walk on cliff edges seem to expect sympathy.

[quote][p][bold]whataboutthat[/bold] wrote: I can't believe this. This misguided woman makes a mistake and the animal police prosecute her. Two years conditional discharge - what a travesty. Why did the magistrates not simply throw this one out? Shame on the RSPCA for wasting my money on the courts' time and for needlessly persecuting this woman. Inspector Hammond - makes him sound right good and proper![/p][/quote]I agree when you consider those idiots who take their dogs for a walk on cliff edges seem to expect sympathy.H2o-hara

FrDarryl says...
3:47pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Two years for the accidental death of a pet by compassionately administering a rationally reduced dosage (NHS: 120mg can be administered to some infants aged 6-24 months) of an over-the-counter analgesic.

Yet how much time do people get trying to kill a police officer with a truck or a knife?

I must be delirious because I just don't get it. A quick look online indicates haloperidol is sometimes indicated.

Two years for the accidental death of a pet by compassionately administering a rationally reduced dosage (NHS: 120mg can be administered to some infants aged 6-24 months) of an over-the-counter analgesic. Yet how much time do people get trying to kill a police officer with a truck or a knife? I must be delirious because I just don't get it. A quick look online indicates haloperidol is sometimes indicated.FrDarryl

Arjay says...
5:27pm Tue 9 Oct 12

I have the impression this might cost the RSPCA dearly.
Clearly a case for advice and education, rather than for prosecution?
Antagonising potential donors by forcing through this prosecution is no way to help raise the profile of the RSPCA.....

One is inclined to say to Inspector Hammond, using the immortal words of Captain Mainwaring:
'You STUPID boy'......

I have the impression this might cost the RSPCA dearly. Clearly a case for advice and education, rather than for prosecution? Antagonising potential donors by forcing through this prosecution is no way to help raise the profile of the RSPCA..... One is inclined to say to Inspector Hammond, using the immortal words of Captain Mainwaring: 'You STUPID boy'......Arjay

 Adrian XX says...
5:37pm Tue 9 Oct 12

This case is a warning to other people

This is indeed a warning to other people: NEVER EVER CALL OR INVOLVE THE RSPCA IN ANYTHING.
They are a lunatic-fringe charity who would like the world to be vegan. They were set up to prevent cruelty but they interfere in cases where there is clearly no cruelty involved. They were even once interested in prosecuting a case of someone eating a fish alive (instead of just letting it die slowly in the air first then eating it). This just goes to show how crazy they are.

The woman should have sought good legal advice: there has to be proof that the animal suffered and didn't simply die in a stupor.

[quote]This case is a warning to other people[/quote] This is indeed a warning to other people: NEVER EVER CALL OR INVOLVE THE RSPCA IN ANYTHING. They are a lunatic-fringe charity who would like the world to be vegan. They were set up to prevent cruelty but they interfere in cases where there is clearly no cruelty involved. They were even once interested in prosecuting a case of someone eating a fish alive (instead of just letting it die slowly in the air first then eating it). This just goes to show how crazy they are. The woman should have sought good legal advice: there has to be proof that the animal suffered and didn't simply die in a stupor.Adrian XX

 dvdr says...
5:47pm Tue 9 Oct 12

I don't like cats, but I have every sympathy for this lady who thought she was doing her best for her pet. Yes, she got it wrong - but lost her pet as a result! To prosecute her for doing what she thought was best is deeply unkind. We don't know how much she could afford for professional treatment, but a fully formed prosecution for her best efforts does seem entirely wrong. Down with the RSPCA for unfeeling Nazism!
As said, I don't like cats, but I do sympathise with someone trying, with perhaps limited resources, to help her pet. Good for her! Bad for the RSPCA!

I don't like cats, but I have every sympathy for this lady who thought she was doing her best for her pet. Yes, she got it wrong - but lost her pet as a result! To prosecute her for doing what she thought was best is deeply unkind. We don't know how much she could afford for professional treatment, but a fully formed prosecution for her best efforts does seem entirely wrong. Down with the RSPCA for unfeeling Nazism! As said, I don't like cats, but I do sympathise with someone trying, with perhaps limited resources, to help her pet. Good for her! Bad for the RSPCA!dvdr

     Adrian XX wrote:

This case is a warning to other people

This is indeed a warning to other people: NEVER EVER CALL OR INVOLVE THE RSPCA IN ANYTHING.
They are a lunatic-fringe charity who would like the world to be vegan. They were set up to prevent cruelty but they interfere in cases where there is clearly no cruelty involved. They were even once interested in prosecuting a case of someone eating a fish alive (instead of just letting it die slowly in the air first then eating it). This just goes to show how crazy they are.

The woman should have sought good legal advice: there has to be proof that the animal suffered and didn't simply die in a stupor.

Yeah the cat probably didnt even suffer much ..... check out the symptoms, sounds like a right laugh -

oneshortleg says...
7:38pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Think this is a massive PR mistake, like so many other companies and organisations who take things a bit too far to prove themselves. I do a lot of charity work but have always made a conscious effort to support local smaller charities as they have less money and therefore are less likely to spend in frivolously. Oxfam once had to radically change things as it was reported it spent a huge amount of each pound on admin!

Think this is a massive PR mistake, like so many other companies and organisations who take things a bit too far to prove themselves. I do a lot of charity work but have always made a conscious effort to support local smaller charities as they have less money and therefore are less likely to spend in frivolously. Oxfam once had to radically change things as it was reported it spent a huge amount of each pound on admin!oneshortleg

ScoobyVic says...
10:15pm Tue 9 Oct 12

She was stupid in not contacting the vets but if she thought that paracetamol might help and didn't know it would harm her cat then she wasn't maliciously doing it. When I watch the American ASPCA programmes if they have anyone deliberately neglecting animals ie starving, fighting etc then they prosecute but if they think someone has made a genuine mistake through not knowing and didn't deliberately do it then they try and re educate rather than prosecuting.
I as a cat owner do know that paracetamol is deadly the same as lily pollen but I don't assume everyone knows this, she must be devastated.
And to be labelled as a cat killer on the echo website and in the paper will take a long time to go away.

She was stupid in not contacting the vets but if she thought that paracetamol might help and didn't know it would harm her cat then she wasn't maliciously doing it. When I watch the American ASPCA programmes if they have anyone deliberately neglecting animals ie starving, fighting etc then they prosecute but if they think someone has made a genuine mistake through not knowing and didn't deliberately do it then they try and re educate rather than prosecuting. I as a cat owner do know that paracetamol is deadly the same as lily pollen but I don't assume everyone knows this, she must be devastated. And to be labelled as a cat killer on the echo website and in the paper will take a long time to go away.ScoobyVic

 Capricorn 1 says...
10:15pm Tue 9 Oct 12

If people got fined for stupidity, hands up who would never have been fined in their life.

To prosecute this woman is adding insult to injury, and the RSPCA has shot itself in the foot.
Are there any more metaphors that I can mix?

If people got fined for stupidity, hands up who would never have been fined in their life. To prosecute this woman is adding insult to injury, and the RSPCA has shot itself in the foot. Are there any more metaphors that I can mix?Capricorn 1

 ScoobyVic says...
10:36pm Tue 9 Oct 12

Also having worked in the pet trade for quite a number of years and keeping various different pets I myself have seen first hand that the RSPCA think they are God of the animal world.
You have to bow down to them almost even if they are wrong otherwise they'll take your animals just because they can.
I can't help wondering if she hadn't told them she had given her cat paracetamol if this would even have happened? Have they actually done an autopsy that really said Midnight died from poisoning?
She was stupid for doin it and I certainly don't condone it but think she has paid a heavy price for a mistake.

Also having worked in the pet trade for quite a number of years and keeping various different pets I myself have seen first hand that the RSPCA think they are God of the animal world. You have to bow down to them almost even if they are wrong otherwise they'll take your animals just because they can. I can't help wondering if she hadn't told them she had given her cat paracetamol if this would even have happened? Have they actually done an autopsy that really said Midnight died from poisoning? She was stupid for doin it and I certainly don't condone it but think she has paid a heavy price for a mistake.ScoobyVic

elfinia says...
2:31pm Wed 10 Oct 12

Ignorant woman made a mistake.

She lost her beloved cat and then is prosecuted.

A disgraceful waste of public money and a shocking, pompous lack of common sense from the RSPCA. Why don't they pay for a poster scheme to inform the public NOT to use human medicine on animals.

Ignorant woman made a mistake. She lost her beloved cat and then is prosecuted. A disgraceful waste of public money and a shocking, pompous lack of common sense from the RSPCA. Why don't they pay for a poster scheme to inform the public NOT to use human medicine on animals.elfinia

 elfinia says...
2:42pm Wed 10 Oct 12

I took my cat to the ( private) vet not realising that he had terminal cancer and thinking that I would be bringing him home that evening after treatment.
I phoned up and they gave me the sad news ( we had had him for 15 years ) and strongly suggested he were euthanised. I asked them to wait until my son ( a teenager at that time ) was back from college so he could "say goodbye" as he adored the cat......they were really unhelpful , saying the cat would suffer ( although the cat had not shown signs of "suffering" and it would just be a few hours).

I was surprised that I was made to feel "bad" about suggesting such a thing. In the event my cat was kept until we got there.

Why was such an autocratic fuss made ?

I took my cat to the ( private) vet not realising that he had terminal cancer and thinking that I would be bringing him home that evening after treatment. I phoned up and they gave me the sad news ( we had had him for 15 years ) and strongly suggested he were euthanised. I asked them to wait until my son ( a teenager at that time ) was back from college so he could "say goodbye" as he adored the cat......they were really unhelpful , saying the cat would suffer ( although the cat had not shown signs of "suffering" and it would just be a few hours). I was surprised that I was made to feel "bad" about suggesting such a thing. In the event my cat was kept until we got there. Why was such an autocratic fuss made ?elfinia

 mummy123abc says...
7:00pm Wed 10 Oct 12

it says..

She gave the cat a quarter of a 500mg tablet followed by a second quarter the following morning.

The cat later collapsed and a family member called the RSPCA asking for help.
She was put on a saline drip to combat dehydration and boost her energy levels but died from organ failure.

so obviously and firstly, they meant no harm, hence them calling for help. The cat was put onto a drip to help but it failed, by the time she found out she was harming her animal rather than helping it, it was already too late.

Obviously if she thought her ct had been hit by a car she should have sought out a vet, but to be honest I grew up with loads of cats and sometimes they get bumps from cars which are so minor they end up with a few scratches and other than that are fine. If her cat looked well and was eating/acting normal apart from the limp perhaps she wanted to sub the pain until morning to go to a vet???

I think people are being too judgemental and unfair in this case and she should never have been charged at all! Especially when there are people out there purposely poisoning cats out of bitterness!!

http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/9973339.Prosecuted__the_woman_killed_her_beloved_pet_cat_trying_to_cure_its_limp/

it says.. She gave the cat a quarter of a 500mg tablet followed by a second quarter the following morning. The cat later collapsed and a family member called the RSPCA asking for help. She was put on a saline drip to combat dehydration and boost her energy levels but died from organ failure. so obviously and firstly, they meant no harm, hence them calling for help. The cat was put onto a drip to help but it failed, by the time she found out she was harming her animal rather than helping it, it was already too late. Obviously if she thought her ct had been hit by a car she should have sought out a vet, but to be honest I grew up with loads of cats and sometimes they get bumps from cars which are so minor they end up with a few scratches and other than that are fine. If her cat looked well and was eating/acting normal apart from the limp perhaps she wanted to sub the pain until morning to go to a vet??? I think people are being too judgemental and unfair in this case and she should never have been charged at all! Especially when there are people out there purposely poisoning cats out of bitterness!!mummy123abc