Dog kicked to death 'did not suffer' (From Wilts and Gloucestershire Standard)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting WGS NEWS to 80360, or email
us
Dog kicked to death 'did not suffer' RSPCA claim
11:04am Thursday 14th May 2009 in News
The original story which caused outrage on Nov 6 last year - To view click on the link below
A CALLOUS animal killer will not face cruelty charges from the RSPCA - because the dog he kicked to death did not suffer, according to inspectors.
Animals lovers reacted with horror after learning that the charity did not consider the attack caused cruelty.
Phoebe, a miniature Yorkshire Terrier, was killed instantly when she was kicked across the room during a domestic row in Arnolds Way, Cirencester, on November 2 last year.
The story originally caused outrage as the dog's attacker, a 52-year-old man from Hemel Hempstead, received just a police caution for criminal damage - as the law classes pet dogs as property.
But revelations that the RSPCA concluded that, as the dog died instantly, it did not suffer and there was no case of animal cruelty.
The recommendation was made following a post-mortem by a vet.
"It is irrelevant whether it was one kick or two. Killing an animal is killing an animal whether it is quick or slow."
Animal lover Jilly Cooper
Under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, the RSPCA can prosecute for causing unnecessary suffering to animals with sentences including jail, havy fines or a lifelong ban from keeping animals.
Phoebe's owner, aged 51, is still traumatised by the incident despite counselling.
Her sister said: "The RSPCA told us they could not do anymore about it.
"I think it is disgusting. My sister is still devastated about it."
"It seems that nobody wants to know and I am upset he got away with it. What sort of message does that send out to people?"
Animal loving author Jilly Cooper, who lives in Bisley, branded the decision not to prosecute in this case "pathetic."
She said: "It is irrelevant whether it was one kick or two. Killing an animal is killing an animal whether it is quick or slow. At the very least he should be fined as a punishment."
Cotswold MP Geoffrey Clifton-Brown said the law needed changing with harsher penalties to deter similar incidents.
"Whether a blow was intended to kill or not, it should be dealt with harshly," he said. "Whether it’s a single blow or multiple kicks, that someone is prepared to treat a pet in this way is completely unacceptable."
Cirencester animal rights activist Joyce Moss said she was sickened by the "illogical" decision not to prosecute.
"It just sets a bad example that somebody is allowed to get away with animal cruelty," she added.
• Do you think the RSPCA was right not to proceed with a prosecution? Post your comments below.
Comments(5)
eunicegalvin
says...
8:22pm Thu 14 May 09
Wicker Man
says...
12:37pm Fri 15 May 09
Emma G
says...
3:04pm Fri 15 May 09
Safewings
says...
10:55am Sun 17 May 09
There has been no provision in the Act to address abandonment, neglect or cruelty and this is put beyond doubt by the recent horrendous story of Phoebe and how she was kicked to death by nothing less than a callous coward.
To read the rspca`s statement regarding this unnaceptable action "Although 'deeply troubled by the violent death' of Phoebe, the charity explained: 'Evidence of suffering is necessary for cruelty to be proven in the courts ".
This decision has caused obvious outrage, yet the animal charity said "The death was so quick that the little dog did not suffer - and therefore no cruelty charge could be brought ".
This case has seriously compromised animal welfare in the UK and has to be seen as a green light to others angered by their pets or no longer want to keep them to just "kick them" to death and according to the rspca if killed with one blow no act of cruelty has taken place.
How blinkered the rspca are when wearing their animal rights hat and denouncing fox hunting as cruel when the fox was usually killed by one bite. How bizzarre that they accept the casualties of fireworks each year with hardly a response.
Whilst the political parties are having a spring clean with the expenses scandal perhaps its` time that there was a serious re-think and reshuffle regarding animal welfare in the UK and who sets down the guidelines and who enforces it.
The new Animal Welfare Act was the initial work of the rspca as they "worked with " Labour MP Ian Cawsey under the guise of a Private Members Bill but when this failed it was picked up by the Labour Government and most likely by Mr Cawseys` future Landlord Elliot Morley and he also being a strong supporter, I believe, of the rspca.
The AW Act has failed abysmally and it becomes clearer by the day that an animal rights politically charged charity are not the most suitable animal welfare advisers and especially not the enforcers.
reg varnish says...
3:27pm Thu 14 May 09
yes, the right decision by RSPCA. I don't condone the act of killing but if they can't make a case because no actual cruelty was deemed to have occurred then it's right to concentrate their limited resources on cases they can win; there's no shortage of animal cruelty in the land.