RSPCA "INVESTIGATE" AS 2 POLICE DOGS DIE IN LOCKED VEHICLE

WHY DO THE POLICE PASS THIS OFFENCE TO THE RSPCA ?

THE RSPCA is investigating after two police dogs died when they were left in a dog handler's car during the heatwave.
The German shepherds were found in the car at Notts Police's HQ in Arnold yesterday.
The Post understands the police dog handler was off duty but had called into the headquarters at Sherwood Lodge, Arnold.
It is unclear how long the dogs had been left in the car on what was the hottest day in Notts for three years – with temperatures rising to 29.3 degrees celsius.
The RSPCA has launched an investigation into the incident.
A spokeswoman from the charity said: "We are investigating two dogs which have died in a hot car.
Under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, anyone found guilty of causing unnecessary suffering to an animal can face up to six months in prison or a fine of up to £20,000.
A Notts police spokesman said: "Nottinghamshire Police reported the death of two German shepherd police dogs to the RSPCA on Tuesday, June 30, after they were discovered at force headquarters at 2.15pm.
The spokesperson said the force could not confirm any further details about the incident, but said no one had been suspended.
Notts Assistant Chief Constable Peter Davies said: ''This is a tragic incident and we value the important work our police dogs carry out on a daily basis. That is why we swiftly reported this incident to the RSPCA and we will be working with them very closely."
"The RSPCA has been informed and will, I am sure, carry out a thorough and speedy investigation.
http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/homenews/Police-dogs-die-car-heatwave/article-1128150-detail/article.html

COUPLE DESPARATELY NEEDING HELP ARE JAILED BY RSPCA

Only a matter of days ago the RSPCA killed a family's cat, only hours after capturing it. Last month they failed to prosecute a man who kicked his girlfriends dog to death, saying it didn't suffer.
And they have the audacity to prosecute AND JAIL a STRUGGLING couple who just needed some HELP ! DISGRACEFUL.

A husband and wife from Bath have been jailed and banned from keeping animals for ten years after cats, dogs and rabbits were discovered living in 'filthy' conditions in their home.
Mark and Rebecca Lanfear, have been given 12-week jail terms after causing 'prolonged suffering' to their 18 pets.
The couple appeared before Bath Magistrates Court to admit ten charges each of animal neglect, while Mrs Lanfear's 69-year-old mother, Sheila Wheeler, also pleaded guilty to the same charges and was given a 12-week community order.
The suffering they caused to the animals in their care cost the RSPCA around £28,000 in vets' bills, accommodation and court costs in a case that a senior official said was caused by 'things getting horribly out of hand'.
An RSPCA investigation was launched following a tip-off from a member of the public in October last year.
RSPCA Chief Inspector Becky Griffiths, led the team which entered the house in Oldfield Park. Celia Strathdee, defending, said her clients were deeply ashamed at what had happened and acknowledged that what they had done was wrong.
She said events in the family home had spiralled out of control in such a desperate way that none of the defendants felt able to tackle the problems.
Mrs Strathdee said the couple lived with Mrs Wheeler who was in poor health.
She told the court Mr Lanfear had been suspended from his job as a driver due to illness, creating a 'huge' drop in his monthly income and contribution to the running of the house.
The 47-year-old's parents had both diagnosed with cancer which proved terminal for his mother who died in October last year.
Mrs Lanfear, who works as a claims negotiator for a firm in Bath, was then left with the task of helping to take care of her husband's father and her own mother as well as the finances of the house.
The 43-year-old suffered a nervous breakdown and took two months off work from July to August last year.
Mrs Lanfear has three horses which live in a yard around ten miles away from her house.
Mrs Strathdee said: "It seems to me that when everything was going wrong and the stress became too much she (Mrs Lanfear) sought refuge at the yard.
"The horses were not just loved but adored.
"Despite the fact that chaos seems to run in the home, the horses were beautifully looked after."
Chairman of the bench, Andrew Turnbull, said the offences were so severe that custody was the only appropriate sentence.
He also ordered that the RSPCA must take possession of Mrs Lanfear's three horses within 28 days.
Chief Insp Griffiths said the ruling was unusually severe and that custody was normally imposed only in cases involving physical attacks on animals.
She said: "This is a strong message to people that they have to look after their animals.
"We must now take steps to get the horses rehomed as soon as possible."
http://www.thisisbath.co.uk/news/Couple-jailed-animal-neglect/article-1072540-detail/article.html

THE RSPCA KILLERS

Family's missing cat is put down 1hr after it's found !

The rspca have been accused of killing a couple's pet cat - just one hour after picking her up in a neighbouring garden.
Three-year-old Luna had gone out to play, but a neighbour thought she was a stray and called the animal charity on Saturday morning.
Twenty minutes later an inspector arrived and an hour after that the tabby had been taken to a local vet's and put down by a lethal injection.
Upset owners Harry and Jennifer Hamilton now plan to take legal action against the RSPCA.
Harry, a 28-year-old engineer, raged: "Luna was the nicest cat in the world. My wife, who is fiveand-a-half months pregnant, is absolutely devastated.
"We can't believe a charity we support with donations could behave in this way. We are gutted."
He added: "The RSPCA said they thought Luna was a stray and vicious, but lots of cats are scared when approached by strangers. I thought they were supposed to keep a cat for 28 days not just a few hours. I'm so mad."
He and teacher Jennifer, 25, now plan to bury Luna in the back garden at their home in Goole, East Yorkshire.
The RSPCA, which is investigating the matter, said: "We apologise profusely for this upsetting incident."

COMMENTS
palval wrote:
As an animal lover I am appalled at this poor cats demise and the heartache caused to her owners Maybe if this incident hadnt occured on a Saturday morning events wouldnt have taken place so quickly
I have become disillusioned with the RSPCA recently and any future pleadings for money from them will be consigned to the recyling bin and my money given to other animal charities (GS – good thought here)
17/6/2009 13:42 BST on Mirror.co.uk
Romano wrote:
God, this is terrible! This sort of tragedy could happen to many cats whom some folk think are strays. Actually, it almost certainly has happened many times. The RSPCA are not often as quick to come out to cruelty cases as they are to a supposedley stray cat. I strongly suggest the RSPCA be ultra careful in future!
Francis H. Giles (Reading)
17/6/2009 14:03 BST on Mirror.co.uk
hasa23 wrote:
Thanks to the mirror for help on this - the RSPCA ought to know what they have done to my family!
Thanks again.
17/6/2009 14:12 BST on Mirror.co.uk
Becca_Bee wrote:
The RSPCA, which is investigating the matter, said: "We apologise profusely for this upsetting incident."
Not good enough. My cat recently went missing and after putting posters up we found out he'd died. The woman who found him rang the council, who took him to the RSPCA were they "disposed" of him. They didn't even bother scanning him, if they did they would have discovered he was microchipped and they could have informed us that he was dead and we could have buried him at home.
What is the point in supporting and donating to a charity if the people who work there can't even do their jobs properly?
17/6/2009 14:33 BST on Mirror.co.uk
Tan wrote:
This is awful and not the 1st time i have sadly heard this happening with the charity.
17/6/2009 14:53 BST on Mirror.co.uk
FeeFeeFee wrote:
Whilst I sympathise with the loss of this loving pet, suing the RSPCA isn't going to change what happened, only stretch their already over stretched budget.
Perhaps if this couple had been responsible enough to have their cat Microchipped then this misunderstanding could have been avoided. (GS – what rubbish – for uselessness of microchipping, see comment high-lighted above)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/06/17/the-rspca-killers-115875-21447065/

ITS ALWAYS "THE WORST CASE OF CRUELTY" THE RSPCA HAVE SEEN AS THEY PROSECUTE YET MORE PENSIONERS

ONLY DAYS AFTER THEY TOOK NO ACTION AGAINST A MAN WHO ADMITTED KICKING DOG TO DEATH

Michael Barnes and wife Diane were found guilty last Friday of allowing Ginger, a 10-year-old tom cat, to be subjected to unnecessary suffering.
The couple, both 63, adopted the stray cat five years ago, shortly after their former black cat Sammy died.
But last summer they passed off a rare flesh-eating skin disease that developed into cancer as a "scab", and the animal had to be put down.
After being found guilty at Croydon Magistrates' Court Mr Barnes remained defiant, calling the £1,430 in fines and compensation imposed by magistrates "daylight robbery".
He maintains that he and his wife "never hurt the cat on purpose".
"We love animals and we took in that stray because it sort of adopted us and wanted to be fed," he said.
"I can't believe we're being punished for looking after an animal that wasn't ours to start with, out of the goodness of our hearts.
"We genuinely thought the problem with its face was a scab from fighting other cats.
"There's no way either me or my wife would willfully try to harm an animal. We've had pets all our lives and we've never had any problems before."
It was the first time either Mr Barnes or his wife had ever been in court.
"It's been the most degrading and humiliating experience ever and it has really affected our health," former surveyor Mr Barnes said.
"The courts and the RSPCA have done us a great injustice. They are just out to get every penny they can.
"I'm disgusted that our good name has been muddied over something we never intended to do."
The couple are now banned from keeping animals for five years.
Although Mr Barnes is protesting their innocence, RSPCA inspector Lynn Marshall says it was the "worst case" of animal cruelty she has ever seen.
She visited their home in Gascoigne Road on July 22 last year after a concerned member of the public reported "a cat with a hole in its face".
When sentencing them, chairman of the bench Ray Stibbards said: "The vet should have been seen earlier when treatment should have been given. It should have been obvious."
The couple were each fined £150 for the offence, ordered to pay £550 compensation to the RSPCA and a £15 victim surcharge.
http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk/courts/New-Addington-couple-prosecuted-cat-hole-s-face/article-996926-detail/article.html

KELLY IS A 31 YEAR OLD SINGLE MUM OF 3 WHO'S BROTHER HAD JUST DIED, WHAT DO THE RSPCA DO ? HELP HER ? THEY PROSECUTE HER BECAUSE HER DOG HAS A RASH

A WOMAN who allegedly caused suffering to her pet terrier by failing to treat a chronic skin complaint has been banned from keeping dogs for three years.
Plymouth magistrates heard that the RSPCA rescued Bonny from owner Kelly Mooney because it had red, itchy skin.
Mother-of-three Miss Mooney told the court that she loved the seven-year-old dog but had become overwhelmed by family and financial problems.
But she admitted causing unnecessary suffering to the cross-bred terrier by failing to get her treated by a vet between July and August last year.
Mooney, aged 31, was given a conditional discharge for two years but ordered to pay £250 of the RSPCA's costs. She was also banned from keeping a dog for three years and ordered to sign Bonny over to the care of the charity.
The court heard that the dog had made a full recovery and was now ready to be re-homed.
Presiding magistrate John Matthews told Mooney: "Elements of this case are desperately sad but you clearly neglected care of the dog and suffering has resulted. Clearly in these circumstances the dog needs to be rehoused."
John Wyatt, prosecuting for the RSPCA, said: "An inspector attended at her house last August and found the dog to be in a poor condition, and suffering from skin loss and other problems."
He said that Bonny needed immediate treatment and she was taken to a veterinary hospital. Mr Wyatt added that blood tests found that she had suffered no internal damage and she improved after treatment.
Mr Wyatt said that Miss Mooney told the RSPCA in interview that she had last taken Bonny to the vet in 2006. She declined to sign the dog over to the care of the charity.
Julian Jefferson, for Mooney, said she was extremely distressed and "deeply sorry".
He added: "Her overwhelming feeling towards the dog is love."
But Mr Jefferson added that it would be better if the dog was rehomed.
The court heard that Bonny, who had been with Miss Mooney since she was a puppy, had a longstanding problem.
Mr Jefferson said that she had got the dog treated in the past through the PDSA charity.
But the court heard that Miss Mooney's brother died and she had to cope with the stress and cost of the bereavement, as well as looking after three children as a single mother.
Mr Jefferson said that ironically the RSPCA, which ended up prosecuting her, could have helped with Bonny's treatment.
http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/news/Terrier-homed-owner-failed-seek-treatment/article-911648-detail/article.html

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

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

RSPCA CAUGHT TAKING SCOTTISH DONATIONS DESPITE PREVIOUS DENIAL

PARLIAMENTARY MOTION DEMANDS RSPCA PAY BACK MISAPPROPRIATED SCOTTISH DONATIONS

An English-based animal charity that denied deliberately raising money in Scotland has admitted accepting up to £1.25m a year from Scottish donors.
As the storm surrounding the RSPCA's fundraising practices, the charity confirmed it receives 3.5% of its donations from animal lovers north of the border, despite the fact that it does not operate in Scotland. The charity's income from one-off and regular donations was £35m last year.
As reported in The Herald on Tuesday, the RSPCA, the world's most well-known animal welfare charity, was accused by the Scottish SPCA of "stealing food from the mouths of Scotland's animals" by deliberately fundraising in Scotland, and misleading donors by refusing to clarify the issue on its publicity material.

Yesterday MSP Christine Grahame, who sits on the Scottish Parliament's animal welfare committee, laid down a motion demanding that the charity pay back all money raised in Scotland over the last decade and change its advertising and fundraising materials.
In a statement, the RSPCA denied deliberately fundraising in Scotland and claimed to direct Scottish donors to the Scottish SPCA.
However, when The Herald made a donation to the charity online, no such direction was made, despite using a Glasgow postcode. When the donation was made by phone, using the same postcode, the operator pointed out that "Scotland has its own animal charity" and asked if she should withdraw the cash pledge. However, she did not say that the RSPCA only operates in England and Wales.
The Herald also spoke to an animal lover who has been donating to the RSPCA for the past 15 years, unaware that her money would not help animals in Scotland. Barbara Smith, 64, from Paisley, unwittingly sent £10 cheque to the charity on Monday.
"Until this week I assumed the RSPCA was a UK-wide charity," said Ms Smith. "I was shocked and very angry when I discovered through press coverage that this isn't the case. I've given them hundreds of pounds over the years, but I won't be giving them any more. From now on my money will go to the Scottish SPCA."
The Scottish SPCA said it had been "overwhelmed" with hundreds of donations and messages of support since launching a hard-hitting campaign, featuring a starving dog next to the line: "The RSPCA won't save me."
Scottish SPCA chief executive Stuart Earley said: "The RSPCA previously said it did not raise money in Scotland, but by its own admission this is clearly not the case.
"For all charities in the current economic climate, every single pound donated is extremely valuable. Any figure up to £1.25m may not be much to a the RSPCA, but it would make an enormous difference to us. It would run our Glasgow rescue centre for two years."
Commenting specifically on The Herald's donation experiences, Mr Earley added: "If the RSPCA is referring people from Scotland to ourselves, that signals a change in its policy and we are, of course, pleased.
"However, it is both unfortunate and in keeping with our past experiences to learn that the RSPCA is continuing to accept online donations from Scotland."
A spokeswoman for the RSPCA said she could not confirm the exact amount of donations given by Scottish donors last year, but admitted it was 3.5% of the total amount - as much as £1.25m. She also confirmed that, in light of The Herald's findings, the charity would consider changing its internet donation policy.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2487059.0.RSPCA_admits_taking_1_25m_of_Scots_cash.php

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 ANIMAL RIGHTS TERRORIST LINKS EXPOSED

EX-RSPCA EMPLOYEE JAILED FOR 11 YEARS FOR ANIMAL RIGHTS OFFENCES

Former RSPCA employee Heather Nicholson was jailed for 11 years for her part in the animals rights SHAC attacks.

The attacks focused on the hapless families of alleged suppliers to Huntingdon Life Sciences.

Ms. Nicholson, it seems, has much in common with Robin Webb. Like Mr.Webb, Ms Nicholson left her position in the RSPCA to join the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and the SHAC conspiracy. Like Webb too, she left an ostensibly innocent job to pursue an extreme animal rights campaign.

Robin Webb was just one of several hard-line animal rights activists on the RSPCA’s ruling council.

He was recently found by Mr Justice Irwin tobe a “pivotal figure” in the ALF. He was filmed by Channel 4’s Dispatches offering advice on how to make a bomb and filmed again in the United States demonstrating how to make a different device.

Anne Kasica of the SHG said:“Heather Nicholson may have been jailed for 11 years but there are plenty of extremists still at large and willing to step into her shoes.”“Many of them have strong links to organizations like the RSPCA. Because of this, many ordinary people – vets, lawyers, drivers and businessmen –have to live with threats on a daily basis.”

“It is time that there was a full public inquiry into the membership and activities of the RSPCA and its employees.”

RSPCA DOUBLE STANDARDS

The RSPCA has finally apologised “unreservedly” to the Hindu community for killing a Temple’s sacred cow over a year ago.The charity says that it now plans to "reassess its protocol" when dealing with the welfare of animals at "organisations which have a non-violent ethos".

No such protocol is in the public domain.

The RSPCA raid on the Temple was led by Superintendent Tim Wass who was immediately promoted to Chief Officer of the Inspectorate.

On issuing the apology to Bhatkivedanta Manor Temple, the RSPCA claimed that it now recognised the hurt caused to the sentiments of these communities, and wished to build a progressive relationship.

Stewart Coyle, the farm manger of New Gukol, a Hindu cow protection programme said: "The RSPCA's resolution will now help to protect all our cows. I believe the temple and RSPCA can now work together for animal welfare".

Anne Kasica, of the SHG, asked: “Does this ‘resolution’ now mean that everyone is safe from the RSPCA?

I don’t know of any farm that does not have a ‘non violent ethos’, but I think that farmers will continue to live in fear of an ‘unannounced visit’ from the RSPCA, commanded by someone like Mr Wass.”

Ernest Vine, also of the SHG, said: “Is there perhaps a danger here that the RSPCA will start to apply their double-standards to those with a‘non-violent ethos’ on the one hand, and ‘violent’ farmers and pet owners on the other?”

“Could we see scenes reminiscent of the Middle Ages where ordinary people are forced to flee to Hindu Temples in order to save the lives of their elderly or ill pets from the RSPCA?”

RSPCA TARGET ANOTHER PENSIONER

THE RSPCA are set to take their case against a Chatteris man to the county court as they look to finally recover a fine of more than £31,000.

Roger Barrett (pictured) was fined a total of £31,291.41 in June 2004 for causing unnecessary suffering to three ponies.

Barrett, lost an appeal against the fine 12 months later and then went to the High Court for permission to appeal.

However, there was never a hearing.

The animal charity is now looking to take the case to the county court and recover the costs from Barrett "when the property is released".Jason Stevens, prosecuting, said: "The RSPCA incurred substantial costs keeping the horses and treating the horses through the investigation."The court finds itself with a large debt outstanding in their files. It's a bit of an eyesore and they would like to see it done away with because it would make life easier with some administrators."I don't suggest repossession; a release when the property is transferred would be the normal way all debts are recovered."Barrett, 70, was given a two-year conditional discharge after pleading guilty to ill-treating the ponies.The court ruled however that Barrett, a breeder whose animals had won international competitions, was unlikely to reoffend and the ponies were returned.David Chapple, defending, said: "Quite extraordinarily and quite wrongly the court then imposes what is effectively an extremely draconian penalty on someone who has just been imposed with a conditional discharge."Sue Morris, chairman of the bench, said Mr Stevens deserved the right to apply to the county court for "having the courtesy of coming back" to Fenland magistrates.She said: "Because it is such an important issue we are going to allow Mr Stevens to make his application to the county court and, subject to what happens there, we will allow him to come back if appropriate.

RSPCA WASTE £110,000 PROSECUTING YET ANOTHER CAT LOVING PENSIONER

IS THIS REALLY WHAT DONATORS THINK THE RSPCA SHOULD BE SPENDING THEIR HARD EARNED MONEY ON ?

A DEFIANT pensioner who kept 40 cats at her home has been found guilty of animal cruelty.
In a case which cost the RSPCA over £110,000, Elsie Nash, aged 79, was told that her well-intentioned actions had led to unnecessary suffering.
Animal welfare experts found that many of the 40 cats had respiratory and ear infections, and criticised the state of the three-bedroom house.
Nash will be sentenced next month. But, speaking outside Birmingham Magistrates Court, she refused to accept that she had acted wrongly, and said she had no regrets.
“My life is my own, and the cats were my life,” she said.
“They couldn’t care less about the welfare of cats.”
The court was shown a video of the house, in Kingsbury Road, Erdington, which was run-down and dominated by cats.
Nash was found guilty of 13 charges of cruelty, but not guilty over the death of one cat following a nose infection.
Judge Qureshi warned that he would be considering all his options for sentencing - including prison .

http://www.birminghammail.net/news/top-stories/2009/01/16/pensioner-elsie-nash-found-guilty-of-animal-cruelty-97319-22707290/

BANNED POLICE PRACTICE STILL COMMON PLACE IN RSPCA

Will the RSPCA stop “colluding” too?

Mark Saunders’ family are to drop their action against the police,following the Court of Appeals confirmation that allowing police officers to “confer” before making their statements provides them with an “opportunity for collusion”.
The Association of Chief Police Officers have outlawed the practice.The RSPCA has been repeatedly criticised by the courts for allowing its inspectors and witnesses to meet each other in conference – and even to alter their statements.
Anne Kasica of the SHG said:“It is good news that Mark Saunders tragic loss has resulted in apositive result for justice. ACPO’s decision is obviously right. The question remains whether other agencies – perhaps most notably the RSPCA– will follow suit.
The RSPCA’s pre-trial conferences are such anendemic part of their culture, I wonder whether they will ever be ableto stamp it out – even if their Prosecutions Department tries to stop it.”

Contributor Simon de Walt said...
This post says it all. Barrister Sally Case (big salary plus indexed-linked pension and other benefits) and her "independent" fat-cat lawyers won't be happy about ACPO's concession reported above. Tim Wass and his holy-cow-killers in the RSPCA's sinister "Special Operations Unit" will never give up their secret pre-trial conferences. The RSPCA needs to keep its conviction rate high - besides, its lawyers just make too much money from them. The charity is, I hear, paying a top barrister £6,500 a day to prosecute a three month in the Magistrates Court. Do the math on that ... a brand new car every day? Wow!

RSPCA TELL RESCUER TO TURN DOG OUT ON THE STREET

SHAME ON YOU RSPCA, ISNT THIS WHAT PEOPLE DONATE MONEY TO YOU FOR ?

A FYLDE animal-lover claims the RSPCA told her to dump a lost dog she had rescued from the streets.
Catherine Whatmough rescued the black Collie, which was wandering alone in the middle of Freckleton Street in Lytham on New Year's Day.

The 43-year-old took the dog to her local police station, only to be told they had no facilities to take the dog in.She then tried to contact Fylde Council's dog wardens, but none was available.

After contacting the RSPCA, she says she was told they could not take the dog and that she should let it back out on to the street.

The mother-of-three said: "I was really worried it could cause an accident, because a driver might swerve or slam the brakes on to avoid it so I took it in.

I felt I couldn't just leave it there."I called the police, who said they did not deal with stray dogs and I needed to contact the wardens."I rang the council and they said there was no dog warden on duty.

They took my details and said someone would ring me back but no one did."I called the RSPCA emergency number and they said if there was no other option then I would have to let it free. I was quite shocked by that."I have two dogs so I didn't want to risk it staying with me.

The dog ended up staying with my dad."She was lovely and well-behaved.

The next day we managed to get in touch with the owner who had reported her missing to the council."The dog ran off on New Year's Eve because it got scared by the fireworks but the owner had similar problems trying to report her missing."He was thrilled she was safe."

A spokesman for the RSPCA stressed it was not the charity's policy to tell people to release stray dogs back on to the street and the call operator would be spoken to as "a mistake had been made".She added: "We are glad this issue has been highlighted as legislation means stray dogs are the responsibility of councils and the police."Being a charity, the issue is if we step in then we can start being used to plug the gap. If a dog is injured, then we will help but it is the responsibility of the local authority."A council spokesman said: "We have two on-call dog wardens to cover the entire Fylde and there are occasions when neither is available."If that is the case provisions are made and our call centre staff will usually be able to direct people to a dog home that will try to home or locate owners of lost animals."

http://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/blackpoolnews/39Turn-lost-dog-out-on.4841180.jp

RSPCA INVASION OF PRIVACY

It would be hard to think of a charity that stirs more controversy than the RSPCA.

Whole websites are dedicated to it, smarting with injustice, bristling fur balls of virtual rage.

The webmasters are not frustrated badger-baiters, dog-eaters or seal-clubbers thirsting for blood. They are animal lovers in the full, mildly eccentric British tradition of enjoying the company of other species rather more than their own, and placing animal welfare at the top of the moral pyramid.

But it’s “welfare” that is the problem. Welfarists believe they have a duty of care to wild, domestic and companion animals, which, crudely put, means treating them kindly.

Against this school of thought stands the rights movement, which rejects human exploitation of animals in all its forms: as meat, pet, workhorse, laboratory tool, racer, fighter, public exhibit, performer or quarry in the hunt. It is towards this school of thought that the RSPCA, amid much well-publicised clamour, has shifted its ground.

This places in the front line every cat- and dog-owner but especially pet shops, a point made clear by the RSPCA in a letter to local authorities in 1999. “The RSPCA,” it said bluntly, “is opposed to the sale of animals in pet shops.” It is this demonisation of the trade, and what critics regard as the harassment of individuals, that has done more than anything to widen the rift.

Any allegation of cruelty by one person against another is likely to result in the appearance of a police lookalike demanding to inspect or even seize their animals. Widespread misunderstanding of the Animal Welfare Act means that many pet-owners do indeed believe RSPCA inspectors have the power to do this.

It is a misapprehension that the organisation finds convenient and which it seems in no hurry to correct. As the spokesman said, “We would prefer you didn’t publish that.”

It is a position that many might applaud. Legal nicety versus relief of animal suffering? It’s a no-brainer. But it’s not always as simple as that. Conflict arises because the police, who do have bona-fide powers of entry, have neither the resources nor the expertise to enforce the act.

For this reason, says Chris Newman, chairman of the Federation of Companion Animal Societies, enforcement defaults to the RSPCA. “They impersonate police officers and commit trespass. People do believe they have powers of entry.”

Nigel Weller, a solicitor based in Lewes who specialises in defending RSPCA prosecutions, puts it more strongly: “In every single case I’ve been involved in, they have abused their power.” Often, he says, the RSPCA ask police to attend, ostensibly to avoid a breach of the peace. “Then they argue it was a police officer, acting legally, who seized property, when in fact it was the RSPCA.”

As RSPCA prosecutions are brought privately and do not require the sanction of the Crown Prosecution Service, this raises issues both of accountability and conflict of interest.
Sally Case, head of prosecutions, insists that RSPCA inspectors are trained specifically to make clear to pet-owners that they have no such right.

They act without an owner’s permission, she says, “only if an animal is suffering in a dire emergency. If the court feels evidence has been wrongly obtained, it can refuse to admit it”.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article1848410.ece

RSPCA FAIL TO ACT OVER DROWNING DOGS

TRAGIC DOG OWNERS ANGERED AT RSPCA RESPONSE

TWO pet dogs drowned after being swept into a drainage gulley while out with their owners on a canalside walk.
Lesley Weare and her husband Paul, of Scotland Road in Melksham, were left shocked and angry after losing their dogs, Lady and Kaitlyn, during the torrential downpours on Saturday.
Their pets were swept into a drainage gulley and tunnel running under the Kennet and Avon Canal near The Barge Inn in Seend, by floodwater pouring off nearby fields. They had been on a towpath walk heading towards Bradford on Avon when the tragedy happened.
After realising their pets had been swept away, the distraught couple called police for help and were directed to the RSPCA charity.
But Mrs Weare, 40, and her husband, 41, were unhappy at the charity’s call handler’s response, and were left trying to find the bodies of their dogs alone.
She said: “I ran down the field sobbing to where the tunnel came through the other side.

All I could see were branches and debris and concrete blocking up the exit, the water was so fast.
“In the meantime my husband had rung the police who directed him to the RSPCA and this was where our anger started.
“The woman at the RSPCA told my shaking, freezing cold, distraught husband that if he thought the animals were probably dead then there really wasn’t a lot she could do.”
Shortly after, the couple found the body of their four-year-old springer spaniel Lady before heading to the nearby Barge Inn to see if they could find out who owned the fields next to the towpath to continue the search for Kaitlyn.
Mrs Weare said staff were very helpful and both they and a local farmer offered to go back to the scene the next morning to search for Kaitlyn, the two-year-old offspring of Lady and another of the couple’s dogs, golden retriever Boomer.
They found Kaitlyn’s body at about 8.30am on Sunday.
Mrs Weare said they were furious at the response of the RSPCA.
She said: “I can say now that the RSPCA will never get another penny of my money. Why didn’t they help us when it mattered?”
An RSPCA spokeswoman said: “We received a call at 14.25pm from the police passing on a message from a member of the public that two dogs were trapped in a tunnel. No mention was made of water but it was still logged as an emergency.

http://www.wiltshiretimes.co.uk/news/3990023.Dogs_drown_in_flood_drama/

DOES A HALF HEARTED APOLOGY AND A REPLACEMENT COW HELPS RSPCA AVOID LEGAL ACTION ?

Sorry we killed your cow, RSPCA tells Hindus – have another one !

Archbishop of Canterbury helps to heal bitter rift after temple animal is put down
By Jerome TaylorSaturday, 13 December 2008

Gangotri the cow suffered paralysis after a vigorous mating session and was put down
When animal welfare officers walked into the grounds of Watford's Bhaktivedanta Manor Temple on13 December 2007 and put down one of its cows, the local Hindu community was outraged. Gangotri, a 13-year-old blue Jersey cross, was being nursed by temple officials after becoming paralysed during an overly vigorous mating session with Karma Deva, the resident bull. But the officials, from the RSPCA, believed Gangotri was "suffering unnecessarily" and killed her.

The decision caused a bitter rift to develop between Britain's Hindus, who regard cows as sacred, and the RSPCA. But a year on, the two groups have buried the hatchet thanks to a series of high-level talks and a little encouragement from the Archbishop of Canterbury, a patron of the society.
The Independent has learnt that a meeting between temple officials and the RSPCA's chief executive, Mark Watts, took place earlier this week. The society agreed to apologise for upsetting the Hindu community and offered to give a replacement cow to the temple as a goodwill gesture.
Officials from Lambeth Palace yesterday said they played no part in brokering that final meeting but one temple official admitted that progress in the talks only came about once Rowan Williams was contacted. "The Archbishop is a patron of the RSPCA and we wrote to him asking for his help," said Stuart "Shyamsundar" Coyle, the chief herdsman on the temple's farm, which claims to be Europe's largest cow sanctuary.
"The Church of England worked very hard in getting the RSPCA to talk to us about our concerns and we are extremely grateful for their help."
A spokesman from the RSPCA stressed yesterday that its vets had acted within the law when they put Gangotri down but admitted that they had upset the Hindu community in the way it was carried out. "We recognise we offended religious sensibilities," the spokesman said. "We know what happened caused a lot of offence to the Hindu community and we wanted to show that we want to work with Britain's Hindus in the future. The RSPCA has so much in common with Britain's Hindus when it comes to our attitude towards animal welfare."
Kapil Dudaki, who led the temple's "Gangotri Task Force" campaign group, said the donation of a new cow would help calm tensions between Hindus and the RSPCA.
"It is a wonderful gesture and we gladly accept it," he said. "It will very much help repair some of the damage done to our community in the past year. It was the way and the manner in which the RSPCA killed Gangotri which upset our community the most. To see a cow killed on the temple's grounds was utterly devastating."
In Hindu culture and scripture cows are considered sacrosanct. Bhaktivedanta Manor, a community of Hare Krishna devotees that was set up by the Beatles guitarist George Harrison, has a herd of 48 cows, most of which are milked or used to work the land.
Other temples have clashed with the RSPCA and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) over the care of sick animals. Under the Animal Welfare Act officials can kill an animal if they believe it is suffering unnecessarily. Defra has powers to destroy any animals that have contracted a contagious disease.
But most Hindus believe that killing a cow, even for merciful reasons, is sacrilegious because only God can decide when a sacred animal should die.
Yesterday Defra released a new set of guidelines on how to deal with sacred temple animals without offending the Hindu community. A spokesman from the Hindu Forum of Britain welcomed the new protocol.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/sorry-we-killed-your-cow-rspca-tells-hindus-ndash-have-another-one-1064471.html?startindex=50

RSPCA PROSECUTE RABBIT COUPLE

AWARD WINNING BRITISH RABBIT COUNCIL MEMBERS PROSECUTED BY THE RSPCA BECAUSE THEY SAY THAT THEIR HUTCHES ARE TOO SMALL !


A PAIR of rabbit enthusiasts won top awards for one of their animals the day before being seized by RSPCA officers, a court heard.

Southampton Magistrates’ Court was told a rabbit belonging to breeders Dawn and Peter Bundy won two prizes for “best in show” at an exhibition of rabbits.

The following day RSPCA and environmental health officers went to the couple’s home in Southampton, and took 73 of the pair’s 126 rabbits.
Officers removed the specialist rabbits – worth about £3,000 – from the back yard of the house on the advice of vet Kimberly Evans on October 1 last year.
The bench heard the animals were in such small hutches some could not sit up on their hind legs. Mrs Bundy, a member of the British Rabbit Council, told the court the animals had been kept in small hutches to stop them becoming too long in the body.
She added the rabbits had not been exercised in winter months to keep them in prime condition for showing.
Mr Bundy added: “They didn’t need to stand on their hind legs. They only do that to look out for danger and there was none.”
Mr and Mrs Bundy said they thought the animals had been kept in “perfect” condition.
Mrs Bundy said: “I love my rabbits. I looked after them to the best of my ability.
“The ones with dirty hutches were going to be cleaned that afternoon but I got interrupted.”
Miss Evans previously told the court the seized rabbits were found to have long claws and were slightly overweight but not unhealthy. She added that 16 of the animals had since died or been destroyed humanely.
Mr and Mrs Bundy, who have been breeding show rabbits since 1991, deny contravening two sections of the Animal Welfare Act.

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/3839137._I_love_my_rabbits__court_told/