Long Wait - 80 Charges.

[mixeduppup]

Just a remark. People are saying it's filmed at night but in some of the shots you can see daylight through the doors and windows.

[Tapua]

My Labs will play with any bedding so straw is the answer especially in winter. I have wheaten straw in thier plastic kennels which are within the big concrete kennels. Water buckets are outsie of the actual kennel which means the kennels dogs rarely emiminate in their pens either. I do not keep water in the house water is outsie that will allow the dogs to indicate they need to go outside but generally they go in and out he back door which is propped open (no snake problem here) Dogs do need access to water - so having it outside the house allows the dog to respond to his thirst and most often than not elliminate while outside. It makes house training very very easy.

[Linda K]

Oh straw would definitely make you an evil puppy farmer, irrespective how many dogs you have, according to the AR nuts, as it is obvious people only use straw to cut down on costs. Seriously, why do those morons think that straw is used in horse boxes - it is great insulation, and wonderfully warm. Guess they better not visit too many farms then and see all those farm dogs in the hay barns. They seriously are tools who do not have a clue at all about animal behaviour and husbandry, only their own fluffy ideas of how it should be. But since so many of them think they should be living in homes and treated like members f the family, and are making calls for annual licences Australia wide, independent inspections etc, wonder just how many of them would be happy for their own homes to have the same sort of thing for ALL members of their family - bet they would be up in arms if someone was to suggest that in order to have kids, you needed a licence and an inspection to make sure your home was clean, and you knew how to look after children

[Alibi]

Just a remark. People are saying it's filmed at night but in some of the shots you can see daylight through the doors and windows.

I noticed this too. Elderly dogs which it looks like some were should always have access to water and something soft to lay on.

[Zereuloh]

Just a remark. People are saying it's filmed at night but in some of the shots you can see daylight through the doors and windows.

I noticed this too. Elderly dogs which it looks like some were should always have access to water and something soft to lay on.

IT actually looks like footage was shot at different times. Some of it looks like its night, and some of it is daytime. Either way, its trespassing, and I tend to agree with the comments on how well groomed ALL those dogs are for neglected animals. I really dislike how these animal rights groups go about things, and have a general lack of understanding for how things actually work. Its like the sheep mulesing argument, they just have no idea!

[Pretty Miss Emma]

The concern here the way the 'evidence' was gathered was unlawful. If she does loose in court what sort of precedence does that set?

Is the AA footage going to be used in court? and even if it isn't, has putting it on national television compromised the integrity of the jury?

Any charges referred to the Courts by a council will be summary offences - will be in the Magistrates court, no jury. But rules of evidence still apply.

I don't know about Vic, but in NSW I don't think that council officers are "authorised officers" under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. So if that was the case any charges referred by council would not be cruelty ones. DOes anyone in Vic know whether council officers are authorised under cruelty legislation down there?

I believe that in Vic council officer are not "authorised officers".

[Alyosha]

Sounds about right. If that is the case any offences referred by council would be more likely to be under rules and regs that are council responsibility, like housing standards or animal numbers etc.

[Silvawilow]

The concern here the way the 'evidence' was gathered was unlawful. If she does loose in court what sort of precedence does that set?

Is the AA footage going to be used in court? and even if it isn't, has putting it on national television compromised the integrity of the jury?

Any charges referred to the Courts by a council will be summary offences - will be in the Magistrates court, no jury. But rules of evidence still apply.

I don't know about Vic, but in NSW I don't think that council officers are "authorised officers" under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. So if that was the case any charges referred by council would not be cruelty ones. DOes anyone in Vic know whether council officers are authorised under cruelty legislation down there?

I believe that in Vic council officer are not "authorised officers".

Doesn't it depend on the individual ACO's qualifications and whether the Council enforces particular legislation in the municipality or the RSPCA?

[Alyosha]

No. It depends on the Act. It will specify who are authorised under it.

[Steve]

No. It depends on the Act. It will specify who are authorised under it.

In Victoria anyone the premier has given the nod to is authourised - council officers were included as far as I know inthe last legislative up date .This gave greater powers to both council and RSPCA .

There are things going on here we need to learn about ,understand and know about - who is prosecuting for example, and why don't they say out loud what the charges are etc. Lots to say about it all - though it needs to be taken off public forums.

[Jed]

Meanwhile,where are the court charges for cruelty?

Thanks to AA, AWL and RSPCA, we are back to the days of Salem and the witch hunts.

The victims are presumed guilty without any trials, or any evidence.

[Jed]

This topic was put on the forum on 14/8, with a sub-heading which is incorrect. With respect to these people, I think the subheading should be removed.

[sandgrubber]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/07/us/taping-of-farm-cruelty-is-becoming-the-crime.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Some states here in the US are explicitly outlawing covert filming of animal establishments

Quoting from the URL above

But a dozen or so state legislatures have had a different reaction: They proposed or enacted bills that would make it illegal to covertly videotape livestock farms, or apply for a job at one without disclosing ties to animal rights groups. They have also drafted measures to require such videos to be given to the authorities almost immediately, which activists say would thwart any meaningful undercover investigation of large factory farms.

Critics call them “Ag-Gag” bills.

Some of the legislation appears inspired by the American Legislative Exchange Council, a business advocacy group with hundreds of state representatives from farm states as members. The group creates model bills, drafted by lobbyists and lawmakers, that in the past have included such things as “stand your ground” gun laws and tighter voter identification rules.

[Steve]

This topic was put on the forum on 14/8, with a sub-heading which is incorrect. With respect to these people, I think the subheading should be removed.

Are you saying that Casey Shire have lied and that there are no charges and its not in the magistrates court ?

Quote from Casey Shire - https://www.facebook...151507023752471

We can confirm that; • The business owner has been charged with 80 offences for not complying with the Code of Practice for the Operation of Breeding and Rearing Establishments standards, Prevention of Cruelty to Animals offences and the City of Casey Community Local Law 2/2010. The prosecution will continue at the Magistrate's Court later this month. Council continues to monitor the welfare of the dogs on-site.

and

Thanks for your feedback. Council does not wish to jeopardise its prosecution of this case as a result of being seen to condone or support inappropriate and/or threatening comments posted by others on Council’s Facebook page. We will continue to monitor this page and any comments that breach Council’s Facebook disclaimer will be removed.

Edited August 24, 2013 by Steve