Update on horse cruelty case in Derbyshire.

That's horrendous - the picture made me feel ill
frown.gif


And to think she was a judge as well
frown.gif
 
OMG! there is absolutely no excuse for that kind of neglect.... surely she could have rung someone if she needed help...!!!
 
She got four months - so will only serve two! Her daughter got a suspended sentence - so in effect, she got nothing! Yet some of those animals had suffered for years!!
 
The case is so appalling I wonder if anyone ever questioned if the old lady knew what she was doing? For a show judge to treat ponies like that beggars belief.
 
The punishment given is laughable, if these horses have been suffering for years and by the pictures of its hooves it certainly has been a good few years how can it go undetected.

Yes the "lady" in question is getting on and yes she may be struggling for money but I'm sorry that is no excuse especially when she has been involved with horse / ponies in the past, she should no what basic care is and if she couldn't provide this then make a call to the relevant body for help.

I'm so cross I could spit !
 
how can anyone treat these beautiful animals like this? it makes me livid. theres support out there to help, its disgusting to let the horses get into that state and suffer.
 
Hi, all friends,

Hi, Teabelly, you're so cross you could spit, well i just did a great big fart, directed at The Law!

BS x

PS: Just looked at the link... and the defence lawyer said they hadn't noticed anything was wrong? It's just sickening. I wonder if the lawyer was paid by legal aid (ie you and me) also?

And, so she was a judge with the Welsh Pony and Cob Society, not Association (?), as another source quoted. I wonder what other members of the Society think?
 
Has anybody read the two comments left? The posters are outraged - that they got taken to court let alone a prison sentance
crazy.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
some weird uneducated folk on here too

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL! I take that to mean me! Or did you mean YorksG? Or maybe AmyMay?

Are we are all "weird, uneducated trolls" because we have a different opinion regarding the sentence?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Did you see the coments on the earlyer post about the case?? some weird uneducated folk on here too maybe trolls...

[/ QUOTE ]

Pssst....it's "comments" and "earlier". Plus "some" and "maybe" should have a capital letter! to add to this, there are the missing commas and full stops.

Init!
grin.gif


YorksG- We could have a Bridge Party!
cool.gif
grin.gif
Do you play?
wink.gif
Or are you not ejicatid enuf?
grin.gif
 
I find the sentence harsh on a woman of that age - let's face it, she must have lost her marbles along the way. The daughter was - IMHO - more culpable!

But what the people who commented on the sentence ignored was that it was NOT the RSPCA that decided the sentence - it was the court. The RSPCA HAD to prosecute - or give the horses back to their owners!!

There was a similar situation some years back - a very respected Arabian breeder who - in her 80s - was taken into a nursing home and the person who was being paid to care for her horses took the money and pocketed it! The old lady (being a keen hunt supporter) refused to sign the horses over to the RSPCA so RSPCA was prepared to prosecute. In the end, the BHS's then Head of Welfare managed to negotiate a solution in which the horses (including 3 aged stallions) were signed over to the BHS and the RSPCA dropped the planned prosecution. (The stallions - 2 in their 20s - were successfully gelded and rehomed.)

I'm no fan of the RSPCA - but normally it will NOT prosecute in cases like this IF the owners sign their animals over. But ga-ga old ladies who've owned horses all their lives always think they know best.
 
I did not ignore the fact that the court imposed the sentence. I am well aware that the RSPCA have no authority to sentence anyone. Where did you get the impression that people believed that the RSPCA were responsible for sentencing?
 
[ QUOTE ]
I did not ignore the fact that the court imposed the sentence. I am well aware that the RSPCA have no authority to sentence anyone. Where did you get the impression that people believed that the RSPCA were responsible for sentencing?

[/ QUOTE ]

I was referring to comments left on the newspaper site - castigating the RSPCA for the prosecution AND the sentence.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I find the sentence harsh on a woman of that age - let's face it, she must have lost her marbles along the way. The daughter was - IMHO - more culpable!

But what the people who commented on the sentence ignored was that it was NOT the RSPCA that decided the sentence - it was the court. The RSPCA HAD to prosecute - or give the horses back to their owners!!

[/ QUOTE ]

This is incorrect. The RSPCA are making S. 20 applications without any connected issue of summons. They believe that S. 20 (Animal Welfare Act 2006) is a stand alone section.

This means that if horses or other animals are seized the RSPCA is making applications to court to 'dispose' of them, 'put them down' or whatever and the owner may never have the opportunity of defending their actions in court because S. 20 is a civil action in a magistrates court and there is no legal aid available. The RSPCA will, of course, have a crack legal team.

Equality of arms anyone?

[ QUOTE ]
There was a similar situation some years back - a very respected Arabian breeder who - in her 80s - was taken into a nursing home and the person who was being paid to care for her horses took the money and pocketed it! The old lady (being a keen hunt supporter) refused to sign the horses over to the RSPCA so RSPCA was prepared to prosecute. In the end, the BHS's then Head of Welfare managed to negotiate a solution in which the horses (including 3 aged stallions) were signed over to the BHS and the RSPCA dropped the planned prosecution. (The stallions - 2 in their 20s - were successfully gelded and rehomed.)

I'm no fan of the RSPCA - but normally it will NOT prosecute in cases like this IF the owners sign their animals over. But ga-ga old ladies who've owned horses all their lives always think they know best.

[/ QUOTE ]

The downside of this is that the RSPCA are completely unregulated and there is no ombudsman who can check whether their actions are correct or even within the law. People who are refusing to sign over animals are getting them back with no ensuing prosecution in some cases.

Please everyone, do not sign anything unless a solicitor who is an expert in animal welfare law has read it and agreed. It is very difficult when faced with lots of people in uniform milling about telling you that you have failed your animals or even harmed them. Just remember that there may be very good legal and veterinary reasons why what they are saying is incorrect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top