Options
Deliberately killing someone's pet - no more than a broken window in eyes of the law
[Deleted User]
Posts: 45
Forum Member
✭
I don't know if many of you will have heard about the stables owner who shot and killed a horse due to a £30 debt. He then loaded the horse up in a JCB bucket and tipped her into the garden of the woman who had her on loan and who owed the £30. The horse did not even belong to the woman owing the debt and was a healthy 7 year old mare who was sweet natured. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2795929/equestrian-centre-shoot-dead-perfectly-healthy-seven-year-old-ex-racehorse-dump-body-owner-s-garden-unpaid-bill-30.html
Under current law, the most this man can be charged with is criminal damage. This is so wrong. The law should reflect the emotional and psychological effects these acts have on the owners of the animals. If you agree, please sign the following petition. It needs to get 100,000 signatures to have parliament consider it. Thank you.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/71053
Under current law, the most this man can be charged with is criminal damage. This is so wrong. The law should reflect the emotional and psychological effects these acts have on the owners of the animals. If you agree, please sign the following petition. It needs to get 100,000 signatures to have parliament consider it. Thank you.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/71053
0
Comments
If I poisoned the neighbours' cats, I doubt it would just be minor criminal damage.
If I set my dog on a flock of sheep, there would animal welfare and dog control offences.
etc etc.
Signed.
Nevermind that , the land owner would shoot the dog on site . legally !
This.
Why if he has not caused undue suffering to the animal when he euthanised it? As far as I am aware shooting is still one of the approved forms of dispatch in this country.
I wonder if the proponents of this change in law would want the award of punitive damages in those circumstances?
Anyway in reference to the title of this thread, aren't horses considered livestock rather than pets?
Either you're on a wind up or you didn't bother to even read the story.
The RSPCA inspector said the horse was killed illegally and arrests have been made.
I hope the animal rights nutters pay this scummy man a visit.
Arrested for criminal damage and not animal cruelty. And I always take anything the RSPCA say with a large portion of salt.
Like it or not the horse was slaughtered in what is considered a 'humane' manner.
This is not against the AWA.
It's perfectly legal for people to send dud racing horses/greyhounds off to be shot.
The legal issue is that it was slaughtered without permission.
This is a moral problem.
The law, even updated, remains a bit of an ass where animals welfare is concerned.
That's appalling. I find it difficult to comprehend the mindset of a person who could do this.
The horse was apparently "leased" (from somebody) If I was the actual owner I'd be livid.
If you are for instance a milkman (my husband was at the time) and bitten badly by a large dog you can only claim monetary losses, his case one weeks wages and the replacement of the clothes that were ripped.
His terror of large dogs and suffering meant nothing to the courts.
I can't see them changing their rules for pet owners when innocent people going about their business are only recompensed for any money they lose.
I agree but would add sentencing in general is pretty weak in this country, even a human life is only worth a few months/years these days.
I have signed the petition.
There's more outrage expressed on this forum in one session here than people bothering to sign. Mind you, you might need to push it out further afield. That is one area at least, where social media comes in useful. Animal forums, RSPCS discussions, You Tube, etc.
"Euthanised"? The article says the horse was "perfectly healthy", so I'm not sure where you got that term from. The horse was killed, not euthanised.
I know some horse owners who love them dearly and definitely see them as more than property.
Whether an animal is classed as "livestock" depends on the reason the animal is being kept, i.e. for meat, or other produce, rather than the species of animal. Horses kept by private individuals, for pleasure, are not livestock. Just like a pigs, sheep, or cows kept as pets are not livestock either.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/67018
Well euthanised is the term the RSPCA use, regardless of the health of the animal. I think you may be confused because the term is also used widely in the human 'right to die' debate.
So if someone owes you money you think as long as it is done quickly then it would be ok to go and kill someone's pet ? What is livestock to one person can equally be someone's pet and in this case it did not even belong to the lady concerned.
A normal, caring and rational person does not shoot an animal because you are owed money. And if you believe you are right you do not wait until night time and then dump it over a hedge into a garden.
And it would appear it was not "euthanized humanely " it was dieing from a gun shot wound and the RSPCA have said it was killed illegally.
And their excuse that they shot it because they could not get it into the box, does that mean they will be shooting all their clients horses that will not get into the box , or maybe they might call the owner first !
In this case illegally killed is the term the RSPCA have used
Well the chap has only been charged with criminal damage and not animal cruelty so the CPS/police can't have thought much of the RSPCA's 'evidence'.
http://www.minsterfm.com/news/local/1464430/raskelf-man-denies-alleged-horse-shooting/
As we all know the CPS will go with what they feel they can get a conviction on not always what the crime was at it's maximum.
But it appears you feel it was ok anyway.