More Rspca Cases Thrown Out Of Court

[readie 184]

http://www.countryside-alliance.org/ca/campaigns-hunting/rspca-private-prosecution-of-avon-vale-thrown-out-of-court

 

[paulus 26]

http://www.countryside-alliance.org/ca/campaigns-hunting/rspca-private-prosecution-of-avon-vale-thrown-out-of-court

 

its seems Mr Rees had it spot on again

[whippet 99 2,613]

fooking brill .,.................about time this all stopped and the way there carrying on ,...............it will be a useless cause as proven time and time again as political propaganda.....

[arnieboy 93]

yet another waste of money when will they learn?

[paulus 26]

yet another waste of money when will they learn?

when they run out of money and donators

[pip1968 2,490]

lacs said they will spend 1million on training 8 ex cops up to monitor hunts,what goods that if they havnt had a prosicution in 2 seasons

[whippet 99 2,613]

lacs said they will spend 1million on training 8 ex cops up to monitor hunts,what goods that if they havnt had a prosicution in 2 seasons

the thing is with the law as it stands there wasting there time ,.............we can drag hunt all we want but from decades of breeding those hounds wont stop if they smell the real thing ...........its impossible and with the land you drag hunt over ,.............live foxes cross them all the time and when you got so many hounds drag hunting under the control of the huntsmen you are going to have accidents............

it dont take a genius to work that out , ....but the intention is too drag hunt and sometimes when there trying to stop hounds the rest of the pack wonder off and can start hunting live scent...............so as fooked up as it is you are always going to have accidents and if these idiots want to film the accidents what happen then let them carry on as the hunting intentions are what matters and this is always proven in each case ,..........ending up a lost cause........

[mushroom 12,879]

lacs said they will spend 1million on training 8 ex cops up to monitor hunts,what goods that if they havnt had a prosicution in 2 seasons

:laugh:

 

Fec 'em let them spend their money

[the_stig 6,614]

more fecking tax payers money ----

[pip1968 2,490]

 

lacs said they will spend 1million on training 8 ex cops up to monitor hunts,what goods that if they havnt had a prosicution in 2 seasons

the thing is with the law as it stands there wasting there time ,.............we can drag hunt all we want but from decades of breeding those hounds wont stop if they smell the real thing ...........its impossible and with the land you drag hunt over ,.............live foxes cross them all the time and when you got so many hounds drag hunting under the control of the huntsmen you are going to have accidents............

it dont take a genius to work that out , ....but the intention is too drag hunt and sometimes when there trying to stop hounds the rest of the pack wonder off and can start hunting live scent...............so as fooked up as it is you are always going to have accidents and if these idiots want to film the accidents what happen then let them carry on as the hunting intentions are what matters and this is always proven in each case ,..........ending up a lost cause........

 

spot on that whippet 99 its a stupid law that cant be enforced as mistakes will happen

[The one 8,467]

Let them spend there money the folk donating it will be getting sick of it

[finder 6]

good stuff.

[spade 224]

Shame the arsepca weren't made to pay the defendants £20k costs instead of the tax payer.

[sussex 5,777]

The more lacs spend the quicker there disappear up there own arse... along with the arse spca..

[paulus 26]

Clive Rees

 

• Success for the Avon Vale Five.
  
  Hi everyone.
  
  I invited you to watch this space for the result of the Avon Vale Hunt Spectacular. The final performance was today at Chippenham Magistrates' Court before District Judge Cooper. I represented all five defendants as solicitor until for technical reasons two weeks ago Ian Kelsey of Bristol took over Mr. Jonathan Seed's case. Today I acted as advocate for Paul Tylee-Hinder, a former gamekeeper, Josh Charlesworth a local farmer, and Stewart Radbourne MFH, while Ben Pethers the hunt terrierman was represented at the hearing by Janet Gedrych, a barrister instructed by me.
  
  We knew following protracted negotiations that the RSPCA was going to withdraw the Hunting Act allegations against all five men, while Mr. Radbourne and Mr. Pethers had agreed to plead guilty to causing damage to the sett when they had dug down to rescue Ben's dog, which had gone into the sett of its own accord when Ben had left it sitting on his quad.
  
  The dog had been left there while Pethers and Radbourne went to check a place where hounds were suspected of having "cold-marked" a fox, and where the farmer one side of the hedge had given permission for foxes to be flushed and shot humanely by the hunt.
  
  Both men admitted that they had been technically wrong to dig into the sett but the Judge agreed that their main concern had been to rescue the dog. He told them within a few minutes of hearing the mitigation that he would deal with them by way of a fine. The potential penalty includes a fine of £10,000 and 6 months in gaol.
  
  The RSPCA's costs were again astronomical; in the region of £50,000! Some of the Society's costs were ordered to be paid out of "Central Funds"; that is by the taxpayer, but what is interesting is that the Judge refused to allow the fees claimed by the RSPCA's expert witness Prof. Stephen Harris of Bristol University whose evidence he described as not helpful in the circumstances of the particular case, especially since the RSPCA had withdrawn all Hunting Act allegations.
  
  The refusal to order payment of Prof. Harris' costs is not surprising in my view because Prof. Harris' opinion had been based on witness statements alone. Unlike in the Heythrop case he had not been shown any video of hounds hunting, and on this occasion no-one had even seen a fox! His report was not the kind of report that expert witnesses are meant to create; it was in my view a cynical "points-scoring" exercise, with every point being taken against the hunt.
  
  The Defendants on the other hand received the benefit of a Central Funds Costs Order. That means that their legal fees will be mostly funded by you and me as taxpayers rather than by the RSPCA which brought the case. That's good news for me but not such good news for the taxpayers of the UK.
  
  It is a further example, if one were needed, of the RSPCA - a private prosecutor - incurring costs in prosecuting hunting folk and then seeking to recoup as much as possible from the public purse. No wonder there is no money left for genuine criminal defence work!
  
  Justice has been done. The two men who had been guilty of a miscalculation in the heat of the moment received a fine. No other orders were made. The Judge commented that it was a shame that the lawyers had not resolved matters much earlier, but it takes two to tango!
  
  I am sure the five defendants in this case would agree with the District Judge's views, but it might have been better never to have alleged a breach of the Hunting Act in the first place!
  
  Clive Rees.