RSPB and DOE setting up falcon breeder's

[SPAR 2]

Please tell me Derek if you cant steal birds from the wild why are the convictions stated here related to you?

 

Main

sampling

data

Results of DNA testing Conviction

date

Offences Sentence Porsecutor

(assisting

agency)

6-Jul-93 Case revolved around 12 1992 and 12 1993 peregrine

offspring, 20 of which were DNA profiled. No parents

available for DNA testing (claimed to have been stolen)

but results showed that claimed sibling groups contained

unrelated birds and that at least 5 female parents, rather

than the claimed two, were needed to produce the 20

offspring tested. A further four untraced offspring were

all believed of wild origin.

May-95 COTES 18 months

imprisoment

POLICE (RSPB)

9-Jul-93 Four peregrines shown to be unrelated to claimed

parents (note four further untraced peregrines also likely

to be of wild origin)

Apr-94 WCA Fine £750 Costs

£100

POLICE (RSPB)

 

 

27-Feb-94 23 peregrines were shown to be unrelated to claimed

parents. This included offspring back to 1987 and 16

from 18 progeny declared as captive-bred in 1993. A

number of other peregrines were not traced for DNA

testing and are believed likely to be of wild origin.

Sep-95 COTES Four months

imprisonment

POLICE (RSPB)

 

31-Jan-96 Two 1993 peregrine sibling offspring shown to be

unrelated to claimed parents or each other. A further

third bird, claimed as a wild-disabled bird, was probably

a sibling to one of the two unrelated offspring and also

illegally taken from the wild.

Apr-97 WCA Fine £450

Costs £700

POLICE (RSPB)

 

27-Feb-94 As above, co-defendant Dec-95 WCA Absolute discharge POLICE (RSPB)

Wildlife related investigations involving DNA profiling

WCA - Wildlife and Coutryside Act 1981

COTES - Control of Trade in Endangered Species (Enforcement) Regulations 1985 and 1997

PBA - Protection of badgers Act 1992

Crim Decep - Criminal Deception, Theft Act 1968

PAA - Protection of animals Act 1911

DDA - Dangerous dogs Act 1991

 

I think you were F***** up the arse sidewards when it comes to the RSPB and COE caught red handed trying to escape from the truth which you never had a leg to stand on. If I was you I would personally be thinking about seeing a SHRINK!!!!!!!!!!!

ATB

Edited March 29, 2008 by SPAR

[Johnjo 0]

Please tell me Derek if you cant steal birds from the wild why are the convictions stated here related to you?

 

Main

sampling

data

Results of DNA testing Conviction

date

Offences Sentence Porsecutor

(assisting

agency)

6-Jul-93 Case revolved around 12 1992 and 12 1993 peregrine

offspring, 20 of which were DNA profiled. No parents

available for DNA testing (claimed to have been stolen)

but results showed that claimed sibling groups contained

unrelated birds and that at least 5 female parents, rather

than the claimed two, were needed to produce the 20

offspring tested. A further four untraced offspring were

all believed of wild origin.

May-95 COTES 18 months

imprisoment

POLICE (RSPB)

9-Jul-93 Four peregrines shown to be unrelated to claimed

parents (note four further untraced peregrines also likely

to be of wild origin)

Apr-94 WCA Fine £750 Costs

£100

POLICE (RSPB)

 

 

27-Feb-94 23 peregrines were shown to be unrelated to claimed

parents. This included offspring back to 1987 and 16

from 18 progeny declared as captive-bred in 1993. A

number of other peregrines were not traced for DNA

testing and are believed likely to be of wild origin.

Sep-95 COTES Four months

imprisonment

POLICE (RSPB)

 

31-Jan-96 Two 1993 peregrine sibling offspring shown to be

unrelated to claimed parents or each other. A further

third bird, claimed as a wild-disabled bird, was probably

a sibling to one of the two unrelated offspring and also

illegally taken from the wild.

Apr-97 WCA Fine £450

Costs £700

POLICE (RSPB)

 

27-Feb-94 As above, co-defendant Dec-95 WCA Absolute discharge POLICE (RSPB)

Wildlife related investigations involving DNA profiling

WCA - Wildlife and Coutryside Act 1981

COTES - Control of Trade in Endangered Species (Enforcement) Regulations 1985 and 1997

PBA - Protection of badgers Act 1992

Crim Decep - Criminal Deception, Theft Act 1968

PAA - Protection of animals Act 1911

DDA - Dangerous dogs Act 1991

 

I think you were F***** up the arse sidewards when it comes to the RSPB and COE caught red handed trying to escape from the truth which you never had a leg to stand on. If I was you I would personally be thinking about seeing a SHRINK!!!!!!!!!!!

ATB

 

Spar,

I think you are right,Neil has answered his question time and time again but he keeps coming back with with the same questions

I find it inconcievable that a right thinking individual could persist with this.

He never answers a question .

I don't know what scooby falcons has to do with this, but probably one of Dereks pals just putting his tuppence worth in

to make it look good

 

I will not post on this again because the man is obvioulsy in need of psychiatric help

[SPAR 2]

I say NO more, I rest my case.

Edited March 29, 2008 by SPAR

[jasper65 6]

No more what?

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

Please tell me Derek if you cant steal birds from the wild why are the convictions stated here related to you?

 

Main

sampling

data

Results of DNA testing Conviction

date

Offences Sentence Porsecutor

(assisting

agency)

6-Jul-93 Case revolved around 12 1992 and 12 1993 peregrine

offspring, 20 of which were DNA profiled. No parents

available for DNA testing (claimed to have been stolen)

but results showed that claimed sibling groups contained

unrelated birds and that at least 5 female parents, rather

than the claimed two, were needed to produce the 20

offspring tested. A further four untraced offspring were

all believed of wild origin.

May-95 COTES 18 months

imprisoment

POLICE (RSPB)

9-Jul-93 Four peregrines shown to be unrelated to claimed

parents (note four further untraced peregrines also likely

to be of wild origin)

Apr-94 WCA Fine £750 Costs

£100

POLICE (RSPB)

 

 

27-Feb-94 23 peregrines were shown to be unrelated to claimed

parents. This included offspring back to 1987 and 16

from 18 progeny declared as captive-bred in 1993. A

number of other peregrines were not traced for DNA

testing and are believed likely to be of wild origin.

Sep-95 COTES Four months

imprisonment

POLICE (RSPB)

 

31-Jan-96 Two 1993 peregrine sibling offspring shown to be

unrelated to claimed parents or each other. A further

third bird, claimed as a wild-disabled bird, was probably

a sibling to one of the two unrelated offspring and also

illegally taken from the wild.

Apr-97 WCA Fine £450

Costs £700

POLICE (RSPB)

 

27-Feb-94 As above, co-defendant Dec-95 WCA Absolute discharge POLICE (RSPB)

Wildlife related investigations involving DNA profiling

WCA - Wildlife and Coutryside Act 1981

COTES - Control of Trade in Endangered Species (Enforcement) Regulations 1985 and 1997

PBA - Protection of badgers Act 1992

Crim Decep - Criminal Deception, Theft Act 1968

PAA - Protection of animals Act 1911

DDA - Dangerous dogs Act 1991

 

I think you were F***** up the arse sidewards when it comes to the RSPB and COE caught red handed trying to escape from the truth which you never had a leg to stand on. If I was you I would personally be thinking about seeing a SHRINK!!!!!!!!!!!

ATB

 

Spar,

I think you are right,Neil has answered his question time and time again but he keeps coming back with with the same questions

I find it inconcievable that a right thinking individual could persist with this.

He never answers a question .

I don't know what scooby falcons has to do with this, but probably one of Dereks pals just putting his tuppence worth in

to make it look good

 

I will not post on this again because the man is obvioulsy in need of psychiatric help

CHILDISH REMARKS MEAN NOTHING. DOCUMENTED FACTS ARE WHAT ARE NEEDED.

 

Now let me make my point clearly, I am accusing Neil Hunter of perverting the course of justice and he must answer the following questions;

1] Did he fill in a legal registration document that states it is an offence to make a false declaration?

2] Did he stick the box to say that the Peregrine falcon that he received from me was a gift?

 

I have been asked to explain the situation in relation to the significance of the DOE cable tie that was on the peregrine falcon that Hunter received from me, legally as a gift. That is a good question.

 

The people that have kept registerable birds for a long time will be familiar with DOE cable tied birds. Birds were cabled tied for various reasons, the commonest being that the ring fell off the leg of the bird and the knuckle of talon was then too big to allow the closed ring to go back on the knuckle. To sell a cable tied bird the owner of the bird had to apply to the DOE for a license. This fact is stated on the front of the registration document of the bird in question. If this was not done then when the registration document was filled in and sent to the DOE they would have known that the seller has committed a criminal offence and he or she is liable to be prosecuted and banned for five years. However, the cable tied bird can be legally given away as a gift without the need to apply for a licence to someone who you thought was your friend, for example, and that person then filled in the registration document to testify that the bird was a gift.

 

The bird that Hunter received from me was cable tied and was given to him, as a gift and therefore I did not need license. Neil Hunter confirmed this fact by stating the bird was a gift on the DOE registration document.

 

As a point of interest what occurred to the sparrow hawks that I gave you Neil? Did you kill or lose them as well?

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

Please tell me Derek if you cant steal birds from the wild why are the convictions stated here related to you?

 

Main

sampling

data

Results of DNA testing Conviction

date

Offences Sentence Porsecutor

(assisting

agency)

6-Jul-93 Case revolved around 12 1992 and 12 1993 peregrine

offspring, 20 of which were DNA profiled. No parents

available for DNA testing (claimed to have been stolen)

but results showed that claimed sibling groups contained

unrelated birds and that at least 5 female parents, rather

than the claimed two, were needed to produce the 20

offspring tested. A further four untraced offspring were

all believed of wild origin.

May-95 COTES 18 months

imprisoment

POLICE (RSPB)

9-Jul-93 Four peregrines shown to be unrelated to claimed

parents (note four further untraced peregrines also likely

to be of wild origin)

Apr-94 WCA Fine £750 Costs

£100

POLICE (RSPB)

 

 

27-Feb-94 23 peregrines were shown to be unrelated to claimed

parents. This included offspring back to 1987 and 16

from 18 progeny declared as captive-bred in 1993. A

number of other peregrines were not traced for DNA

testing and are believed likely to be of wild origin.

Sep-95 COTES Four months

imprisonment

POLICE (RSPB)

 

31-Jan-96 Two 1993 peregrine sibling offspring shown to be

unrelated to claimed parents or each other. A further

third bird, claimed as a wild-disabled bird, was probably

a sibling to one of the two unrelated offspring and also

illegally taken from the wild.

Apr-97 WCA Fine £450

Costs £700

POLICE (RSPB)

 

27-Feb-94 As above, co-defendant Dec-95 WCA Absolute discharge POLICE (RSPB)

Wildlife related investigations involving DNA profiling

WCA - Wildlife and Coutryside Act 1981

COTES - Control of Trade in Endangered Species (Enforcement) Regulations 1985 and 1997

PBA - Protection of badgers Act 1992

Crim Decep - Criminal Deception, Theft Act 1968

PAA - Protection of animals Act 1911

DDA - Dangerous dogs Act 1991

 

I think you were F***** up the arse sidewards when it comes to the RSPB and COE caught red handed trying to escape from the truth which you never had a leg to stand on. If I was you I would personally be thinking about seeing a SHRINK!!!!!!!!!!!

ATB

 

Spar,

I think you are right,Neil has answered his question time and time again but he keeps coming back with with the same questions

I find it inconcievable that a right thinking individual could persist with this.

He never answers a question .

I don't know what scooby falcons has to do with this, but probably one of Dereks pals just putting his tuppence worth in

to make it look good

 

I will not post on this again because the man is obvioulsy in need of psychiatric help

CHILDISH REMARKS MEAN NOTHING. DOCUMENTED FACTS ARE WHAT ARE NEEDED.

 

Now let me make my point clearly, I am accusing Neil Hunter of perverting the course of justice and he must answer the following questions;

1] Did he fill in a legal registration document that states it is an offence to make a false declaration?

2] Did he stick the box to say that the Peregrine falcon that he received from me was a gift?

 

I have been asked to explain the situation in relation to the significance of the DOE cable tie that was on the peregrine falcon that Hunter received from me, legally as a gift. That is a good question.

 

The people that have kept registerable birds for a long time will be familiar with DOE cable tied birds. Birds were cabled tied for various reasons, the commonest being that the ring fell off the leg of the bird and the knuckle of talon was then too big to allow the closed ring to go back on the knuckle. To sell a cable tied bird the owner of the bird had to apply to the DOE for a license. This fact is stated on the front of the registration document of the bird in question. If this was not done then when the registration document was filled in and sent to the DOE they would have known that the seller has committed a criminal offence and he or she is liable to be prosecuted and banned for five years. However, the cable tied bird can be legally given away as a gift without the need to apply for a licence to someone who you thought was your friend, for example, and that person then filled in the registration document to testify that the bird was a gift.

 

The bird that Hunter received from me was cable tied and was given to him, as a gift and therefore I did not need license. Neil Hunter confirmed this fact by stating the bird was a gift on the DOE registration document.

 

As a point of interest what occurred to the sparrow hawks that I gave you Neil? Did you kill or lose them as well?

 

 

If I was to conclusively show that the DNA evidenced used in my case was 'not worth the paper it was written on what would you say then? 'we are very sorry' I think not as you do not care if I am guilty or not you just want to stand up for Neil Hunter no matter what the facts.

[crow wing 0]

Please tell me Derek if you cant steal birds from the wild why are the convictions stated here related to you?

 

Main

sampling

data

Results of DNA testing Conviction

date

Offences Sentence Porsecutor

(assisting

agency)

6-Jul-93 Case revolved around 12 1992 and 12 1993 peregrine

offspring, 20 of which were DNA profiled. No parents

available for DNA testing (claimed to have been stolen)

but results showed that claimed sibling groups contained

unrelated birds and that at least 5 female parents, rather

than the claimed two, were needed to produce the 20

offspring tested. A further four untraced offspring were

all believed of wild origin.

May-95 COTES 18 months

imprisoment

POLICE (RSPB)

9-Jul-93 Four peregrines shown to be unrelated to claimed

parents (note four further untraced peregrines also likely

to be of wild origin)

Apr-94 WCA Fine £750 Costs

£100

POLICE (RSPB)

 

 

27-Feb-94 23 peregrines were shown to be unrelated to claimed

parents. This included offspring back to 1987 and 16

from 18 progeny declared as captive-bred in 1993. A

number of other peregrines were not traced for DNA

testing and are believed likely to be of wild origin.

Sep-95 COTES Four months

imprisonment

POLICE (RSPB)

 

31-Jan-96 Two 1993 peregrine sibling offspring shown to be

unrelated to claimed parents or each other. A further

third bird, claimed as a wild-disabled bird, was probably

a sibling to one of the two unrelated offspring and also

illegally taken from the wild.

Apr-97 WCA Fine £450

Costs £700

POLICE (RSPB)

 

27-Feb-94 As above, co-defendant Dec-95 WCA Absolute discharge POLICE (RSPB)

Wildlife related investigations involving DNA profiling

WCA - Wildlife and Coutryside Act 1981

COTES - Control of Trade in Endangered Species (Enforcement) Regulations 1985 and 1997

PBA - Protection of badgers Act 1992

Crim Decep - Criminal Deception, Theft Act 1968

PAA - Protection of animals Act 1911

DDA - Dangerous dogs Act 1991

 

I think you were F***** up the arse sidewards when it comes to the RSPB and COE caught red handed trying to escape from the truth which you never had a leg to stand on. If I was you I would personally be thinking about seeing a SHRINK!!!!!!!!!!!

ATB

 

Spar,

I think you are right,Neil has answered his question time and time again but he keeps coming back with with the same questions

I find it inconcievable that a right thinking individual could persist with this.

He never answers a question .

I don't know what scooby falcons has to do with this, but probably one of Dereks pals just putting his tuppence worth in

to make it look good

 

I will not post on this again because the man is obvioulsy in need of psychiatric help

CHILDISH REMARKS MEAN NOTHING. DOCUMENTED FACTS ARE WHAT ARE NEEDED.

 

Now let me make my point clearly, I am accusing Neil Hunter of perverting the course of justice and he must answer the following questions;

1] Did he fill in a legal registration document that states it is an offence to make a false declaration?

2] Did he stick the box to say that the Peregrine falcon that he received from me was a gift?

 

I have been asked to explain the situation in relation to the significance of the DOE cable tie that was on the peregrine falcon that Hunter received from me, legally as a gift. That is a good question.

 

The people that have kept registerable birds for a long time will be familiar with DOE cable tied birds. Birds were cabled tied for various reasons, the commonest being that the ring fell off the leg of the bird and the knuckle of talon was then too big to allow the closed ring to go back on the knuckle. To sell a cable tied bird the owner of the bird had to apply to the DOE for a license. This fact is stated on the front of the registration document of the bird in question. If this was not done then when the registration document was filled in and sent to the DOE they would have known that the seller has committed a criminal offence and he or she is liable to be prosecuted and banned for five years. However, the cable tied bird can be legally given away as a gift without the need to apply for a licence to someone who you thought was your friend, for example, and that person then filled in the registration document to testify that the bird was a gift.

 

The bird that Hunter received from me was cable tied and was given to him, as a gift and therefore I did not need license. Neil Hunter confirmed this fact by stating the bird was a gift on the DOE registration document.

 

As a point of interest what occurred to the sparrow hawks that I gave you Neil? Did you kill or lose them as well?

 

 

If I was to conclusively show that the DNA evidenced used in my case was 'not worth the paper it was written on what would you say then? 'we are very sorry' I think not as you do not care if I am guilty or not you just want to stand up for Neil Hunter no matter what the facts.

 

Derek..these are two very seperate issues..ie..who ticked the box and where the peregrines came from which you were convicted for..Neil Hunter has answered clearly that he did not tick the box on the registration doc to say it was a gift..and you say you did'nt do it either..why not just leave it at that now..

 

Re the DNA..I sincerely hope that you can prove an injustice was done and are vindicated of any wrong doing..but until you find this out 100 % then perhaps it is best that this whole matter is left where it is for now..

[jasper65 6]

Mods, since Mr Ca&&ing is blatantly not prepared to answer any questions directed at himself on this thread, instead stating that for now we deal with Neil Hu**er until such time as we "cannot" discuss his DNA evidence, would there be any objection to one of us starting an alternate thread, Maybe something along the lines of THE TRUTH ABOUT DEREK CA**ING.

 

Can we all be assured of the same right to freedom of speech as has been afforded to this convicted peregrine thief? Guarantee's that the thread will not be closed until it has run its course?

 

wasn't this the whole idea of this thread being left so both parties can air their differences ? why start a thread which fundimentaly will be the same as this one and consiquently lead down the same path?

 

I'm certain if you read back through this thread its painfully obviouse over the vast amount of posts most things are being covered? also if you look back to the beggining of the thread the original post wasn't started By Derek Can**ng but from a guy who has since left the forum for one reason or another.

 

if you feel you want to air the Truth about Derek Can**ng which hasn't already been covered already then feel free to do so on this topic, as you can see it will get maximum viewing by the amount of Publicty already generated. surley it would make sense to carry on with this topic than start another which fundimentaly will lead the same way? you are obviousley a thinking man so you know it makes sense...

 

I'm sure the other alternative is to start the post of your desire on your own forum?

 

Jasper

[Neil Hunter 0]

Mods, since Mr Ca&&ing is blatantly not prepared to answer any questions directed at himself on this thread, instead stating that for now we deal with Neil Hu**er until such time as we "cannot" discuss his DNA evidence, would there be any objection to one of us starting an alternate thread, Maybe something along the lines of THE TRUTH ABOUT DEREK CA**ING.

 

Can we all be assured of the same right to freedom of speech as has been afforded to this convicted peregrine thief? Guarantee's that the thread will not be closed until it has run its course?

 

Jasper,

How many times has he asked the same question,and how many times have I answered it. We keep going in circles,and I have to admit I am sick of it. Derek Canning is a convicted peregrine thief.He has already tried to air his grievances by sueing me civilly for the peregrine.He failed and was found at that time to be a liar. 15 years on ,regardless of what Mr Canning may say,this is dead and buried and is going nowhere.

 

He says in one breath I sent him to jail, and in the other that the charges pertaining to the peregrine I PURCHASED were dropped.

 

He produced a receipt in court , alledgedly from me , thanking him for the gift of the peregrine. The receipt was not in my handwriting and my name and / or address was spelled incorrectly. The magistrate said it was obvious Derek Canning had falsified the receipt and that it was also obvious he had a grudge against me due to the fact I was a serving police officer at the time.

 

What more needs to be said.There is nothing to be settled that hasn't been already. Mr Canning is clearly deluded.

 

I see no value in the thread continuing and have no intention of posting on a another one if it happens to be started.

 

Derek , one question.Have you ever illegally taken a peregrine or peregrine falcons from an eyrie. ???????????????

Edited March 29, 2008 by Neil Hunter

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

Derek , one question.Have you ever illegally taken a peregrine or peregrine falcons from an eyrie. ???????????????

I'm sorry Neil but the court needs you to stop harrasing the prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner because that is one question he has actually answered.

We have established in this FORUM of LAW , that you cannot steal a Wild Peregrine because they dont belong to anybody.

 

I have printed this statement and will be using it as my sole defense if I'm ever caught with a suspicious bird. I dont think any other defense should be needed. Besides if I dig hard enough I could find out he police man who arrests me once farted in church. That's blasphemy and he should be buried up to his neck and pelted with rocks until the till his head explodes like a peregrine squished in a vice.

 

Come to think of it good things may yet come out of this thread, does anyone think the same reasoning should apply to trees, if I want one and its not "owned" by anyone, surely I could cut it down to give me a few hours entertainment. Surely if a car hasnt been registered to a new owner by the factory, I could steal it and I wouldnt be commiting an offence.

 

Come on now NEIL HU**er, own up, youre a bad man, YOU sent this poor sole (I seldom spell something wrong!!!) to get bum raped for 18 months when all he'd done is take a bird that didnt belong to anyone.

 

Ahhh for the days when a man had a right to a fair trial followed by a speedy hanging

Evan you must find this thread very interest, as you are on it day and night. The picture of you does not do you justice. Evan I have got a questions for you, was the DNA profiling flawed in my court case?

[Neil Hunter 0]

A nest raider yesterday became the first person in Britain to be jailed for trapping and selling wild birds caught in this country.

 

DNA fingerprinting techniques, similar to that used for convicting murderers and rapists, were used to refute Derek Canning's claim that he had bred rare peregrines from captive parents and was breaking no law.

 

In fact, he had trapped them or taken them from nests in the wild, and yesterday at Newcastle Crown Court he was jailed for 18 months. Judge Michael Cartlidge said: "In a sense you were stealing from the public what was their own heritage . . .

 

"Your suggested breeding programme was a sham - throughout this case you have taken enormous trouble to disguise your offences."

 

Canning, 33, a warehouseman, fabricated a succession of cover stories after 14 young peregrines - and no parent birds - were discovered during a police raid on his home at Riding Mill, near Stamfordham, Northumberland.

 

He claimed the parent birds had been stolen by a rival breeder. Seventeen months later he produced two parents, but the court was told that these were also taken from the wild.

 

The court was told that he advertised his young peregrines in a bird magazine, claiming they were captive-bred. Mark Styles, for the prosecution, said: "The defendant asked for cash, camera equipment, newish cars, Rolex watches or jewellery in return for these chicks."

 

Police and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds were first alerted to his activities when Canning was stopped driving near a nest site in Kielder Forest with two chicks soon after a nest had been robbed.

 

The authorities were unable to prosecute him on that occasion and the chicks were returned to him, but their suspicions had been aroused and further inquiries resulted in the raid on his home.

 

Using DNA evidence, geneticists at Nottingham University were able to show that Canning's claims about how the young peregrines were related to each other and had been captive-bred were untrue.

 

Canning denied one count of keeping or offering for sale a prohibited bird species and six counts of selling prohibited birds under the Control of Trade in Endangered Species Regulations. The jury found him guilty after a two-week trial.

 

The court was told that Canning tried to get round Department of the Environment laws by registering his birds as being legitimately born in captivity. In all, Canning illegally had 22 wild birds in captivity during a two-year period.

 

The RSPB hopes some of the peregrines remain sufficiently wild to be released. Investigations officer Guy Shorrock said: "He is an obsessive, persistent and very devious man. The preparation for the case was something of a running battle, because he kept coming up with new stories about how these young peregrines had been hatched in captivity.

 

"He saw these birds only in terms of the money he could make from selling them."

 

Britain's peregrine population plummeted in the 1950s after the introduction of organo-chlorine pesticides, but it has made a strong recovery and there are now about 1,200 breeding pairs.

[Neil Hunter 0]

I do not wish to gloat over this, however, I am going to!

 

A fellow named Derek Canning was caught by the Northumbria Police (North England) out

in his car close by a Peregrine site that contained 2 nestlings. On the front seat, wrapped

in a coat, were two baby Peregrines. When asked why, he said that he was taking them

out for some fresh air. Not surprisingly, the boys in blue were sceptical. More so when

they found that the nest was now two nestlings short of a full brood.

 

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) arranged a search warrant and

raided his house with the Northumberland Police. About 20 young birds were found with

an assortment of documentation. This claimed that the birds were family groups,

although (alas) the adults were no longer available (lost, died, stolen, etc).

 

Blood samples were sent to my lab where Jon Wetton (post-doc) analysed their DNA

profiles. We used a series of single locus probes and determined the relationships of

these birds. They did indeed fall into families, but not in accord with the registration

documents. Also, they required more adults as parents that Canning had ever possessed.

the pobability of mutations were 'vanishingly remote' - 10 to the minus 36!

 

In court, we presented the DNA evidence, and the RSPB presented a lot more about

conditions of care, suspicious behaviour, etc. For example, he had been arrested by a

sharp-eyed bobby (sorry, policeman for the non-Brits) who saw himn walking up to a

mail box with a parcel: the bobby was surprised because in high summer Mr Canning was

wearing big, furry, orange gloves - the sort that do not leave fingerprints!

 

He kept producing parents that had been recovered. Presumably, he was going back into

the wild and trapping adults at the nest sites in an attempt to produce 'parents'.

 

Anyway, the long and the short of it was that the jury of 10 good ladies and true (plus a

couple of equally good and true gentlemen) believed not a word of it. Found him guilty on

all counts, and sent him to prison for 18 months. This is the first time that someone has

been imprisoned in the UK for wild-life crime like this, although I think the fact that he

had sold quite a few of the youngsters added to the gravity of his sins. It is more serious if

you sell a wild bird as captively bred than simply possessing it illegally.

 

The RSPB and the Police did an amazing job in tracking down birds that he had sold having

claimed them as captively bred. The DNA work was intricate rather than difficult. It is

all very satisfactory.

 

If anyone out there wants to know more, just ask. If you need help with similar

casework, just shout. We have molecular probes for most birds of prey.

[Harris Will 3]

WOW... What a character reference!!!

[Neil Hunter 0]

DEREK,

ARE YOU THE PEREGRINE THIEF MENTIONED IN THE PREVIOUS 2 POSTS. I DIDN'T WANT TO BE REPETATIVE BUT I THOUGHT I WOULD TAKE A LEAF OUT YOUR BOOK.IS IT YOU OR IS THERE ANOTHER DEREK CANNING I DON'T KNOW ABOUT.

[jasper65 6]

Jasper,

How many times has he asked the same question,and how many times have I answered it. We keep going in circles,and I have to admit I am sick of it. Derek Canning is a convicted peregrine thief.He has already tried to air his grievances by sueing me civilly for the peregrine.He failed and was found at that time to be a liar. 15 years on ,regardless of what Mr Canning may say,this is dead and buried and is going nowhere.

 

He says in one breath I sent him to jail, and in the other that the charges pertaining to the peregrine I PURCHASED were dropped.

 

He produced a receipt in court , alledgedly from me , thanking him for the gift of the peregrine. The receipt was not in my handwriting and my name and / or address was spelled incorrectly. The magistrate said it was obvious Derek Canning had falsified the receipt and that it was also obvious he had a grudge against me due to the fact I was a serving police officer at the time.

 

What more needs to be said.There is nothing to be settled that hasn't been already. Mr Canning is clearly deluded.

 

I see no value in the thread continuing and have no intention of posting on a another one if it happens to be started.

 

Derek , one question.Have you ever illegally taken a peregrine or peregrine falcons from an eyrie. ???????????????

 

Neil

 

I did mention this in a previouse post below.

 

http://www.thehuntinglife.com/forums/index...st&p=477012

 

some posts have been deleted in the past to protect people from Abuse or Threatening behaviour! but 99% of the time we attempt clean it up until some sense is made of it all, and if the Offending abusive Poster still continues with his onslaught he/she is removed, the thing is when this sort of behaviour starts the offending person normally loses all crediblity...

 

So far this post has abided by the queensbury Rules with no biteing or kicking in the goolies , its a clean Disagreement which I certainly have taken part in many times in the past and its also a topic you both felt needs getting off your chests....

 

If you look at the post I have pasted in above I agreed its getting into a bit of a "My Dad Can Fight Your Dad" scenarion which to be frank is a shame, its a funny game this Falconry! can't you tell the seasons finished when it all kicks off? but at the end of the day we all have something in common apart from Falconry? we're Men! and a good man takes it on the chin and responds in a way he feels fit to defend himself! so far both parties have equiped themselves well on all accounts and kept it comparativly clean. Its understandable you have brought over certain friends to back you up clued up on the situation which is certainly your progative! Personaly what I hate are certain Brown Tongue members who obviously havn't got a clue but picked up bits and peices and for some reason feel the need to take part? but like I say "Freedom Of Speech" is the name of the game on a clean disagreement within forum rules so they certainly have their right to a opinion...

 

Time out won't hurt anyone ! but feel free to carry on if both parties generaly feel the need to keep getting a case across....

 

Jasper