RSPCA PROSECUTION CONFLICT

As Lord Justice Auld and Lord Bingham have rightly observed recently, private prosecutions are supposed to be the exception rather than the norm and they should be carefully controlled by the Director of Public Prosecutions. The problem is that the Political Animal Lobby gave £1,000,000 to the Labour Party when former RSPCA Chairman Richard Ryder was in charge. The animal rights loonies of the RSPCA know that they can do almost anything they like while Labour are in power and controlling the police. Sally Case and her stooges in the Prosecutions Department know that their prosecutions make money. This is despite the thousands of pounds a day which their tame lawyers are each allowed to bill. The victims they choose are often very soft targets who can be vilified in the media - many are people who need, or who have asked for, help. The RSPCA is presently spending over ten million pounds a year (that's £10,000,000) on prosecutions which are often against the elderly (eg RSPCA v Ken Bolton), the disabled (eg RSPCA v Rosalind Gregson) or children (RSPCA v C (a child)). That ignores the huge cost of spinning against the defendants too. Ken Bolton is the oldest ever criminal in England and was "92 years young" when the case against him was proved in his absence and a dubious warrant for his arrest issued by Blandford Magistrates earlier on this year. Rosalind Gregson was obviously very seriously mentally ill, and grieving for her son's death, but was still prosecuted and subjected to the usual media campaign. RSPCA v C was featured in the BBC's recent "File on 4" investigation in which Phil Wilson, the RSPCA's public relations guru and their new Head of Prosecutions, so distinguished himself. Defence barrister Nick Tucker made his views about the RSPCA and their motives pretty clear when he spoke on the programme. I agree with Frank Field and Roger Gale - the MP who excoriated the RSPCA in the slightly later Inside Out show - the RSPCA's Prosecutions Department is a disgrace and must be taken off the road. I join these MPs, lawyers and publications like Disability Now, the Sunday Times and the Telegraph. The CPS must take over the RSPCA's Prosecutions Department before any more misery is caused. If not, the RSPCA's new motto will shortly be - "Cruel to humans, fatal to animals".

the rspca dont care about animals anymore, they kill the majority of animals that are unfourtunate enough to come into their so called care, the rspca are only bothered about publicity, politics and donations.

The RSPCA are NO LONGER an animal welfare group they are a publicity machine just out to get as many donations from Joe public, who still believe that they actually care about animals
They are only interested in getting proseccutions as these mean publicity and more lovely (donations)money for them to spend on plush new offices
The more prosecutions that they get the more donations they get
They do not care about animals only money that is why they are targetting owner,s who love their pets as they are easy targets
Some how this message must be got across the the general public and the RSPCA will be shown up for the money grabbing moron,s that they are

The RSPCA unlike other privately prosecuting bodies such as local authorities have a direct conflict of interest, where say a Council prosecute for an offence such as fly tipping, they will be awarded costS from a successful prosecution, they will also get publicity that directly benefits the issue they have prosecuted the offender for.They have no other incentive to prosecute other than to remedy the immediate issue.
The RSPCA, on the other hand gain immense publicity from private prosecutions, they have a substantial media machine that drives publicity around prosecution cases.
The gain financially as a direct result of prosecuting from donations recieved following particulary major cases.
If these prosecutions were simply civil matters, firstly the media wouldn't be as interested, the issue arises because these are criminal prosecutions, so we have a registered charity that is financially benefiting from criminal prosecutions.
I smell a conflict of interest here, to make matters far worse, as we have seen from recent RSPCA prosecutions and stories from this and other sites the RSPCA pay at least lip service to the CPS code of practice, most other prosecuting authorities adhere to this religiously, not so with the RSPCA.
as we have seen from this and other similar sites RSPCA inspectors are all too often arrogant and egotistical.They seem that they will do anything to get publicity and a prosecution.
The RSPCA generally let the public assume that they have powers that they simply don't have ! they dress like Police Officers to give the impression that they have Police powers, they even infer that they do have such powers. THIS WHOLE SCENARIO IS A COMPLETE RECEIPE FOR DISASTER.