webble
Well-Known Member
The OP has said that the pics were taken by the RSPCA but that cant be the case with a few of those pics and if thats not fact I would question what else isn't
RSPCA with out photos
- Thread starter dymented
- Start date
dymented
Well-Known Member
Have you been to speck savers
photos taken by a vet at the rspca center where the dog was killed 
Im sure if you scroll back you can see what i posted just in case you cant i coped and pasted it above you can clearly see it says taken by a vet at the rspca center in fact it was my vet that took the photos his own words were i can not for the life off me understand why they have done this . The photo off the dogs chilling out on the sofa was to show ignorant people what they were like at home The one of the plummer terrier was take be for the seized her the only other photo i have of her in the rscpas care was in a plastic bag skinned and beheaded Do not be fooled by the rspca it could happen to any one
Last edited:
Tiddlypom
Carries on creakily
Might you have been grassed up by someone with a grudge against you or your family?
dymented
Well-Known Member
Quite possible i live in an area thats full off bunny huggers but as i have stated every thing was legal and above bored But what excuse to the rspca need they do what they want when they want they have no governing body to investigate there wrong doing at all as i was told when i made formal complaints i believe the reply from inspector j g was ( going to be interesting me investigating myself )
FionaM12
Well-Known Member
Some things about this seem very odd. The photo of the terrier on the Facebook page, next to the photo of its remains, bears the caption "From this to this in two days" implying the photo was taken two days before its death (end of April).
https://www.facebook.com/rspcakilldog
On this thread, the OP says the photo was taken "four weeks before it was seized" yet here's the very same photo on a for sale site from three months ago.
http://www.pets4homes.co.uk/classifieds/544650-plummer-terrier-bitch-mablethorpe.html
It's all a bit hard to follow.
https://www.facebook.com/rspcakilldog
On this thread, the OP says the photo was taken "four weeks before it was seized" yet here's the very same photo on a for sale site from three months ago.
http://www.pets4homes.co.uk/classifieds/544650-plummer-terrier-bitch-mablethorpe.html
It's all a bit hard to follow.
FionaM12
Well-Known Member
Also... on the facebook page it says "Was told officially on Tuesday 13th (May) 8 weeks after they took her that she died in a fight".
EIGHT weeks after they took her? :confused3: Then how could the photo have been taken four weeks before she was seized?
And in the first post here, the Op says
So, she'd only been in their care two days, but she died 8 weeks after they took her?
EIGHT weeks after they took her? :confused3: Then how could the photo have been taken four weeks before she was seized?
And in the first post here, the Op says
So, she'd only been in their care two days, but she died 8 weeks after they took her?
FionaM12
Well-Known Member
Also... on the facebook page it says "Was told officially on Tuesday 13th (May) 8 weeks after they took her that she died in a fight".
EIGHT weeks after they took her? :confused3: Then how could the photo have been taken four weeks before she was seized?
And in the first post here, the Op says
So, she'd only been in their care two days, but she died 8 weeks after they took her?
EIGHT weeks after they took her? :confused3: Then how could the photo have been taken four weeks before she was seized?
And in the first post here, the Op says
So, she'd only been in their care two days, but she died 8 weeks after they took her?
FionaM12
Well-Known Member
Sorry for the double posting. I don't know how that happened! 
Copied and pasted from Facebook:
Copied and pasted from Facebook:
Last edited:
dymented
Well-Known Member
FionaM12
Some things about this seem very odd. The photo of the terrier on the Facebook page, next to the photo of its remains, bears the caption "From this to this in two days" implying the photo was taken two days before its death (end of April).
implying she was alive well and healthy !
FionaM12
On this thread, the OP says the photo was taken "four weeks before it was seized" yet here's the very same photo on a for sale site from three months ago.
i do appolagise when i asked my son for a photo off his dog he gave me a few and i chose that one. She was in the same condition as they took her. He could not take his dogs with him to his new place and we offerd to keep his dogs so they would be safe
FionaM12
Also... on the facebook page it says "Was told officially on Tuesday 13th (May) 8 weeks after they took her that she died in a fight". the rpsca called my solicitor i used when they siezed the dogs and told him Monday 17th she had been killed on the Sunday in a fight. They never contacted me at all till 8 weeks after she was killed
FionaM12
So, she'd only been in their care two days, but she died 8 weeks after they took her?
they took her on the friday and so they say she died on the sunday 2days later
FionaM12
Rspca did this: Was told officially on Tuesday13th 8 weeks after they took her that she died in a fight and when i asked over the other dog being emaciated with bites marks on his legs inspector J G reply was hes only lost a tad over 2.5 kg and it was his bedding that caused the marks on him and that they had addressed the matter wtf do they think they can get away with neglecting animal in there care. I have had animals over 40 years and nothing has ever happened to any animal i have owned and looked afte
yes thats correct 8 week later they told me officially she was killed in a fight as stated on FB i had viseted 4 dogs one which looked emaciated to me the repli i got was hes only lost a tad over 2.5kg since making complaints they have refused me access to the remaining dogs what are they hiding ????
I would gladly post the detailed reports by the rspcas own vet showing her gruesome death in there hands but i am pretty sure some one from or who has dealing with the rspca would report the thread again .Question is did she deserve to die FionaM12 by being torn to bits in the care of the rspca thank you for your questions hope this helps a bit FionaM12 but if your that bored try having a read on here http://www.grumpyoldsod.com/rspca6.asp many more story's about how and what the rspca do and treat people and animals in there care !
Some things about this seem very odd. The photo of the terrier on the Facebook page, next to the photo of its remains, bears the caption "From this to this in two days" implying the photo was taken two days before its death (end of April).
implying she was alive well and healthy !
FionaM12
On this thread, the OP says the photo was taken "four weeks before it was seized" yet here's the very same photo on a for sale site from three months ago.
i do appolagise when i asked my son for a photo off his dog he gave me a few and i chose that one. She was in the same condition as they took her. He could not take his dogs with him to his new place and we offerd to keep his dogs so they would be safe
FionaM12
Also... on the facebook page it says "Was told officially on Tuesday 13th (May) 8 weeks after they took her that she died in a fight". the rpsca called my solicitor i used when they siezed the dogs and told him Monday 17th she had been killed on the Sunday in a fight. They never contacted me at all till 8 weeks after she was killed
FionaM12
So, she'd only been in their care two days, but she died 8 weeks after they took her?
they took her on the friday and so they say she died on the sunday 2days later
FionaM12
Rspca did this: Was told officially on Tuesday13th 8 weeks after they took her that she died in a fight and when i asked over the other dog being emaciated with bites marks on his legs inspector J G reply was hes only lost a tad over 2.5 kg and it was his bedding that caused the marks on him and that they had addressed the matter wtf do they think they can get away with neglecting animal in there care. I have had animals over 40 years and nothing has ever happened to any animal i have owned and looked afte
yes thats correct 8 week later they told me officially she was killed in a fight as stated on FB i had viseted 4 dogs one which looked emaciated to me the repli i got was hes only lost a tad over 2.5kg since making complaints they have refused me access to the remaining dogs what are they hiding ????
I would gladly post the detailed reports by the rspcas own vet showing her gruesome death in there hands but i am pretty sure some one from or who has dealing with the rspca would report the thread again .Question is did she deserve to die FionaM12 by being torn to bits in the care of the rspca thank you for your questions hope this helps a bit FionaM12 but if your that bored try having a read on here http://www.grumpyoldsod.com/rspca6.asp many more story's about how and what the rspca do and treat people and animals in there care !
dymented
Well-Known Member
We have now issued legal proceedings against the rspca for neglect and cruelty inflicted on the poor dog that was torn to bits in there care will keep you all updated as and when there is any news
Lynsey&Smartie
Well-Known Member
Good for you. Whether you have been hunting legally as you claim or illegally as the RSPCA appear to claim it is totally unacceptable for the RSPCA to seize an animal 'for it's own protection(?!)' if they do not have the facilities, resources and staff to ensure that it is protected and cared for i.e. in this case kept away from a pack of larger dogs which could attack and kill it. If they cannot do this they should not and should not be able to forcibly remove peoples animals.
Goldenstar
Well-Known Member
Good for you .
MerrySherryRider
Well-Known Member
Hope you have deep pockets.
You've still omitted to say what the circumstances where prior to the dogs removal in the presence of the police, except to vaguely say it 'all legal and above board'. The whole story sounds very dodgy.
You've still omitted to say what the circumstances where prior to the dogs removal in the presence of the police, except to vaguely say it 'all legal and above board'. The whole story sounds very dodgy.
Fides
Well-Known Member
Agreed - the last publicised case like this cost the losing side £26K in RSPCA legal fees.
abracadabra
Well-Known Member
good luck, though doubt you'll get anywhere whether you're in the right or wrong, they're a law unto themselves,
Alec Swan
Well-Known Member
Agreed, but my bet is that the charity wont be that stupid, and will settle out of Court. Let's face it, they can afford such triflings.
Alec.
Goldenstar
Well-Known Member
Of someone taking a private proceeding against the RSPCA for neglect for allowing a dog to be killed by other dogs in RSPCA care ?
What where the names in the case and I'll look it up I would like to see the details of that one.
Fides
Well-Known Member
No just as an example of how much RSPCA legal fees can run up to
OP - because of the amendments to the DDA you could, in theory, now insist the police prosecute them under the DDA and failing to meet their duty of care.
Goldenstar
Well-Known Member
Well let's hope OP can afford her day in court .
And her brief is on top of it all and I look 'forward 'to hearing the explanation of how OP's dog ended up skinned and in bits in a bag when returned to her .
I can only hope they are taking better care of the other dogs .
And her brief is on top of it all and I look 'forward 'to hearing the explanation of how OP's dog ended up skinned and in bits in a bag when returned to her .
I can only hope they are taking better care of the other dogs .
dymented
Well-Known Member
On the first page of this thread it says ( The warrant supposedly stated encouraging a dog to fight with a wild animal, they did not show me or leave a copy ) Every thing was alleged No charges have ever been brought against me !
Alec Swan
Well-Known Member
And this very point brings to the fore, a now accepted prosecuting service who are themselves now open prosecution. Prosecuting services should be above reproach, not doing their level best, as the rspca are doing, to extricate themselves from the mire.
The rspca are a collection of clowns, and they shouldn't be. They should be open to respect.
Alec.
Goldenstar
Well-Known Member
Yet OP , it's my understanding they have six months from when they cautioned you .
Dry Rot
Well-Known Member
Has everyone forgotten the days when someone reporting seeing a man carrying a spade and accompanied by a small dog was sufficient "proof" of badger baiting to have them get the police helicopters out?
It doesn't take much to raise the zeal of the do-gooders. Why would they need evidence and witnesses to confuse the issue? The primary duty of the police is to "protect life and property". Wouldn't their role in being present when the dogs were seized be simply to make sure there was no breach of the peace?
Can an action in detinue be brought in the Small Claims Court? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detinue) If so, that would allow the OP to take action himself at minimal cost, and on-line too, without risking anything like £25k in legal fees. Or even £260 come to that!
Why do I suggest that? Because the only way to fight these bullies is with publicity. Even winning a Small Claim action would put the matter in the newspapers. Maybe some white knight would then step forward to fund a further legal action?
It doesn't take much to raise the zeal of the do-gooders. Why would they need evidence and witnesses to confuse the issue? The primary duty of the police is to "protect life and property". Wouldn't their role in being present when the dogs were seized be simply to make sure there was no breach of the peace?
Can an action in detinue be brought in the Small Claims Court? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detinue) If so, that would allow the OP to take action himself at minimal cost, and on-line too, without risking anything like £25k in legal fees. Or even £260 come to that!
Why do I suggest that? Because the only way to fight these bullies is with publicity. Even winning a Small Claim action would put the matter in the newspapers. Maybe some white knight would then step forward to fund a further legal action?
dymented
Well-Known Member
I totally under stand that but why when the cps say there is no evidence that i have committed a crime Why do the rspca still insist on holding the dogs and trying to bring a private prosecution ? Where do they think they are going to get evidence from ? Un less they plan on manufacturing it them self . Personal if i had laid down and let them walk all over me and not complained over them killing the poor dog , injuring another dog , and starving anther one i would have every thing back to normal now . Thank you Dry Rot for your advice on the small claims court but its a criminal matter so has to be in magistrates court so i am told but i will seek further advice on it to try to cut costs
Dry Rot
Well-Known Member
I am not a lawyer and don't know either. Just an addict of Judge Judy! OK, that TV series is in the USA but some of the cases she handles either have been through the criminal courts or may go onto there later. I don't think one excludes the other. In fact, the burden of proof is less in the civil courts so cases sometimes do go through both after having failed in the criminal court. OK, it is also a different country, different laws, and different legal system but justice is justice. Good luck with whatever you do and I think most here are backing you and your cause.
MerrySherryRider
Well-Known Member
Not with me. He deliberately refuses to state why the dogs came to the attention of the RSPCA and police. His story has more holes than a Swiss cheese.
dymented
Well-Known Member
How many times do i have to post the same answer The warrant supposedly stated encouraging a dog to fight with a wild animal, they did not show me or leave a copy we have asked twice for a copy and not received any I do not no you from Adam but id put ££ you have something to do with the rspca The rspca can not hid the fact the dog was killed in there care Fact she was killed by other dogs in there care Fact The cps say there are no charges to answer. What else do you want to no ??? its been proven that the rspca lie cheat and bribe people to lie as well as fabricate evidence have a read on here or dose every one not an rspca lover telling pork pies http://www.grumpyoldsod.com/rspca again.asp or read people comments from horse and hound http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/archive/index.php/t-504698.html
Fides
Well-Known Member
I'm supporting you, but you haven't actually answered the question, merely stated what they accused you of. Perhaps a better way of phrasing the question would have been 'What were you doing with your dogs (and also how many of them were with you at the time) that could have been misconstrued as 'fighting with a wild animal'?'
Or more simply - what were you doing that they were wrong about?
ETA - regardless of whether you were in the right or wrong, they had a duty of care to the animals they seized that they didn't fulfill and the police could prosecute them under DDA. If they fail, you could still take civil action.
Last edited:
MerrySherryRider
Well-Known Member
No Demented, I do not work for the RSPCA.
I do own a horse that was starved to the point of death before the RSPCA rescued him and prosecuted the owner successfully.
I have also owned several dogs that were rehomed from the RSPCA. My own experience of the RSPCA has been very positive and down to earth.
I do own a horse that was starved to the point of death before the RSPCA rescued him and prosecuted the owner successfully.
I have also owned several dogs that were rehomed from the RSPCA. My own experience of the RSPCA has been very positive and down to earth.
Dry Rot
Well-Known Member
See my post above. Not so long ago it was enough to be seen to be carrying a spade and accompanied by a small dog to get the police helicopters out.
I have had the SSPCA here. They were given the Cook's Tour and were so impressed that they gave me a copy of the complaint they'd received so I could pass it to my solicitor to bring an action in defamation against the writer as the allegations were so blatantly untrue. That's all it takes to get their attention. One complaint from a liar.
You do not seem to get it that you don't need to do anything to get the unwanted attention from these "welfare" organisations and do-gooders. OK, they have a role, but more often they over step the mark in order to justify their existence.
I have also had the SSPCA's lies. I have been chasing DEFRA over an infestation of ragwort up wind of my property. (DEFRA has the duty and powers to take action under the 1959 Weeds Act, not the SSPCA/RSPCA). The SSPCA visited the site because the absentee owner had left a dog on a chain for three months with someone paid to come in once a day only to feed and water. The SSPCA stated there was no ragwort (there are also ponies on site) yet, anticipating what would happen, I took photographs of the ponies grazing amongst a carpet of ragwort shortly after this visit. If you like, I will publish the photographs here with a copy of the letter I received from DEFRA.
Many of these "inspectors" have very little training and not much experience. You do not have to do anything other than have a bad neighbour make an allegation to have these people make your life hell, It is time they were made accountable. Note, I do not say stopped and I do believe they have a role but, as I've said before, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Justice is depicted blind folded and carrying a two edged sword for good reason.