RSPCA PROSECUTE OVER 60 CHILDREN PER YEAR

CHILDREN OF FARMERS, KENNEL AND PET SHOP OWNERS REGULARLY PROSECUTED BY RSPCA

WHEN WILL THIS INSANITY END?

Sir, Edward Nugee, QC, claims in his letter (Jan 8) that “it is a fundamental right of a citizen of this country to institute a private prosecution of a criminal offence”. To support his argument, he says that “the RSPCA frequently institutes private prosecutions”.

The example he gives is a weak one. The RSPCA’s private prosecutions, and its prosecution of children and the vulnerable in particular, have long been a vexed issue. The charity prosecutes many hundreds of people, including about 60 children, a year. These people do not benefit from statutory safeguards that protect the vulnerable and children in CPS cases.
Last November, at a lecture delivered in Middle Temple Hall, Bernard Richmond, QC, proposed that it was always wrong for children to be privately prosecuted. Of the hundreds of advocates present, not one disagreed with him. Last September, the BBC radio programme File on 4 focused on RSPCA private prosecutions and, in particular, its prosecution of vulnerable people and children.
Lord Bingham, in Jones v Whalley \ UKHL 41 held that “it is hard to regard \ as an important constitutional safeguard when \ are all but unknown in Scotland.”
It is hard to disagree with Lord Bingham on this issue. I have defended hundreds of farmers, huntsmen and kennels in non-CPS prosecutions. My view, for what it is worth, is that the sooner private prosecutions become “all but unknown” in England and Wales, the better.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article6981254.ece

RSPCA PROSECUTION SENTENCES 79 YR OLD CAT LOVING PENSIONER TO 12 WEEKS IN PRISON (SUSPENDED)

YET ANOTHER PENSIONER PROSECUTED BY "CHARITY" !

A BIRMINGHAM pensioner who was convicted of cruelty after keeping 40 cats at her home while banned has been given a suspended prison sentence.
Elsie Nash, aged 79, was sentenced to 12 weeks’ imprisonment, suspended for 18 months, and banned from keeping any cats for life.
She was told by District Judge Khalid Qureshi that she had come within a “hair’s breadth” of being sent immediately to jail.
He said, though, he had taken into account her age and the fact that her intentions, albeit misguided, were honourable.
The District Judge said that, for some reason he could not understand, Nash had fallen out with the RSPCA and had chosen not to get any expert advice, which had resulted in her animals suffering.
He said the pensioner had not expressed any remorse, had previously committed almost identical offences and committed a “flagrant breach” of a previous banning order.
The District Judge told her, if people continued to bring cats to her, she should put a notice on her door and phone the police or RSPCA.
Nash, of Kingsbury Road, Erdington, had previously been convicted of 13 charges of animal cruelty, at the city magistrates’ court.
District Judge Qureshi said conditions at her home had been “appalling”.
Timothy Gascoigne, defending, said that at one time Nash had worked closely with the RSPCA and the police, before they fell out.

http://www.birminghammail.net/news/top-stories/2009/02/11/pensioner-elsie-nash-gets-suspended-sentence-for-cat-cruelty-97319-22903398/

SPCA TELLS RSPCA TO STOP STEALING

The Scottish SPCA today challenges the RSPCA to stop stealing food from the mouths of Scotland's defenceless animals and tell the truth to the Scottish public.
Scotland's animal welfare charity has launched an unprecedented campaign calling for the English and Welsh charity to admit it can't save a single animal in Scotland.
Chief Executive Stuart Earley said, "Many people do not know that the RSPCA does not rescue or rehome any animals in Scotland and by advertising here it has been intentionally adding to the confusion to make money.
"The RSPCA is in breach of Institute of Fundraising guidelines it helped draw up which require charities to be explicitly clear about where they work. Occasionally using small print to tell the Scottish public it is registered in England and Wales is in no way explicit.
"We are a completely separate charity and have asked the RSPCA to make it clear it does not save animals in Scotland so people can make an informed choice about who to donate to. However, after six months of talks we are no further forward.
"This has been increasing the huge pressure on our resources for many years and enough is enough. It's time the RSPCA told the truth."
Research has demonstrated that 70% of the Scottish public believe the RSPCA saves animals in Scotland. High profile RSPCA campaigns in Scotland last year included a membership drive in Scottish supermarkets and adverts on Scottish radio stations.
"The RSPCA seems determined to portray itself as a UK charity, even if it is at the expense of animal welfare in Scotland," said Mr Earley.
"Further RSPCA advertising has included television adverts on UK channels. While these particular adverts cannot be restricted to England and Wales, they should not deceive the Scottish public.
"We are therefore calling for the RSPCA to be explicitly clear in its advertising that it does not rescue or rehome animals in Scotland.
"This could be by explicitly stating where it works or even describing itself as the ‘RSPCA for England and Wales'. Either would clear up the confusion almost immediately.
"We are also calling for the RSPCA to at all times make it clear to anyone donating from Scotland that their donation will not help animals in their country.
"This should extend to any legacies it receives made out to the ‘Scottish RSPCA' or ‘RSPCA Scotland'. We believe these should come to us and be used to care for animals in Scotland but even this basic and fair principle has been rejected.
"It is impossible to quantify how much we have lost to the RSPCA but any loss is damaging because we receive no government or lottery funding and rely on public support.
"While anyone can of course support any charity they wish, we know the majority of the Scottish public would prefer their donations to help charities in Scotland and it is on this basis, in defence of the abandoned and neglected animals in need of our help, that we are taking this stance.
"We did not want to have to campaign in this way and very much hope this brings about a change in RSPCA policy."
Mr Earley continued, "People will ask why we don't merge. The answers are simple, the most significant of which is the Scottish SPCA is subject to Scottish law and, like the police in Scotland, is a reporting agency to the Crown Office, a status far greater than that afforded to the RSPCA.
"Animal welfare is also a devolved issue in Scotland and the Scottish SPCA is in effect a legally recognised defender of animal welfare on behalf of the Scottish Government, which again is a status the RSPCA does not have in England and Wales.
"Indeed, we are extremely proud of our influential role in the development of the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act of 2006 and subsequent legislation, which is a reflection of the excellent reputation the Scottish SPCA has with MSPs.
"The Scottish public have their own animal welfare charity in the Scottish SPCA and it is essential they are aware of this fact."

http://www.scottishspca.org/news/142

RSPCA ACCUSED OF POACHING FUNDS FROM THE SCOTTISH

TURF WAR BREAKS OUT BETWEEN ANIMAL CHARITIES AS RSPCA DECIEVE SCOTTISH SPCA DONATORS

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, one of Britain’s richest charities, was accused yesterday of dirty tricks by a fellow charity, including deliberately fundraising in areas outside its remit.

In an unprecedented turf war within the charitable world, the equivalent Scottish welfare society claimed the RSPCA poached donations and legacies intended to help animals in Scotland.

The RSPCA, which denies the accusations, operates only in England and Wales.

The Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Scottish SPCA), which is a completely separate organisation, challenged the RSPCA “to stop stealing food from the mouths of Scotland’s defenceless animals and tell the truth to the Scottish public”.

The Scottish charity, less than a tenth of the size of the RSPCA, accuses the English organisation of TV advertising in Scotland; a membership drive in Scottish supermarkets; and adverts on Scottish radio stations.

It also believes the RSPCA are guilty of accepting legacies dedicated to "RSPCA Scotland" or "Scottish RSPCA".

The Scottish SPCA challenged the English organisation to admit that it cannot save “a single animal” in Scotland.

Stuart Earley, chief executive of the SSPCA, said, “Many people do not know that the RSPCA does not rescue or rehome any animals in Scotland and by advertising here it has been intentionally adding to the confusion to make money.

“The RSPCA is in breach of Institute of Fundraising guidelines it helped draw up which require charities to be explicitly clear about where they work. Occasionally using small print to tell the Scottish public it is registered in England and Wales is in no way explicit.

“We are a completely separate charity and have asked the RSPCA to make it clear it does not save animals in Scotland so people can make an informed choice about who to donate to. However, after six months of talks we are no further forward.

“This has been increasing the huge pressure on our resources for many years and enough is enough. It’s time the RSPCA told the truth.”

The issue of recognition is a long running bone of contention with the SSPCA, which in 2007 had an income of £10.1 million and an expenditure of the same amount. “We are desperate for every penny we can get,” said an insider. “The RSPCA spent £17m on marketing in 2007 - that’s 170 per cent of what it costs us to run.”

By contrast, the RSPCA was ranked the seventh top charity in Britain by the consultancy Intangible Business, with an income in 2007 of £114m, of which £63.1m was from legacies. Its expenditure was £111m.

The RSPCA also has reserves in the order of £150m.

Both charities have a venerable history. The RSPCA was founded in 1824, the first national animal protection in the world. It was granted royal approval in 1840. It now hads 172 branches in England and Wales.

The Scottish SPCA was founded in 1839 and now has 10 animal rescue and rehoming centres across Scotland, plus two wildlife resuce units in Fife and Shetland.
However, the SSPCA said research had demonstrated that 70 per cent of the Scottish public believed the RSPCA saved animals in Scotland.

“The RSPCA seems determined to portray itself as a UK charity, even if it is at the expense of animal welfare in Scotland,” said Mr Earley.
“We are therefore calling for the RSPCA to be clear in its advertising that it does not rescue or rehome animals in Scotland.
“This could be by explicitly stating where it works or even describing itself as the ‘RSPCA for England and Wales’. Either would clear up the confusion almost immediately.
“It is impossible to quantify how much we have lost to the RSPCA but any loss is damaging because we receive no government or lottery funding and rely on public support.”

A merger between the two charities is ruled out because the Scottish SPCA fulfil a semi-judicial status. The charity has a similar status to the police in Scotland in that it is a reporting agency to the Crown Office, a status greater than that afforded to the RSPCA.

In a statement, the RSPCA said it did not deliberately advertise in Scotland and in fact went “to great lengths” to ensure wherever possible that adverts are not distributed outside of England and Wales.
“Every piece of printed literature, television advertising and internet banner advertising always features the wording "The RSPCA is a charity registered in England and Wales". We always make every effort to exclude advertising messages reaching Scottish consumers. All Scottish donors, who contact us via RSPCA fundraising campaigns, are directed to the Scottish SPCA so that they can donate to them if they so wish.

“We do not send direct mail or door drops as these can be controlled by postal codes. With television advertising, if a station is able to restrict Scottish coverage, we only buy English and Welsh airtime. However, many satellite channels only enable us to purchase UK wide.
“The RSPCA is fully aware of the difficulties arising from cross-border fundraising and was party to the creation of the Institute of Fundraising code. The Society fully supports the open and honest approach that the code promotes.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article5644077.ece

RSPCA CANT TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PLASTIC OWL AND A REAL ONE

RSPCA OFFICERS SPEND OVER TWO HOURS TRYING TO RESCUE PLASTIC OWL

ANIMAL rescuers had their heads in the clouds yesterday when a concerned postie called for help after spotting what he thought was an owl in distress.
RSPCA officers watched the bird for several hours and were so worried it had not moved they called out the fire brigade.
But on closer inspection it was found to be a fake which phone company BT put on top of the pole, in Cordelia Crescent, Rayleigh, to stop birds perching there.
Carolyn Dyerson, 43, of Cordelia Crescent, said: “I couldn’t believe my eyes. The woman from the RSPCA had been sitting outside for two hours watching it. She thought it was real and had even brought a net with her to catch it. I felt like telling her it hadn’t moved in three weeks.”
Ms Dyerson said the owl was put on the pole by BT after her neighbour complained about bird muck landing on her car.
Southend’s aerial ladder platform was called in at 10.40am yesterday. Sub officer Paul Tregear said: “Just to make sure, the aerial ladder was called out to rescue this so-called owl. But we were told by neighbours it was a decoy. We obviously didn’t know this until we arrived.”
An embarrassed RSPCA was tipped off about the owl by a postman who said he had the seen the bird in the same position while on his rounds. RSPCA spokesman Klare Kennett said: “It’s not the first time we have been called to rescue an animal that isn’t real, but we’d rather be safe than sorry.”

http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/3963547.Owl_s_that__Plastic_bird_sparks_RSPCA_rescue_bid/

RSPCA PROSECUTIONS

I read with interest the article "Maltreatment of Animals"
I am a Franchised Criminal Solicitor who is also a member of the NSA and I have a small farm at the foot of the Sussex Downs. Being a Franchised Criminal Solicitor means that I am approved by the Government for a contract to supply criminal defence services, which means that I provide those services under the Legal Aid System. Whilst I agree with the general advice given of seeking advice and help from a solicitor at the earliest opportunity, that advice should be taken a stage further.
Obviously RSPCA prosecutions are extremely stressful and distressing for those on the receiving end. However the article fails to mention what I consider the most important point. An RSPCA prosecution is a criminal one. As a result, if you are convicted the repercussions can be disastrous because of the draconian powers that the magistrates have by way of disqualification from keeping animals and, in the worst cases, imprisonment. It is my view therefore, being a criminal lawyer of twenty-seven years admission, that whilst you need to seek expert advice, the solicitor that you have used all your life to deal with family matters and aspects such as conveyancing may not necessarily be the best person in these cases as he may not have the experience to deal with an RSPCA prosecution.
When the RSPCA appear at you gate, you need the expert advice of a Franchised Criminal Lawyer. Not only will he be familiar and have the skills to deal with the RSPCA and the police, but he will also have the added benefit of being able to provide you with his services under the Legal Aid Scheme. You will therefore not have to fund your defence - it will effectively be free. As a result of the Human Rights Act coming into force in this country, Crimi8nal Legal Aid is no longer means-tested and is not dependent upon your financial situation. In my experience all RSPCA prosecutions attract Legal Aid because of the serious nature of those prosecutions, the expertise needed to defend them, and the serious punishments the Court can impose if convicted.
Criminal Defence Solicitors who are contracted to the Government advertise this fact in the local press and in Yellow Pages, but if necessary you should contact either the Law Society or the Legal Services Commission direct who will supply you with a list of solicitors who have a Criminal Defence Contract. However, you should go one step further and ask whoever you contact whether they have defended an RSPCA prosecution before. This is a specialist area that requires specialist skills and there will be a solicitor in your area who is both franchised and has experience in dealing with the RSPCA.
If you are represented by a Franchised Solicitor, the added stress of continuing to try and find money to fund your defence privately will not be an issue. Defending RSPCA prosecutions is expensive because it requires the instruction of numerous experts. The trial by its very nature can last several weeks. The worry of funding your defence is therefore removed which relieves you of that added burden. I have heard of some farmers who have been forced to remortgage their premises to pay their solicitors when the chances are that a Franchised Solicitor who is an expert and is approved by the Government to do such work has been practising in their locality.
There are other aspects of the article that I disagree with. For instance, in my experience the RSPCA do not enter into a dialogue - the first you know about them is when they seize your animals. My advise is fairly simple; don't talk to the RSPCA about any allegations unless in the presence of a Franchised Criminal Solicitor, endeavour to keep the RSPCA off your property, remember they have no right to enter unless in the company of the police and, most importantly, try to avoid the animals being seized by the RSPCA. Unfortunately that is normally unavoidable as the first you will know about their interest is when they are in the field rounding up your animals in the company of the police. It is then absolutely vital that you contact an expert because those animals will have to be seen by your independent expert vet or nutritionist within the first twenty-four hours. Unfortunately this is not covered by Legal Aid and this is one expense you will have to be responsible for but it is vital to the conduct of any defence that a independent vet and any other appropriate independent expert does see them.
Nigel WellerSolicitors
Lewes,
East Sussex

RSPCA SHEEP RESCUE HIPOCRACY

ONLY A MATTER OF DAYS AFTER THE RSPCA THREATENED CUMBRIAN FARMER JEFF BELL WITH PROSECUTION IF HE LOST ANY SHEEP DURING FLOOD RESCUE THEY DO THE EXACT OPPOSITE.

FIREFIGHTERS have rescued more than 200 sheep after rising flood waters threatened to sweep the animals to their deaths.
Four Staffordshire Fire and Rescue vehicles and a water rescue unit, as well as the RSPCA, were called to fields opposite the National Arboretum in Croxall Road, Alrewas, at 8.45am.

They were unable to save 15 of the animals, which died of hypothermia. However, more than 200 sheep were removed from the danger by teams of firefighters and RSPCA officers. As the clock chimed for the two-minute silence at the nearby arboretum, a boat rescue crew was battling to rescue the flock. Assistant area commander Rob Barber, who led the operation, said: "This is a huge operation where we have been working hard to ensure we can rescue as many sheep as possible. Unfortunately we could not save 15 of them who have died from hypothermia."We believe there has been heavy rainfall during the night and the sheep have moved nearer and nearer to a hedge and got trapped by the rising water.
This is hard to drain as there is nowhere for it to go so we had to conduct an emergency rescue mission."We asked the RSPCA to come in order to advise us on how to handle the sheep and have some experts on site"

http://www.burtonmail.co.uk/burtonmail-news/displayarticle.asp?id=365493