RSPCA POLICY NOT TO ACCEPT ABANDONED PETS

HOW THE RSPCA DEAL WITH LOST PETS

WHAT THE RSPCA DONT WANT YOU TO KNOW

Saturday, 16 October 2010

RIDICULOUS RSPCA PROSECUTION FAILS

Another RSPCA attempt to criminalise an ordinary law-abiding person has failed,
A case that not only failed the evidential test, but would also have failed any reasonable person's public interest test.
BUT STILL GENERATES PUBLICITY FOR THE RSPCA.
"ITS CHEAPER TO PROSECUTE THAN ADVERTISE"


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

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

Tuesday, 12 October 2010

MENTALLY ILL LADY JAILED AS RESULT OF RSPCA PROSECUTION

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


PROSECUTOR CHARLOTTE MITCHELL

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

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


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

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

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




Friday, 8 October 2010

NO JUSTICE AT THE RSPCA













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

Morpeth Red Squirrels Chairman Norris Atthey has been charged with causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal, namely a grey squirrel, by drowning it.
The RSPCA has confirmed that it issued a summons to Mr Atthey yesterday morning to appear at South East Northumberland Magistrates Court in Bedlington next month to answer the charge under the Animal Welfare Act.
The action follows a report in the Herald on August 12 in which Mr Atthey described killing a grey squirrel and challenged the RSPCA to prosecute him.
Mr Atthey, 66, of Ulgham, has confirmed that he has received the summons and is receiving specialist legal advice.
He has been ordered to appear at the court at noon on Monday, November 8.
http://www.morpethherald.co.uk/news/local-news/morpeth_squirrel_killer_is_arrested_1_1536967

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



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

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


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

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

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


Wednesday, 6 October 2010

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

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


Tuesday, 5 October 2010

RSPCA TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW?

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

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

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

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

WHO HAS SUPPLIED THESE CONTROLLED DRUGS TO THE RSPCA?

WHY HAVE THE POLICE TAKEN NO ACTION?

WHY HAVE THE RCVS TURNED A BLIND EYE?







RSPCA FAILED PROSECUTORS TAKE 3 MONTHS TO COMPLY WITH COURT ORDER

WHY NO CONTEMPT OF COURT RULING AGAINST THE RSPCA?

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


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

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

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

Tuesday, 28 September 2010

YOU CAN HIT A CHILD, BUT CANT HIT A DOG, UNLESS YOU HAVE "ROYAL" CONNECTIONS

RSPCA DOUBLE STANDARDS EXPOSED
Poor Mary Bale. The woman who, in a "moment of madness", dumped a cat in a wheelie bin has been charged with animal cruelty. The RSPCA is prosecuting her with causing unnecessary suffering to a cat and "not providing the animal with a suitable environment". It would make you giggle if it didn't have the potential to ruin her life. The woman appears to have led a blame­less existence for 45 years and then she did something silly; we've all done silly things. She has said she is profoundly sorry. My cats do far worse things to little voles, mice and even baby birds than Ms Bale did to that cat in the bin. But that's OK, because it's "natural". Among the dozens of rules for owning a cat, introduced in the ridiculous Animal Welfare Act four years ago ("groom" it!?), is making sure your cat is able to "exhibit normal behaviour patterns". Funnily enough, the RSPCA's advice on kitties doesn't extend to explaining that normal behaviour may mean carnage from the natural kingdom appearing on your kitchen floor twice a day.
Sweet charity
A sense of proportion is beyond the wit of animal lovers, themselves often rather in­humane creatures, as viciously self-righteous as a parade of cardinals. Factory farming amounts to far greater cruelty than the actions of a few callous pet owners. Yet in 2009, the RSPCA spent ten times as much on its "inspectorate", a quasi-military force with the power to break into places without a warrant, than it did on the Freedom Food campaign to encourage high welfare standards in animal farming, which has a far wider impact on animal welfare, given the numbers involved.
The RSPCA seems to be more interested in harassing members of the public. Two years ago, it used its new powers to frighten off schools from keeping pets, asking them to name a sole individual responsible for rabbits' welfare - so it knew whom to threaten when the play got a bit noisy.
The British are profoundly hypocritical when it comes to attitudes to children and animals; just because it's a cliché, it doesn't mean it isn't true. Where is the list of rules instructing parents to provide outdoor space, healthy food and appropriate company for a child - on pain of prosecution? Abandon an animal and you get prosecuted; abandon a child and you get to join Fathers 4 Justice.
Pets rule
I know, it's different - we have a choice, we understand what's going on. But children don't. You can hit a child; you can't hit a dog. The RSPCA has had countless people convicted of animal cruelty since being given the power to prosecute four years ago. It doesn't even need to prove an animal was suffering: now, it can step in when it thinks that it might be about to suffer. Meanwhile, kids are left in overcrowded accommodation, getting fat on McDonald's and displaying behavioural difficulties associated with too much telly and computer games. It isn't only dogs that need exercise.
Look at the list of things I have to provide for the gerbils that are about to arrive for a child's birthday, according to my legal duty of care ­under the Animal Welfare Act. The "five welfare needs" that the politicians thought they were agreeing to when they passed the bill have bred like gerbils. There are now dozens of rules for each type of pet. The gerbils' "five needs" include: a cage, a nest box, bedding, burrowing material, water from a bottle with a spout, a "mixed diet" of grains, fruit and veg, occasional sunflower seeds and peanuts, an exercise wheel, toys, a gnawing block, friends, peace and quiet and a vet. For cats, it's separate beds and toys and hiding places, company when they want it, solitude when they don't, a well-balanced diet and allowing them to behave naturally. Does that mean I have to let them chase the gerbils?
http://www.newstatesman.com/society/2010/09/hit-child-animal-welfare-cat