SHWNGO Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 http://dandenong-leader.whereilive.com.au/news/story/tooradin-puppy-farm-owner-faces-115-charges/ A TOORADIN business owner has pleaded guilty to 115 charges relating to the illegal operation of a puppy farm. Derul Van Hollis, 68, fronted Dandenong Magistrates' Court today after four adjournments of the case. His solicitor David Starvaggi entered a guilty plea on his client's behalf and asked Magistrate Brian Barrow for an adjournment until February. Leader viewed the charge sheets for the case, which includes 115 charges against Mr Van Hollis and a separate 115 charges against Demfield Ltd, which trades as Tooradin Knackery. Both sets of charges are being heard concurrently and include conducting a breeding and rearing establishment that was not registered. The case comes after Casey Council executed a search warrant at the South Gippsland Highway business on January 16, 2012. The case will return to the court on February 28. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 So do we know what the charges are - cruelty or just not having the permits etc ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHWNGO Posted December 7, 2012 Author Share Posted December 7, 2012 doesn't say other than "include conducting a breeding and rearing establishment that was not registered." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Rusty Bucket Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 You can like Casey Council on facebook - they put the story up there https://www.facebook.com/CityOfCasey I think it's more than just being unregsitered ie that would be 1 count out of 115. So it's probably 114 counts of animal cruelty - one for each critter on the site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda K Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 according to the Age, he was charged under "Oscars Law" - hadn't actually heard that had passed into being yet, certainly think all the people campaigning saying they want Oscars law have heard it passed into being in 2011. Or maybe I have just been asleep and not noticed Big Ted sneaking yet another law change by us all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 No mention of cruelty. Quote In the Dandenong Magistrates Court on Thursday, Derul Van Hollis and his company Demfield Pty Ltd pleaded guilty to running an unregistered breeding business and failing to comply with the code of practice for breeding and rearing establishments. The prosecution, by Casey Council, was the first brought under "Oscar's law", named after a puppy rescued from a dog-breeding factory in central Victoria in 2011. Magistrate Brian Barrow blocked a media request for access to the brief of evidence, after counsel for the council, Brett Melke, argued that although the defendant had pleaded guilty, a substantial number of issues were still in dispute. Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/breeder-pleads-guilty-to-puppy-farm-charges-20121206-2axp3.html#ixzz2ELv5k5P7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jed Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 T/A Tooradin Knackery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redangel Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 "Oscars Law" hasnt been adopted as far as I know...it is a proposed policy is it not? Unlikely that the owner has been charged under "Oscars law" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Rusty Bucket Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 There's a lot more info about it in the older posts on the facebook page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 There's no such thing as "Oscars Law" it exists only in the imaginations of the AR loonies, so no one's going to be charged under that any time soon. It would be interesting to see the list of charges Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tralee Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) There's no such thing as "Oscars Law" it exists only in the imaginations of the AR loonies, so no one's going to be charged under that any time soon. It would be interesting to see the list of charges AR loonies I assume you are calling Animal Rescuers loonies IMB that constitutes the promotion of neglect and omission and the blind ignorance of injustice towards senitient beings less fortunate than ourselves. It would be interesting to see what you really meant and how I must have miscontrued the acurate sense of your response. Edited December 7, 2012 by Tralee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) I'm not sure how one could think of Debra Tranter as an "animal rescuer" , she's more of a tresspassing theif and certainly an animal rights loonie.. People seem happy enough to follow her though and to put faith in something ( Oscars Law) , which is never to be. They can't even work out the definition of what a "puppy farmer" is, let alone call for legislation to stop it. Edited December 7, 2012 by Pav Lova Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redangel Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) deleted... Edited December 7, 2012 by redangel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 There is a difference between animal RIGHTS and animal rescue Tralee and there is no such thing as Oscars law in law. Before anyone gets too caught up in all of this before we know what it is they have been charged with be aware that new laws were bought into Victoria which enable them to charge people for not having their Domestic Animal Licences or their development applications in place.They dont need to be keeping them in poor conditions or treating them cruelly for charges to be made or to be found guilty of this crime . Do you all have a current development application and approvals to enable you to breed dogs from your property ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) Were these people breeding designer dogs in sub standard conditions? What is it exactly that they have been charged with? Edited December 8, 2012 by Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) Noticed you edited your post Trespass is never necessary .If there is reason to believe someone is doing something which would require someone coming in and catching them there is already a process in place which can be done legally . Edited December 8, 2012 by Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redangel Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) Steve I have no idea what dogs were involved or if the conditions were sub standard....I was commenting on the article that said the person allegedly was running a puppy farm (it isnt proven) Edited December 7, 2012 by redangel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) Yep but an illegal puppy farm in Victoria is anyone who breeds a dog without the necessary paperwork and approvals and who doesnt fit exactly the requirements for breeding establishments This may be that they had a couple of entire dogs and a litter and didnt cover the paperwork,didnt have their dogs registered or have the correct kennel facilities such as a disused piggery. You need to understand big commercial kennels which do breed designer dogs in disused piggeries wouldnt be those ones being charged because they have the necessary approvals and tick all of the boxes for keeping records etc Ill wait before I make judgement and I would advise others do so too. In the last few months many very small breeders including registered purebred have had visits from council in Victoria to ensure they have a kennel area , which fits the requirements for the codes and have been given 28 days to comply if they like them but there isn't anything in law to say they have to give someone time to comply before they charge them. One this week was a working dog breeder who now has to decide on building something that resembles a piggery or desex their dogs but they could have just as easily been charged for being an illegal puppy farm. Edited December 8, 2012 by Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redangel Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Thank you for the information. I understand where you are coming from now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 (edited) Thank you for the opportunity to be able to explain it! Edited December 8, 2012 by Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now