RSPCA with out photos

[Alec Swan]

……..

Please get this out into the wider public, it might stop someone else less fortunate than yourself having to go through this.

Amongst other well authenticated reports, I'd suggest that those with an interest google 'The truth about Mr. Pig'. It's an article from The Telegraph. I particularly liked the story of the girl who kept a ferret and went rabbeting with it. She was prosecuted by the rspca and when the case was thrown out, the Magistrate concerned advised the girl that she was free to continue with her activities, as she'd broken no Laws. This is just one example of the shameful treatment meted out, by the rspca and to those who whilst often ill advised are not uncaring members of the public. The examples which are available by the simple expedient of Google, are staggering.

The problem with the charity concerned having the power of prosecution is that very few Courts will be in a position to contradict the often deceitful and certainly biased 'evidence' which is placed before them. Indeed, the Courts would reasonably expect that any prosecuting counsel to be factual and truthful, which is rarely the case.

The odd thing, or so it seems to me, is that through all the valid and accurate criticisms of the charity concerned, they continue with a display of supreme arrogance, on their own sweet way and never that I've read, offer any explanations, apologies or justifications.

We need an rspca, of that there's no question, just not the fraudulent and shameful organisation and one which is run by the current incumbents. It's time for a change of management and direction, but with board members voting themselves and their equally corrupt colleagues in to positions of power, then nothing will change. I'm really not sure how change can be affected, it certainly won't be by reason.

Alec.

 

[Alec Swan]

……..

I was found guilty of not seeking a vet

……...

…….. . I am absolutely delighted that the OP has got justice. …….. .

The OP's Vet gave a written statement to the effect that the treatment given by the OP was satisfactory and that no undue suffering had been caused.

The prosecuting (rspca) counsel agreed that there would be no need for the OP's Vet to attend the hearing as they would accept his written statement.

On the morning of the trial, the said prosecuting counsel changed their minds, and said that they would wish to cross-examine the Vet. When the Vet was frantically called by 'phone, he was in surgery with a waiting list and couldn't attend the hearing.

The Judge ruled that the written statement was then inadmissible, as the prosecuting counsel had the right to cross-examine the witness, and that friends, was how the only charge which stuck was achieved. It would only be the truly gullible who would consider that in their apparent search for justice, that the rspca have any possible concept of morality.

Justice? Had the Vet attended, then the whole case would have been dismissed. The cynics amongst us may wonder at the motives behind the prosecuting counsel's motives. Me? I see the case as being weak to the point where the only way of achieving any sort of result was by being dishonest and by bringing a Court of Law in to disrepute.

My advice to the OP would be that he appeals the decision. Should the case be overturned, then there will be no need to take a private prosecution against the rspca for the simple reason that with a Not Guilty verdict, over the whole case, they (even they) aren't that stupid.

Alec.

 

[dymented]

The OP's Vet gave a written statement to the effect that the treatment given by the OP was satisfactory and that no undue suffering had been caused.

The prosecuting (rspca) counsel agreed that there would be no need for the OP's Vet to attend the hearing as they would accept his written statement.

On the morning of the trial, the said prosecuting counsel changed their minds, and said that they would wish to cross-examine the Vet. When the Vet was frantically called by 'phone, he was in surgery with a waiting list and couldn't attend the hearing.

The Judge ruled that the written statement was then inadmissible, as the prosecuting counsel had the right to cross-examine the witness, and that friends, was how the only charge which stuck was achieved. It would only be the truly gullible who would consider that in their apparent search for justice, that the rspca have any possible concept of morality.

Justice? Had the Vet attended, then the whole case would have been dismissed. The cynics amongst us may wonder at the motives behind the prosecuting counsel's motives. Me? I see the case as being weak to the point where the only way of achieving any sort of result was by being dishonest and by bringing a Court of Law in to disrepute.

My advice to the OP would be that he appeals the decision. Should the case be overturned, then there will be no need to take a private prosecution against the rspca for the simple reason that with a Not Guilty verdict, over the whole case, they (even they) aren't that stupid.

Alec.

The private prosecution against the rspca is for the neglect and cruelty they have inflicted on the poor dogs whilst in there care IE one dog being killed torn to bits , one dog having his tail snapped in half , one dog being mauled , failing to treat a dog that had a chest infection. the emaciation of a dog ,as well as numerous other things relating to the dogs

 

[dymented]

All the dogs are now safely back at home away from the abuse and neglect that the rspca inflicted on them . They were returned in a very poor state
all the dogs had bites to there legs and side's as well as massive fur loss , and were under weight ,that's the caring charity workers for you
The ball is now firmly rolling and legal action against the rspca and police is well under way !! ,They kept the dogs for no other reason than the fact they do not agree with any form of hunting ,they broke numerous laws and regulations , they allowed one dog who was 8 weeks pregnant to be torn to pieces,(Then returned her skinned and beheaded ) they broke the tail of anther dog twice in a door , they refused to treat a dog with a chest infection as it was to costly (but said I could pay to have the treatment done ) anther dog got mauled , they forgot to feed one dog for a week so he lost 5 kg in body weight ,all the dogs have puncture wounds on there legs and massive fur loss. That is the rspcas care for you P.S it cost the charity over £160,000 to fabricate and lie to get me to court only for the district judge to say there was no evidence of any crimes had ever been committed The shocking thing is that its nothing new for the rspca as they will do and say anything to try to cover up there cock ups Its unreal i wonder how many innocent people have been stitched up by the despicable charty with there lies !!!

 

[dymented]

I am still awaiting reports and paper work They certainly are dragging there feet , so we can move forward with a case against the charity
[video=youtube_share;pPX54Kbo7Yw]http://youtu.be/pPX54Kbo7Yw[/video]

 

[MerrySherryRider]

A civil case against both the police and the RSPCA is out of the financial reach of most ordinary taxpayers. Who is funding your case ? The donations you received, though kindly intended, aren't more than a drop in a bucket.

 

[dymented]

A civil case against both the police and the RSPCA is out of the financial reach of most ordinary taxpayers. Who is funding your case ? The donations you received, though kindly intended, aren't more than a drop in a bucket.

They will be brought to justice for the cruelty and neglect the put the poor dogs through I have never asked for anything but did receive 110% in support from THL members ,I will carry on and not stop till I do , one dog killed , one dog lost 4kg in two weeks , anther dog got mauled , one dog had his tail broken twice in a door in there care , they wrote asking me to pay for treatment on one dog as it was proving to costly to carry on with , all dogs had massive fur loss and bite marks all over there bodys all from a charity that claims to no what is best for animals and is supposed to care for animals. But thank you for your concerns MerrySherry

 

[Alec Swan]

A civil case against both the police and the RSPCA is out of the financial reach of most ordinary taxpayers. Who is funding your case ? The donations you received, though kindly intended, aren't more than a drop in a bucket.

As we are regularly assured on here, that when the rspca take out a criminal prosecution, they are doing so under the facility afforded to any ordinary member of the public, then it would follow that dymented is entitled to follow the very same path, I'd have thought.

Alec.

 

[Alec Swan]

They will be brought to justice for the cruelty and neglect the put the poor dogs through I have never asked for anything but did receive 110% in support from THL members ,I will carry on and not stop till I do , one dog killed , one dog lost 4kg in two weeks , anther dog got mauled , one dog had his tail broken twice in a door in there care , they wrote asking me to pay for treatment on one dog as it was proving to costly to carry on with , all dogs had massive fur loss and bite marks all over there bodys all from a charity that claims to no what is best for animals and is supposed to care for animals. But thank you for your concerns MerrySherry

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and whilst in their charge and care, they permit a catalogues of abuse? Those who offer 'evidence' to the Court quite clearly offer perjured evidence, and there are STILL those who would defend the charity concerned and their conduct?

Well Done dymented, power to you arm!

Alec.

 

[Alec Swan]

I do wonder, dymented, if there are grounds for your Counsel to request a judicial revue of your case, and consider the reasons why the Judge on the day dismissed just about every aspect of the evidence offered, and rather than the dubious support claimed by a worthwhile charity, the simple facts of perjury aren't considered. It seems that it wasn't just the rspca staff who are at fault, but serving Police Officers too.

Were you or I to offer a Court perjured statements then we would have to face up to our dishonesty and the consequences. How come the established bodies are treated in a different fashion, and treated in a lenient fashion, I wonder.

Alec.

 

[EQUIDAE]

Dymented - I questioned why you had the dogs removed in the first place, but how the dogs were treated by the RSPCA was beyond disgraceful. Do you have legal counsel? If not I would like to donate my solicitor hubby for advice - he is appalled at the behaviour of the RSPCA recently.

 

[MerrySherryRider]

So you do have unlimited funds for taking out a private prosecution then ? I thought you were just an ordinary member of the public with a couple of past convictions. Or are you still seeking donations from the public ?

 

[Alec Swan]

Perhaps some of those who previously donated to the rspca would care to redirect their charitable efforts to a man who, as his accusers, hasn't always lived a pure or perfect life! It's a thought!

Alec.

 

[dymented]

Thank you EQUIDAE for your kind offer I have a great counsel on the go at the moment But thank you any way

 

[dymented]

So you do have unlimited funds for taking out a private prosecution then ? I thought you were just an ordinary member of the public with a couple of past convictions. Or are you still seeking donations from the public ?

Dear MerrySherryRider humble pie must taste great
I work long and hard to earn my money , I have never ever asked for any donations ! My counsel has been paid for in full, But thank you for your concerns , You would be amazed at the amount of people who come from all walks of life that have been persecuted by the charity workers .

 

[Dry Rot]

Dymented, I take my hat off to you, I really do!

I once took on The Kennel Club but found a lawyer who would do it pro bono (that's for free for those who don't speak latin!) and got them to change their competition rules. Can't say it did me or anyone else much good though because the KC are relentless in their pursuit of power and money and, like the RSPCA, care nothing for dogs. (I gather HM The Queen takes advantage of 'my' rule change, so perhaps someone has benefitted!). I know a similar case in the greyhound world where an ordinary dog owner took on the authorities but had to sell his house to pay the legal fees. Some care about justice enough to do that and it isn't only those who can spell and talk proper who think it is worthwhile.

Sir Arthur Conon Doyle is quoted as saying, "If you take on the authorities, the ranks of the establishment will be drawn against you". He made that quote when taking on the case of an obviously innocent man who was wrongfully imprisoned. It just wasn't convenient for the authorities to admit that they'd made a mistake. So nothing new then.

 

[Dobiegirl]

https://www.facebook.com/Helpsavebullseye/

This dog was seized after it attacked some Shetland ponies from what I can gather, this is the condition of the dog after it was returned to the owner.

 

[Alec Swan]

Assuming that I've seen the same pics as you Dg, they look to me rather like bed sores, gained by sleeping on bare wooden boards.

Alec.

 

[Dobiegirl]

Assuming that I've seen the same pics as you Dg, they look to me rather like bed sores, gained by sleeping on bare wooden boards.

Alec.

That doesnt explain the dogs ear or its tail, I think there is a degree of self mutilation going on as well.

 

[EQUIDAE]

That doesnt explain the dogs ear or its tail, I think there is a degree of self mutilation going on as well.

Tail looks like the poor thing has been stood wagging it's tail against the wall

 

[Alec Swan]

That doesnt explain the dogs ear or its tail, I think there is a degree of self mutilation going on as well.

Dogs, as humans who are deeply disturbed by their immediate environment will often self harm. I didn't see the pic of the tail, so I'll go and have another look. The ear? Could it be a form of skin complaint? I'm unsure. Certainly the (bed?) sores looked to be chronic and well established.

I also couldn't see any reference to the story. Was the dog in question taken by the rspca from his owner?

Alec.

 

[Alec Swan]

Having now looked at all the other pics on offer, and obviously I'm not a vet, but I would strongly suspect that the injuries are indeed bedsores which have been worsened by an infection which hasn't been treated, AT ALL. Looking at his belly skin and that around his scrotum, it does appear to be inflamed, doesn't it?

The poor chap can't have been too comfortable.

Alec.

 

[Dobiegirl]

If you go to the fb page and scroll down you will see the story, this dog escaped with a recently acquired bitch and got into a field with some Shetlands which were savaged. The dogs were seized by the police and the owner has set up a fb page to get this dog released, whether the dog was passed on to the RSPCA or went into kennels I dont know but I do know of other cases where dogs have been returned in less than mint condition.

The thing is if anyone of us allowed our dogs to get into this state we would be liable to prosecution but the authorities seem to be exempt from this.

 

[Dobiegirl]

https://www.facebook.com/notes/emma-semple/teddys-tale-the-truth/10153242528093990


Another case of a dog in police care who again got less then adequate care, this particular case is almost laughable except for the fact this little dog was so close to losing his life and shows how careful we all have to be with our dogs.

 

[Alec Swan]

Dg, I'll admit that I wandered through the blog with my opinions swinging backwards and forwards, but then came to the conclusion that the whole argument was around humans arguing with each other, rather than considering what was right for the dog, and that wouldn't be a 'first', would it?!

I tend to take the view that there is always an answer to every dog's behaviour problems, and though it's dependent upon the abilities of those who have the care and control of the animal, should there be a shortage of those who can listen to the dog, read it's body language and who can actually 'Speak Dog', then the answer is all so often to send the poor little sod off to heaven. The woman who put her face down to the dog and got her nose nipped may be better off with a dog which comes from the same arcade as the one where we can buy the kiss-me-quick hats. It would be unusual for anyone to be able to step in to a relationship with any dog and assume any immediate intimacy, certainly not an idiot.

Considering the 'authorities', and sadly, their level of self importance often seems to take precedence over the principles of their remit in that few are truly fit for purpose. I remain of the opinion that there are many dogs which rather than have fools inflicted on them would be better off PTS.

Teddy looks to be a bonny little man, and from the fulsome description, one who I could probably get along with quite well.

Alec.

 

[dymented]

Advance warning, next Thursday's Panorama is on the RSPCA... a little bird tells me (or would that be if it was about the RSPB?) that this programme has attracted a record number of legal letters - this is a programme that they definitely don't want aired !

We're disappointed to learn that BBC Panorama will broadcast a programme about the RSPCA on Thursday 3 August 2017.
We understand that the programme will seek to portray an RSPCA that would not be recognised by its staff, volunteers, supporters or the many thousands of animals and people helped each year
https://www.rspca.org.uk/whatwedo/latest/details/-/articleName/2017_08_02_Panorma

 

[RunToEarth]

It's tonight not next Thursday? Really hope that it prompts the public to raise questions on the RSPCA's practices and indeed it's motivation.

 

[Alec Swan]

Thanks dymented. I shall watch with interest. It's on at 20:00 tonight. The resume has the rspca less than pleased. We'll see.

Did you ever get any sort of final resolve to your case?

Alec.

 

[tim_]

Thanks for the heads up. I've mixed feelings about the RSPCA, they certainly do some good work but there are a number of bad reports about things as well.

 

[dymented]

Still in the process Alec the charity wont give the solicitor any info he asks for hes having to fight for everything they are trying to drag it out as long as they can the solicitor i am using is in the episode tonight as well