any update on TIC TOC . did the rspca persue this?

Moomin1 said:
Cptrayes I think that would be a separate matter about the illegal copyright. I don't think it will make it in admissible so long as it is proven it is genuine footage and where it came from.
Click to expand...

I think I'm correct in saying that evidence which was obtained illegally cannot normally be used to prosecute someone. Which is why wire taps, etc, need a licence, recording phone calles needs the permission of the caller, and breaking into premises to obtain evidence needs a warrant.

The video was posted by the copyright owner but swiftly removed and would not be admissable as hearsay by people who say they saw it. The copies that we all saw were posted in breach of copyright. Unless someone who was actually there would testify, I don't think that there is any evidence.

So basically what I am saying is let's not blame the RSPCA for this one too, there is nothing they can do.
 
Last edited:
There is one big advantage of taking someone to the small claims court and getting a county court judgment on them. Once they have a county court judgment they will then come up in any searches that anyone makes on them. This means that any credit search carried out on them will reveal previous court judgments and make it much more difficult for them to get any credit in the future.
www.riskdisk.com is one of the companies that collates this information.
 
cptrayes said:
I think I'm correct in saying that evidence which was obtained illegally cannot normally be used to prosecute someone. Which is why wire taps, etc, need a licence, recording phone calles needs the permission of the caller, and breaking into premises to obtain evidence needs a warrant.

The video was posted by the copyright owner but swiftly removed and would not be admissable as hearsay by people who say they saw it. The copies that we all saw were posted in breach of copyright. Unless someone who was actually there would testify, I don't think that there is any evidence.

So basically what I am saying is let's not blame the RSPCA for this one too, there is nothing they can do.
Click to expand...

You may be right cptrayes. Let's not put all our eggs in one basket just yet though.
 
Moomin1 said:
You may be right cptrayes. Let's not put all our eggs in one basket just yet though.
Click to expand...

I just wish she could be named on this forum. Are there other's where they aren't so strict? People need to be told who she is.

It puzzles me that we can rubbish the RSPCA, Robinsons tack shop or anything else anyone wants but not dealers who we know for a fact to be total criminals
 
cptrayes said:
I just wish she could be named on this forum. Are there other's where they aren't so strict? People need to be told who she is.

It puzzles me that we can rubbish the RSPCA, Robinsons tack shop or anything else anyone wants but not dealers who we know for a fact to be total criminals
Click to expand...

I know, it's very frustrating.

All we can do I suppose is wait and see what happens from the RSPCA end of things.

I don't know of any other forums really, I only go on this one! :)
 
Moomin1 said:
I know, it's very frustrating.

All we can do I suppose is wait and see what happens from the RSPCA end of things.

I don't know of any other forums really, I only go on this one! :)
Click to expand...

BECAUSE.... if we name her, without proof (and we have just established there isn't anything that is going to stand up in court) we could be legally liable as well as the Horse and Hound for libel. While it is frustrating that people know what is going on, the law states very clearly we can't go around saying things that aren't proven. Take an extreme example Lord McAlpine. Named on public forums and then... shock horror, proven beyond doubt to be completely innocent. Now he is actively pursuing individuals who named him or simply passed on the info as well as the original media source. I completely share frustration but in this instance, someone has to take up the issue, collate evidence and then present it to someone like trading standards etc to prosecute.

On the positive side, how many people now check for recommendations? and while we cannot be negative on a public forum, opinions and experiences can be freely shared via PM. I am sure there are a lot of people who have been able to avoid certain dealers by reading and questioning on this very forum...

And while not the biggest fan of the RSPCA, in this instance, I can't see how they could be really involved. Horses are not well treated but they are not starved, basic welfare is taken care of. Trading standards would be a better bet for selling goods that do not match the description.
 
Luci07 said:
BECAUSE.... if we name her, without proof (and we have just established there isn't anything that is going to stand up in court) we could be legally liable as well as the Horse and Hound for libel. While it is frustrating that people know what is going on, the law states very clearly we can't go around saying things that aren't proven. Take an extreme example Lord McAlpine. Named on public forums and then... shock horror, proven beyond doubt to be completely innocent. Now he is actively pursuing individuals who named him or simply passed on the info as well as the original media source. I completely share frustration but in this instance, someone has to take up the issue, collate evidence and then present it to someone like trading standards etc to prosecute.

On the positive side, how many people now check for recommendations? and while we cannot be negative on a public forum, opinions and experiences can be freely shared via PM. I am sure there are a lot of people who have been able to avoid certain dealers by reading and questioning on this very forum...

And while not the biggest fan of the RSPCA, in this instance, I can't see how they could be really involved. Horses are not well treated but they are not starved, basic welfare is taken care of. Trading standards would be a better bet for selling goods that do not match the description.
Click to expand...

I think we should just wait and see what happens with the RSPCA side of things. We don't know that there isn't a case yet.
 
Moomin1 said:
I think we should just wait and see what happens with the RSPCA side of things. We don't know that there isn't a case yet.
Click to expand...

Well that would be good, but I do wonder if that is stretching that a bit for them? I obviously am basing my opinion on previous posts (i.e have no idea what is happening with this in the real world!)
 
tic toc apart, there must be hundreds of disgruntled customers that could prove what she is , if she sued the horse and hound or anyone who slated her. she may threaten , but she wouldnt sue , thats for sure . i for one would love her too ,as i cant afford to bring a law suit against her . but i , and others ,would love to defend one !!!
 
I don't think for one minute the RSPCA would get involved. TicToc was getting a few slaps, but far, far worse goes on every day (just go to any sale or fair) and they don't want to know. Its not like he looked starved or anything. It seems to be the buyers who are being treated badly!! I think all that can be done is to make sure everyone puts the word out about unscrupulousdealers.... losing customers means businesses close down.
I wonder why a good rider, knowledgeable about horses, has to resort to selling by trickery? Getting a good reputation would surely be a better way to run a business??
 
the thing is , she is not a good rider , schooling all the horses is down to whichever unfortunate person who works for her at the time. she is also not that knowledgable , although she must have learnt something over the years ! the reason for the trickery is simple. you see a very nice horse at a sale . why is it there , selling for meat money. its lame or dangerous etc. of course it is. so you can buy it for £200 . you have got a really nice horse for £200 now it needs to be sound/quiet, and you can stick on £2000 ! horse looks good in advert, write a lovely story about what its done and bingo along comes your customers . keep the horse sweet until its vetted or paid for and bingo !! worry about any fallout later . be comforted by the £2000 profit sitting in your bank account and accuse anyone who has a go of being jealous ! do this x 10 , 50, 300, and youre laughing . the idiots just keep on coming . file all ccs under "trash ".
 
Moomin1 said:
Cptrayes I think that would be a separate matter about the illegal copyright. I don't think it will make it in admissible so long as it is proven it is genuine footage and where it came from.
Click to expand...

She put it in the public domain herself, so I should imagine its perfectly admissable :)
 
cptrayes said:
I just wish she could be named on this forum. Are there other's where they aren't so strict? People need to be told who she is.

It puzzles me that we can rubbish the RSPCA, Robinsons tack shop or anything else anyone wants but not dealers who we know for a fact to be total criminals
Click to expand...


I suspect most know who "she" is and who tic toc is, even my mother who's stalks my Facebook asked who she was and mother hasn't been in horses for at least 20 yrs now.
 
stormox said:
I don't think for one minute the RSPCA would get involved. TicToc was getting a few slaps, but far, far worse goes on every day (just go to any sale or fair) and they don't want to know. Its not like he looked starved or anything. It seems to be the buyers who are being treated badly!! I think all that can be done is to make sure everyone puts the word out about unscrupulousdealers.... losing customers means businesses close down.
I wonder why a good rider, knowledgeable about horses, has to resort to selling by trickery? Getting a good reputation would surely be a better way to run a business??
Click to expand...

If you had read the thread then you would realise the RSPCA were involved from the start.

I am surprised you call it a 'few slaps', to me it was excessive and unnecessary.

I am not sure what comparing this footage to completely different scenarios will prove. Take each individual story and footage for what it is - individual, without making any comparisons.
 
if you google tic toc horse then the old thread comes up where the dealers are named.....just so people can be forewarned.

I must admit Im not sure why people can slate hotels etc online and rate them, but not a horse dealer.
 
it would be good to comment on this regularly to keep it near the front pages , the more people that see it , the more that hopefully will stay away from these " dealers ". ;)
 
I agree, Moomin1, that it was stupid and unneccessary use of the whip. But the rider did get his come-uppance when he hit the deck, and I don't think you can prosecute someone for laughing. All i am saying is that the RSPCA could better spend their time and money (what they have left after their anti-hunting campaigns!!) following REAL crueltry cases- starving animals, dogs thrown out on motorways,, cats used as targets for air-guns, etc than waste their money on this vieo.
I think there should be a site where people can give honest feedback on dealers- kinda like ebay have. There are plenty of good dealers who would benefit coz of their good feedback. Only the bad dishonest ones would suffer (rightfully) and lose business.
 
I agree with you Stormox.

It was unreasonable behaviour but it lasted a minute. It's not still going on as we write, and the RSPCA have better (or worse) cases to spend their time on, like starving animals who are still starving.
 
Surely you could have a rating website as long as no comments were posted?

In terms of the video. I recall no hat was being worn - karma.
 
stormox said:
I agree, Moomin1, that it was stupid and unneccessary use of the whip. But the rider did get his come-uppance when he hit the deck, and I don't think you can prosecute someone for laughing. All i am saying is that the RSPCA could better spend their time and money (what they have left after their anti-hunting campaigns!!) following REAL crueltry cases- starving animals, dogs thrown out on motorways,, cats used as targets for air-guns, etc than waste their money on this vieo.
I think there should be a site where people can give honest feedback on dealers- kinda like ebay have. There are plenty of good dealers who would benefit coz of their good feedback. Only the bad dishonest ones would suffer (rightfully) and lose business.
Click to expand...

But they are already pursuing the type of cases you talk about, daily.

So why not pursue this one aswell?

But alas, if they didn't do anything about it, they would get slated to. It's a no win for the RSPCA whatever they do.
 
Moomin1 said:
But they are already pursuing the type of cases you talk about, daily.

So why not pursue this one aswell?

But alas, if they didn't do anything about it, they would get slated to. It's a no win for the RSPCA whatever they do.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure you know I am not the RSPCA's biggest fan but I am a realist. And people like me don't think the RSPCA should or could do anything on that one instance. Same as not believing that the RSPCA could be available to check on slaughter houses. I am all for the RSPCA doing the job of promoting and supporting animal welfare but not to pick up the slack of a government body such as Defra (and of course, not the political campaigning either but thats another story).

This does come down rather to the public perception that our rescues as a whole can manage the entire debacle going on right now and the sad truth is they can't. They do not have the money, time or volunteers .
 
Luci07 said:
Pretty sure you know I am not the RSPCA's biggest fan but I am a realist. And people like me don't think the RSPCA should or could do anything on that one instance. Same as not believing that the RSPCA could be available to check on slaughter houses. I am all for the RSPCA doing the job of promoting and supporting animal welfare but not to pick up the slack of a government body such as Defra (and of course, not the political campaigning either but thats another story).

This does come down rather to the public perception that our rescues as a whole can manage the entire debacle going on right now and the sad truth is they can't. They do not have the money, time or volunteers .
Click to expand...

Very true Luci07, I think people expect the RSPCA and other charities to save the world, and I agree regarding slaughter houses. That is not the RSPCA's job, and it should be done by the governing bodies.

However, in this instance, I personally would like to see action taken, as this is most likely not the only instance in which this sort of thing has taken place.

I am quite sure if someone saw a dog being beaten in a similar fashion, the public would want something done, and I see no difference here.
 
Moomin1 said:
Very true Luci07, I think people expect the RSPCA and other charities to save the world, and I agree regarding slaughter houses. That is not the RSPCA's job, and it should be done by the governing bodies.

However, in this instance, I personally would like to see action taken, as this is most likely not the only instance in which this sort of thing has taken place.

I am quite sure if someone saw a dog being beaten in a similar fashion, the public would want something done, and I see no difference here.
Click to expand...

^^^^^^ this
If thats how they treat a horse in public and put it out for the world to see, what goes on behind closed doors for non compliance or problems understanding.
Throw the book at them, a bloody big book!
 
and here we have an example of how the RSPCA can never please everyone, if they did or do pursue this then they're accused of wasting more resources, if they don't pursue it they're accused of 'typical RSPCA' won't do anything!!!

I didn't see the video, but if admissable evidence is there then some action whether that's a warning or more should be done if it's as bad as what i've been told.

Regarding who it was that said you can't find her guilty of just laughing, if you look at the Animal welfare act, there is an offence of being responsible for an animal and allowing someone else to cause un-necessary suffering without taking reasonable action to stop that happening. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/45/section/4 see section 4.2
 
Moomin1 said:
I am quite sure if someone saw a dog being beaten in a similar fashion, the public would want something done, and I see no difference here.
Click to expand...

The problem is that it is clearly illegal to beat a dog with a whip. Unfortunately it is not illegal to beat a horse with a whip otherwise every member of every Olympic team would be in court at one time or another.

The defence would say that the horse was being beaten as a punishment for bucking in order to make it safe to sell. Now we all know that's junk, but the Magistrates (who won't be seeing the video, remember because it was obtained by copyright violation) have just seen numerous riders at the Olympics hit their horses, and have to bring in a verdict "beyond reasonable doubt". There's not much chance of that, which is why we'll never, in my opinion, see the Tic Toc case in a criminal court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top