reynold
Well-Known Member
Taken from warmwell.com
includes a previous email from a niece of Jamie Gray
interesting viewpoint if perhaps not what we want to hear...
return to warmwell.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All twenty nine donkeys and Shetland ponies which the RSPCA seized must be returned to the Grays, as the court ordered, forthwith
(The email below from Jamie Gray's niece pulls no punches in its criticism of RSPCA)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Self Help Group for Farmers, Pet Owners and Others experiencing
difficulties with the RSPCA (The SHG)
Press Release
For Immediate Release
7th April 2008
EQUINE LAWYERS HAIL AN HISTORIC VICTORY AGAINST RSPCA
ALL SPINDLES FARM RESCUE HORSES TO BE RETURNED OR SOLD
The action for the return of his horses brought by James (Jamie) Gray
against the RSPCA has taken a dramatic turn.
All twenty nine donkeys and Shetland ponies which the RSPCA seized must
be returned to the Grays, as the court ordered, forthwith.
The remaining ninety-six animals, including some valuable thoroughbreds,
will, as Mr Grays lawyers requested, be sold at auction.
Commenting on the courts findings, Anne Kasica of the SHG said:
Despite the case having been made a cause celebre by the RSPCAs Head
of Media, Henry Macaulay, the RSPCA faces yet another public relations
disaster following Judge Sandeep Kainths ruling on Friday in Oxford.
This is an enormously positive ruling. It shows that the RSPCAs whole
approach to welfare cases is wrong - it will not accept advice from
independent vets, for fear that they might say something it doesnt want
to hear.
The RSPCA prefers to take its aggressive courses of action, no matter
how unreasonable and wasteful they might be, just as long as they
increase the pressure on defendants.
Let us hope that this result will force the RSPCA to reconsider its
belligerent approach to cruelty cases.
Referring to the claim by Kirsty Hampton of the RSPCA that they had
intended to seek new owners for these horses before trial, Ms. Kasica
went on to say:
This is laughable. The RSPCA only seek new owners when they have a
court order for confiscation following a successful criminal prosecution
- so they can rehome expensive animals with acceptable people for a
substantial donation and then try to recover huge boarding costs from
the defendants.
As a result of the RSPCAs refusal to deliver up any of Mr. Grays
animals the RSPCA faces another huge costs bill from its own lawyers a
specialist firm instructed privately to present the RSPCAs case.
And yet the RSPCA accepted that all of the donkeys and ponies which
have been ordered back were in "good condition and claimed that they
were seized, not because of their condition, but because of concerns
about Mr Gray and his family.
As to the remainder, there was, the judge rightly ruled, no evidence
to show they were in any danger" and that a sale at auction was a
respectable, and traditional, way for horses to change ownership.
The idea of a sale in this case never arose until Mr Grays
application, and then the RSPCA resisted it. The RSPCAs idea was to
ensure that Mr Gray never got any money for his investment in the
horses, and that he should face a massive costs bill.
Kirsty Hampton is well-known to us. She has been involved in
considerable controversy and was responsible for making serious and
untrue allegations of cruelty against Mr and Mrs David Burden.
In their case, the RSPCA organised a meeting of witnesses, at which the
RSPCA ghosted a report which was later claimed to have been written by
an independent expert in sheep. Ms Hampton was present at that
meeting, and her case against the sheep farmers was thrown out.
Ernest Vine, also of the SHG, said:
There are countless defendants who are experiencing massive
high-profile seizures by the RSPCA, who are very aggressive and threaten
massive costs orders against them, whilst engaging in a huge media
campaign to increase the pressure still further.
For those still awaiting a private prosecution for cruelty by the
RSPCA, which usually takes six months to emerge, this must be very
heartening news.
Only this week David and Margaret Heading have had over a hundred
cattle seized from them by the RSPCA from East Farm in Thetford.
Their animals were transported to a place of safety by the RSPCA and
I understand that, as with Jamie Grays case, the RSPCA have not yet
suggested their sale.
Mr. Vine concluded:
The court in Mr. Greys case may have been persuaded to make the order
by the fact that the RSPCA claimed to have spent an incredible £153,000
boarding his animals so far.
Evidence given during the hearing by independent equine specialist vet
John Parker contrasted starkly with the RSPCAs highly prejudicial
press-releases.
Mr. Parker stated that none of the horses, donkeys and ponies had been
"caused unnecessary suffering, although some animals had arrived at Mr
Grays farm from a semi-feral origin. He found the bedding and general
condition of the farm to be of an "extremely good quality." And when
asked if he believed any animals would be at risk of cruelty if they
were returned, Mr Parker simply said "No".
The RSPCA is now under severe pressure to withdraw its private
prosecution against the Grays who face allegations of animal cruelty.
They are due before Oxford Magistrates on 28 April 2008.
The RSPCA is believed to be considering an appeal against Judge Kainths
ruling.
Ends
Word Total: 798
Notes to Editors: -
1. The result is another landmark victory for Jacqui Fulton, of Blythe
Liggins, who has represented Mr Gray and his family throughout
2. The RSPCA spends 44% of its annual income of over £100,000,000 (one
hundred million pounds) on its prosecutions department.
3. In the light of Judge Kainths findings, the RSPCA, which claims to
apply the Code for Crown Prosecutors, will have to satisfy Sally Case,
Head of Prosecutions, that it has considered whether each of the
allegations stands a reasonable prospect of success and is in the
public interest.
4. The RSPCA is a private body so there is no mechanism to challenge the
decision which Ms Case reaches.
5. Mr. Grays animals had been placed with organisations such as the
International League for the Protection of Horses (ILPH) and Redwings,
with whom the RSPCA has a special relationship and with whom it worked
on the raids which it conducted against Mr Gray.
6. Many of Mr Grays animals were seized on advice from independent
expert Nic de Brauwere, who is Head of Welfare at Redwings. Mr de
Brauwere claims to have been on hundreds of unannounced visits with
the RSPCA. He was severely criticised by District Judge Philip Browning,
when the RSPCAs private prosecution against Gina and Martin Griffin was
thrown out in Norwich.
7. Launching the RSPCAs usual attack on judges who have found against
them, Kirsty Hampton, who was responsible for the raids, said:
The decision to return the horses to the Grays is devastating. We had
hoped that the court would ask us to seek new owners for them who were
guaranteed to provide for their future welfare. An open sale to an
unknown bidder means that we cannot be sure of the level of future care
they will receive.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An email received January 15 2008 maintains that the RSPCA is far from what the public tend to perceive.
"The RSPCA is corrupt. Those horrible people have told so many lies it's unreal.
My uncle is Jamie Gray, the man accused of animal cruelty recently in the press. I'm sure you must have heard about the case.
Here's just a little info to show how corrupt the RSPCA, and certain other Animal Welfare Organisations, are.
My uncle has all his vets' reports for his animals - receipts for the stacks of haylage he has delivered on a regular basis.
My uncle makes every effort to ensure that the wellbeing of his animals is second to none. An independent vet gave very good reports after vetting the animals, but the RSPCA officer in charge of the case wasn't happy with that so she had an RSPCA vet also check them. Apparently, this is "the worse case of animal cruelty he has seen in his 30 years as a vet". If this was the case then he must have been walking around with his eyes closed for the past 30 years.
I'm no expert but even I could see those animals were not neglected.
The RSPCA and other welfare organizations involved in this case have all seen the food on site - alone with fresh water and clean dry bedding. But they chose to leave this out of their speeches to the press.
The family has been hounded by the press - the very press who have published cruel, wicked lies about them. Their children can no longer go to school, and my aunt can't go to her local shops. Their entire village think they are guilty - and some of the villagers have too made up lies. Their phone is constantly ringing with either the press hounding them to say something or people calling and spouting abuse.
I understand the anger the public are expressing concerning the farm in Amersham, Buckenhamshire. However, the public have not been told the truth. The RSPCA and other AWO's, are lying through thier teeth, as are the villagers, who my uncle will most certainly want to see in court. He loves his animals and there is no way he would do what he is being accused of. One of the horses that was taken away was one my uncle actually rescued himself just a week before the RSPCA came in to his farm. But the RSPCA have not mentioned this although they have been made very aware of it.
All of his animals were checked by the vet just days before the RSPCA moved in.
They told the press that 30+ dead animals were found piled up against a fence. That is mammoth lie on its own.
I seriously do not know how these people sleep at night.
There are just too many lies reported in the press for me to mention.
These people should never be allowed to do this to innocent people. They are meant to be concerned about the welfare of animals not targeting good people who are animal lovers.
In the past I have made donations to the RSPCA, but NEVER AGAIN. Not after witnessing the kind of organization it actually is.
The public are donating millions of pounds to the RSPCA, yet don't actually know the facts about it. The RSPCA needs to be exposed for the corrupt organization that it is.
Instead of spending the donations of the good hearted public, in targeting innocent animals lovers, they should be using those resources to help the thousands of poor animals who truly do need their help. I'm sure there are some good officers on the ground who are trying to do a good job but sadly, none were in charge when the RSPCA entered my uncle's farm. It would seem that those officers trying to do a good job are a minority within the organization.
Thank you.
Charmaine.
includes a previous email from a niece of Jamie Gray
interesting viewpoint if perhaps not what we want to hear...
return to warmwell.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All twenty nine donkeys and Shetland ponies which the RSPCA seized must be returned to the Grays, as the court ordered, forthwith
(The email below from Jamie Gray's niece pulls no punches in its criticism of RSPCA)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Self Help Group for Farmers, Pet Owners and Others experiencing
difficulties with the RSPCA (The SHG)
Press Release
For Immediate Release
7th April 2008
EQUINE LAWYERS HAIL AN HISTORIC VICTORY AGAINST RSPCA
ALL SPINDLES FARM RESCUE HORSES TO BE RETURNED OR SOLD
The action for the return of his horses brought by James (Jamie) Gray
against the RSPCA has taken a dramatic turn.
All twenty nine donkeys and Shetland ponies which the RSPCA seized must
be returned to the Grays, as the court ordered, forthwith.
The remaining ninety-six animals, including some valuable thoroughbreds,
will, as Mr Grays lawyers requested, be sold at auction.
Commenting on the courts findings, Anne Kasica of the SHG said:
Despite the case having been made a cause celebre by the RSPCAs Head
of Media, Henry Macaulay, the RSPCA faces yet another public relations
disaster following Judge Sandeep Kainths ruling on Friday in Oxford.
This is an enormously positive ruling. It shows that the RSPCAs whole
approach to welfare cases is wrong - it will not accept advice from
independent vets, for fear that they might say something it doesnt want
to hear.
The RSPCA prefers to take its aggressive courses of action, no matter
how unreasonable and wasteful they might be, just as long as they
increase the pressure on defendants.
Let us hope that this result will force the RSPCA to reconsider its
belligerent approach to cruelty cases.
Referring to the claim by Kirsty Hampton of the RSPCA that they had
intended to seek new owners for these horses before trial, Ms. Kasica
went on to say:
This is laughable. The RSPCA only seek new owners when they have a
court order for confiscation following a successful criminal prosecution
- so they can rehome expensive animals with acceptable people for a
substantial donation and then try to recover huge boarding costs from
the defendants.
As a result of the RSPCAs refusal to deliver up any of Mr. Grays
animals the RSPCA faces another huge costs bill from its own lawyers a
specialist firm instructed privately to present the RSPCAs case.
And yet the RSPCA accepted that all of the donkeys and ponies which
have been ordered back were in "good condition and claimed that they
were seized, not because of their condition, but because of concerns
about Mr Gray and his family.
As to the remainder, there was, the judge rightly ruled, no evidence
to show they were in any danger" and that a sale at auction was a
respectable, and traditional, way for horses to change ownership.
The idea of a sale in this case never arose until Mr Grays
application, and then the RSPCA resisted it. The RSPCAs idea was to
ensure that Mr Gray never got any money for his investment in the
horses, and that he should face a massive costs bill.
Kirsty Hampton is well-known to us. She has been involved in
considerable controversy and was responsible for making serious and
untrue allegations of cruelty against Mr and Mrs David Burden.
In their case, the RSPCA organised a meeting of witnesses, at which the
RSPCA ghosted a report which was later claimed to have been written by
an independent expert in sheep. Ms Hampton was present at that
meeting, and her case against the sheep farmers was thrown out.
Ernest Vine, also of the SHG, said:
There are countless defendants who are experiencing massive
high-profile seizures by the RSPCA, who are very aggressive and threaten
massive costs orders against them, whilst engaging in a huge media
campaign to increase the pressure still further.
For those still awaiting a private prosecution for cruelty by the
RSPCA, which usually takes six months to emerge, this must be very
heartening news.
Only this week David and Margaret Heading have had over a hundred
cattle seized from them by the RSPCA from East Farm in Thetford.
Their animals were transported to a place of safety by the RSPCA and
I understand that, as with Jamie Grays case, the RSPCA have not yet
suggested their sale.
Mr. Vine concluded:
The court in Mr. Greys case may have been persuaded to make the order
by the fact that the RSPCA claimed to have spent an incredible £153,000
boarding his animals so far.
Evidence given during the hearing by independent equine specialist vet
John Parker contrasted starkly with the RSPCAs highly prejudicial
press-releases.
Mr. Parker stated that none of the horses, donkeys and ponies had been
"caused unnecessary suffering, although some animals had arrived at Mr
Grays farm from a semi-feral origin. He found the bedding and general
condition of the farm to be of an "extremely good quality." And when
asked if he believed any animals would be at risk of cruelty if they
were returned, Mr Parker simply said "No".
The RSPCA is now under severe pressure to withdraw its private
prosecution against the Grays who face allegations of animal cruelty.
They are due before Oxford Magistrates on 28 April 2008.
The RSPCA is believed to be considering an appeal against Judge Kainths
ruling.
Ends
Word Total: 798
Notes to Editors: -
1. The result is another landmark victory for Jacqui Fulton, of Blythe
Liggins, who has represented Mr Gray and his family throughout
2. The RSPCA spends 44% of its annual income of over £100,000,000 (one
hundred million pounds) on its prosecutions department.
3. In the light of Judge Kainths findings, the RSPCA, which claims to
apply the Code for Crown Prosecutors, will have to satisfy Sally Case,
Head of Prosecutions, that it has considered whether each of the
allegations stands a reasonable prospect of success and is in the
public interest.
4. The RSPCA is a private body so there is no mechanism to challenge the
decision which Ms Case reaches.
5. Mr. Grays animals had been placed with organisations such as the
International League for the Protection of Horses (ILPH) and Redwings,
with whom the RSPCA has a special relationship and with whom it worked
on the raids which it conducted against Mr Gray.
6. Many of Mr Grays animals were seized on advice from independent
expert Nic de Brauwere, who is Head of Welfare at Redwings. Mr de
Brauwere claims to have been on hundreds of unannounced visits with
the RSPCA. He was severely criticised by District Judge Philip Browning,
when the RSPCAs private prosecution against Gina and Martin Griffin was
thrown out in Norwich.
7. Launching the RSPCAs usual attack on judges who have found against
them, Kirsty Hampton, who was responsible for the raids, said:
The decision to return the horses to the Grays is devastating. We had
hoped that the court would ask us to seek new owners for them who were
guaranteed to provide for their future welfare. An open sale to an
unknown bidder means that we cannot be sure of the level of future care
they will receive.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An email received January 15 2008 maintains that the RSPCA is far from what the public tend to perceive.
"The RSPCA is corrupt. Those horrible people have told so many lies it's unreal.
My uncle is Jamie Gray, the man accused of animal cruelty recently in the press. I'm sure you must have heard about the case.
Here's just a little info to show how corrupt the RSPCA, and certain other Animal Welfare Organisations, are.
My uncle has all his vets' reports for his animals - receipts for the stacks of haylage he has delivered on a regular basis.
My uncle makes every effort to ensure that the wellbeing of his animals is second to none. An independent vet gave very good reports after vetting the animals, but the RSPCA officer in charge of the case wasn't happy with that so she had an RSPCA vet also check them. Apparently, this is "the worse case of animal cruelty he has seen in his 30 years as a vet". If this was the case then he must have been walking around with his eyes closed for the past 30 years.
I'm no expert but even I could see those animals were not neglected.
The RSPCA and other welfare organizations involved in this case have all seen the food on site - alone with fresh water and clean dry bedding. But they chose to leave this out of their speeches to the press.
The family has been hounded by the press - the very press who have published cruel, wicked lies about them. Their children can no longer go to school, and my aunt can't go to her local shops. Their entire village think they are guilty - and some of the villagers have too made up lies. Their phone is constantly ringing with either the press hounding them to say something or people calling and spouting abuse.
I understand the anger the public are expressing concerning the farm in Amersham, Buckenhamshire. However, the public have not been told the truth. The RSPCA and other AWO's, are lying through thier teeth, as are the villagers, who my uncle will most certainly want to see in court. He loves his animals and there is no way he would do what he is being accused of. One of the horses that was taken away was one my uncle actually rescued himself just a week before the RSPCA came in to his farm. But the RSPCA have not mentioned this although they have been made very aware of it.
All of his animals were checked by the vet just days before the RSPCA moved in.
They told the press that 30+ dead animals were found piled up against a fence. That is mammoth lie on its own.
I seriously do not know how these people sleep at night.
There are just too many lies reported in the press for me to mention.
These people should never be allowed to do this to innocent people. They are meant to be concerned about the welfare of animals not targeting good people who are animal lovers.
In the past I have made donations to the RSPCA, but NEVER AGAIN. Not after witnessing the kind of organization it actually is.
The public are donating millions of pounds to the RSPCA, yet don't actually know the facts about it. The RSPCA needs to be exposed for the corrupt organization that it is.
Instead of spending the donations of the good hearted public, in targeting innocent animals lovers, they should be using those resources to help the thousands of poor animals who truly do need their help. I'm sure there are some good officers on the ground who are trying to do a good job but sadly, none were in charge when the RSPCA entered my uncle's farm. It would seem that those officers trying to do a good job are a minority within the organization.
Thank you.
Charmaine.