RSPCA defends hunt case cost

W OXON: The RSPCA has hit back at claims by MPs it broke charity rules by going ahead with a costly prosecution of the West Oxfordshire hunt.

The Chipping Norton-based hunt and its former huntsman and master were convicted of illegal fox hunting in the first such prosecution ever mounted by the RSPCA, last week.

A cross-party group of MPs and peers have reported the RSPCA to the Charity Commission, after it was revealed the cost of the prosecution was £326,000.

But a spokesman for the RSPCA said: “As part of its charitable activity, we investigate and prosecute animal welfare offences to ensure laws to protect animals are upheld and to deter others from cruelty.”

Comments (9)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:55am Mon 24 Dec 12

xjohnx says...

This is clearly a matter where the RSPCA wasted charity money in huge amounts. They should have turned it over to the PCC.

The RSPCA spends huge amounts on executive wages and needs to keep bringing in the money.

It was just a cynical move by a modern money making organisation seeking to raise its corperate profile.
This is clearly a matter where the RSPCA wasted charity money in huge amounts. They should have turned it over to the PCC. The RSPCA spends huge amounts on executive wages and needs to keep bringing in the money. It was just a cynical move by a modern money making organisation seeking to raise its corperate profile. xjohnx

8:56am Mon 24 Dec 12

xjohnx says...

Whoops! For PCC read DPP.
Whoops! For PCC read DPP. xjohnx

11:24am Mon 24 Dec 12

margaretf says...

What could the RSPCA possibly spend money on which would be more appropriate to its aims and objectives? Well done.

Margaret
What could the RSPCA possibly spend money on which would be more appropriate to its aims and objectives? Well done. Margaret margaretf

11:54am Mon 24 Dec 12

xjohnx says...

margaretf wrote:
What could the RSPCA possibly spend money on which would be more appropriate to its aims and objectives? Well done.

Margaret
Looking after sick and mistreated animals would be best way to spend the money.

The huntsmens prosecution would have been better handled by the public prosecutor. This way the RSPCA wasted £300,000+ on a private prosecution that could have been spent on helping animals directly.
This was mainly a cynical stunt to boost publicity for the corporate RSPCA. The RSPCA spends millions on excecutive wages, expenses etc. so need people like you and me to finance them.
[quote][p][bold]margaretf[/bold] wrote: What could the RSPCA possibly spend money on which would be more appropriate to its aims and objectives? Well done. Margaret[/p][/quote]Looking after sick and mistreated animals would be best way to spend the money. The huntsmens prosecution would have been better handled by the public prosecutor. This way the RSPCA wasted £300,000+ on a private prosecution that could have been spent on helping animals directly. This was mainly a cynical stunt to boost publicity for the corporate RSPCA. The RSPCA spends millions on excecutive wages, expenses etc. so need people like you and me to finance them. xjohnx

2:05pm Mon 24 Dec 12

Alan Kirby says...

The RSPCA only had to take the case on because the monitors concerned had taken similar evidence to the police no less than 30 times in recent years and been fobbed off by them or the CPS - so this was the only way this cruel and lawless gang were ever going to be brought to justice. The Heythop felt forced to plead guilty to as few of the 45 charges as they thought they could get away with because the evidence was incontrovertible. Monitors have no doubt ALL the charges would have succeeded had it been practical to try them. The Heythrop's pretence to be 'trail hunting' was exposed in court as a cynical subterfuge, as it has with at least three other Hunts in the last year or so. The difference here was that, instead of condemning the Hunt's illegal behaviour and lies, as he should, and praising the monitors who exposed the Heythrop at enormous cost and danger to themselves, as he should, the Judge chose to attack the prosecution, making remarks that revealed him as clearly pro-hunt - rather like condemning the police for spending a lot in bringing a gang of armed robbers to justice, after giving the criminals a mild slap on the wrist. Monitors, always hugely outnumbered by the ruthless and vicious Hunt support have suffered endless assaults, threats, vile abuse, obstruction, harassment and property damage - indeed no fewer than 14 Heythrop supporters have been convicted or cautioned for such offences in the last few years.
Incidentally, the public clearly doesn't agree that the RSPCA wasted money on this prosecution because donations have reportedly been poring in to them since the verdict. I am sure they will not be browbeaten by vested interests. however rich and powerful, and howwever much assisted by a compliant and credulous media, into backing away from launching similar prosecutions of hunt cruelty and illegality in the future.
The RSPCA only had to take the case on because the monitors concerned had taken similar evidence to the police no less than 30 times in recent years and been fobbed off by them or the CPS - so this was the only way this cruel and lawless gang were ever going to be brought to justice. The Heythop felt forced to plead guilty to as few [12] of the 45 charges as they thought they could get away with because the evidence was incontrovertible. Monitors have no doubt ALL the charges would have succeeded had it been practical to try them. The Heythrop's pretence to be 'trail hunting' was exposed in court as a cynical subterfuge, as it has with at least three other Hunts in the last year or so. The difference here was that, instead of condemning the Hunt's illegal behaviour and lies, as he should, and praising the monitors who exposed the Heythrop at enormous cost and danger to themselves, as he should, the Judge chose to attack the prosecution, making remarks that revealed him as clearly pro-hunt - rather like condemning the police for spending a lot in bringing a gang of armed robbers to justice, after giving the criminals a mild slap on the wrist. Monitors, always hugely outnumbered by the ruthless and vicious Hunt support have suffered endless assaults, threats, vile abuse, obstruction, harassment and property damage - indeed no fewer than 14 Heythrop supporters have been convicted or cautioned for such offences in the last few years. Incidentally, the public clearly doesn't agree that the RSPCA wasted money on this prosecution because donations have reportedly been poring in to them since the verdict. I am sure they will not be browbeaten by vested interests. however rich and powerful, and howwever much assisted by a compliant and credulous media, into backing away from launching similar prosecutions of hunt cruelty and illegality in the future. Alan Kirby

2:10pm Mon 24 Dec 12

xjohnx says...

Alan Kirby wrote:
The RSPCA only had to take the case on because the monitors concerned had taken similar evidence to the police no less than 30 times in recent years and been fobbed off by them or the CPS - so this was the only way this cruel and lawless gang were ever going to be brought to justice. The Heythop felt forced to plead guilty to as few of the 45 charges as they thought they could get away with because the evidence was incontrovertible. Monitors have no doubt ALL the charges would have succeeded had it been practical to try them. The Heythrop's pretence to be 'trail hunting' was exposed in court as a cynical subterfuge, as it has with at least three other Hunts in the last year or so. The difference here was that, instead of condemning the Hunt's illegal behaviour and lies, as he should, and praising the monitors who exposed the Heythrop at enormous cost and danger to themselves, as he should, the Judge chose to attack the prosecution, making remarks that revealed him as clearly pro-hunt - rather like condemning the police for spending a lot in bringing a gang of armed robbers to justice, after giving the criminals a mild slap on the wrist. Monitors, always hugely outnumbered by the ruthless and vicious Hunt support have suffered endless assaults, threats, vile abuse, obstruction, harassment and property damage - indeed no fewer than 14 Heythrop supporters have been convicted or cautioned for such offences in the last few years.
Incidentally, the public clearly doesn't agree that the RSPCA wasted money on this prosecution because donations have reportedly been poring in to them since the verdict. I am sure they will not be browbeaten by vested interests. however rich and powerful, and howwever much assisted by a compliant and credulous media, into backing away from launching similar prosecutions of hunt cruelty and illegality in the future.
Suspect you are biased. Many people persecuted illegaly by hunt sabs and lab sabs will suffer for the rest of their lives. How do you feel about them? Or is that blood sport OK?

Have you given the bodies back yet, or will they remain lost forever?
[quote][p][bold]Alan Kirby[/bold] wrote: The RSPCA only had to take the case on because the monitors concerned had taken similar evidence to the police no less than 30 times in recent years and been fobbed off by them or the CPS - so this was the only way this cruel and lawless gang were ever going to be brought to justice. The Heythop felt forced to plead guilty to as few [12] of the 45 charges as they thought they could get away with because the evidence was incontrovertible. Monitors have no doubt ALL the charges would have succeeded had it been practical to try them. The Heythrop's pretence to be 'trail hunting' was exposed in court as a cynical subterfuge, as it has with at least three other Hunts in the last year or so. The difference here was that, instead of condemning the Hunt's illegal behaviour and lies, as he should, and praising the monitors who exposed the Heythrop at enormous cost and danger to themselves, as he should, the Judge chose to attack the prosecution, making remarks that revealed him as clearly pro-hunt - rather like condemning the police for spending a lot in bringing a gang of armed robbers to justice, after giving the criminals a mild slap on the wrist. Monitors, always hugely outnumbered by the ruthless and vicious Hunt support have suffered endless assaults, threats, vile abuse, obstruction, harassment and property damage - indeed no fewer than 14 Heythrop supporters have been convicted or cautioned for such offences in the last few years. Incidentally, the public clearly doesn't agree that the RSPCA wasted money on this prosecution because donations have reportedly been poring in to them since the verdict. I am sure they will not be browbeaten by vested interests. however rich and powerful, and howwever much assisted by a compliant and credulous media, into backing away from launching similar prosecutions of hunt cruelty and illegality in the future.[/p][/quote]Suspect you are biased. Many people persecuted illegaly by hunt sabs and lab sabs will suffer for the rest of their lives. How do you feel about them? Or is that blood sport OK? Have you given the bodies back yet, or will they remain lost forever? xjohnx

6:15pm Mon 24 Dec 12

cerdicboy says...

Following the National Rifle Associations response for the Sandy Hook Elementary School killing of 20 children and six adults in the USA. Where more guns in schools was the answer from the gun lobby. Here the Countryside Alliance response to the RSPCA funding of the Heythrop hunt for fox hunting.
The group, which includes the usual blood sports heartless like Simon Hart, the Conservative MP and former Countryside Alliance Chief Executive, Kate Hoey and Mark Williams, Liberal Democrat MP, and of course Baroness Mallalieu the cruel Queen of the Exmoor Stag Hunters.
They have told the charity commission watchdog that they had “concerns about the motivation for bringing this prosecution”.
They described the £326,000 cost of bringing the private prosecution against members of the Heythrop Hunt in Oxfordshire as “staggering” and urged the Commission to investigate. They don't seem to want the RSPCA to investigate hunters and again they want to be above the rule of law.
I think a small donation to the RSPCA would be in order as on one should be allowed to abuse animals and get away with it. Also the police and CPS should do more in this area rate than turn a blind eye to these countryside blood sports killers.
Following the National Rifle Associations response for the Sandy Hook Elementary School killing of 20 children and six adults in the USA. Where more guns in schools was the answer from the gun lobby. Here the Countryside Alliance response to the RSPCA funding of the Heythrop hunt for fox hunting. The group, which includes the usual blood sports heartless like Simon Hart, the Conservative MP and former Countryside Alliance Chief Executive, Kate Hoey and Mark Williams, Liberal Democrat MP, and of course Baroness Mallalieu the cruel Queen of the Exmoor Stag Hunters. They have told the charity commission watchdog that they had “concerns about the motivation for bringing this prosecution”. They described the £326,000 cost of bringing the private prosecution against members of the Heythrop Hunt in Oxfordshire as “staggering” and urged the Commission to investigate. They don't seem to want the RSPCA to investigate hunters and again they want to be above the rule of law. I think a small donation to the RSPCA would be in order as on one should be allowed to abuse animals and get away with it. Also the police and CPS should do more in this area rate than turn a blind eye to these countryside blood sports killers. cerdicboy

5:15pm Tue 25 Dec 12

xjohnx says...

cerdicboy wrote:
Following the National Rifle Associations response for the Sandy Hook Elementary School killing of 20 children and six adults in the USA. Where more guns in schools was the answer from the gun lobby. Here the Countryside Alliance response to the RSPCA funding of the Heythrop hunt for fox hunting.
The group, which includes the usual blood sports heartless like Simon Hart, the Conservative MP and former Countryside Alliance Chief Executive, Kate Hoey and Mark Williams, Liberal Democrat MP, and of course Baroness Mallalieu the cruel Queen of the Exmoor Stag Hunters.
They have told the charity commission watchdog that they had “concerns about the motivation for bringing this prosecution”.
They described the £326,000 cost of bringing the private prosecution against members of the Heythrop Hunt in Oxfordshire as “staggering” and urged the Commission to investigate. They don't seem to want the RSPCA to investigate hunters and again they want to be above the rule of law.
I think a small donation to the RSPCA would be in order as on one should be allowed to abuse animals and get away with it. Also the police and CPS should do more in this area rate than turn a blind eye to these countryside blood sports killers.
Point is, the RSPCA should have better things to do with the money than duplicate the job of the Public Prosecution Service.
The £325,000 could have been spent directly on caring for distressed animals.

If the RSPCA wants to run legal campaigns and prosecutions, it should not pretend to be a charity.
[quote][p][bold]cerdicboy[/bold] wrote: Following the National Rifle Associations response for the Sandy Hook Elementary School killing of 20 children and six adults in the USA. Where more guns in schools was the answer from the gun lobby. Here the Countryside Alliance response to the RSPCA funding of the Heythrop hunt for fox hunting. The group, which includes the usual blood sports heartless like Simon Hart, the Conservative MP and former Countryside Alliance Chief Executive, Kate Hoey and Mark Williams, Liberal Democrat MP, and of course Baroness Mallalieu the cruel Queen of the Exmoor Stag Hunters. They have told the charity commission watchdog that they had “concerns about the motivation for bringing this prosecution”. They described the £326,000 cost of bringing the private prosecution against members of the Heythrop Hunt in Oxfordshire as “staggering” and urged the Commission to investigate. They don't seem to want the RSPCA to investigate hunters and again they want to be above the rule of law. I think a small donation to the RSPCA would be in order as on one should be allowed to abuse animals and get away with it. Also the police and CPS should do more in this area rate than turn a blind eye to these countryside blood sports killers.[/p][/quote]Point is, the RSPCA should have better things to do with the money than duplicate the job of the Public Prosecution Service. The £325,000 could have been spent directly on caring for distressed animals. If the RSPCA wants to run legal campaigns and prosecutions, it should not pretend to be a charity. xjohnx

11:44pm Fri 28 Dec 12

DoctorBob says...

xjohnx wrote:
Whoops! For PCC read DPP.
What should the rest of your nonsense read as?
[quote][p][bold]xjohnx[/bold] wrote: Whoops! For PCC read DPP.[/p][/quote]What should the rest of your nonsense read as? DoctorBob

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree