Ingrid Posted April 3, 2009 Report Share Posted April 3, 2009 LINKY I heard this on my local radio this morning and am fuming !!!! How can the RSPCA say the dog didn't suffer when Neville Hill said it was still alive when he put it on her doorstep As they said after the news report it sound like the RSPca are saying it's ok to kill a dog on your own premises as long as it doesn't suffer, the presenter was as gobsmacked as I am Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neoclassic Perk Posted April 3, 2009 Report Share Posted April 3, 2009 it sound like the RSPca are saying it's ok to kill a dog on your own premises as long as it doesn't suffer, the presenter was as gobsmacked as I am Legally, that it true - if the animal does not suffer, then it is not illegal to kill one However, it is a criminal offence - destruction/damage to property (like it or not, dogs are considered to be possessions) - which the RSPCA can do nothing about, but the CPS can, if it is in the public interest to prosecute, and if not, then a private prosecution is the only way to obtain legal redress. It is a tragic case; once again, animals are the innocent victims, caught up in a dispute between people who should know better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackmagic Posted April 3, 2009 Report Share Posted April 3, 2009 Once again the law is an ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redditchlady Posted April 3, 2009 Report Share Posted April 3, 2009 FFS I dare not type what I am thinking. Poor doglet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranirottie Posted April 4, 2009 Report Share Posted April 4, 2009 I will put my neck on the line here and no doubt get a barrage for it but IF what he says is true,that she doesn't control her dogs and they/it was attacking his elderly dog he might not be painted quite so black. If a dog was attacking one of my elderly dogs and I had no other recourse I might hit it with the nearest thing....which could be a hoe. I would do anything I could to protect my dogs. It does sound as tho it/they have attacked his dog before and that (according to him) she does nothing to stop it. x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReikiAnge Posted April 4, 2009 Report Share Posted April 4, 2009 Cher, I did note that bit too - it's a bit of a difficult one to judge in that respect as I too would do anything to protect one of mine and that would include using force against another dog if necessary. However, I wouldn't then leave the other dog on the other owner's doorstep! It's not the poor dog's fault if they're not under control Either way, poor dog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurel n Hardy Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 FFS I dare not type what I am thinking. Poor doglet me either poor pooch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted June 11, 2009 Report Share Posted June 11, 2009 I think I posted a link related to this story previously & I'm afraid I don't think it's remotely controversial myself - the bloke smashed the dogs skull & should be prosecuted for it. Whilst I appreciate the desire to protect his own dog there is such a thing a reasonable force & I honestly don't see how hitting a dog over the head with a hoe with sufficient force to fracture his skull can be considered reasonable. As for the pathologist's view I wonder if he'd be confident enough in it to have someone fracture his skull & test his theory that it's not suffering? To me the idea that you can / should prosecute someone for letting their dogs get too fat but smashing a dog's skull is okay (just as long as it's a quick death) is just ridiculous - there's no wonder increasing numbers of people think the law is an ass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenOldie Posted June 12, 2009 Report Share Posted June 12, 2009 This is the second incident recently in which the RSPCA fail to prosecute because an animal was killed but 'didn't suffer'. The other one was the Yorkshire terrier killed by a kick from his owners boyfriend during a domestic. I'm sure there are more which never come to light or are unreported. It gives people carte blanche to abuse animals with no consequences in a climate in which cruelty and neglect are on the increase. What a sad message for yet another generation of young people who are growing up to have little respect for themselves or any other living thing and treat children and animals as disposable commodities. This is not a generalisation, by the way, as there are legions of wonderful, stable, achieving youngsters out there, but in nearly 30 years of social work it is very depressing to see the number of youngsters nowadays who have absolutely no respect for the police, teachers, medics or their parents because there are absolutely no consequences for their actions. Sorry for the rant, it has been a sense of optimism that has kept me in the job this long, as well as involved in animal welfare, but cases like those reported highlight the messages given out to adults as well as children that somewhere there will be a loophole in the law so do what you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranirottie Posted June 14, 2009 Report Share Posted June 14, 2009 I fully agree that the man said that the dog was still alive when he put it on the doorstep,and altho I think that there may be two sides to this (as I stated before) i think it does prove that the dog did suffer! I think he may have acted under provocation/defence of his dog,but to leave it injured on a doorstep and walk away is cruelty. x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mop Posted June 15, 2009 Report Share Posted June 15, 2009 There is a lot more to this than is in that article, this woman said she left her dogs in the house, so how did it get out to attack the other dog? This dog seems to have attacked the other dog on several occassions and the woman didn't control him. I am not saying this man was right to do what he did, but if she had gone to the shops she may not have been in when he left the dog on the step. Her story is different to his so it is one against the other and no other witnesses, only these 2 people know the truth of what happened and unless the RSPCA can find out the truth they won't be in a position to prosecute the man. There are a lot more questions about this incident, unfortunately once again it is the dog that suffers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabina Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 The final decision as to whether to prosecute or not lies with the vet really. If the vet that saw the dog does not think it suffered then the rspca CANNOT prosecute. That is how the law is worded as frustrating as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mop Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 I have known cases of animal neglect and cruelty were vets wouldn't back the RSPCA so these people got away with it. I have seen Inspectors begging vets to let them prosecute people but as the vets loose money when they have to go to court, they wouldn't back them. Talking to one of my vets a couple of weeks ago, she told me that she has worked for some vets who she couldn't understand why they went through all the training because they don't care and in some cases, don't like animals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 Surely, if you don't agree with / like the vet's opinions / handling etc then you can always do what the rest of us do - find another one / seek a second opinion? People have been prosecuted for a lot less than this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mop Posted June 17, 2009 Report Share Posted June 17, 2009 They did Ian, none of the vets would go to court to back them, I was told this is a big problem and is why a lot don't get prosecuted, vets won't back them then they get slated because they look like they are doing nothing. If this vet who saw the dog won't back them there is nothing the RSPCA can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts