Successful Prosecution - Warrant Issued

[Sheridan]

How can the rspca justify 15,000 bucks in court costs for an ex parte matter that probably took less than ten minutes?

I think the answer to that, Raz, is that it's the RSPCA and they don't have to justify anything.

[BlackJaq]

How can the rspca justify 15,000 bucks in court costs for an ex parte matter that probably took less than ten minutes?

I think the answer to that, Raz, is that it's the RSPCA and they don't have to justify anything.

Also "rehabilitate" and "regain their trust" sounds better than "we will raise these pups with sufficient socialization, appropriate nutrition and proper health care just as an ethical registered breeder would" and the emotional drivel is where most of their donations come from, I imagine. Joe Public reads this article and there will be tears of compassion brimming in his eyes and wads of cash spilling from his wallet, it will never even occur to him to question what is written :p

[j]

How can the rspca justify 15,000 bucks in court costs for an ex parte matter that probably took less than ten minutes?

It just says costs, so that probably takes into account court costs plus food, medication, desexing etc etc for the entire time the dogs were in their care. Until the courts awarded custody of the dogs to the RSPCA, they weren't the owners, but were obliged to care for the animals, so have now claimed those costs from the owner. They were seized in October and the initial court matter when the RSPCA were granted custody was early March. That's five months

[raz]

How can the rspca justify 15,000 bucks in court costs for an ex parte matter that probably took less than ten minutes?

It just says costs, so that probably takes into account court costs plus food, medication, desexing etc etc for the entire time the dogs were in their care. Until the courts awarded custody of the dogs to the RSPCA, they weren't the owners, but were obliged to care for the animals, so have now claimed those costs from the owner. They were seized in October and the initial court matter when the RSPCA were granted custody was early March. That's five months

i dont care. What other charity in Australia is answerable to no one but is allowed to set up their own prosecutor on a committee whre a committee member gets to fling tens of thousands of dollars in costs each court case to his own legal firm. Disgraceful! The police prosecutor should be handling these matters in Magistrates Courts!

[redangel]

I know this is a little OT but why is it when a horse is poorly treated/left for dead by a person it seems the authorities are not truly interested, yet a dog prosecution can happen so easily & attract hefty fines/costs? Maybe Im seeing it wrong? Is it becausde horses are deemed "livestock"

Im glad people are brought to justice, but dont understand the costs awarded & rehabilitation required for 5 day old pups in good condition in the case above. I guess given more info it may be come apparent

[Steve]

Pretty sad that the owner doesn't get a second opinion - We are told the dog had a uterine infection,worms and fleas. Where is the harm in allowing the owner to have their own vet also examine the dog and either agree or disagree? Someone who isnt employed by the Rspca needs to be able to take a look. Im not saying this one is not what its reported to be but surely everyone is a sitting duck without it.

[Steve]

I know this is a little OT but why is it when a horse is poorly treated/left for dead by a person it seems the authorities are not truly interested, yet a dog prosecution can happen so easily & attract hefty fines/costs? Maybe Im seeing it wrong? Is it becausde horses are deemed "livestock"

Im glad people are brought to justice, but dont understand the costs awarded & rehabilitation required for 5 day old pups in good condition in the case above. I guess given more info it may be come apparent

I guess its easy to pick a dog up and look after it off site than it is a horse - but Im guessing . Around here they come in and give you a list of things to do to fix the situation and if it isnt done they take the animal - makes no difference what species it is.

[Sheridan]

I know this is a little OT but why is it when a horse is poorly treated/left for dead by a person it seems the authorities are not truly interested, yet a dog prosecution can happen so easily & attract hefty fines/costs? Maybe Im seeing it wrong? Is it becausde horses are deemed "livestock"

Im glad people are brought to justice, but dont understand the costs awarded & rehabilitation required for 5 day old pups in good condition in the case above. I guess given more info it may be come apparent

I guess its easy to pick a dog up and look after it off site than it is a horse - but Im guessing . Around here they come in and give you a list of things to do to fix the situation and if it isnt done they take the animal - makes no difference what species it is.

Are you familiar with the Penderlea Common horses that the RSPCA is apparently investigating? As far as I'm aware, not one has been impounded. It's not that hard to get a float, I'd have thought, at least for an animal welfare organisation.

[redangel]

I have heard of this

Sheridan I know of a case where a horse was down for days on end, had gaping sores/malnutrition & nobody stepped in. When a rescue did step in & nursed horse back to health despite several other horses being rescued from this persons keep, vet attendance, documentation etc..noting was done to this day by the rspca/authorities & the person still keeps horses.

It seems hit and miss as to which animals get help, which people get prosecuted & what penalty they get.

If an organisation is set up to care for animals, accepts charity to do so...why is it not bound to answer when someone asks a question? Is there a code of conduct/duty of care?

[WoofnHoof]

I think in the case of horses it's partially due to being a bit harder to prove that the owner hasn't been feeding and watering it, if it's in a paddock with grass and water available a lot of the inspectors don't have the education to recognise whether that is sufficient. I've made complaints about horses in the past and the inspector has come back with the tired old "It's got food and water, must be skinny because it's old". I've seen more underweight horses than I've had hot dinners, the lack of understanding of the basics of equine nutrition is depressing.

The place where some of my horses are agisted does a lot of rehab of RSPCA horses, so they must be seizing (or getting surrendered) a fair amount of horses but it isn't following through to prosecutions.

[BlackJaq]

Hate that stupid "it's skinny because it's old" line. Makes me want to tear my hair out in great big chunks and rage like Rumpelstiltskin

Edited April 26, 2013 by BlackJaq

[disintegratus]

I know this is a little OT but why is it when a horse is poorly treated/left for dead by a person it seems the authorities are not truly interested, yet a dog prosecution can happen so easily & attract hefty fines/costs? Maybe Im seeing it wrong? Is it becausde horses are deemed "livestock"

Im glad people are brought to justice, but dont understand the costs awarded & rehabilitation required for 5 day old pups in good condition in the case above. I guess given more info it may be come apparent

It's because a horse is not as cute and fluffy as puppies. You'll find the exact same thing across the board with any animal that's not a puppy or a kitten. The RSPCA will spend thousands "rehabilitating" a kitten that's been stuck in a drain, when obviously the most humane thing to do would be to euthanase it immediately, but will not hesitate to put down hundreds of perfectly healthy, rehomable animals because of overcrowding. If they instead spent those exorbitant amounts of money imrpving their facilities, they'd have a greater capacity to help more animals. They also will not lift a finger to help an animal if it had the bad luck to be born with scales instead of fur.

Edited April 26, 2013 by disintegratus