STOP RSPCA PRIVATE PROSECUTIONS NOW

RSPCA prosecutions are private prosecutions and as such are not subject to the same safe guards and pubic interest’s tests as are prosecutions brought by the police for example. In police prosecutions they are brought by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), not the police themselves. This means that before a case can be brought an entirely independent and impartial body reviews all the evidence before Court action is taken. In essence this means three important tests; (a) has an offence been committed. (b) is there sufficient evidence of an offence having been committed that a successful prosecution is likely, and (c) is the prosecution in the public interest.

With RSPCA there are no such safeguards, as the prosecutions are not independently scrutinized. Therefore the RSPCA can, and I would suggest do, prosecute for political and financial objectives. They can, and have, prosecuted people for offences that do not actually exist in law, for example cruelty to an invertebrate. The RSPCA claim that they only prosecute as a last resort, I would suggest that clearly this is untrue. They also claim that they prosecute in accordance with the Code of Practice for Crown Prosecutors (i.e. as above), again I would suggest this is untrue as they cannot be considered impartial, they are after all a political campaigning body with written policies against some practices. As an example, stated policies are against the trade in wild caught animals. There also oppose the trade in captive bred wild animals, therefore it is imposable for them to be impartial in a prosecution of some that keeps reptiles or fish, or indeed many animals commonly kept as pets as they would either be wild caught or bred in captivity!

Furthermore, as has been highlighted in some of the posts on this forum the RSPCA engage in some highly dubious practises, such as witness coaching, which would get any case brought by the CPS dismissed by the Court. There is also the question of highly dubious practises concerning ‘impartiality’ of expert witness, for example it is common practice for the ‘expert’ that attends a raid orchestrated by the RSPCA to advise on the state of the animals concerned. To recommend there remove, to hold and care for the animals pending a prosecution and to appear as an expert witness in the prosecutions, all of these roles being paid for by the RSPCA. In some circumstances the partner of the expert is also paid to appear as an expert witness, a highly lucrative venture! Do such arrangements happen with prosecutions brought by the CPS – no, and for very good reason I would suggest.

There are also other very worrying concerns, as these are private prosecutions defendants are unlikely to qualify for legal aid. Therefore they are only entitled to the defence which they can afford. As the cost to defend a prosecution brought by the RSPCA is likely to be in excess of £10,000 (minimum), how many people can afford to contest a prosecution? Often defendants are advised to plead guilty purely on economic grounds, is this right? Is this justice? Personally I would suggest not.

It is also worth noting that due to a quick in the law should the RSPCA loose a prosecution they are highly unlikely to have to pay costs, in facts not only are the defendants costs paid for from central funds in such cases, i.e. taxpayers pockets, so are the RSPCA costs. This means effectively there is no financial deterrent for the RSPCA in taking any persecutions.

I have highlighted just a few of the concerns regarding RSPCA prosecutions, there are many more. Is it not time for a change, should ordinary caring people who look after there pets to the best of there abilities be subject to such atrocities. Is this justice, I for one think not!