STV / SSpca

[dixiebop 125]

This evenings' News coverage of the Uddingston Baiting case,was rank !!! full of Outright lies and SSpca propaganda,asking for wife ,girlfriends to turn their partners in,and parading a wee red tyke thats been kept,telling the general public that anyone owning such dogs should be reported Clachan you;ll need to paint yours ,seriously, everyone should contact STV and complain about the coverage.

Events Cord,theres' a Job for you, get contacting all the Orgs,etc

Edited March 1, 2012 by dixiebop

[events co-ordinator 353]

The plea was guilty what do you expect from the SSPCA they have NEVER had a conviction on that charge when it was contested in court. When you plead guilty you hold your hands up and take what comes. they will get as much mileage out of this as they can it only makes life more difficult for the people who try to defend these cases.

[anythingoes 28]

The plea was guilty what do you expect from the SSPCA they have NEVER had a conviction on that charge when it was contested in court. When you plead guilty you hold your hands up and take what comes. they will get as much mileage out of this as they can it only makes life more difficult for the people who try to defend these cases.

sure the plea was guilty , the judge even said that if it was as bad as the crown was trying to make out then there would have been alot more charges not one that tries to cover all aspects , but at end of day he plead so he acepts liability and was punished acordingly due to that fact , even the jusge stated maybe the uddinstone lad should have remained not guily due to the flaws she found in the so called evedince (half of which was disregarded as it prove nohing , in particulare to the so called involvment in badger contact) but we live and learn.

 

 

the sspca had to go all guns blazzing to justify there actions as it cost them aalmost in the region of 1 million for this case and for a ban and community service its not realy value for money ..........

[bendrover 556]

the lad in question has been painted as some sort of nazi,now we all know that is not the case and he is infact a good lad.but its a fair assumption to think he would advise every one who would keep illegal photos and take all reasonable precautions to stay within a very flawed law

[events co-ordinator 353]

Most of that So called "Evidence" would have dissapeared had the defence lawyer sought advice from people more experienced than him but he Chose not to do that I don't know why as stated the SSPCA have never won this argument in court when its been defended that fact alone should have spurred the defence. This whole case was based on the stuff from the guys computer and what he said to them. This is why we stress NO COMMENT until You have spoken to a SPECIALIST soliciter. The local legal aid guy is NOT up to the job.

[dixiebop 125]

The plea was guilty what do you expect from the SSPCA they have NEVER had a conviction on that charge when it was contested in court. When you plead guilty you hold your hands up and take what comes. they will get as much mileage out of this as they can it only makes life more difficult for the people who try to defend these cases.

I EXPECTED the SSpcs to act in the manner they did! DISINFOMATION is their fortie...WHAT I DON'T EXPECT is STV helping their case, with allowing the shit ! they spout to be broadcast Rightly our wrongly the verdict was not the case,They Blatantly Aided an Abetted the SSpca to imply ALL TERRIERWORK was ILLEGAL,a fact which is WRONG,THEY the STV EDITIORAL should be held to ACCOUNT,I Do hope You and the Oganisations involved With Terrier/Lurcher work ,make their OBJECTIONS of the Misinformation reported in their coverage of the case ,be heard...