FionaM12
Well-Known Member
Hang on. The OP says HE is prosecuting the RSPCA. Your post reads as though it's them prosecuting him. Which way round is it please? :confused3:
RSPCA with out photos
- Thread starter dymented
- Start date
Hang on. The OP says HE is prosecuting the RSPCA. Your post reads as though it's them prosecuting him. Which way round is it please? :confused3:
_GG_
Well-Known Member
I just took that from the other forum, where I do believe everything is posted that they are taking the RSPCA to court. If it came across the other way in my post...my apologies as I realise I said that Dymented was given a court date, I should have worded that better. As it's not Dymenteds dog that died, I would expect that it is his son that is actually taking the action, but I don't know???
Dymenteds post on 16th Sept said...
"We finally have a date in October. i cant understand why there dragging it out like this. They know full well there in the wrong unless its just to cause as much suffering as they can I will update more as i get more info Its take nearly two months just to get a date some justice system we have in the uk"
Last edited:
_GG_
Well-Known Member
Also, I can't read the RSPCA statement, but apparently it states that it was the sons other dogs that killed the pregnant bitch, but that Dymenteds own vet report says that the injuries were cause by larger dogs.
I infer nothing with that...just sharing it.
I infer nothing with that...just sharing it.
FionaM12
Well-Known Member
Thanks GG, that's a bit clearer. 
Alec Swan
Well-Known Member
How interesting. There was, so I understand, a communication from the rspca, or their representative (the contracted kennel owners?), that states that the dog concerned was infact killed by dogs other than the owner's. That said, it's actually immaterial which dogs killed the dog concerned. The dead dog was in the care of the rspca and it is they who are responsible.
As you and others, I follow this with interest, and an open mind.
Alec.
_GG_
Well-Known Member
Um...I have a slight (read massive) issue with something and I would appreciate someone else taking a look to tell me what I am missing please.
On the facebook page "RSPCA did this" the first post is another statement about what has happened with more detailed pictures of the dog after it had been returned to the OP/his son. *Warning* the photo's are very graphic.
Now, I had some doubts, so looked through the page photo's to find the original picture of the dog in question, made up as a poster that says, "My name was Stella and I was 8 weeks pregnant when I was taken away..." and it shows a picture of the dog that Dymented says has been killed in the care of the RSPCA and please someone correct me if I am wrong, but Stella, as pictured and named in the original poster has four white feet. The pictures in the statement at the top of the page, again stating that they are pictures of the dog that was supposedly killed in the care of the RSPCA has four brown feet? There is a lot of blood in the pictures, granted, but that is brown fur, not stained white fur. Also, the carcass looks to have blue eyes and the original picture shows a dog with dark eyes. Finally, I am not at all convinced that the head of the carcass is that of the original dog pictured. The face and nose of a dog is essentially skin laid over bone, with little muscle or tissue to create disparity. In the original picture of the dog, where she is alive, the skull is iverted between the eyes, quite different to the shape of the close up picture of the carcass. I am more than willing to be proven wrong, but don't go and look if you don't have a strong stomach. It just doesn't look like the carcass matches the dog named Stella at all.
Finally, in the comments on that post, the page manager posted this photograph, stating that they didn't want to post the full report as it was going to be used as evidence.
I find it very interesting that in highlighting the part that says, "The dog was found dead on the 18/03/14 in the kennel with blood on its throat"...a thick black line is drawn over the part that reads, "Vet check on 14/03/14 revealed a puncture wound to the left *????* and small scars to face but otherwise in good condition".
So, the dog, on seizure, according to this statement posted by the facebook page admin states that the dog had a puncture wound and scars on the face before being taken into RSPCA custody.
I am feeling a little uneasy again. Someone please tell me I am wrong.
FionaM12
Well-Known Member
GG, someone on the Facebook page has actually pointed out the feet are brown, not white "like the live dog", and admin of the page have "Liked" the comment! Totally confusing...
_GG_
Well-Known Member
I just don't get it. A friend in Texas who is a very experienced taxidermist and has intimate knowledge of skeletal structures has looked at the photo's and said it is not the same dog. Skeletal structure, size and colours don't match the picture of Stella at all.
I gave him no background information at all.
Alec Swan
Well-Known Member
I thought that I had my head around this! So what are we saying? Are we saying that the dog which was killed, whilst in the care of the rspca wasn't the property of the complainant? If so, where is their dog? This has the makings of a farce!
Alec.
Alec.
FionaM12
Well-Known Member
I think we're saying that the only evidence is the OP's word and his very confusing story, and some photos on a Facebook group. We don't know whether anything the OP has told us is true or whether any dog died in the hands of the RSPCA. I hope some details of the supposed court case do come out. Then we might have an idea of what went on.
_GG_
Well-Known Member
Not saying anything like that Alec. I believe, with now very little doubt that the dog that Dymented has said was seized and killed in RSPCA care was not the dog in the photographs of the carcass he has been sharing. I do not believe that the dog was in perfect condition when she was seized either because the report that he himself has made public shows that the dog had a puncture wound somewhere and scars to the face.
Apparently, as we have been told, national media has been interested in running the story yet, I have yet to speak to any media outlet that has even heard of it.
I believe people are being defrauded out of money by donation for something that simply isn't true as it has been reported here, on the other forum or on the facebook page.
dymented
Well-Known Member
the dogs feet are covered with blood still from being in a plastic bag they are in fact white ! if your friend would like to put pen to paper i would love his expertise as our vet could not find her micro chip and we are still unsure if its my sons dog ! the mark on her face was done in rspca care ! because we have brought charges against them they have charges me with causing her pain and suffering due to having an infection on an internal organ bearing it in mind they did not pick anything up when they looked her over they day they took her It to hide the fact what has happened to my sons dog that is all
gg the photo of the report is from the rspca not my vet .the puncture wound they refer to in the report happened in there care not mine or my sons , the dog was used for ratting , rabbiting and did has small old scars on her nose from running through the under growth Nothing illegal there !!!
_GG_
Well-Known Member
I never said the photo was from anywhere...just that you posted it. I accept what you say about blood stained fur...I just don't buy it. I've seen it enough and I've never seen white fur, stained with blood, old or new, look like that, not does the carcass look to match. As I have said, I am happy be proven wrong and would support you if I felt you were telling us the truth.
Tell us the court date, allow one of us to be there if you have nothing to hide. It won't be me, I'm too far away but there is nothing to stop you telling us when and where.
The picture of remains returned in a bag were the size of one page of a newspaper, so unless you have the world smallest doormat, it doesn't ring true.
Report says vet check found puncture wound and scars on the day that it was seized. Are you now saying that the dog was attacked on the same day as seizure and again, fatally on the 18th....4 days later, not 24 hours later as you've said so many times?
dymented
Well-Known Member
the dog had old scars on her nose from running through cover they claim she had a puncture wound when they looked at her on the same day she did not have one here !! , Now the rspca say she was killed on the 18th they also rang my solicitor at the time and told him she had been killed on the Sunday but i can prove she had been killed on the Saturday they are doing there best to cover everything up ill comment after the day as clive has asked me not to comment any more you can read about it in the papers
FionaM12
Well-Known Member
So, your solicitor Clive Rees had no problem with you writing about it, putting photos all over the net and begging for money to pay him for months, until now? Coincidentally just after GG asked for the court case date and time.
_GG_
Well-Known Member
How many dogs were seized? Was it 9? That report only says 3?
Fides
Well-Known Member
RSPCA have their own powers of prosecution issued by the state and cps cannot get involved - this annoys me no end
Claire-R
Well-Known Member
Can someone please Dumb this down for me because I'm quite confused. The dog was attached by another dog whilst in the care of the RSPCA then sent back to the owners vets for an autopsy? Why is this dog skinned and literally in bits? surely that's not the work of another dog?
_GG_
Well-Known Member
Part of assessing wounds/damage/fatal injuries is removing the skin. Not sure why the head would have been severed. The op believes it has been done, including the microchip removed to cover up wrongdoing.
Claire-R
Well-Known Member
Thank you! now I get the gist!
Spudlet
Well-Known Member
RSPCA have their own powers of prosecution issued by the state and cps cannot get involved - this annoys me no end
No, this is entirely incorrect. The RSPCA undertakes private prosecutions.
The SSPCA does have some additional powers under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 I believe - but I can assure you that the RSPCA does not.
ester
Not slacking multitasking
I'd like to see the skin on the edge of one of the pics GG, I do think the photos are poss misleading and at least one of her hind feet looks white to me. I think it is hard to say re. the sizing from those pics too, if in fact all of her was in the plastic bag. If not known why the skinning would have been done to PM, apart from perhaps to look at bruising under the skin? I'm not sure, only ever been involved in illness PMs before.
Oh people posted while I typed!
Oh people posted while I typed!
ester
Not slacking multitasking
I'd imagine the microchip would have fallen out as opposed to removed, they should have kept it with the body though.
_GG_
Well-Known Member
I'd like to see the skin on the edge of one of the pics GG, I do think the photos are poss misleading and at least one of her hind feet looks white to me. I think it is hard to say re. the sizing from those pics too, if in fact all of her was in the plastic bag. If not known why the skinning would have been done to PM, apart from perhaps to look at bruising under the skin? I'm not sure, only ever been involved in illness PMs before.
Oh people posted while I typed!
I have changed my mind. I'm not going to question this photograph any more.
I'll explain why tomorrow.
Last edited:
_GG_
Well-Known Member
I will welcome PM's off anyone that wants to know what I have discovered about the OP, all found quite easily through information he has been stupid enough to make public, but I won't post it publicly for legal reasons.
Dymented. Quite a web you have weaved, congratulations, but you can go back under your rock now....or perhaps into your garden shed for a smoke!
Dymented. Quite a web you have weaved, congratulations, but you can go back under your rock now....or perhaps into your garden shed for a smoke!
MerrySherryRider
Well-Known Member
Can you pm me please. x
_GG_
Well-Known Member
Yes x
Fides
Well-Known Member
After being 'dissed' by pm by the op I'd be interested too
MerrySherryRider
Well-Known Member
RSPCA have their own powers of prosecution issued by the state and cps cannot get involved - this annoys me no end
As the poster above said, the RSPCA (like some other charities) brings private prosecutions. The CPS does prosecute animal cruelty cases but they do not have the specialist resources that the rspca has and cases are often directed to the RSPCA.
It's a win-win for the CPS as they don't have to fund prosecutions against defendants in animal abuse trials.
Claire-R
Well-Known Member
I'd like to be nosey!