Oh the hypocrisy. You can eat live bugs and that's fine. You can subject tame animals to fear and possible trauma as part of the "trials". A wild rat would have been OK to kill and eat. But because it was a tame rat it's a crime.
Presumably the zelebs thought the rats were wild and that they just got lucky catching a couple. Although the wildness of the camp is clearly fake, this proves it once and for all. The rat was on the payroll.
They want to get their facts right.
He killed a rat, he fed the camp...end of.
What about all the cockroaches, witchetty grubs, crocodiles (to eat their tongues) Kangaroos (to eat their testicles, penis) and all the other animals slain in the name of entertainment.
If this is the Red Top Papers trying to make something out of nothing I will be so far up their arses they'll think they have hemorrhoids for tonsils.
Well, it isn't just the red tops reporting this it's BBC news and Sky News too with quotes from a guy from the RSPCA!
I think the producers have to go an have a re-think over the entire use of live "creatures" be they mammals or insects. And really the producers are to blame for not stepping in and stopping Gino.
Sorry to sound like that bloke from the Really Wild Show, but if Gino and Stu are being charged about the rat, why aren't charges being brought for the BT trials and animals being eaten alive? Surely that is just as, if not more, cruel. Is the only point that the rat was tame? So do animals and insects that aren't tame don't have a nervous system, and don't feel any pain then?
Just odd that this rat incident has been singled out in a show which I think is cruel to animals in almost every episode.
It seems that if animals are to be used on tv they are supposesd to discuss it with them and get some kind of permit in advance, but this didn't happen for this segment. It also seems that the problem is killing an animal for the sake of tv. ITV may have allowed them to kill and eat the rat for tv, but as far as Gino and Stuart were concerned, they were killing the rat for food. They definitely shouldn't be expected to have complied with all of the relevant form filling, so it seems a nonsense to me.
Charging Stuart and Gino seems to be something of a publicity stunt by the Australian RSPCA. If anyone has done something wrong, it's the producers, but I can't help but get the impression that the organisation are just trying to pursue a high profile story for the sake of it.
The swift killing of a possibly tame rat for food has to be low down the list of animal cruelty they come across. I don't see how relevant it is if the rat is tame, expect the rat would have been a lot less scared when it was captured, which would be a good thing.
How ridiculous. Australia is full of hunters, white and aboriginal, who kill all sorts of vermin in the outback. I bet there isn't a single person in Australia who's ever gone to prison for killing vermin.
Rats are not indigenous to Australia and they compete with native animals and are considered vermin. No one has ever gone to prison or even have been charged killing one.
Sorry to sound like that bloke from the Really Wild Show, but if Gino and Stu are being charged about the rat, why aren't charges being brought for the BT trials and animals being eaten alive? Surely that is just as, if not more, cruel. Is the only point that the rat was tame? So do animals and insects that aren't tame don't have a nervous system, and don't feel any pain then?
Just odd that this rat incident has been singled out in a show which I think is cruel to animals in almost every episode.
See Sam Bora's post above.
They shouldn't have done it, the producers should have stepped in when they heard them discussing it (as has been said) but I'm sure they won't be punished too severely and, if it does make the production rethink these trials, it's a good thing.
So if it was a tame rat, does that also mean they didn't really catch it and that was just made up for the show?
What about Shipwrecked? They killed several chickens and pigs on that and didn't get arrested.
I think it boils down to what purpose the animal was bred for, chickens and so one are bred for purpose, that purpose is to slaughter and eat, but the rats were not bred for that purpose, they were bred to add to the show to make the lives of the contestants uncomfortable, I wondered at the time of the killing if they were stirring up a hornets nest, these rats are bred for appearing in tv shows and films, such as Titanic and Indiana Jones, and they are not bred for food.
The way it was killed will also be looked at, Gino claimed to have slit it's throat, well that will be classed as cruelty to the rat.
I cant believe this story. Look how much it is going to cost for court appearances and if they get sent to jail because they put rodents into the jungle.
I dont blame Gino and Stuart for killing the rat. They were starving and it was for food. They wouldnt have known that the rat wasn't wild. I do blame the producers for placing the rats in in the first place and for not providing the celebrities with enough food in which they felt they needed to kill.
If they do get jailed, I hope that there is a big campaign for their release.
It seemed obvious to me at the time that the rat was tame - it had different markings to a wild rat (it was dark brown with a white belly, and was easy to catch - and they would hardly put slebs into a camp where there was a risk of leptospirosis would they?). I tried to find a pic of it to start a thread about it, but I couldn't find any.
However, if anyone is to face any charges (which is just ridiculous IMO) it should be the producers, who allowed the rat to be killed and eaten.
I do blame the producers for placing the rats in in the first place and for not providing the celebrities with enough food in which they felt they needed to kill.
The celebs knew what they were letting themselves in for. And they were hardly starving, it isn't as if they hadn't eaten for weeks on end.
They didn't kill and eat one of the camp members, so saying they hadn't been starving for weeks is a moot point. They were very hungry and had been losing weight and they were eating less calories than is recommended by most experts if you want to lose weight in a safe way.
Vegetarians can object to them eating the rat for food, but in the same way they complain about them eating other meat for food.
If they had loads of food and killed the rat, and not eaten it, I could see the point, but they did eat it, and seemed to appreciate it as food.
There are many more important things for animal rights campaigners to worry about, and trying to take action against a chef killing an animal for food undermines all of their other work for the general public.
On this morning's BBC news, they are reporting on the British RSPCA helping out orphaned or injured seals, and that is admirable work that everyone can get behind. Their Australian equivalent could end up doing more harm than good if they aren't careful.
LOL! Sorry, hate to laugh at another's misfortune but this is a bit funny.
Why couldn't Jordan have killed the bloody thing, she could have been off the telly/tabloids for three years!! (At least it would have given her something else to write about other than Peter in her next autobiography).
I'm sad they're only concerned for the rat - at least it was killed before it was eaten unlike the other stuff this vile programme forces people to eat.
On this morning's BBC news, they are reporting on the British RSPCA helping out orphaned or injured seals, and that is admirable work that everyone can get behind. Their Australian equivalent could end up doing more harm than good if they aren't careful.
Hang on a second what's the difference - just because orphaned/injured seals are cute and cuddly and a lot of people don't like rats? I hate I'm a Celeb for the very reason that it is cruel to animals and insects for the sake of entertainment. IMHO it is long overdue for everyone involved to be held accountable for the horrible things that have been done. Phew glad I got that of my chest!
This may explain why Stuart looked subdued on Friday. He had apparently already been questioned about the incident at that time. I really thought the OP was a joke :eek:
Yes I was just thinking that. People on here commented at the time that he didn't look too happy.
It could also explain why Gino's wife seemed reluctant to show her face or speak at his 'coronation'
Then it's the producers who should be charged. They were responsible for the celebs and presumably had not told them they weren't to kill and eat anything. And if they were the ones who planted it in the camp, they are the ones responsible for its welfare.
Comments
Presumably the zelebs thought the rats were wild and that they just got lucky catching a couple. Although the wildness of the camp is clearly fake, this proves it once and for all. The rat was on the payroll.
They interviewed a Chief Inspector from the RSPCA in New South Wales.
Both D'Acampo and Manning have indeed been charged and the investigation is ongoing regarding ITV.
The legislation relates to not being allowed to kill an animal as part of a TV/Movie production.
The BTT insects are okay dokey as the legislation does not cover them.
Methinks on the day in question someone on the production team should have been able to shout hold on guys before the two celebs killed the animal.
They've both been ordered to appear in court in Feb 2010.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8397691.stm
Well, it isn't just the red tops reporting this it's BBC news and Sky News too with quotes from a guy from the RSPCA!
I think the producers have to go an have a re-think over the entire use of live "creatures" be they mammals or insects. And really the producers are to blame for not stepping in and stopping Gino.
I am sure he'll only get a slapped wrist.
What about Shipwrecked? They killed several chickens and pigs on that and didn't get arrested.
LOL - Put down of the year.
Just odd that this rat incident has been singled out in a show which I think is cruel to animals in almost every episode.
Charging Stuart and Gino seems to be something of a publicity stunt by the Australian RSPCA. If anyone has done something wrong, it's the producers, but I can't help but get the impression that the organisation are just trying to pursue a high profile story for the sake of it.
The swift killing of a possibly tame rat for food has to be low down the list of animal cruelty they come across. I don't see how relevant it is if the rat is tame, expect the rat would have been a lot less scared when it was captured, which would be a good thing.
Rats are not indigenous to Australia and they compete with native animals and are considered vermin. No one has ever gone to prison or even have been charged killing one.
They shouldn't have done it, the producers should have stepped in when they heard them discussing it (as has been said) but I'm sure they won't be punished too severely and, if it does make the production rethink these trials, it's a good thing.
I think it boils down to what purpose the animal was bred for, chickens and so one are bred for purpose, that purpose is to slaughter and eat, but the rats were not bred for that purpose, they were bred to add to the show to make the lives of the contestants uncomfortable, I wondered at the time of the killing if they were stirring up a hornets nest, these rats are bred for appearing in tv shows and films, such as Titanic and Indiana Jones, and they are not bred for food.
The way it was killed will also be looked at, Gino claimed to have slit it's throat, well that will be classed as cruelty to the rat.
I dont blame Gino and Stuart for killing the rat. They were starving and it was for food. They wouldnt have known that the rat wasn't wild. I do blame the producers for placing the rats in in the first place and for not providing the celebrities with enough food in which they felt they needed to kill.
If they do get jailed, I hope that there is a big campaign for their release.
However, if anyone is to face any charges (which is just ridiculous IMO) it should be the producers, who allowed the rat to be killed and eaten.
The celebs knew what they were letting themselves in for. And they were hardly starving, it isn't as if they hadn't eaten for weeks on end.
Yes, I noticed that! I'm glad she ignored him. What a nasty suggestion.
Vegetarians can object to them eating the rat for food, but in the same way they complain about them eating other meat for food.
If they had loads of food and killed the rat, and not eaten it, I could see the point, but they did eat it, and seemed to appreciate it as food.
There are many more important things for animal rights campaigners to worry about, and trying to take action against a chef killing an animal for food undermines all of their other work for the general public.
On this morning's BBC news, they are reporting on the British RSPCA helping out orphaned or injured seals, and that is admirable work that everyone can get behind. Their Australian equivalent could end up doing more harm than good if they aren't careful.
Why couldn't Jordan have killed the bloody thing, she could have been off the telly/tabloids for three years!! (At least it would have given her something else to write about other than Peter in her next autobiography).
And no I don't watch it before anyone pipes up.
Hang on a second what's the difference - just because orphaned/injured seals are cute and cuddly and a lot of people don't like rats? I hate I'm a Celeb for the very reason that it is cruel to animals and insects for the sake of entertainment. IMHO it is long overdue for everyone involved to be held accountable for the horrible things that have been done. Phew glad I got that of my chest!
That reply was hilarious
Yes I was just thinking that. People on here commented at the time that he didn't look too happy.
It could also explain why Gino's wife seemed reluctant to show her face or speak at his 'coronation'
Good point.