Crazy!

If you read the whole article it says: Mrs Higgins and her son were charged with selling the fish to a person aged under 16 and with causing unnecessary suffering to a cockatiel by failing to provide appropriate care and treatment.

Typical DM though just picking up on the petty area of the offence. There wouldn't have been many people view it if it said "woman fined for cruelty to bird". The headline they have chosen is more eye-catching.
 
The article also pointed out she had a history of selling pets to children, has obviously done often enough to cause concern and therefore the investigation was warranted. i don't think much of a pet shop owner who reguarly breaks laws concerning animal welfare.
 
I get your point about the bird, and accusation of selling a gerbil to another under 16. But surely it would have been better to stop her trading if her record was bad, tagging just doesn't seem relevant. Not a fan of the DM as agree they do sensationalise things but as an eg. there has recently been a case locally of a scout leader who was found to have a lot of child porn on his computer, he was put on probation, caused a bit of an uproar as you can imagine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top