Jump to content
Two Best Dogs!

RSPCA in the news

64 posts in this topic

asal   

I am comparing the FACT that any person accused of animal abuse is front page news and IS GUILTY, UNTIL, OR UNLESS proven innocent.

 

These peoples lives are destroyed from the moment they are accused. The hate generated and spread across all social media is immense.

 

I still remember the pages of opinions back and forth over the case here on Dogzonline alone, of the debarked dogs seized because their owner had shown them and their owner facing 70 years in jail.. all over one of the most stupid laws the rspca ever had passed in Victorian parliament. Which I believe is still law.  

 

The heart break and stress she suffered when every one was taken and shoved into the rspca's disgusting cells along with dogs carrying or suffering from goodness knows what ailments. 

 

 All because she had them debarked because her neighbour was suffering cancer and had them done by her vet who was in nsw,

 

At the time the RSPCA said she broke the law, our hands are tied, we must prosecute.. Fortunately the Magistrate didn't consider his hands were tied and dismissed the case and they were finally returned.  She was lucky, today they just sell or euthanise them before it ever gets to court now. Think it took 11 weeks before she received them back.

 

The real insanity is any one from another state can show at the same shows in Victoria with debarked dogs and its not an offence?

 

It has taken the two principles of the Murray Grey cattle Stud over ten years to prove their innocence and tens of millions to do so?  they have won the case but at what cost? The RSPCA alone admit to 17 million fighting their side, to this day they have not paid a cent of the 1.4 milllion compensation awarded.

 

https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/stories/committees/SCEI/RSPCA/Submissions/Submission_43-JA_Heath_Inland_Holdings.pdf

 

The emotional stress both suffered at the hands of the press constantly publishing the RSPCA's versions of their crimes from the first day of seizure (in the case of the cattle slaughter of over 100 stud cows, calves and bulls, along with the undisclosed sale of around the same number) does not happen to anyone accused of a crime against humanity, not even defenceless children.

 

As Professor Sumner Miller used to ask, "Why is this so?

 

Yet as Leon Mills points out this is a crime not serious at law? It is heard by a magistrate and not a judge and jury.

 

What Pell did is  certainly a crime serious at law. He got the full Judge and jury trial, yet everything pertaining to the case and after, even now after conviction he is being said to be innocent until after the appeal.   this is just so wrong on so many counts.

 

How is it fine to character assassinate one group of people publicly, when accused of a crime,  yet not the other group?

 

Why no innocent UNTIL for one.  Yet not the other?

 

MANY are innocent, in that first group, but you would never know it.

 

A percentage die from either the stress or take their own lives, same as the children destroyed by the paedophiles, sadly, so terribly tragically, their percentage is well documented, 7 out of ten kill themselves before 30. That's why so few were present to state their own case at the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. Their heartbroken families had to do the representing for them

 

 But no one or the press never mention the percentages for the members of the first group.

 

Accused animal abusers are automatically seen and treated as scum

 

 

and it never washes off , as those innocent of the accusations, have learned first hand.

 

Yet the accusers, have, time and time again proven themselves incompetent, they even show proof of it on their TV programs and so stupid, neither they nor their editors dont even realise that?

 

Yet, what are the figures for the 30% whose lives were shattered yet fought to hang in there and survive? The figures are also available, the majority have pets to help them, except then their pets put them in danger of attracting the attention of another group completely free of accountability, or avenue of appeal if they decide to target them?

 

 

I was at my son's funeral last week (no he died of natural causes in case your wondering).  One of the people there showed me the photo of a class in Ballarat.(He  grew up there)  the children were at a  school associated with Pell's church. 13 of those children killed themselves before becoming adults.

 

According to the statistics, there are approximately 150,000 Australian survivors of paedophiles across all ages doing their best to survive. 

The other 1,050,000 are being mourned by their families.

Staggering isn't it.

 

 

 

Edited by asal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/3/2019 at 11:29 AM, asal said:

Been asked to share, so awful.

 

shared a post to the group: Make the RSPCA Accountable to a 3rd Party.

22 hrs

I am reposting this as I feel that the public need to be made aware and it is in the public's interest to know. 
This appalling video that has been filmed by one of these teenage sociophaths was presented to Dr Liz Walker, CEO of RSPCA Victoria. Dr Walker refused to have inspectors investigate on the grounds that the person who submitted it had not seen it first hand. 
The video was later presented to 3AW and when Dr Walker was questioned about it, she made up one of her stories. 
RSPCA all over Australia have made negative comments about footage regarding horse racing, greyhounds and live export. This leads to several questions about why this footage can not be looked into. Is it because there is no money and T.V. cameras involved, or is it because the RSPCA Victoria inspectors do not have sufficient qualifications and training to investigate, or do they just not want to get involved.
I would like to bring to your attention that RSPCA survives on the public purse. They receive funds directly from the public in the way of donations and bequests. The other way is through state government funding to the inspectorate. In Victoria the inspectors that enforce Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (POCTAA) do so as an Authorised Officer of the Minister, in this case Jaclyn Symes is the Minister for Agriculture. 
If you find the actions on the video unpalatable followed up by the lack of duty of care for the animals involved in this video, by Dr Liz Walker CEO of RSPCA could you please forward the video to Jaclyn Symes the Minister for Agriculture and the Shadow Mininster Peter Walsh. Please make it clear that the inspectors are Authorised Officers of the Minister. You may also like to mention that the offenders can be prosecuted under two acts in Victoria , POCTAA and the Domestic Animals Act. 
Peter Walsh email: 
[email protected] 
Jaclyn Symes email: [email protected]
Daniel Andrews, Premier email:[email protected]
Your State M.P.

 

 

 

Casey Pauwels

26 February at 20:22

Sharing again as the girls that did this were able to get on the the lady’s Facebook illegally and remove it themselves. Everyone please share again so it gets media attention so they’re held accountable.

These girls were asked to leave Arkys property and behaved this way in retaliation. 
By putting their dog on to Arkys beloved silkies.
They have sent numerous texts saying they’re going to kill her dogs & kicked her toy Pomeranian who is tiny and weighs no more than 3 kg.

Hearing the laughter and delight as the girls did this is haunting

Everyone please share again.
Lillico victoria

The girls names are Holly Williams & Sarah McNair 
Their profiles are posted below at the top of the comments

This chicken died as a result of this.

 

Whilst what the girls did was disgusting, cruel and yes, they should be held accountable...(plus there has to be more to it.  Why were they at the property, did she know them?  How did they get onto her Facebook page illegally?)

Plus the comments on that persons FB (Casey Pawels you linked with the vid) are vile and disgusting, threatening to bash/kill/kick their heads in.  I don't know why this was even shared, it had been reported to the police, one got a caution (apparently) and the other has a court date set. 

But to post their names, profile pics and the video to FB (the toilet of the internet) is just shameful, it will no doubt affect the court case, and apart from that, any person who is already unstable or violent could do dreadful things to those girls..and no, I'm not defending them at all, but to basically offer them up to FB vigilantes does more harm than good. 
One of the comments and this by a woman

Quote

I will get my dog to rip their throats out. Who ever puts angry and laughing emojis on these comments and posts must be close to the c#nts that did this.

Shame on everyone involved.

 

Could you please take down the link @asal?

Edited by Animal House
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asal   

the threats were what the girls who filmed the video made to the woman who owned the chook they set their dog onto.

 

 

do you have a problem understanding what was written?

 

its ok to slander someone accused of animal cruelty, I have seen it done here and on social media for decades now.  nice to see someone does think it belongs in the court, same as I do.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asal   
33 minutes ago, asal said:

Whilst what the girls did was disgusting, cruel and yes, they should be held accountable...(plus there has to be more to it.  Why were they at the property, did she know them?  How did they get onto her Facebook page illegally?)

Plus the comments on that persons FB (Casey Pawels you linked with the vid) are vile and disgusting, threatening to bash/kill/kick their heads in.  I don't know why this was even shared, it had been reported to the police, one got a caution (apparently) and the other has a court date set. 

But to post their names, profile pics and the video to FB (the toilet of the internet) is just shameful, it will no doubt affect the court case, and apart from that, any person who is already unstable or violent could do dreadful things to those girls..and no, I'm not defending them at all, but to basically offer them up to FB vigilantes does more harm than good. 
One of the comments and this by a woman

  Quote

I will get my dog to rip their throats out. Who ever puts angry and laughing emojis on these comments and posts must be close to the c#nts that did this.

Shame on everyone involved.

 

Could you please take down the link @asal?

 

are you aware you have put a quote that I have no idea where you got it?

 

it is certainly not in what I posted nor on the links to the videos taken by the girls in question?

 

considering how many people have had their facebook hacked I dont think you have to have known them, but I certainly have no idea if they did or not. does it matter? even if they did and she asked them to leave is no excuse for what happened to her silky hen surely?

 

if you actually read it.

 

they had been asked to leave the property and threatened the owner.

 

they were not threatened .

the threats were made

then executed by them

 

The point of sharing was the fact, that as pointed out, rspca certainly do use videos to prosecute and or push the govenment to act.

 

the stopping of live export was because of an unverified video.

 

it was later learned it had been staged and no one was prosecuted over that.

 

but action Australia wide happened there

 

why no interest in prosecuting these two self convictors?

 

 

Edited by asal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did read what you wrote, thoroughly.  I don't have a problem understanding what was written, you're being quite rude and It's not called for.

 

The quote which I put in, as I explained, was a quote from one of many comments on the link to the video on FB, which you supplied.  It put it in the post to show what type of threats these girls are getting on that FB video posting.  From people who don't know the full story, and have just taken it upon themselves to be vigilantes (albeit by FB posts, but who knows what people are capable of.  These girls have had their names and pictures shared 8K times from that one video link you provided, who knows how many people are now aware of their names/faces,  It's like a mob lynching.
   Most of the comments about the video were baying for the girls' blood (and worse) and no doubt it won't be long before someone knows them and will put their address up.  
This is how people get hurt, without knowing all the facts, people share the video and put their own spin on it.  Yes the girls were wrong, what they did was unbelievably cruel.

 

Now it didn't take me long to do a bit of sleuthing and find out WHO it happened to, and what they had to say about it.  This is the persons own post on FB, made public, so I'm just copying/pasting it here.
 

Quote

In relation to the incident at my home where my pets were attacked i would like to make the following comment. This was reported to police as i will not accept any form of cruelty and i berlieve this is totally unaceptable we were frightened and didnt know what else was going to occur.

Whilst there has been allot of anger about this please realise they are young girls that have committed this crime and threats of violence etc are absolutely not acceptable nor do they help this situation at all.

Please do not message me about this i will not be discussing this matter with anyone as it is a criminal matter.

The families of the young girls will be destraught and there are circumstances which not everyone is privy to hence the reason the girls were on my property.

Whilst everyone feels very strongly against animal cruelty as do I expressing the same kind of hostility and making threats is not ok and is not going to help anyone.

No doubt the rspca won't look into it, because it's going to cost them money to prosecute them on a video, because videos can be edited etc.

 

You have a history and hatred of the RSPCA, which is evident by your posts.  But you can't taint them all with the same brush, I'm sure they do some good things as well.  But by posting a link to a video on someone's FB page, purely because the RSPCA won't comment on it, you've shared the mob hatred of two young girls....if you had bothered to read the comments under the video you might not have posted the link (it took me 10 mins to read through the comments etc) then find the victim, and read their thoughts on it. 

Edited by Animal House

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asal   

But is it is fine to be rude to one you feel is not quite right in the head is it?  Other's have seen fit to tell me I need to see a doctor. something I should not feef offence about, If its any comfort have been constantly monitored by Nepean hospital since 2000 after Stringy disappeared

... Does that help you?

 

what I do DETEST with a passion you seem to have noticed,

 

IS THE FACT that one organisation has NO avenue of appeal......

 

that they pick and choose who to attack. the softer the target the better. As many have finally began to notice.

 

That so many employed by them are incompetent. yet no avenue of appeal is in place for the target,  or the targets animals, many killed with no appeal available to them first, death is not reversible remember. 

 

The police are subject to accountability.  So should they.

 

It is a very small but hugely important difference

 

get that right.

 

Many people who have realised that have been lobbying governments in all states for that one thing for over 20 years now... Why wont our politicians listen?

 

Why is even an ex prosecutor like Leon Mills ignored?

 

he cannot be so easily dismissed as a disgruntled ex target.

 

 

3rd June 2010
The Honorable Members
General Purpose Standing Committee No.5
Inquiry into the R S P C A raid on the Waterways Wildlife Park
Dear Members,
My full name is Leon Andrew Mills and I have resided in Gunnedah since 1982, I moved to Gunnedah as a result of my applying for the Police Prosecutors position for the Gunnedah Local Court Circuit. I continued in that position until my retirement in 2006. In 2008 I stood in the Local Government elections and was successful in gaining office as a Gunnedah Shire Councillor. I am still in that position today.

The two submission I would like the Honorable Committee to consider are that the compliance section of the RSPCA 9RSPCA Inspectors) be disbanded and that all the duties that they try to perform in relation to the investigation and brief preparation for alleged offences under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979 (the Act), be given to sworn Constables of the NSW Police Force in particular the Rural Crime Unit. My second submission is that all prosecutions under the Act by done by Police Prosecutors in the Local Court jurisdiction.

RSPCA Inspectors obtain their powers s a result of being issued an Authority under .section 4D(2) of the Act. In relation to this Inquiry it is clear that Inspectors Prowse and French have no idea of their powers. I say that on this basis, the Act is clear in relation to what an inspector can do and is set out in Division 2 of the Act. On the Friday following the taking of the Koalas a report was broadcast on the 6.30am local A B C News that Officer Prowse said the reason for taking the Koalas was that they were “stressed”. There is no power under the Act to take an animal that is stressed. It alledging distress, as referred to in Section 24H subsection (5) of the Act, there is no evidence at all that any of these animals were suffering debility, exhaustion or significant physical injury. To support what I am submitting, the Honorable Committee would note that the Officers examined the Koalas at about 10.30-11am. They gave no treatment to these Koalas from that time until after 4.30pm, why? There was nothing wrong with them, and of course we are talking about Officers that would be expected to take immediate action if an animal was suffering debility, exhaustion or significant physical injury. These two Officers had to do something and they illegally removed these Koala for the sole purpose of the T V show R S P C A Animal Rescue. To further support this submission the head of the R S P C A Mr Steve Coleman said no proceedings would be taken against Nancy Small as a result of community outrage. I completely reject this statement. As a former Police Prosecutor of 28 years both in the city and country on rare occasions there is community outrage when some proceedings are taken. I have never before heard of proceedings for a criminal matter being abandoned or not brought because of community outrage. The reason there were no proceedings brought was that there was nothing wrong with these animals.
Offences under the act are Criminal. Officers French and Prowse were supposed to be “investigating” this matter. It is interesting to note the quality of this so called investigation. No interview with Nancy Small or any other carers of these Koalas. No exhibits such as, stool samples, feed provided in the Koala enclosure, photos for identifications of each Koala, no tagging for identification. When one looks at the R S P C A Seizure Notice re this matter S N 010 16 the Officers have not even identified the Koalas to the extent of their sex. This so called investigation is absolutely pathetic and shows the quality of how RSPCA inspectors carry out their duties.
The N S W police have a branch now called the Rural Crime Unit these branches operated both in the city and country. They are staffed by sworn Police who have been fully trained in investigation techniques. Many of these Officers are fully trained Detectives. It would be my respectful submission that these officers should take over the compliance section of the R S P C A. Of course it would require extra staff and resources. It would be my suggestion that appropriate funding could be transferred from the funding the State Government gives to the R S P C A to the Police Budget.
Another benefit of a transfer to Police is that all Police investigations are subject to review by independent authorities such as the Ombudsman or I C A C. This is not the case with R S P C A inspectors, they answer to no one other than themselves. On the 18th of February last I attended the local branch meeting of the R S P C A as the head of the organization Mr Steve Coleman was attending. During the course of the meeting he answered a number of questions re the Waterways incident. Mrs. Dodd asked him a question being, “who can I complain to”, Mr Coleman’s response was “the Chief Inspector of the RS S P C A”. From a community point of view in this day and age it is totally unacceptable that we have an organization such as this that when a complaint comes in they investigate themselves.
The subject Koalas were living in a happy well cared for environment when they were illegally removed by Inspectors French and Prowse. One of the females had a baby Koala in her pouch that Mrs Small was aware of. I have been told that the R S P C A Inspectors became aware of this fact over the 48 hours following their removal. One of the other Koalas was an elderly female that Mrs Small has described as the “Old Lady”. Mrs Small has never denied that this Koala was elderly and whilst ever in good health could live out her days in the Koala Enclosure. Both these Koalas that were supposed to being cared for by Inspectors French and Prowse are now dead so I ask this question what investigation has the RSPCA done in relation to the deaths of these Koala or am I correct in assuming that when an animal dies because of the ignorance or lack of care by that inspector no investigation takes place. This is another example as to why the Police should take over these responsibilities so that when this type of incident occurs it can be properly investigated or reviewed by an appropriate authority.
I referred earlier in this document to the fact that prior to my retirement I was the police Prosecutor for the Gunnedah Court Circuit. During the 1980’s and 1990’s and in some cases still to this day besides representing Police informants in Court Police prosecutors represent many other entities, for example, Probation and Parole, National Parks and Wildlife, D O C S, Roads and Traffic Authority and the RSPCA. Over the years until about 2000, every so often I would receive a brief from an RSPCA Inspector who would be the informant usually in more than one information. If the matter was a “not guilty” plea I would present the case on behalf of the informant. If the offence or offences were proved some costs would be sought by the Informant that would usually be for witness expenses and any fodder that may have been required to give to the animals in question. No Legal professional costs were ever sought. In addition a fact I feel is relevant is that Police Prosecutors DPP Prosecutors and Crown Prosecutors have a duty to place all the evidence before the Court. Each carries a custodial penalty of 2 years imprisonment. True there is a difference in the monetary penalty but goal is the most severe penalty for a Criminal Offence. A common assault is one where the victim suffers no serious injury. For some reason the Parliament does not view aggravated cruelty as a serious offence at law.
The RSPCA since about 2000, to my knowledge, have been engaging private solicitors to conduct their prosecutions and one might ask why did they move to this system.
It is my submission that this practice should cease and that Police Prosecutors should conduct the prosecutions for the RSPCA. I say that on this basis. By engaging private Solicitors or barristers there is no obligation on them to place before the Court evidence that may disadvantage their case. Legal and Professional Costs come into play. If their prosecution is successful they would ask for these costs. It seems unbelievable that recently in one of their prosecutions at Narrabri an amount in excess of a quarter of a million dollars was sought for costs in a matter heard in the Local Court, and as I said before, an offence not serious at law.
In conclusion it is my humble opinion that inspectors French and Prowse have no knowledge in respect to their obligations under the Act and it is clear they see their careers more in the field of TV and to add insult to injury when asked a question by myself about the TV show RSPCA Animal Rescue and their role in this incident when he attended Gunnedah on the 18th February last, Mr Coleman’s explanation was and I quote, “the Officers had been on another job with them and when they said they were going to Gunnedah the crew said we might just tag along” end quote. I informed him that I did not accept that explanation at all. It’s a sad situation when the head of such an organization is trying to assist the coverup.

Yours faithfully
Leon Mills
Councilor
Gunnedah Shire Council

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by asal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asal   

Their practices that made me first question, what is going on?   First came to my notice in 1995.

 

But  until then, like you and 99% of the population, I thought the same, "Where there's smoke there's fire"

 

they never act unless its necessary and the perp is guilty.

 

that is until I received the phone call to please come NOW!  From my husbands recently retired work mate at Sydney University  that awful day.

 

The story of Marion's horses happened in 1995. They had been removed from a drought property in Lithgow and taken to Marion's home in Hazelbrook. I helped Marion put out Bathtubs for their water, more bathtubs full of hay.. individual feeders for their morning and afternoon feeds.

She expected someone would be calling the RSPCA , 27 half starved horses is a horrific sight, so when he turned up she was expecting it.. but I don’t know what was said but whatever, she was so insulted she ordered him off her land. She said he pulled out his phone and told her, “I will show you what I can do.” Made a call and a ten horse truck arrived..... she had called me in panic because she felt so afraid, but when I arrived the truck was leaving...


 

She was heartbroken, couldn’t believe they could just come and take the ten like that.

Ten weeks later she received a court order to appear before a magistrate... interestingly they never came back to check on the remaining 17 still in her care?

I went with her as she was very distressed. The RSPCA barrister told the magistrate he would like to try and settle out of court, so we were taken to a side room and he said if she signed the horses over they would drop the $7,000 they wanted for having fed the horses for the past ten weeks.


 

Knowing she still had the 17 at home feeding back up to weight, if she paid the $7,000 she would have no money to feed them. So asked “Will you promise to find good homes for them”. He assured her , “we will find good homes for them”. She was very hesitant and asked two more times the same question and two more times she was assured. “we will find good homes for them.”

Also present was the man who took them that day....this is NOT HEARSAY.............I WAS THERE, i SAW HIM THERE IN THAT ROOM WITH ME AND MARION. We then went back to the magistrate where the barrister said Marion has signed them over so please waive the $7,000... BUT we still want to charge her for failed to worm the horses! The magistrate like the adds on tv at the time said "its a crime not to worm your" "horses" The add said dogs... He then fined her $7,000 with three months to pay or three months in jail... we left in a state of shock...still has to pay the $7,000 and they have her ten horses.


 

So over the following days I rang to ask to buy some of them as did many of our friends, all of us told “they are not available for sale yet”.

When I rang the Saturday morning, I received the same reply and became angry. I told her “I was there when they were signed over... they have been available for sale for a week now!” She then replied. “well I suppose it wont hurt to tell you, they were sent to McGrath's Hill Sales this morning.”


 

I rang every person who had been trying to buy them, to get to McGrath's Hill sales as fast as you can. It was 9am.. I made it just in time to see the very man who had taken them, been with us when they were signed over walk into the ring with Little Raggy the first mare to be auctioned......


 

To my horror he turned to the auctioneer and told him looking him straight in the eye...”you are to accept bids only from the dogger’s for these horses.” Then turned on his heel, finishing with “and they are all mad.”

NOT HERESAY, I WAS THERE!

The man beside me began bidding so I knew he was a dogger... I explained there were people coming who wanted to buy them so he could make a profit ... he told me ” not to worry, Doug couldn’t make it, had rang and I am buying them for him”.

Except when the Crenel colt came in he didn’t bid, so I asked him why? He said “Doug had only said the mares.” So I asked him to buy the colts and the fillies for me.

But the Crenel colt had sold while we were talking; to the Qld dogger.... but he bought all the others for me. Despite my begging him, the Qld dogger wouldn’t resell so he went on the semi to Qld and slaughtered a week later.

I was so busy arranging transport and payment I didn’t ring Marion to tell her all but one were safe so far, until I was home but she never answered her phone.

 

I went to Marion's house the next day but she would not answer the door nor speak to me. I knew she was there I could hear her sobbing...


 

It took me three months to finally arrive as she was walking down from the shops and she couldn’t run from me..... I finally learned she had received a phone call that Saturday of the sale to advise her all ten had been slaughtered for dog meat.... She found homes for the other 17 and no one had ever came to check them...


 

She never recovered she still won’t answer a phone, she lives with her sister now and her sister answers the phone.

As for the inspector, he is now CEO OF RPSCA NSW!

 

 

Edited by asal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asal   

Perhaps one day, if enough of us keep asking "why is it so"

 

the rspca will finally be held accountable.

 

The target is not guilty until proven innocent. (which is usually too late for either the target or their animals)

 

that the target does have right to appeal, before their animals are disposed of .

 

Better yet, ALL of Leon Mills recommendations are fully adopted........

 

Love Professor Sumner Miller, one day the faith in Physic's will work.....

 

 

Edited by asal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

ut is it is fine to be rude to one you feel is not quite right in the head is it?  Other's have seen fit to tell me I need to see a doctor. something I should not feef offence about, If its any comfort have been constantly monitored by Nepean hospital since 2000 after Stringy disappeared

... Does that help you?

How was I rude to you, and please show me where i said you were not quite right in the head?  :confused:   
I said it's obvious you have a history/hatred of the RSPCA (because I've read other posts where you went on about them), and yet you never even replied to the rest of my post about the video you shared a link to.  Did you even read what I wrote and my concerns about it?
 

You went off on some tangent about something I know nothing about, and had nothing to do with the conversation we were having.  I'm sorry you and your friend had to go through that, but fixating on the RSPCA because of it,  to the exclusion of what others are posting,  seems to be counter productive and unhealthy. 

And it happened 24 years ago?

 

I won't be replying again, I don't see the point because the posts have gotten so far off track I can't keep up, but I do wish you well.

Edited by Animal House

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asal   

I dont count. As you said what happened to Marion happened 24 years ago, yet still she suffers, perhaps weakness of mind on her part. 

 

the target's suffering today and will tomorrow and into the future is who needs to be wished well.

 

Many of them will be weak of mind once they learn the hard way how defenceless they are to protect their pets the way the present laws are.  I wish them well, they will need it.

Edited by asal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tdierikx   

In asal's defence here, I can back up the feeling of trauma that lasts after action by the RSPCA... and I wasn't the actual target of same.

 

Unfortunately, due to the conditions placed by the court (at the behest of the RSPCA), one is not allowed to say anything negative about the RSPCA once one capitulates and pleads guilty in order to avoid being bankrupted trying to fight the charges laid. This means that once they have "won" in court, they can report to the media that you were found guilty (not that you pled under duress) of whatever charge... but you actually have no right to tell your side of the story in response. The only way to have your side of things heard is in court, and the tactic is to swamp your legal team with so much unnecessary paperwork and other crap that the bills climb astronomically... basically, if you don't have a few spare hundreds of thousands of dollars, your defense just will not be heard. Add to that, if you do spend all that money and end up in financial ruin, you'll never see a cent back in costs from the RSPCA. The system is badly broken in this respect, and there is no accountability placed on the RSPCA at any point.

 

I have no doubt that a large number of "guilty" parties are in fact not guilty of anything but the fear of bankruptcy...

 

Then there is social media... the backlash against those "guilty" parties once the "verdict" is published is intense to say the least... which is a whole new level of trauma inflicted...

 

T.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asal   

Well the rspca $29 bargain sale has had some fallout, not the kind of person to cope too well either, he couldnt take it to the vet before wednesday as he didnt have the money until then, hence him asking the rspca. 

 

as we all know a breeder would have been held responsible for selling a dog with such a problem under the 2 week warranty,

 

 

 

54407602_549253905567205_7066270436660609024_n.jpg

Edited by asal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asal   
 
 
 
Found the origional OP  POSTS on fb asking for advice. apparently they took the dog yesterday.
 

I adopted a dog from the RSPCA and he has a sore tooth. I called them so they could help him and did so expecting their assistance because it had only been a couple of weeks since I got him. I had been delayed calling them because I had been in hospital. They told me it was my responsibility and I had a good old go at them for not honouring their promise. Today I had an inspector on my doorstep expecting me to speak to him or he would get a warrant. The police called me and I explained it was over a sore tooth. I haven't heard back and am now concerned they will be back to take this dog that I love so very much. What on earth can I do about this? Thing is, I live 80 Kim's from the nearest RSPCA and for all the resources they have used to come to harass me, they could have checked his tooth. I am so upset and so angry about this. I have never in my 55 years, hurt or neglected an animal and I am stunned by this behaviour.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Comment
Comments
 
  •  
    S B Have you taken the Dog to the vet?
     
     
    •  
      A J I can't afford to at the moment.
       
       
    •  
      S B  . Then I am sorry but you should not have adopted the dog. 
      Can't afford a vet you shouldn't have a pet
       
      •  
  •  
    M M The main thing is the dog should be at a vet, a sore tooth is agony, could you not set up a payment plan with your vet?
     
     
  •  
    T S Vetpay might be able to help u.
     
     
  •  
    L RSPCA obviously doesn't want to pay for it. Easier (and cheaper) to seize the dog. They should have checked it before they sold it.
     
     
     
    •  
      S B  tooth problems can occur at any time. How would it be cheaper to seize dog.

      If you adopt a dog as soon as you sign the dog is your responsibility from that moment on. 
       
       
    •  
      J L Ya reckon?
       
      •  
  •  
    N C              Alex obviously passes the RSPCA s stringent new owner check, that all responsible pet sellers do. And he thought the RSPCA were a caring organisation. It’s the RSPCA being irresponsible
     
     
     
  •  
    S B WOW. Some seem more focused on the hatred of the RSPCA rather than in the suffering of this poor dog
     
     
    •  
      A J     The RSPCA needs to be held accountable for this situation. If you read my post, they failed to assist in that warranty period and remember I contacted them over the animals tooth and they chose to take that further when I called them on their failure to provide care within a warranty period. This is what this is all about. The animal is fine and eating and happy. He has a sore tooth and isn't compromised in any way regarding his health apart from that.
       
       
       
    •  
      A J Furthermore, it is very important to have an initial agreement that if the animal needs care in the first couple of weeks (especially as my animal is older) it should be provided and not reflect at all on my ability to care for the animal.
       
       
       
  •  
    T S 5 freedoms of animal Care. Free from pain and discomfort. 
    The rspca needs to be held accountable yes, but the dog needs treatment before the infection goes deeper. 
    Please look into vetpay, or after pay, or something like that if u can't afford the direct initial costs. Then send the receipt to the rspca and ombudsman and get them accountable for adopting a dog unfit to be adopted out yet.
     
     
    •  
      A J My animals always take priority. Please don't assume otherwise and of course on Wednesday I intend to see to that.
       
       
    •  
      Se B WEDNESDAY OMG
       
       
       
  •  
    L C Your dog, your responsibility
     
     
     
  •  
    M M Typical rspca, after prospective cases. See if a local newspaper would take on the story, im sure theyll forget your adress!
     
     
    J G I have been given word that this dog has been taken from this guy by rspca... is there any truth to this pls... ???.. Anyone!                
     
    T W Absolutely shameful of rspca
     
    •  
    A S Omg typical rspca bullying bullshit if this is true not concerned about helping dog as per usual won't spend a penny of their mllions helping animals anyway whatdo you expect selling for 29.00 per animal sickens me all those poor animals bastards
     
     
     
  •  
     
Edited by asal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asal   

 oh dear, just heard they weren't content with just taking the dog, apparently he had another pet and they took it too on the grounds that as he had ptsd , a mental health issue, none of his pets were safe. so hope he is ok and has friends to help him. so lesson for today, never admit to them you have a problem obviously

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tdierikx   
19 minutes ago, Powerlegs said:

27 purebred puppies for them to sell at an inflated price, and kill off the adults after doping them stupid for 4 months... most likely charging the breeder kenneling costs for those 4 months (and all those lovely drugs don't come cheap either)... grrr!

 

People wonder why so many have negative opinions of the RSPCA...

 

Thanks @shel and @Powerlegs for sharing this story...

 

T.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asal   
2 hours ago, Powerlegs said:

so incredibly sad and what an indictment of their stupidity.

when my friend Nancy had a heart attack I ended up with all her bitches to care for. None of them was happy in any way when I had to catch and put them in carry cages instead of their adored owner. Talking here of chihuahua's who can be incredibly loyal to just one person when its a one owner home, her children had married and her husband had died.

As they had to be removed to my home I had no option but to catch them, nine tried barking and growling at me, but didn't actually bite me.  five bit me full depth of their teeth, I think that counts as aggression.

 

three months later all could be called and handled without risk of being bitten even though the five biters, still were convinced I had stolen them and still looking for Nancy. do not consider myself a dog whisperer, just bribed em with treats.

 

the ones who were in pup bonded with me as soon as they had their puppies and I had their scent on me, smooth sailing after that with them so I am doubly astonished at the report per the ones who had puppies???????

 

they must be so longing for their humans, so sad for them

 

Nancy's girls went utterly nuts with delight, when she finally came home from hospital and that was almost six months later , it was miracle she didn't die, over half the muscle in her heart had

died.

Edited by asal
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asal   

Just received an email from Animal Welfare.

 

 

such a different story and outcome to the so sad one for the poor border collies.  I particulary noticed the sentance I highlighted which I have found  worked for any with pups I looked after too

 

only posted the last of it as its very long otherwise.

 

"

“I was just shocked, I couldn’t believe the state that this gorgeous girl was in. I truly didn’t think she would make it, I remembered telling the team including volunteers not to get attached to Buffy and her puppy because I knew how heart breaking it would be if they didn’t pull through.” – Dr Deshaylia Moodley

While Buffy was under close monitoring, the vet team now had a helpless little newborn puppy in their care. Buffy could not care for Rupert. She could barely lift her head or open her eyes when he cried. Adoringly named Rupert, this little male puppy and sole survivor of his mother’s heartbreaking experience, was also in need of critical attention. Rupert was bottle-fed a specific formula by caring vet nurses around-the-clock during the time of Buffy’s recovery. But what Rupert needed most, was his mother.

“One morning I came in to see that Buffy was awake and finally looking brighter. Her small body curled around Rupert, almost trying to protect him” – Dr Deshaylia Moodley

Two weeks on from her surgery, Buffy was on the mends and finally able to look after her very excited puppy. Rupert was essential for Buffy’s recovery and helped her overcome her fear of humans. It was soon clear that this tiny girl was afraid of people being near her and was timid even with the gentlest of nurses. Her emotional recovery had only just begun.

With loving care, and slow interaction, Buffy eventually began to trust the regular faces she would recognise. The vet nurses that tended to her wound, the Veterinarians who would routinely monitor her, and the volunteers who would offer her a kind hand. Slowly but surely, Buffy was learning how to receive and give affection. After learning to trust, Buffy began to reveal her incredibly sweet and gentle personality.

It takes an entire team to care for these animals in need and without your support, we simply cannot do the vital work that we do. Please consider a gift to ensure we can continue to care for animals like Buffy who urgently need us in times of crisis.  "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tdierikx   

My years volunteering with special needs dogs had me learn that most will respond well to gentle and positive interactions... I've seen cases and helped rehabilitate animals that were in very poor physical and mental states. I will note that a small number were not able to be rehabilitated and safely rehomed... but that was very SMALL percentage.

 

The key is staffing appropriately to ensure that those needing rehabilitation get the proper amount of positive interaction/attention... something that I feel may be sadly lacking in a busy shelter environment such as RSPCA kennels. We had 80 kennels at our rescue, but limited the numbers in care at any one time in order to make sure that each dog got the proper care and attention it needed if staff levels were low on any particular day - remember that rescues and shelters rely a lot on volunteer staff, who may or may not be competely reliable as to whether they turn up on any given day.

 

I'm appalled that 10/10 of these border collies were deemed still as "broken" as when they were siezed some 4+ months after being taken from the only home/people they had ever known. Surely, if proper efforts had been made to rehabilitate them, most should have been showing some signs of improvement? I find it hard to believe that 10/10 dogs were unable to be rehabilitated in any way by so-called "experts" in the field...

 

T.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
asal   

found out more about Alex in Qld who made the mistake of ringing the rspca when he spotted the dog he bought from them had a sore tooth.

 

He had two cats and one other dog.

 

When they came on Tuesday aside from taking the dog they sold him they took both the cats and his other dog as well, have refused to even say where they are. At this point no reason was given for taking them other than his mental condition, no charges have been laid.  

 

This is rspca qld.

 

apparently the original photo i put was exactly what happened to make him open the door.  I  expect nothing can be done to help him get any back. So hope people can stay with him, he so needs to not be left alone, ptsd is a terrible thing to deal with.  From what I have learned presently he is totally alone so pray he can hang in until help arrives.

 

apparently there is a group attempting to get this made public in the press and media, I suspect, but hope I am wrong, but if past is anything to go by the only media release aired or printed  will be from the rspca.

 

.

 

eg

 

54407602_549253905567205_7066270436660609024_n.jpg

Edited by asal
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×