RSPCA: End this cruelty to animal owners

[Fenris]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/.../RSPCA-End-this-cruelty-to-animal-owners.html

RSPCA: End this cruelty to animal owners

The animal charity is spending too much time prosecuting innocent animal owners, believes Christopher Booker

By Christopher Booker
Published: 6:10PM BST 07 Aug 2010

2 Comments

Last week I reported on the tragic story of Alan Brough, the retired builder who became so depressed, after the RSPCA had – for no good reason – taken the herd of 90 semi-wild ponies he had looked after for 30 years on the Cumbrian moors, that he hanged himself.

This week’s story, again passed on to me by SHG (the Self-Help Group set up to advise victims of RSPCA persecution), concerns Michael O’Neill, an Anglesey horse breeder. For three years he was dragged through the courts by the RSPCA, after one of its officials had in 2007 seen sores on two horses he had bought from Ireland for £10,000.

The RSPCA instigated criminal charges against Mr O’Neill, claiming that the sores must have been caused by collars round his horses’ necks. Mr O’ Neill’s vet had already diagnosed their cause as a rare bacterial infection called strangles, for which he had been treating the animals. As the case dragged on, threatening the closure of his business, Mr O’Neill became so stressed that his health deteriorated. At one hearing last year, he had a stroke in the courtroom.

Last week, 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.

 

[Holly Hocks]

Whilst I do not support the RSPCA in many of it's actions - particularly when they have persecuted members on this forum who clearly love their animals, the case of Brough who hanged himself recently is a case which unfortunately was dealt with too late by the RSPCA and in no way should they be to blame for this man hanging himself.

For those who don't know, Brough was the owner of a herd of wild ponies on Caldbeck Common and Uldale Common in Cumbria. For those who have never visited, let me explain the scene. A beautiful landscape, one of the most beautiful in England and on first looking what appear to be a herd of small, black wild ponies. However on closer inspection these ponies were clearly neglect cases. They had severely overgrown hooves, were underweight and due to lack of control, severely deformed limbs meaning the ponies were in severe pain.

When eventually the RSPCA and the Police raided Brough's premises they found several other ponies on his premises - severely underweight (see today's daily newspapers for pictures) and in disgusting conditions. Some of them had to be destroyed.

So please tell me why the RSPCA are to blame for Mr Brough taking his own life. I would be interested to hear your comments as I don't think anyone in their right mind can defend the neglect and cruelty he inflicted on these ponies.

 

[competitiondiva]

I have not followed this case but have seen some of the pictures of the horses/ponies seized, that evidence alone to me shouts that neglect was a serious issue!!! Please anyone reading take a look at the pictures available either on the rspca website or the press websites.....

What I hear alot is that people claim to clearly love their animals but because either they cannot cope through lack of time/money/expertise/help etc... they end up with-holding care... possibly not on purpose. But if they refuse to accept help or sign over the animals, what choice is there for an organisation such as the rspca who cannot possibly consider leaving the animals as they are to continue suffering???????

 

[Meandtheboys]

Well after my experience last week with the RSPCA all I can say is that they had NO IDEA what they are talking about.........and if I could be bothered to waste more time I would be logging an official complaint!!

 

[competitiondiva]

So you are highlighting the very few cases brought by the rspca that did not get a guilty verdict. Just to point out though for reference that cases are lost on a lot more things than the defendant being innocent! Also for reference the rspca are I believe the figure to be around about 95-97% successful in the cases they bring, as opposed to the cps whose figure is a lot lower.

Of course I am not saying the charity is perfect, on the contrary I think it fails in so many ways, but not for the reasons that you highlight Fenris.

You believe that by shouting your mouth off about how bad they are that things will improve??? What the charity fails on is brought about by how big they have grown as opposed to how big a set up they really are!! I could also argue about how they spend their money, but I don't doubt that the intentions are good. People seem to be criticising them for only going after 'innocent' animal owners, well if they are innocent how come the conviction rate is so high?????? Add to that people seem to think the officers only go after easy people?? Violence is actually a common occurence unfortunately to any investigating body. You think dog fighting etc is full of easy people???!!

By spreading your 'anti' propaganda, all you are achieving is to bring down a charity already struggling financially (please note that savings of 57 million pounds had to be made over 3 years just to keep it running at the level it is now) this in turn will decrease funds, decrease ability to help animal welfare, and increase the amount of GUILTY people who walk! and will mean alot of injured animals don't get the care they need! I do realise most people will quote some animal that the rspca hasn't helped, probably because they didn't have the resources TO help them!! So instead of thinking about that one animal that didn't get the aid it needed, think about the thousands that do, also think about all the animals the charity would be able to help if their resources increased!!!!!

You quite conveniently mentioned here or on another post about the income of the rspca, but did not mention the expenditure!!! If you look on the charity commision pages I think you'll find that their income roughly matches their expenditure and they only have I think 1 months running costs sitting in a bank!!!!

 

[pastie2]

Whilst I do not support the RSPCA in many of it's actions - particularly when they have persecuted members on this forum who clearly love their animals, the case of Brough who hanged himself recently is a case which unfortunately was dealt with too late by the RSPCA and in no way should they be to blame for this man hanging himself.

For those who don't know, Brough was the owner of a herd of wild ponies on Caldbeck Common and Uldale Common in Cumbria. For those who have never visited, let me explain the scene. A beautiful landscape, one of the most beautiful in England and on first looking what appear to be a herd of small, black wild ponies. However on closer inspection these ponies were clearly neglect cases. They had severely overgrown hooves, were underweight and due to lack of control, severely deformed limbs meaning the ponies were in severe pain.

When eventually the RSPCA and the Police raided Brough's premises they found several other ponies on his premises - severely underweight (see today's daily newspapers for pictures) and in disgusting conditions. Some of them had to be destroyed.

So please tell me why the RSPCA are to blame for Mr Brough taking his own life. I would be interested to hear your comments as I don't think anyone in their right mind can defend the neglect and cruelty he inflicted on these ponies.

I have avoided posting on this contentious subject, but I was shown around this property 5 years ago, not on the fell but near his home. Ponies were living in what I can only describe as a tunnel under the road, they had hay but were up to their hocks in ****. No air and no light. Certainly no quality of life. He was a hoarder and as good as his intentions were, it was not for the quality of life for his horses. I am sorry that he took his own life and I dont blame any charities. It just shows that he was a very unstable person.

 

[Kittykins]

What I hear alot is that people claim to clearly love their animals but because either they cannot cope through lack of time/money/expertise/help etc... they end up with-holding care... possibly not on purpose. But if they refuse to accept help or sign over the animals, what choice is there for an organisation such as the rspca who cannot possibly consider leaving the animals as they are to continue suffering???????

I've not yet seen any evidence that help was offered to the owner, it appears to have been simply a case of getting him out the way by arresting him, then removing the ponies. I'm not saying that the RSPCA were wrong to take them in this case - on the contrary the condition of many of them does seem woeful to say the least - but perhaps if they were less heavy handed, maybe worked with the owner before things ever got to this state, their PR wouldn't be quite so bad?

 

[Kallibear]

This shows the conditions of some of the ponies removed:


I reserved judgement until more info had come to light. The RSPCA can be a waste of space at times but in this case they seemed to be in the right. It's very sad the man killed himself, but from the pictures shown, he WAS neglacting those ponies (be it unintentially)

 

[Holly Hocks]

I've not yet seen any evidence that help was offered to the owner, it appears to have been simply a case of getting him out the way by arresting him, then removing the ponies. I'm not saying that the RSPCA were wrong to take them in this case - on the contrary the condition of many of them does seem woeful to say the least - but perhaps if they were less heavy handed, maybe worked with the owner before things ever got to this state, their PR wouldn't be quite so bad?

Or maybe he was offered help previously but wouldn't let anyone onto his land and perhaps had a gun licence?? Many people who have land and are farmers in rural areas have firearms which means that the police and the RSPCA only have one way of going in - with force.

 

[pastie2]

This shows the conditions of some of the ponies removed:


I reserved judgement until more info had come to light. The RSPCA can be a waste of space at times but in this case they seemed to be in the right. It's very sad the man killed himself, but from the pictures shown, he WAS neglacting those ponies (be it unintentially)

Well I think these photos have put to bed any speculation of why his ponies were siezed.

 

[Megan_T]

Well I think these photos have put to bed any speculation of why his ponies were siezed.

Agreed.

Those poor ponies. Those are very neglected animals. I don't think any of us would disagree there.

 

[rosie fronfelen]

Or maybe he was offered help previously but wouldn't let anyone onto his land and perhaps had a gun licence?? Many people who have land and are farmers in rural areas have firearms which means that the police and the RSPCA only have one way of going in - with force.

it is wrong to assume this, the facts are not fully known.

 

[Kallibear]

it is wrong to assume this, the facts are not fully known.

She wasn't saying he defintely does or not: I think the point is it's equally wrong to assume the opposite and that the RSPCA were just throwing their weight around for no reason.

It's true, the facts are unknown, but the pictures I posted earlier don't show well loved and cared for ponies.

 

[rosie fronfelen]

i know that and have seen pics. in the paper.

 

[irishdraught]

I've not yet seen any evidence that help was offered to the owner, it appears to have been simply a case of getting him out the way by arresting him, then removing the ponies. I'm not saying that the RSPCA were wrong to take them in this case - on the contrary the condition of many of them does seem woeful to say the least - but perhaps if they were less heavy handed, maybe worked with the owner before things ever got to this state, their PR wouldn't be quite so bad?

With all due respect, unless you are directly involved, why would you see any evidence? This is, presumably still an ongoing investigation and therefore all real evidence will not be for public viewing.

 

[bexwarren24]

I think there are two sides to this story and ppl are only seeing the side they want to. The photos are bad yes. No-one can arguee that but can you seriously say with 100% certainty that they were neglected? Is it not possible that the horses in the photos had some under-lying problem? Maybe they shouldnt have let them get that bad but the family are arguing that these ponies were recieving medical attention (and have medication,receipts to prove it). Whether this is true or not will come out in court. What you can see is that he had at least made an effort to stable 3 of the 4 horses in the pics. I also gather from what I read the first horse in the pics wasnt even his but his grand-daughter. He is (or was) a very elderly horse.

It never says anywhere why he was arrested, who knows, maybe he did have a gun but I think there is far more to this story. It seems as though he had been fighting with the council for a long time over these ponies and when other options failed by them they turned to the RSPCA. There was a post on here just yesterday of some poor neglected ponies, I and others were outraged until we learnt that there was another side to this story. I dont think until ALL the evidence comes out anyone can comment with certainty.

 

[Megan_T]

I think there are two sides to this story and ppl are only seeing the side they want to. The photos are bad yes. No-one can arguee that but can you seriously say with 100% certainty that they were neglected? Is it not possible that the horses in the photos had some under-lying problem?

Bit of a coincidence wouldn't you say?

How unlikely is it that all of the horses had the same underlying problem?

I'm not suggesting the chap did it intentionally at all and it's incredibly sad that he took his own life, but honestly, those photo's show the horses were neglected.. I can't think of any other beliveable reason why they would all look so dreadfully emaciated.

 

[bexwarren24]

Bit of a coincidence wouldn't you say?

How unlikely is it that all of the horses had the same underlying problem?

I'm not suggesting the chap did it intentionally at all and it's incredibly sad that he took his own life, but honestly, those photo's show the horses were neglected.. I can't think of any other beliveable reason why they would all look so dreadfully emaciated.

I dont know the ppl involved only what I have read so cannot comment on what was wrong with these horses. The one at grass obviously have something wrong with his feet. The first one in the pics was elderly. Another one of them was on medication (couldnt tell you which one). They havent provided any pics of the other 100 which were supposed to have over-grown hooves, etc. I know there are some pics on facebook of some of the other horses and it paints a completly different story.

 

[Megan_T]

They havent provided any pics of the other 100 which were supposed to have over-grown hooves, etc. I know there are some pics on facebook of some of the other horses and it paints a completly different story.

Fair point.

You say the first one in the pictures was elderly... how do you know that? This is not a dig by the way, I'm genuinely asking the question.....

I just think, if I showed you this picture without you knowing anymore about it, you'd say the horse was emaciated and neglected... but for some reason (maybe it's just because the man took his own life?) all of a sudden he might have had an excuse to let them get into this state.

If he was physically/mentally ill, had mobility problems, I don't know, any of those things - then of course he was going to struggle to take care of them. The point is that (allegedlly) he let these poor animals get into that state without doing anything about it. It's no wonder the RSPCA seized the animals. If they hadn't, you'd all be up in arms as to why they were leaving them there when they're all so emaciated and poorly and clearly not being properly cared for.

 

[pastie2]

He was a highly volitile man, unstable and possibly a danger to the charity that removed the horses. His horses were in a dreadful state and IF they were on medication I would be very supprised. The vets in this area are second to none there is no way that a vet would have been allowed into his property, nobody was. He would have been removed from the scene for a very good reason. The extent of his unstability was shown by his action of hanging himself.

 

[bexwarren24]

Fair point.

You say the first one in the pictures was elderly... how do you know that? This is not a dig by the way, I'm genuinely asking the question.....

I just think, if I showed you this picture without you knowing anymore about it, you'd say the horse was emaciated and neglected... but for some reason (maybe it's just because the man took his own life?) all of a sudden he might have had an excuse to let them get into this state.

If he was physically/mentally ill, had mobility problems, I don't know, any of those things - then of course he was going to struggle to take care of them. The point is that (allegedlly) he let these poor animals get into that state without doing anything about it. It's no wonder the RSPCA seized the animals. If they hadn't, you'd all be up in arms as to why they were leaving them there when they're all so emaciated and poorly and clearly not being properly cared for.

Well, I dont know for a fact (100%) that he was elderly but I have seen pictures (on the child/grandaughters facebook page, created as a result of this) showing said horse through the years. With the grandchild when she was a little child, etc.

If you showed me that picture yes I would say he was emaciated and quite possibly neglected but as someone who likes facts I would want to see the whole of the stable he was in for example, to see if he had hay and water. Would also like to see proof of vets reports before I drew a conclusion that he was neglected. Maybe he did let them get into this state because he couldnt cope but maybe the RSPCA didnt check the facts.

I dont pretend to be an rspca fan, i'm defanetly not. I'm also outraged that they dragged a man through court, accusing him of causing sores on 2 of his horses through having their head collars too tight when it was infact strangles, which they were being treated for. Said man was later proved innocent in court. After the rspca seized these animals they should have held up their hands and said sorry, our mistake it was strangels but instead they drag him through a 3yr court ordeal trying to argue against the facts. Thats what i disagre with.

 

[bexwarren24]

He was a highly volitile man, unstable and possibly a danger to the charity that removed the horses. His horses were in a dreadful state and IF they were on medication I would be very supprised. The vets in this area are second to none there is no way that a vet would have been allowed into his property, nobody was. He would have been removed from the scene for a very good reason. The extent of his unstability was shown by his action of hanging himself.

Did you know the man pastie? I'm not saying you are wrong, i know nothing of him. I agree that he must have been of somewhat ill health to take his own life. It does seems his family are argueing that they were under vets care, again it will come out in time i guess.

 

[Sussexbythesea]

Bexwarren - For one who apparently has no actual knowledge of this case except through third parties you are exceptionally vociferous on defending this man. I find that bizarre given the actual pictures posted on the forum of which none could have occurred without long term neglect. What sort of evidence would you be happy with?

I think you will find that many people who neglect or abuse their animals are elderly, mentally ill or socially deprived - this should not stop action to prevent further suffering to the animals which should be as swift as possible. Peoples circumstances would be taken into account when deciding what if any enforcement action is later taken - usually there is a published Policy with actions ranging from education, verbal or written warnings right through to prosecution. These decisions will be based on the severity of the offence, the mitigating factors such as mental health (which they (the RSPCA) would most likely get advice on from an expert) and whether it is in the public interest to pursue a case. If ultimately it is taken to prosecution the Court will also take into account such facts when sentencing.

Enough of you kicked up a stink when it took too long for Spud and Carrot to be dealt with.

Having carried out enforcement in an environmental context I can tell you that many people who commit what are apparently minor offences in many peoples eyes have actually many convictions for other things such as GBH, theft, firearms and many other violent offences.

 

[niagaraduval]

Those ponies looked in a horrible state, if he really did love them that much he would have atleast fed them. Also looks athough one has a massive lump on its leg.
No point slating the RSPCA they were doing their job - Sad about him killing himself though.

 

[Megan_T]

I dont pretend to be an rspca fan, i'm defanetly not. I'm also outraged that they dragged a man through court, accusing him of causing sores on 2 of his horses through having their head collars too tight when it was infact strangles, which they were being treated for. Said man was later proved innocent in court. After the rspca seized these animals they should have held up their hands and said sorry, our mistake it was strangels but instead they drag him through a 3yr court ordeal trying to argue against the facts. Thats what i disagre with.

Lol - that has NOTHING to do with this case though does it?

I'm a little confused here.... I can see why that case would annoy people. But the debate here seems to be that some people think these ponies weren't being neglected.. intentionally or otherwise. That's what we're discussing.

 

[Fenris]

He was a highly volitile man, unstable and possibly a danger to the charity that removed the horses. His horses were in a dreadful state and IF they were on medication I would be very supprised. The vets in this area are second to none there is no way that a vet would have been allowed into his property, nobody was. He would have been removed from the scene for a very good reason. The extent of his unstability was shown by his action of hanging himself.

How many horses are worth a mans life?

Any organisation that claims to be a law enforcement agency must take responsibility for the result of its interactions with vulnerable people. The extent of what happened will no doubt be fully investigated by the IPCC and various civil claims.

Nevertheless, if, as you say, he was known to be volatile and unstable then the local police and RSPCA would have known that background, which makes their failure to provide for the all too predictable actions of someone in that frame of mind even more unforgivable.

There is a quote from a vet that I have posted in the other thread. Here it is again:

"Paragon Veterinary Group has castrated many of the ponies over the last two years.

David Black from the group said this week: “Of the ponies we saw, considering their management as wild ponies, the vets involved did not have concerns about their body condition.”"

From http://www.cumberlandnews.co.uk/new...ound-hanged-1.737226?referrerPath=2.1825/home

To address your claim that he posed a danger to the RSPCA, note that he was released without charge which indicates that no violence or threat of violence took place. The police are usually pretty unforgiving about such incidents.

 

[cptrayes]

How many horses are worth a mans life?

This man took his own life. It was his own choice.

As a person who sits in court hearing these cases I can tell you that the RSPCA bend over backwards to get people to accept their help in caring for their animals and make multiple offers to rehome them if they think that the owner simply can't cope.

Having said that, I think that there is no place for an animal charity to have become the de facto animal crime police in this country. It does not sit well with me that we use public charitable donations to pursue animal crime. My personal opinion is that animal crime should be prosecuted by the Crown Prosecution Service, not a charity.

 

[pastie2]

How many horses are worth a mans life?

Any organisation that claims to be a law enforcement agency must take responsibility for the result of its interactions with vulnerable people. The extent of what happened will no doubt be fully investigated by the IPCC and various civil claims.

Nevertheless, if, as you say, he was known to be volatile and unstable then the local police and RSPCA would have known that background, which makes their failure to provide for the all too predictable actions of someone in that frame of mind even more unforgivable.

There is a quote from a vet that I have posted in the other thread. Here it is again:

"Paragon Veterinary Group has castrated many of the ponies over the last two years.

David Black from the group said this week: “Of the ponies we saw, considering their management as wild ponies, the vets involved did not have concerns about their body condition.”"

From http://www.cumberlandnews.co.uk/new...ound-hanged-1.737226?referrerPath=2.1825/home

To address your claim that he posed a danger to the RSPCA, note that he was released without charge which indicates that no violence or threat of violence took place. The police are usually pretty unforgiving about such incidents.

The ponies on the fell had a chance of foraging, the photographs of the other ponies at the start of this post, in my opinion speak for themselves.

 

[Luci07]

This man took his own life. It was his own choice.

Having said that, I think that there is no place for an animal charity to have become the de facto animal crime police in this country. It does not sit well with me that we use public charitable donations to pursue animal crime. My personal opinion is that animal crime should be prosecuted by the Crown Prosecution Service, not a charity.

While I agree with this concept in principle - how would you suggest managing this via the CPS? - and I will explain my question because I can't seem to write this without sounding a tad snotty - this is not a pop or contentious - I am asking because you are in a position to comment and I would be interested!

 

[cptrayes]

The CPS prosecute paedophilia, murder, drug misuse, burglary, incest, rape, fraud ......... the list is endless. Why is animal cruelty any different? The CPS prosecutes and they call expert witnesses. The difference with the RSPCA is only in one fundamental respect - they pay the prosecuting lawyer and case preparation (from charitable donations) as well as supplying expert witness testimony. The two roles are different, they have to be in the interests of justice, so it is only a question of who is paying the piper to play the tune, and I am uncomfortable about it being financed by charitable donation, as I think many people would be if they knew how their money was being used.