|
Post by jackiedo on Jan 13, 2013 13:06:30 GMT 1
Being aware of some of our officers dealing with a similar case at the moment I can tell you the length of time it takes to get something to court is horrendous. A case can NOT be perceived to be pre-judged. Proving immediate danger and getting a vet to sign an order is not easy, only the very worst are taken. Photos are generally NOT made public as it may predjudice a fair trial. And everyone dealing with this sort of thing has nightmares and wishes to god that they could just step in. Any horses taken and rehabilitated (must be kept as they are evidence) until after the trial, if the owner refuses to sign them over can, at the will of the court be made subject of a deprivation order. However, they are still the legal property of the owner and must be sold at market value and any money left over (once costs if they are awarded by the court are taken into consideration) goes back to the owner....
|
|
debsmq
Elementary Poster
Posts: 72
|
Post by debsmq on Jan 13, 2013 17:00:04 GMT 1
I honestly can't believe how many people say how well those poor horses looked....whilst I dont believe that the RSPCA acted correctly, neither has the old guy, whether he is 'ill' or not he is incapable of looking after the horses properly. Just because other horses and ponies are far worse off that doesnt make it right.....
|
|
|
Post by mandal on Jan 13, 2013 17:01:08 GMT 1
Thank you jackiedo. I can't help stating again that I believe there should be changes in the law to deal with very extreme cases we have heard about over the years.
ps. There are sections in the Mental Health Act to remove humans, who are a danger to themselves and or others, to a place of safety. Surely something similar could be put in the Animal Welfare Act?
|
|
debsmq
Elementary Poster
Posts: 72
|
Post by debsmq on Jan 13, 2013 17:08:58 GMT 1
The RSPCA were also aware of Amersham & went there many times over the years I believe, before the final outcome........ This is correct, the neighbours had complained for many years despite being frightened of repercussions.
|
|
|
Post by lawyerbunny on Jan 13, 2013 18:36:04 GMT 1
Jeez...the internet strikes again. We should be careful what we read and believe and certainly be careful about what we post (if anyone wants a reminder of the law on defamation, just shout... ) Whatever the truth of this situation (and many thanks Catrin for posing Michelle's reply) there is clearly a need for this man to receive advice, practical help and support. I can't see any great benefit in discussing a situation on the ground that none of us have seen. We all know that there are few better ways to distort a picture than posting about it on the internet, sadly... or for that matter 'trusting' the editors of a TV programme! Re. evicting someone from agricultural land, it's fairly straightforward from a legal point of view and with no need for a court order if someone's not living on the land, but very difficult from a practical point of view: securing the land and dealing with the animals complicates matters.
|
|
|
Post by elkerlodge on Jan 13, 2013 19:55:26 GMT 1
I totally agree, a professional organisation to acting so unprofessionally, and dangerous
I cant believe it was safe to dart a horse while knelt in a group of others.
Maybe the IH charity for next year should be to train RSPC officers in Psychology & Human Handling.
|
|