# for once a bad pet shop gets prosecuted



## mask-of-sanity

had this link sent to me by a mate...about time someone stood up for pets/reptiles unbelivable reading take a look see what you think 

Billingham pet shop owners guilty of animal cruelty - Billingham - TS23


----------



## mask-of-sanity

20 views and no comments


----------



## Tops

Its pretty shocking to be fair. That leo didnt look too healthy did it.


----------



## mask-of-sanity

yep it is, a lot of pet shops get away with it, its about time something was done and at least these animals were saved


----------



## cooljules

and 2.5 years to bring it to court...so i guess lots of watching...which means lots of suffering and slow deaths...

yes i know sickly or skinny animals get dumped at pet shops (one of ours passes stuff to our rescue) but thats total neglect..


----------



## mask-of-sanity

cooljules said:


> and 2.5 years to bring it to court...so i guess lots of watching...which means lots of suffering and slow deaths...
> 
> yes i know sickly or skinny animals get dumped at pet shops (one of ours passes stuff to our rescue) but thats total neglect..


lets hope its a sign of things to come and that bad pet shops no longer get away with cruelty (sp)


----------



## AuntyLizard

It just amazes me the amount of time that it takes to bring sick, money grabbing people to justice.. How many animals suffered while they were gaining evidence.. 

It is good to see though that they are being brought to justice and omg that place was worse than my house after the kids and Mark have been home all weekend.

Liz


----------



## boromale2008

the person whose petshop it was is a member on this forum because i used to visit the shop.


----------



## mask-of-sanity

boromale2008 said:


> the person whose petshop it was is a member on this forum because i used to visit the shop.


really ! i was sent the link by a mate who lives near there......cant belive people like that can say they care for the animals


----------



## wacky69

i think before everyone starts slagging off they need to get all the information!!! 2.5years to bring it to court cos it took the bloody rspca that long to actually find something to charge them with!!!!

We know the person who this concerns and you honestly couldnt meet a better person, they are totally gutted with this and they are 100% backed by the best rep vet in the north east who is incredibly passionate about reptiles and is normally on the prosecution side not defence side!

Also the rspca jumped to random conclusions about the reps without any vet intervention and failed to do any tests or anything to confirm that the reps were infact at risk!

I wouldnt how long it would take before this appeared and everyone jumping on the band wagon but maybe the full facts must be learnt beforehand instead of presumptions!


----------



## mask-of-sanity

wacky69 said:


> i think before everyone starts slagging off they need to get all the information!!! 2.5years to bring it to court cos it took the bloody rspca that long to actually find something to charge them with!!!!
> 
> We know the person who this concerns and you honestly couldnt meet a better person, they are totally gutted with this and they are 100% backed by the best rep vet in the north east who is incredibly passionate about reptiles and is normally on the prosecution side not defence side!
> 
> Also the rspca jumped to random conclusions about the reps without any vet intervention and failed to do any tests or anything to confirm that the reps were infact at risk!
> 
> I wouldnt how long it would take before this appeared and everyone jumping on the band wagon but maybe the full facts must be learnt beforehand instead of presumptions!


at the end of the day who ever this is was found guilty, so something was wrong with the way these animals had been kept


----------



## sarasin

boromale2008 said:


> the person whose petshop it was is a member on this forum because i used to visit the shop.


Yes she is a member and you have bought from her before. You are all jumping on the pics in the paper, the house was a bloody mess I agree, the leo pictured was a customers who brought it into the shop as they couldnt afford the vets bills, and it was under vet treatment. You dont know the facts the council don't know shit about animals, and the fact that her own vet (who is a prosocuting vet for the RSPCA) is a witness for her speaks for itself. Do you really think she would put her reputation on the line if she thought she was guilty. The court judged on the state of the house and nothing else, incedently why do you think they were not charged on any of the reptiles?
''They were found not guilty of 13 charges relating to reptiles, as the judge ruled the prosecution had put forward insufficient expert evidence''
this is a load of bollocks as well, expert my arse.


----------



## sarasin

wacky69 said:


> i think before everyone starts slagging off they need to get all the information!!! 2.5years to bring it to court cos it took the bloody rspca that long to actually find something to charge them with!!!!
> 
> We know the person who this concerns and you honestly couldnt meet a better person, they are totally gutted with this and they are 100% backed by the best rep vet in the north east who is incredibly passionate about reptiles and is normally on the prosecution side not defence side!
> 
> Also the rspca jumped to random conclusions about the reps without any vet intervention and failed to do any tests or anything to confirm that the reps were infact at risk!
> 
> I wouldnt how long it would take before this appeared and everyone jumping on the band wagon but maybe the full facts must be learnt beforehand instead of presumptions!


Meina just to clear something up, its the council NOT the RSPCA who are doing this.


----------



## mark elliott

i know a couple that need to be taken to court for how they run things but they always seem to get away with it and it's the animals that suffer and no one seems to really care and the pet shops always have a bullshit excuse and get away with it everytime. makes you wonder if some people somewhere are on the take or are people really blind


----------



## wacky69

mask-of-sanity said:


> at the end of the day who ever this is was found guilty, so something was wrong with the way these animals had been kept


at the end of the day we all know what the bloody RSPCA is like and there are numerous threads slagging them off for knowing bugger all!!


----------



## boromale2008

i bought as a beginner from there and even went to your house to pick the crested up, i was impressed with the set ups in your house because compared to the shop it was alot cleaner.
i did contact you about buying not so long ago until i realised who it was, obviously there cant be no smoke without fire.


----------



## mask-of-sanity

wacky69 said:


> at the end of the day we all know what the bloody RSPCA is like and there are numerous threads slagging them off for knowing bugger all!!


thats true but they have eyes and can see whats around them, also from reading it was the council involved also


----------



## Tops

Well people can only go on the information they are given.
If they had to remove several corpses from vivs and cages its still an issue is it not?
Are the council now lying?
Its fine to defend your friends but unless you can also offer another story with photos for evidence its just your word against theirs.


----------



## cooljules

mask-of-sanity said:


> at the end of the day who ever this is was found guilty, so something was wrong with the way these animals had been kept


that isnt necc true..the rspca wanted to do me, cos they said my snakes looked sad, didnt have constant food etc (this was about 4 years ago) and threatend me with court action, i got some well respected herpers i know, 30 years exp some of them, well known people to back me...but the rspca didnt dare take me to court (i begged them too, seriously!)

often i have mega sick stuff get dumped on us, so come on a certain day and you can see really skinny stuff, and often i have no idea or where they like that brought it etc. no idea...just look at the cali king we had dumped, that died 20 min after getting here with that huge tumur...

I have some tattly old vivs, hand made etc as im crap at viv making, and some tanks that arnt the best looking (esp on fotos etc) but fine for the animals and yeah i wished a lot of the BD vivs were bigger, but they get let out...

turn up on certain days, esp the day all the snakes crap etc and piles of poo...sods law when people come but hey ho...

would love to see more details about this, thinking about it, its not clear cut...

i have a inckling...its more rspca fed stuff to the judge etc.(who would know naff all, and like most people, belive and respect them and not know the full feeling of them and reps)

if people here say they know them, and they DO know its not black and white, im more likley to belive it....


----------



## sarasin

mask-of-sanity said:


> at the end of the day who ever this is was found guilty, so something was wrong with the way these animals had been kept


The council said some were too hot, too cold etc but no temps were taken so how did they know, they took a dislike to them when the council were told (in the shop) they were idiots who didn't know their arse from there elbow. And from then on they were never off their backs.
And have you never heard of people being found guilty, only for it to emerge much later that they were innocent.


----------



## mask-of-sanity

cooljules said:


> that isnt necc true..the rspca wanted to do me, cos they said my snakes looked sad, didnt have constant food etc (this was about 4 years ago) and threatend me with court action, i got some well respected herpers i know, 30 years exp some of them, well known people to back me...but the rspca didnt dare take me to court (i begged them too, seriously!)
> 
> often i have mega sick stuff get dumped on us, so come on a certain day and you can see really skinny stuff, and often i have no idea or where they like that brought it etc. no idea...just look at the cali king we had dumped, that died 20 min after getting here with that huge tumur...
> 
> I have some tattly old vivs, hand made etc as im crap at viv making, and some tanks that arnt the best looking (esp on fotos etc) but fine for the animals and yeah i wished a lot of the BD vivs were bigger, but they get let out...
> 
> turn up on certain days, esp the day all the snakes crap etc and piles of poo...sods law when people come but hey ho...
> 
> would love to see more details about this, thinking about it, its not clear cut...
> 
> i have a inckling...its more rspca fed stuff to the judge etc.(who would know naff all, and like most people, belive and respect them and not know the full feeling of them and reps)
> 
> if people here say they know them, and they DO know its not black and white, im more likley to belive it....


i understand what you are saying, but friends will stick up fo each other no matter what ......do you have dead animals about.....i doubt it


----------



## cooljules

sarasin said:


> The council said some were too hot, too cold etc but no temps were taken so how did they know, they took a dislike to them when the council were told (in the shop) they were idiots who didn't know their arse from there elbow. And from then on they were never off their backs.
> And have you never heard of people being found guilty, only for it to emerge much later that they were innocent.


actually i can belive that..

i have seen spotless shops with things wrong...and seen 'normal' shops with good set ups, that to say joe blogs might not look spotless.

unless piles of poo were left in for long time, really bad water etc. not just say untidy vivs its one persons view aganst another..


----------



## mask-of-sanity

sarasin said:


> The council said some were too hot, too cold etc but no temps were taken so how did they know, they took a dislike to them when the council were told (in the shop) they were idiots who didn't know their arse from there elbow. And from then on they were never off their backs.
> And have you never heard of people being found guilty, only for it to emerge much later that they were innocent.


how do they account for the dead animals found ? prosacution have to provide pictures of the shop and animals.....so where they perfect then ?


----------



## sarasin

boromale2008 said:


> i bought as a beginner from there and even went to your house to pick the crested up, i was impressed with the set ups in your house because compared to the shop it was alot cleaner.
> i did contact you about buying not so long ago until i realised who it was, obviously there cant be no smoke without fire.


You are obviously one of the people who believe everything you see in the papers, and as for getting another from us, we put you off because we didn't want you getting rid of another like you did with the first one.


----------



## wacky69

I think before presumptions are made everyone shud get the facts correct and realise yeah they had an underweight leo as previously stated dumped on them by a customer, yeah the house was a mess, this in no way reflects on the way the reps are kept.

The RSPCA will always regardless try drag the rep keeping business down as if it was upto them then no1 would be able to keep reps!

As stated the rep vet defending them is the best rep vet in the north east and she is the most passionate person I have ever met when it comes to reptiles and if she in any way thought any of the animals were in a bad way or at risk she would never be representing them!

She normally is on the prosecution side, I have never personally been to the shop but have bought reps off these people as have many people on this forum and anyone who has bought has never had a bad word to say about them!


----------



## mask-of-sanity

cooljules said:


> actually i can belive that..
> 
> i have seen spotless shops with things wrong...and seen 'normal' shops with good set ups, that to say joe blogs might not look spotless.
> 
> unless piles of poo were left in for long time, really bad water etc. not just say untidy vivs its one persons view aganst another..


i have nothing against messy vivs ect ect.......but there needs to be some sort of standard of care in place


----------



## boromale2008

sarasin said:


> You are obviously one of the people who believe everything you see in the papers, and as for getting another from us, we put you off because we didn't want you getting rid of another like you did with the first one.


i told you why i got rid of that one which was i got a new job and was working ridiculous hours and didnt feel i was giving the crested my full attention, or would you have rather me kept it in bad conditions and mistreated it???


----------



## cooljules

mask-of-sanity said:


> i understand what you are saying, but friends will stick up fo each other no matter what ......do you have dead animals about.....i doubt it


had many animals come in, suddenly dumped, dying etc. so yes...of course not left in vivs etc, but you could turn up when say we have 5 bad ones in, being treated yet could drop dead the minute before you turn up, or the same day...

yes that looks bad, but really would love to find out more from those in the know...and no im not dending them yet, as i want nothing more than BAD shops to be shut, hell enough of them around...but if a judge is told lots of stuff, found NOT guilty on 13 reptile related things, and as said temps not taken, somehting isnt right


----------



## cooljules

boromale2008 said:


> i told you why i got rid of that one which was i got a new job and was working ridiculous hours and didnt feel i was giving the crested my full attention, or would you have rather me kept it in bad conditions and mistreated it???


working long hours affects a crestie? no it doesnt...i dont have any spare time to give hands on, close care to any of our animals, but all are well looked after etc what they need. you dont have to be there 24/7 playing with the animal


----------



## mask-of-sanity

cooljules said:


> had many animals come in, suddenly dumped, dying etc. so yes...of course not left in vivs etc, but you could turn up when say we have 5 bad ones in, being treated yet could drop dead the minute before you turn up, or the same day...
> 
> yes that looks bad, but really would love to find out more from those in the know...and no im not dending them yet, as i want nothing more than BAD shops to be shut, hell enough of them around...but if a judge is told lots of stuff, found NOT guilty on 13 reptile related things, and as said temps not taken, somehting isnt right


but this is a council prosecution not an rspca one....... the saying is theres no smoke with out fire.............and yes we should hear the other side to the story i agree


----------



## cooljules

mask-of-sanity said:


> but this is a council prosecution not an rspca one....... the saying is theres no smoke with out fire.............and yes we should hear the other side to the story i agree


but who do the council take advice from?


----------



## mask-of-sanity

cooljules said:


> but who do the council take advice from?


customers report councils also , the council are the ones that issues the licence


----------



## Tops

I wouldnt get your bun in a twist over them not taking temperatures.
It could well be possible they thought that the premises were in a bad enough condition with corpses all over the place that they didnt need to concern themselves with temps.

If you know the people, you are more likely to side with them and think of them in a positive light. If you dont then you can only go on evidence presented.

Defend all you like but I doubt you will change anyones opinion and certainly not the council or judges.
I cant imagine several different types of animals all turned up at the same time and died within minutes of each other.


----------



## cooljules

mask-of-sanity said:


> customers report councils also , the council are the ones that issues the licence


but who guides the council on the care of each animal, say temps etc.

say how to keep a lep, a BD, a WD, various snakes etc etc.


----------



## Art_Gecko101

The thing that sounds fishy to me is this........

Why would they spend 2.5years building a case and then not bother to get expert evidence for the reptiles to support their case? Reptile keepers tend to be quite a passionate bunch so i cant imagine it'd be hard to find a vet or 'expert' that'd be willing to give evidence to help stop animals suffering.


----------



## kirsten

i'm outraged at the amount of time it took to get a prosecution!! 2 1/2 years!!! thats rediculous. and no presecution for the reps as there was not enough expert evidence, thats annoying, anyone can see that leo's is neglected the same as any of the other animals!!

i am, however glad that at least something has been done.


----------



## wacky69

the council/rspca actually turned up on full cleaning day. Now i know we all spot clean during the week but when you have ppl coming in who have no idea on how reps/exotics should be kept they will look at a snake viv or even a beardie viv and think it looks disgusting when WE know thats just what reps are like, Water bowls get knocked over,also as for food not being in the vivs, what rep keeper will leave crix or locusts in the viv overnight unless u want a bitten rep and veg gets everywhere and unforunately they dont quite know how to use the toilet yet and we all know they are miging pooers lol


----------



## boromale2008

cooljules said:


> working long hours affects a crestie? no it doesnt...i dont have any spare time to give hands on, close care to any of our animals, but all are well looked after etc what they need. you dont have to be there 24/7 playing with the animal


 well then your a better person than me managing it,but i was doing nearly 70 hours from monday to friday and was knackered,so instead of forgetting about the animal and forgetting to clean and stuff i thought i would let the crested go to someone who already had them and would look after it, would you have rather me dumped it on someones door step in a carrier bag or let it run free in the great outdoors??


----------



## wacky69

kirsten said:


> i'm outraged at the amount of time it took to get a prosecution!! 2 1/2 years!!! thats rediculous. and no presecution for the reps as there was not enough expert evidence, thats annoying, anyone can see that *leo's is neglected* the same as any of the other animals!!
> 
> i am, however glad that at least something has been done.


As it saying in the article the leo was a rescue so you are telling me when you take in resues you never get any that bad? ive seen countless amounts of threads with leos in worse condition that that. them being the 'my leo hasnt ate for a year' threads


----------



## Art_Gecko101

kirsten said:


> i'm outraged at the amount of time it took to get a prosecution!! 2 1/2 years!!! thats rediculous. and no presecution for the reps as there was not enough expert evidence, thats annoying, anyone can see that leo's is neglected the same as any of the other animals!!
> 
> i am, however glad that at least something has been done.


 
I dont know who the owners of this shop are, nor have i ever been there, but how many times have you seen a member of this forum (or a similar one) post a photo of their gecko that looked like that? ive certainly seen more than one, and often it's because someone just dumped it on them, The same thing happens with shops all the time because people that are lost will go to shops for help. 

Dont get me wrong, if they really have been mistreating these animals i hope thy get whats coming to them, but sometimes you;ve got to question what you read


----------



## kernix

the council kicked off with the owners of my local reptile shop for not putting water bowls in for the beardies...

but as far as i'm aware can't having a water bowl in a beardie tank make it ill/kill it?


----------



## mask-of-sanity

cooljules said:


> but who guides the council on the care of each animal, say temps etc.
> 
> say how to keep a lep, a BD, a WD, various snakes etc etc.


that i cant answer as i dont no , but at the end of the day they where found guilty on some of the cases, if there vet was that great how come they still had a guilty verdict, the care of some of the animals was bad enough for them to prosecute


----------



## reptile_man_08

I just want to know why a parrot was in the freezer:lol2:.
Should sue the newspaper for taking pictures of you and twisting the truth.


----------



## wohic

kernix said:


> the council kicked off with the owners of my local reptile shop for not putting water bowls in for the beardies...
> 
> but as far as i'm aware can't having a water bowl in a beardie tank make it ill/kill it?


As far as i am concerned beardies should always have access to water.
mine drink daily and bathe in their bowl.
IMO its cruel to deprive them of water.


----------



## mask-of-sanity

what we need to remember is that this wasnt just reptiles, this was other animals also


----------



## mask-of-sanity

wohic said:


> As far as i am concerned beardies should always have access to water.
> mine drink daily and bathe in their bowl.
> IMO its cruel to deprive them of water.


agree my beardies have water all the time and they use it


----------



## cooljules

wohic said:


> As far as i am concerned beardies should always have access to water.
> mine drink daily and bathe in their bowl.
> IMO its cruel to deprive them of water.


only my gravid or brumating adults will drink standing water when they are not eating


----------



## brian

The thing is with rep shops you get offered all sorts of crap hey and sometimes thay want money for it and you have to say no thanks or you end up with a large vet bill and a great fine and a case in court to answer to

The sad thing about this is it gives the rspca more to shout about right or wrong thats what happens 

I once saw a 9 foot albino burm you wouldent beleave viv was full of crap, old shed, the snake had mites, caps, looked like a flat tyer ie all baggy skin, and a ruddy great rabbit defrosting on top of viv and the place was full of flyes a total crap hole and he thought it was ok just off feeding for a while......................


----------



## brian

kernix said:


> the council kicked off with the owners of my local reptile shop for not putting water bowls in for the beardies...
> 
> but as far as i'm aware can't having a water bowl in a beardie tank make it ill/kill it?


 

Think you might mean uro's


----------



## sarasin

reptile_man_08 said:


> I just want to know why a parrot was in the freezer:lol2:.
> Should sue the newspaper for taking pictures of you and twisting the truth.


 The parrot had been for a pm to the vets, it was when bird flu was rife.


----------



## brian

reptile_man_08 said:


> I just want to know why a parrot was in the freezer:lol2:.
> Should sue the newspaper for taking pictures of you and twisting the truth.


 
Or for stuffing ie taxi dermy I know somebody who had a fox in his frezzer for a long time next to the sunday roast also waighting for a stuffing :lol2:


----------



## suez

Art_Gecko101 said:


> The thing that sounds fishy to me is this........
> 
> Why would they spend 2.5years building a case and then not bother to get expert evidence for the reptiles to support their case? Reptile keepers tend to be quite a passionate bunch so i cant imagine it'd be hard to find a vet or 'expert' that'd be willing to give evidence to help stop animals suffering.


yes i agree here very fishy.
I have to say here the vet defending is usually on the prosocuting side and is passionate about all animals especially reptiles. 
I have seen the animals in the care of this person (i must add i never saw the shop)and the animals are in tip top condition i dont beleive the truth is being told in that paper.


----------



## reptile_man_08

Ah, so there was a logical explanation.


----------



## wohic

I have just googled the story and there is loads of links relating to this ....... not just the one from that paper.
its all very sad.....


----------



## brian

I also know somebody who had a croc seized and then he was told to look after it as the rspca could not look after it 

Animal Nile croc 
who Barry Nailor 
Location animal instincts shipley 
time approx 6 years ago

And that took ages to get to court


----------



## suez

reptile_man_08 said:


> Ah, so there was a logical explanation.


well yes there was.
this is not just defending someone because she is a friend.
I can only judge what i have seen with my own eyes and that is clean well cared for animals.
the defending vet is my own vet and she goes the extra mile for any animal.she is usually the proscution vet for the rspca and i know 1 million % she would NOT defend anyone who would ill treat in fact she would be after their blood.


----------



## kato

*Prosecuting*

How long the Courts take to Prosecute is irrelevant, what matters is the end result. In this case Guilty!!!! Whether they have kept Animals in the past to the highest standards does not matter, because on the instances that they have been found guilty on they have NOT kept the Animals satisfacory.

Two and a half years a go when a case was firt started it is likely that the Charged were given the chance to change there ways - but if this was ignored then they deserve everything that they get.


----------



## kaimarion

kernix said:


> the council kicked off with the owners of my local reptile shop for not putting water bowls in for the beardies...
> 
> but as far as i'm aware can't having a water bowl in a beardie tank make it ill/kill it?


NO, if the water bowl is put too close to a heat source the humidity will go up which can lead to an RI if it(the humidity) get's too high. Also if the water container/bowl is too deep there is a chance a young BD could drown.


*"During the search the council's animal welfare and licensing services noticed the strong smell of animal faeces and rotting food. The floors were littered with animal feed, clothing and bird faeces with cages, glass tanks, dirty laundry and rubbish bags near the door.

On visiting the shop, which smelled of urine and dirty animal bedding, officers had to provide the animals with food and water.

They removed several dead animals including a rabbit, finch, lizard, gecko, two snakes, a tortoise and an Amazon parrot - the latter from the freezer."*


----------



## Athravan

So the parrot was in the freezer, I can understand that, and I don't think the council have a right to reference animals kept in freezers - I have animals that have died of old age over a long time span in my freezer - because they might be useful for taxidermy or research. So that should really not have shown any conclusion.

I too have had leopard geckos given to me as skinny as that one, and rescues in extremely bad conditions, one of which we were reported to the RSPCA for even though it only came in the day before, and I pointed this out to the customer.

However,


> rabbit, finch, lizard, gecko, two snakes, a tortoise


I cannot envisage any situation in which 2 snakes - and a tortoise (extremely hard animals to kill and very slow about dying!), 2 lizards, a bird and a rabbit all keel over in the same day. How does that happen? Where is the logical explanation for that? I haven't lost that many animals in my shop in the two years we've been open and I run a rescue! Let alone in one day. So that point alone is seriously worrying.

The council have come to me on cleaning day and it's never been a problem. Customers report stupid things. I recently got reported for not keeping my baby beardies on substrate - something I do to ensure their health (I keep them on cage carpet), and was reported because I don't keep them on chips/sand! The council isn't always knowledgeable, they came, they listened to our explanation - and couldn't tell me if it was legal to keep beardies on cage carpet or not - they'd have to speak to a vet and get back to me, absolutely ridiculous. The council can get it wrong. I too have been told I MUST keep water in with my uromastyx (even though any humidity increase can cause serious mouth rot and problems) or I will be prosecuted. We all know the council isn't perfect.

There has never been a day when there was no water in any of the tanks. It takes 1 hour at the beginning of the day to wash out and clean about 70 tank bowls here. Why would the council have to provide water? Water is a basic necessity that should be provided daily.

But unless the council fabricated those dead animals this is very very worrying to me. But I do hope there are logical explanations as we all want to believe the best of people on the forums and shops in the UK, and we all know the council/RSPCA haven't been right on the nail before, but the newspaper article (and the other google links) are very damning, so perhaps a full and honest story and explanation of the points would help clear the reputation that has been damaged here.


----------



## Andy

With a bit of luck they will be banned from keeping animals full stop. I dont believe its a conspiracy, you dont get found guilty of 8 offences and contravening pet shop licences for nothing.


----------



## weeminx

Andy said:


> With a bit of luck they will be banned from keeping animals full stop. I dont believe its a conspiracy, you dont get found guilty of 8 offences and contravening pet shop licences for nothing.


:2thumb:
exactly


----------



## Optikal

I think Kim & Aggie might need to pay them a visit :whistling2:


----------



## LFBP-NEIL

There was a dead parrot in the freezer - whenever you read a report in the paper about animal cruelty they always put in the "found in the freezer" bit. Just exactly where are we supposed to keep dead animals until they are incinerated! How many people reading this have got a dead chicken in their freezer..

But otherwise pretty grim reading, being a shop owner myself who routinely puts in 18 hour days to make sure there isnt an animal thats needing food, water, cleaning, vet treatment, as well as all the other "business" related stuff.. There can be no excuses for that many dead animals in a shop, if there is and this is a carefully planned set up we need to know more..


----------



## cooljules

also sick and neglected animals a shop takes in, should not be in view of the public who often would get the wrong idea...even if a sign said rescue, being treated. should be well out of sight and seperate.


----------



## LFBP-NEIL

Also.... If you are in a position of routinely having half dead animals dumped on you, then you need to do something called "due diligence" or in plain english - protecting your arse... all rescues should be logged, name & address of person surrendering the animal, photograph of condition, any notes on the condition must be recorded, and finally get your regular vet to give it the once over.

And if you cant do this.. well then leave the rescuing animals to people who can - simple really?


----------



## cooljules

pink said:


> Also.... If you are in a position of routinely having half dead animals dumped on you, then you need to do something called "due diligence" or in plain english - protecting your arse... all rescues should be logged, name & address of person surrendering the animal, photograph of condition, any notes on the condition must be recorded, and finally get your regular vet to give it the once over.


bit hard when you get a knock on the door, handed a bag etc and run off, or just a knock...
i take fotos, when i have a camera and make notes...but had a soft shell, a cali and one or 2 i can think of where they wouldnt leave details, and at best a mobile number


----------



## cooljules

pink said:


> Also.... If you are in a position of routinely having half dead animals dumped on you, then you need to do something called "due diligence" or in plain english - protecting your arse... all rescues should be logged, name & address of person surrendering the animal, photograph of condition, any notes on the condition must be recorded, and finally get your regular vet to give it the once over.


also, no vets near me wont even touch reps....and the ones that do dont know and look stuff up so wouldnt come out.


----------



## mask-of-sanity

having read some reports on google...i must say interesting reading.........one said there where 22 dead animals...............rats had started to eat cage mates.........some of the animals that had no water included rats and birds.....niether of these should ever be without water..........pretty grim reading tbh 

i worked in a pet shop, all animals were checked before the shop was opened and routine jobs done


----------



## LFBP-NEIL

cooljules said:


> bit hard when you get a knock on the door, handed a bag etc and run off, or just a knock...
> i take fotos, when i have a camera and make notes...but had a soft shell, a cali and one or 2 i can think of where they wouldnt leave details, and at best a mobile number


referring to pet shops really, but yes not always possible. however any reasonable person in the land when presented with a log book of rescues would be prepared to accept there will be the odd dump and run discrepency.


----------



## LFBP-NEIL

> They also said animal welfare officers had visited premises on their weekly cleaning day.


Now i dont know about any other shop owners on here, but we dont have a weekly cleaning day, you literally need to clean daily, spot clean as and when required, start at the beginning and when you finish you start again, it never ends. doing this most reptiles will only need a deep clean fortnightly/monthly, and then you dont do them all at once, do a set amount of vivs each day so its an ongoing constant cleaning cycle, not one big build up of shit that then needs tackling in one go. all of our rodents are checked daily, furries should be cleaned out just before they start to get smelly, not when they are stinking,


----------



## Fangio

I'm not gonna mince my words here. This disgusts me. No amount of "it was cleaning day" or any other pathetic excuses covers the fact of so many dead animals of differet types, on the same day AND the fact that the council had to provide food and water to these animals - a basic necessity for life.

I've worked in pet shops. Never was anything left to get like this. To be frank I hope they throw the book at you, assuming what was reported is true. You give a bad name to animal keepers and help to put people off using shops when there's so many good ones out there doing things properly.


----------



## cooljules

pink said:


> Now i dont know about any other shop owners on here, but we dont have a weekly cleaning day, you literally need to clean daily, spot clean as and when required, start at the beginning and when you finish you start again, it never ends. doing this most reptiles will only need a deep clean fortnightly/monthly, and then you dont do them all at once, do a set amount of vivs each day so its an ongoing constant cleaning cycle, not one big build up of shit that then needs tackling in one go. all of our rodents are checked daily, furries should be cleaned out just before they start to get smelly, not when they are stinking,


ours get a morning spot clean before they all warm up, then warmed up food and watched and water. and main big cleans, changes a few each on certain days.


----------



## uroplatus

I have come on here to give you my side of the story. I know my name has not been brought into it but since I have nothing to hide I am on here to tell you the facts.
I am well aware of what was written in the papers and I know that you will all form your own opinions of the case from the information you have got and from what I am writing now. I cannot prove anything to you and I also will not be able to go into anything in great detail as we are appealing against this decision. 
We opened our shop in Dec 05' and we were licensed with all enclosures in place and everything was fine. In August 06' we had a visit from the council saying our rabbits were overcrowded - we sorted the problem and as far as we were aware that was that. We had a number of visits from the council including one from their vet who was asking for identification for various reptiles and then told us we were housing them wrongly (hang on if you cant id a species how can you say whether the animals is kept right or not???) Also she pointed out some reptiles which she considered to be ill and told us we had to take them to our vets - these included two spider geckos that she said we emaciated (they were spider geckos and looked like normal healthy spider geckos), we took all of these to our vet who gave all a clean bill of health. The council on the visits they came on we informed a monday was cleaning day for the animals at home (not the shop as mentioned on here - the shop animals we cleaned out on varying days depending on stock rotation, spot cleaning etc.). 
We had a freezer in the back of the shop which had in it a dead amazon parrot - this parrot was rescued by us from the RSPCA, she was a feather plucker when we got her and eventually got back all her plumage. She was fine healthwise until we bought in 4 parrots from a well known breeder for the shop. They came back to our house overnight before going into the shop and within a couple of days one of the parrots bacame sick and died, our vet pmd it and couldnt discover the cause of death, within a couple of weeks our parrot barney became sick and was under veterinary treatment, she died we also had her pmd and put her body in our shop freezer for burying later on. Also in our freezer was a couple of snakes and lizards - one of which a customer had brought in dead and a tortoise which had came in from a supplier dead we were keeping the body for proof of death; I'm suprised it wasnt mentioned about the hundreds of rats, mice and chicks in the freezer (snake food). The dead rabbit and finch had no pms done and therefore the cause of death is unknown, no mention is made in the paper that the other rabbits and finches were perfectly healthy.
On the day of the raid they came first thing on a morning so some of the animals had run out of water and/or food from being fed the day before - how many of you can prevent this happening first thing on a morning before you get to them? Also by the time they had got the to the shop as they raided the house first it was after 4pm so of course animals here running low on food and water, we would have normally been to the shop many hours before this but we were not allowed. So we were prosecuted for this, also with it being our full cleaning day at home some of the animals had faeces in with them and their bedding needed changing. Our animals were fully cleaned out a minimum of once weekly which is standard procedure for most animal keepers. Everyone has different routines and opinions of things but the point on here is that they are claiming we have broken the law - our animals needed cleaning out but they were certainly not caused unneccessary suffering due to this - no evidence was given in court to suggest it had either but we were still convicted on it.
I make no excuses about the state of the house - we neglected our housework NOT our animals. In regards to the rats eating themselves as has been mentioned - I had introduced some new rats into a couple of my cages on the saturday - all seemed well and no fights happened so I assumed they were fine, but obviously not, it looks as though a fight had broken out and rats being rats have picked on the weaker one. The suggestion is that they were starving so had to eat each other - the photos taken by the council show food clearly present in the cage with the dead rats so how is that the case? I am gutted my rats did this but I dont see how I am accountable for an animals behaviour? 
In regards to the other charges we were charged for birds. We had lost some birds overnight when the raid happned which was concerning to us never mind the council, if we had gone in on the morning and seen a number of birds dead we would have gotten a pm done on at least a couple of the deads, as at the time we had had the problem wih our parrots and it was when bird flu was rife so we were concerned that that may have been the problem,. But when the council came across these dead birds what did they do? Nothing - no pms performed on ANY dead animals they just assumed that it was neglect and did no further checks. If I told you the whole time that their vet was there she physically examined ONE animal what would you say? She didnt handle animals and yet gave evidence in court that they were neglected to the point of death, also not one of the animals was given treatment by her and not one of them was removed and taken to her surgery for further observations, treatments or anything - so if our animals were dying as mentioned how is that the case when the vet did not even consider them ill enough to take to her surgery? So they are the charges against us birds and rats. We were found not guilty of the reptiles. If I tell you we were being prosecuted for not having any food in with our snakes or lizards I'm sure you will all see why that is a bit odd? Also we were being prosecuted for keeping snakes in RUBS and hatchling snakes in small tubs, also our vivarium construction (wooden vivs, sliding glass fronts, vents), for temperatures when not one person bothered to take the temperature, for not providing lighting for the reptiles in RUBs - so in short a large number of the people on this forum would be prosecuted by our council if they came and saw how people keep their animals.
In regards to the skinny leo, what I am supposed to do when people come into the shop and dump their sick reptiles on me? I took it in along with a few other which they were attempting to prosecute us for and I treated them and was observing them to ensure they were improving. What most people dont take into account is that when an animal is thin is that is it losing weight or gaining it - the leo was improving not deteriorating in our care. Our biggest mistake with the thin reptiles is that we kept them in the shop - they had clear signs on the enclosures stating not for sale under treatment, which they were. Whenerver we took in rescues we always attempted to get details of the people who brought them in but the majority of the time people would refuse to do this, so what were we supposed to do turn the animals away or take them without details? I wonder whether the council would raid a rescue centre and seize animals due to neglect and prosecute the owner of the rescue? I think not, we have been persecuted for other peoples mistakes with their animals.
What was left out of the report from the papers is that we provided a full veterinary history, including PMs for all animals that had seen the vet dating back to 99'. We were left with our dog - if the house was as terrible and we were as incapable of looking after animals as stated why would they leave us with our dog? 
The councils vet stood up in court and said she was not an expert in reptiles - so why did she think she had the knowledge to inform the council to prosecute us for them in the first place if she didnt know about them?
Our vet is a prosecuting vet for the RSPCA and an excellent reptile and all round vet, she has never done a defence case before but believes the evidence provided by the council does not conclude unneccessary suffering. In her words just because an animals is thin does not conclude unneccessary suffering - further investigations are needed of which none were done. She also said a lack of food and water one one occassion proves nothing - none of the animals were dehydrated which shows water was recently given plus the fact that water was present in many cages shows it had been given recently which we know it had been. Every single animal had been given food and water the day before, and all animals were given food and water every single day . We never neglected to give our animals what they needed, as I mentioned earlier our house conditions were awful but unless an animal has access to our house I dont see the relevance, the only animal which had access was the only animal they left behind- very odd.
In regards to the licensing charges - we were found guilty of blocking the fire exit - yes we did block it, we were shut at the time and we werent aware it would contravene our licence conditions - we should have known better so I will hold my hand up to that one.
The other licensing charges are that the food and water bowls in the birds were filthy with poo, feathers and algae in them, I know for a fact I sterilised those bowls the day before the raid and altough poo and feathers may have been in it from the birds perching over the tops of the bowls the night before there is absolutely no way there was algae - plus the council failed to take any pictures of this - and yet we were still found guilty. The last licensing charge is in regards to the rabbit run - this one has us really confused - we were licensed with the run in the Dec 05' and yet by the Sept 06' it was suddenly wrong and contravened licence conditions by allowing the public to lean over and touch the rabbits - we based our pen on the pets at home design which to this day is still open topped in our council's area and yet no one is prosecuting them.
Also we had never had a complaint made against us except for the 'annonymus' complaint the council said they had received about overcrowded rabbits - we all know if anything is wrong in a pet store people do not mince their words and can and do complain to councils and RSPCA.
I really feel I have said all I can for our side of things and you can choose to believe what you will. All I will say is isnt it strange that over 350 animals were removed from us and the council only allowed our vet to see 19 of them when she wanted to inspect them - the rest are claimed to have died - so how can they account for the deaths of all of them? We still legally own the remainder of the animals and we are fighting to get them back. We are appealing this case as we know the charges (except the fire exit) are wrong, our vet agrees there is no way with the lack of evidence present we should have been found guilty and our solictor is backing us all the way - he has said if he thought we were guilty he wouldnt be fighting it the way he is.
My mam will come on later and explain what happened to her - another thing left out of the papers.
Just a quick note thank you to everyone who is supporting us through this difficult time - we know people will believe what they want but at the end of the day we know the truth and to us thats all that matters.


----------



## Julie&James

Some of you stone-throwers should be careful that you're not living in a glasshouse. People love to judge don't they.

First, the prosecution. The council (not the RSPCA) brought the action against these people. The RSPCA's senior prosecuting vet for the region was DEFENDING them. What does that tell you exactly ?

You think the fact that a council prosecuted someone proves their guilt ? Maybe you don't know much about council prosecutions. Let me enlighten you ..

CLICK HERE - Council prosecutes mother of two over 40p debt.

CLICK HERE - Council prosecutes 80 year old woman for feeding the birds.

CLICK HERE - Council prosecutes family for overfilling wheelie bin by 4 inches.

So don't be so sure that a council prosecution means anything. Councils usually couldn't find their arse with both hands. Ask someone who works for one.

So, they were found guilty by the judge in court. Let's examine that ...



> Summarising, District Judge Kristina Harrison said: "It's not just untidy, unfortunately it paints a picture of utter squalor.
> "It's quite simply disgusting."


So, let's rephrase .. "poncy middle-class Magistrate with detached house and a cleaner thinks working class people have a messy house and obviously shouldn't be allowed to keep pets". 


This is also the judge who didn't even give a driving ban to a woman who caused an accident that killed her own son.

It's also the judge who decided to halve the sentence of a drink driver who was caught only 5 months after being prosecuted for the same thing.

Keep googling. It doesn't take long before it's clear she's a TERRIBLE JUDGE.

As for the "evidence" in the case. There were clearly issues of tidiness and cleanliness, but having visited reptile shops up and down the country, I can't honestly say I've ever seen one that was 100% clean and tidy. Some have been frankly a disgrace, and while I'm not condoning that, I think we need to take a deep breath before we start screaming ANY DIRTY PET SHOP SHOULD BE CLOSED DOWN. Because before long we'd have nowhere to buy anything, other than faceless online resellers. 

What's more telling is the evidence they tried to bring but failed. Such as "keeping baby snakes in a small tub". "Not giving snakes food all the time throughout the day/week". "Keeping bearded dragons without standing water". On those criteria, *most of us on these forums would be prosecuted*, so again, before you jump to conclusions, ask yourself how valid this entire prosecution was. Bird seed in the water in an aviary cage ? Show me a petshop ANYWHERE that doesn't have that every day of the week. A smell of animal faeces ? Again .. open the door of your local shop and take a good sniff. Unless they spend 24 hours a day cleaning, there will be a smell of poo. It's par for the course.

As for the newspaper story (which is what most of you are using to make your judgements here), you've clearly never had cause to be on the receiving end when the press decide your story will sell a few papers. I hope to hell you never do. Suffice to say that truth and accuracy don't count for much, when theres the chance of a lurid headline and some gory details (however relevant or otherwise), and some gawping bystanders who will cluck and shake their heads and mutter "shouldn't be allowed".

Half this thread disgusts me, and it's not the half talking about the person in this story.


----------



## Andy

So your saying these people had done nothing wrong at all and its all a fabrication and lies?


----------



## Cheeky-x

All Im Saying Is The Pics Dont Look That Good, And Doesnt Make People Go In Your Favour. And The Pic Of The Leo, If It Had Only Been Dropped Off Via A Customer. Why Wasnt It Put Into Isolation And Vetted And Then Proof Would Of Been Present That They Or Whoever Was Doing Somethin About It. Im Not Judging, Im Just Expressing MY Opinion. Why Would The Council Be On Your Back If Someone Hadnt Reported It And You Hadnt Been Doing Anything Wrong, I Know They Can Be Bas***ds At The Best Of Times But Thats A Bit Too Far.!! x


----------



## Julie&James

Andy said:


> So your saying these people had done nothing wrong at all and its all a fabrication and lies?


They blocked a fire exit, and had a messy house.

Hows your house Andy? I hope it's spotlessly tidy and clean 100% of the time, because if the council turn at random up and it's a bit messy .. you never know.

Also, do you have any reptiles in tubs or rubs ? Any snakes that they might find without food right at this moment ? Rescued any animals that don't look 100% ever ?

I don't own a pet shop, but if I did, there's every chance that bird water bowls would have seeds and feathers in them first thing in the morning (unless I stayed there all night and spot cleaned, 7 days a week). Also, I don't keep rats, but I've heard plenty of stories of people who do waking up and finding one has attacked and partly eaten the other. It's what rats do sometimes.

Also, if I did keep a petshop and wanted to investigate deaths of animals by having them post-mortemed, there's every chance I'd keep them in the freezer. I know full well I have a number of dead mice in my freezer right now (since my snake is rather partial to them), and in the way this case was prosecuted there's every chance I would have been found guilty as well.

Those elements formed the basis of this case, and who here can honestly say they couldn't possibly have been a victim given the same circumstances ?



Cheeky-x said:


> All Im Saying Is The Pics Dont Look That Good, And Doesnt Make People Go In Your Favour. And The Pic Of The Leo, If It Had Only Been Dropped Off Via A Customer. Why Wasnt It Put Into Isolation And Vetted And Then Proof Would Of Been Present That They Or Whoever Was Doing Somethin About It. Im Not Judging, Im Just Expressing MY Opinion. Why Would The Council Be On Your Back If Someone Hadnt Reported It And You Hadnt Been Doing Anything Wrong, I Know They Can Be Bas***ds At The Best Of Times But Thats A Bit Too Far.!! x


First off, I don't know if anyone has ever mentioned this before, but your posts are almost unreadable. Try not capitalising every word. It would help.

The vast majority of pet shops take in rescues. That's part of the business. Most customers won't leave details as they themselves are worried about getting in trouble for letting the animal get sick or underfed in the first place. So, hypothetically, if you were in this persons position, what would you do ? Take the animal and try to help it, as they did, or refuse because of the risk of the council prosecuting you and let the animal suffer. Apparently, everyone in this thread thinks animal suffering is a terrible thing. I think people need to make their minds up. As for isolation, the leo WAS isolated from other animals, and no part of this prosecution accuses the shop owners of housing a sick animal with other healthy ones.


----------



## Andy

My house is always clean and tidy, there is never faeces or food on the floor and I have no dead animals in my freezer. If a bird was shitting in its water bowl over night I would move the bowl from under its perch etc etc.

Putting a dead animal in the freezer is pointless if your getting a PM done as freezing and defrosting is going to damage the organs and any bacteria etc. Its better to keep it cool not frozen and get it to the vet ASAP.

I suppose time will tell if these people are found innocent after their appeal I will gladly apologise and take back my words but I cannot believe its all a conspiracy.


----------



## mask-of-sanity

Julie&James said:


> They blocked a fire exit, and had a messy house.
> 
> Hows your house Andy? I hope it's spotlessly tidy and clean 100% of the time, because if the council turn at random up and it's a bit messy .. you never know.
> 
> Also, do you have any reptiles in tubs or rubs ? Any snakes that they might find without food right at this moment ? Rescued any animals that don't look 100% ever ?
> 
> I don't own a pet shop, but if I did, there's every chance that bird water bowls would have seeds and feathers in them first thing in the morning (unless I stayed there all night and spot cleaned, 7 days a week). Also, I don't keep rats, but I've heard plenty of stories of people who do waking up and finding one has attacked and partly eaten the other. It's what rats do sometimes.
> 
> Also, if I did keep a petshop and wanted to investigate deaths of animals by having them post-mortemed, there's every chance I'd keep them in the freezer. I know full well I have a number of dead mice in my freezer right now (since my snake is rather partial to them), and in the way this case was prosecuted there's every chance I would have been found guilty as well.
> 
> Those elements formed the basis of this case, and who here can honestly say they couldn't possibly have been a victim given the same circumstances ?


and you no personally that they used that to form the basis of this case do you......in all my time of owning rats/ birds ect never has a water bottle been empty the day after filling it........none of my pets/reps smell of urine on cleaning day......the only ones that used to were my rabbits in the summer but then they got cleaned a lot more than weekly, unless you worked there how do you no this is all fabricated 

thankyou to the owner of the shop for your reply, i have read it but will re read it......if the gecko was a rescue then why wasnt it with your vet ?


----------



## Julie&James

Andy said:


> My house is always clean and tidy, there is never faeces or food on the floor and I have no dead animals in my freezer. If a bird was shitting in its water bowl over night I would move the bowl from under its perch etc etc.


Birds shit when they flutter from perch to perch. They also sit in their food bowl, and around it. Unless you were holding a vigil outside your aviary 24 hours a day, there's a chance you'd get shit or seed in the water bowl. We can split hairs all day, but surely you can admit that seed, feathers and poo in a water bowl first thing in the morning in a bird cage is hardly animal cruelty.



> Putting a dead animal in the freezer is pointless if your getting a PM done as freezing and defrosting is going to damage the organs and any bacteria etc. Its better to keep it cool not frozen and get it to the vet ASAP.


Fine. The fact remains that these people were prosecuted for having dead animals in a freezer. That was the evidence on which the judge decided they were causing animals suffering. Are you stating for the record that you consider that a safe conviction ?



> I suppose time will tell if these people are found innocent after their appeal I will gladly apologise and take back my words but I cannot believe its all a conspiracy.


Nobody is saying it's a conspiracy. The shop owners have admitted to a number of facts. Their house was a mess because they neglected the housework due to the requirement of looking after the animals. The animals were given precedence. There are other personal reasons why the house was in the state it was, but those aren't in the public domain. Suffice to say they are more than reasonable.

It's funny how on the one hand we have threads constantly bemoaning the ridiculous bullying and false prosecutions weilded by the RSPCA who often know less about the care of particular species than the owners they're prosecuting. Here we have the council (who are even less experienced and capable than the RSPCA) prosecuting someone who is being DEFENDED by the senior RSPCA vet.

If you don't think that sounds dodgy, then I guess we differ on how believable stuff is that you read in the paper, or the ability of the courts not to make a mockery of justice.



mask-of-sanity said:


> and you no personally that they used that to form the basis of this case do you......in all my time of owning rats/ birds ect never has a water bottle been empty the day after filling it........none of my pets/reps smell of urine on cleaning day......the only ones that used to were my rabbits in the summer but then they got cleaned a lot more than weekly, unless you worked there how do you no this is all fabricated


Yes I do because I've spoken extensively to someone who was actually IN THE COURT, rather than taking a few paragraphs from a newspaper report (and we know how truthful the press is, always, right ?), and jumping to conclusions.

I can say personally that my leo rubs stink of crap every evening when we take them out of the rub to clean and feed them and replenish their water and calcium bowls. Leo shit stinks. 5 minutes after they shit, the rub will stink, no matter how well ventilated they are. If you keep snakes in rubs (and I'm pretty sure you do), please tell me you've never opened a rub after the animal has defacated and found it smelly.



> thankyou to the owner of the shop for your reply, i have read it but will re read it......if the gecko was a rescue then why wasnt it with your vet ?


Do you take every animal you assist to be housed at the vets ? Every snake you help feed up ? Every one ? Because I'm pretty sure that a majority of people who take in an animal might GO to the vet to ask advice, get a diagnosis, buy medication .. but except for in EXTREME cases, they will house and treat the animal at home. I'm surprised to hear you automatically pay for every rescue you handle to be homed at the vet's surgery in all cases. You must be very well-to-do. Could you lend me a tenner sometime ?


----------



## wohic

innocent until proven guilty, thats what they say isnt it.
I am going to nit pick at something uroplatus said now.........._.as I mentioned earlier our house conditions were awful but unless an animal has access to our house I dont see the relevance, the only animal which had access was the only animal they left behind- 

_so you are saying no animals had access to your house ? so the photos of the cages bin bags, washing etc... was that at the shop ?
I realize this is still on going with sentencing on the 24th so things must be very stressful.... 


I truly hope that if this is indeed a miscarriage of justice, that things are put right.......

Thing is though we all pass comments every day on things reported in the newspapers and on the news, why should this be any different.
I would be interested in hearing your side of the story about the seized animals that were illegally imported as well if you care to ?


----------



## mask-of-sanity

Julie&James said:


> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes I do because I've spoken extensively to someone who was actually IN THE COURT, rather than taking a few paragraphs from a newspaper report (and we know how truthful the press is, always, right ?), and jumping to conclusions.
> 
> I can say personally that my leo rubs stink of crap every evening when we take them out of the rub to clean and feed them and replenish their water and calcium bowls. Leo shit stinks. 5 minutes after they shit, the rub will stink, no matter how well ventilated they are. If you keep snakes in rubs (and I'm pretty sure you do), please tell me you've never opened a rub after the animal has defacated and found it smelly.
> 
> Do you take every animal you assist to be housed at the vets ? Every snake you help feed up ? Every one ? Because I'm pretty sure that a majority of people who take in an animal might GO to the vet to ask advice, get a diagnosis, buy medication .. but except for in EXTREME cases, they will house and treat the animal at home. I'm surprised to hear you automatically pay for every rescue you handle to be homed at the vet's surgery in all cases. You must be very well-to-do. Could you lend me a tenner sometime ?


but you never saw the shop and are taking word of mouth from a third party........i have also had gecko must of just been mine because they didnt smell.........the diff between any non feeders i take in and the gecko is that the gecko is obviously ill where as the snakes just were slow at feeding, any snake that was thought to be ill or had an underlying problem got a vet visit......i do not take in rescue's lets get that straight, and your pretty sure i keep my snakes in rub's, well you are very wrong, the only snakes kept in tubs are a royal and any hatchling snakes once big enough they go into vivs. infact there tubs sit inside the viv they will be going into , so you my dear need to get your facts straight dont you


----------



## uroplatus

Thanks you to everyone who has posted on our behalf - especially Julie&james who seem to have gone out of their way to help my points.
Mask-of-sanity - the leo had been checked by our vet and was housed with a couple of other leos which came in from the same person, all were underweight although the one from the picture was the worst. They were in a viv seperate from any other reptiles and were unable to get contact with other reptiles so therefore isolated.

Wohic - the photos shown were the house not the shop. The 'illegal animals' were two short tailed opposums which we brought back from Hamm a few years ago and had permission from DEFRA to do so, unfortunately the people on the ferry decided we were illegally landing them and attempted to prosecute us. With the assistance of a very well known and well respected defender of the law we got the charges thrown out of court. Basically from that the council received a letter at the beginning of August about the charges which at the time still stood, and from then they were on our backs.

I hope people do keep an open mind until at least after the appeal.


----------



## mask-of-sanity

uroplatus said:


> Thanks you to everyone who has posted on our behalf - especially Julie&james who seem to have gone out of their way to help my points.
> Mask-of-sanity - the leo had been checked by our vet and was housed with a couple of other leos which came in from the same person, all were underweight although the one from the picture was the worst. They were in a viv seperate from any other reptiles and were unable to get contact with other reptiles so therefore isolated.
> 
> Wohic - the photos shown were the house not the shop. The 'illegal animals' were two short tailed opposums which we brought back from Hamm a few years ago and had permission from DEFRA to do so, unfortunately the people on the ferry decided we were illegally landing them and attempted to prosecute us. With the assistance of a very well known and well respected defender of the law we got the charges thrown out of court. Basically from that the council received a letter at the beginning of August about the charges which at the time still stood, and from then they were on our backs.
> 
> I hope people do keep an open mind until at least after the appeal.


thankyou for your reply....would it not have been better to house the geckos seperatly if they were all under weight.....i am sure you understand that threads like these need to be made public so that pet shops that do neglect animals may think twice about it.........i am not saying you did neglect after reading your post regarding the prosecution, and if your appeal does vindicate you of the charges i hope to see a thread saying that , thankyou for the imformation you have given us


----------



## sarasin

This is what happened to me on the same day, as Lauren. 
The day it happened, the council also come to my house, with a warrent was for illegal animals, since I don't have any illegal animals I was happy to show them round. I had to tell them what the reptiles were, as they didn't have a clue. After they had looked round (the vet was there too) I was told that the vet was not happy with the way they were being kept (ie: no heat for the Rhacs, even though I told her they didn't need any) and they would be removing them. She asked what the 'muck' was in the bowls for the Rhacs, I told her it was cgd, it was obvious she thinks all reptiles just eat livefood.
They did take all of my reptiles apart from the ones in the living room (beardies, uromastyx (even though the vet said they should have had a waterbowl provided, and a pair of saras) now at the time I was looking after 4 boa's that had been bought from a customer to sell in the shop, but these were found to have mites so were at mine getting treatment from our vet for the mites.
2 days later I had all of the animals returned and was told there would be no charges against me. Funnily enough the 4 boa's were not returned, even though they said I was not being charged with anything (its obvious to me they kept them because they were Laurens) Also taken was an incubator with Rhac eggs in which were due to hatch, when they were returned I was told 4 eggs had hatched and the youngsters were also returned. When I checked the incubator after they had left I found 5 empty shells, I phoned them and was told they knew nothing about the missing baby.
On checking the reps over later I noticed one of my female gargs had burns on all of her feet, again I contacted them and was told they didn't know what had happened to her, the garg was treated at my vets but infection set in and she died about a week later. 
When I went to court and told my story to the judge, she just didn't want to know.
At the end of the day you are all going to believe what you want to, Lauren can't prove her side to you, all she can do is tell her side of the story, but I know all she is guilty of is not doing the housework. Which if you read the paper is all the judge went on about. 
Now I don't know what the dead animals died of, and neither do the council since no pm's were performed. This in itself shows me they didn't have a :censor: clue what the proceedures should be when prosecuting someone for neglect (no food or water etc)
When this was pointed out by Laurens vet again the judge didn't want to know, this whole thing stinks, if they had done pm's and found they had been starved etc believe me I would not be sticking up for her like this. But how do they (or you) know why these animals died?
You are all going on about the dead reptiles, but isn't it funny they have not been found guilty for these? It says in the paper that the ''council had put forward insufficient expert evidence'' for these charges, BOLLOCKS with dead animals what other evidence do the need.
As for the breaches of their license these are a bloody joke, blocking the fire exit (the day the council went in the shop was closed anyway) not having a lid on the rabbit run (how many pet shops do? ) 
And why do you all think its the council who are telling the truth? 
As Lauren said there is more to this which we can't go into as there will be an appeal.


----------



## Art_Gecko101

I've never been to the shop or your houses so i cant comment on any of the claims etc, because evidently there are always 2 sides to a story and there are things on both sides that obviously arnt ideal. 

However, this i find disgusting and i hope once the shop business is resolved (however that may turn out) that you will press on to find out what happened here


> On checking the reps over later I noticed one of my female gargs had burns on all of her feet, again I contacted them and was told they didn't know what had happened to her, the garg was treated at my vets but infection set in and she died about a week later


It sounds to me like she was given a heatmat or something similar like an unguarded bulb in the viv which if it got to the stage where it burnt her was obvious mistreatment on their part!

As ive said before, i'm not going to pass judgement on any of this as i dont know enough to do so fairly, but i really do hope it's all settled quickly and with as little mess as possible.


----------



## cooljules

i think being done for stuff in rubs n tubs....could affect 95% of keepers.

also aid temps were wrong, but not taken....

im looking round now, at lots of vivs full of tokays, which get misted and drink from the droplets on leaves etc daily, wont drink standing water so rather than have a build up where crix will drown etc, they dont have a dish..

also....as i cool my adult snakes, no eat or food for many months...what would a judge say about that? esp if its no expert whos presenting the case to the judge...


----------



## Julie&James

mask-of-sanity said:


> but you never saw the shop and are taking word of mouth from a third party........


And you're taking your opinion from a 5 paragraph SENSATIONAL story in the local press. All the local press report is what sells papers. Headlines and gore. They're not in the slightest bit interested in the details of the case. For my part, I have a good deal more information on which to base my opinion.



> i have also had gecko must of just been mine because they didnt smell..


You should have bred from them, because leo's with non-smelling shit would certainly have been a big hit. Maybe your nose is dysfunctional ?



> .......the diff between any non feeders i take in and the gecko is that the gecko is obviously ill


Now you're actually diagnosing a medical condition from a single photograph? The leo in the photo is emaciated. That could be as a result of persistent non-feeding. Perhaps due to a medical condition, perhaps due to maltreatment, who knows. All we know is, it's skinny, and was like that when it arrived at their shop. Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that it's "obviously ill" ?



> where as the snakes just were slow at feeding, any snake that was thought to be ill or had an underlying problem got a vet visit......


And all the sick animals in this case had got vet visits, and she has the vet reports dating back years during the time she owned the shop. What you're just not getting here is that this person CARES ABOUT THE ANIMALS, and whatsmore is a very knowledgable and responsible keeper. You're judging based on faulty information. Also, your original post didn't mention vet VISITS, you asked "if the leo came to you in that state why wasn't it with your vet". Like I said, beyond a visit, do you HOUSE sick animals at the vets ?



> i do not take in rescue's lets get that straight,


No, but you're able to help people who might have animals who are having difficulty eating right ? Non feeders and the like ? Thats akin to a rescue, since without help, the animal might possibly die. The fact that you return them to the owner is incidental.



> and your pretty sure i keep my snakes in rub's, well you are very wrong, the only snakes kept in tubs are a royal and any hatchling snakes once big enough they go into vivs. infact there tubs sit inside the viv they will be going into , so you my dear need to get your facts straight dont you


So, I say "you keep snakes in rubs", and you say "NO I DONT ... (except for this one and that one and those other ones)". So basically, as I said .. YOU KEEP SNAKES IN RUBS. That, in the case of this prosecution, was considered to be ANIMAL CRUELTY, and you would have been convicted, just as this person was. Just as I would be. Regardless of whether the tub is placed in a viv, the snake being confined in a tub is considered to be keeping a snake (even a hatchling) in a tub. My facts are straight, perhaps yours aren't.

Maybe now the penny might drop.


----------



## gtm15782

I'm with art gecko on this one. I'm not sure on which side to take but hope it works out for the best of the animals but in the case of the garg, If these are the people that are supposedly meant to be stopping animal cruelty and they are killing reps when looking after them for such a short period of time then something has to be done.
Man I hate the government sometimes.


----------



## wohic

you're taking your opinion from a 5 paragraph SENSATIONAL story in the local press. All the local press report is what sells papers. Headlines and gore. They're not in the slightest bit interested in the details of the case. For my part, I have a good deal more information on which to base my opinion.



You should have bred from them, because leo's with non-smelling shit would certainly have been a big hit. Maybe your nose is dysfunctional ?



Now you're actually diagnosing a medical condition from a single photograph? The leo in the photo is emaciated. That could be as a result of persistent non-feeding. Perhaps due to a medical condition, perhaps due to maltreatment, who knows. All we know is, it's skinny, and was like that when it arrived at their shop. Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that it's "obviously ill" ?



And all the sick animals in this case had got vet visits, and she has the vet reports dating back years during the time she owned the shop. What you're just not getting here is that this person CARES ABOUT THE ANIMALS, and whatsmore is a very knowledgable and responsible keeper. You're judging based on faulty information. Also, your original post didn't mention vet VISITS, you asked "if the leo came to you in that state why wasn't it with your vet". Like I said, beyond a visit, do you HOUSE sick animals at the vets ?



No, but you're able to help people who might have animals who are having difficulty eating right ? Non feeders and the like ? Thats akin to a rescue, since without help, the animal might possibly die. The fact that you return them to the owner is incidental.



So, I say "you keep snakes in rubs", and you say "NO I DONT ... (except for this one and that one and those other ones)". So basically, as I said .. YOU KEEP SNAKES IN RUBS. That, in the case of this prosecution, was considered to be ANIMAL CRUELTY, and you would have been convicted, just as this person was. Just as I would be. Regardless of whether the tub is placed in a viv, the snake being confined in a tub is considered to be keeping a snake (even a hatchling) in a tub. My facts are straight, perhaps yours aren't.

Maybe now the penny might drop.[/quote]


There are actually several independent reports from which to take the information, not one single one there is also many pictures (some that are not published on the net that I am aware of) that have been seen by people involved in this case.
I find it hard to believe that this is all a fabrication and that the animals were is perfectly satisfactory conditions...... how ever if this is the case then i am sure the pet shop owners have a case for sueing the press, the judge, the prosecution and ever one
Getting personal and insulting is not going to help the pet shop owners cause, they need level headed people on their side .


----------



## Julie&James

wohic said:


> There are actually several independent reports from which to take the information, not one single one there is also many pictures (some that are not published on the net that I am aware of) that have been seen by people involved in this case.


How many of the people posting in this thread have seen anything beyond the news article posted in the OP ?



> I find it hard to believe that this is all a fabrication and that the animals were is perfectly satisfactory conditions...... how ever if this is the case then i am sure the pet shop owners have a case for sueing the press, the judge, the prosecution and ever one


Nobody has suggested it's a fabrication, or that nothing was wrong. The people involved in the case have held their hands up and admitted to several of the points made during the trial. What is clear about this case is that it's the usual story of blind authority, with WAY less information and expertise than the accused, bringing a case against the owners of a pet shop which sells reptiles, just like in the many many cases we've seen in umpteen threads about the RSPCA bullying reptile keepers. The only difference here is that there's a juicy press story, and a prosecution brought by an incompetent council, on bullshit charges, convicted by a judge with a track record of bizarre and ridiculous rulings.



> Getting personal and insulting is not going to help the pet shop owners cause, they need level headed people on their side .


I've done neither. I've simply answered several points raised by another poster in the thread. Kindly point out where I've been personal or insulting. I have simply a) pointed out that 99% of snake keepers on these forums use rubs. and b) that the claim that leopard gecko shit doesn't stink is ridiculous. Forgive me for using a mocking tone in replying to that particular point but .. come on .. non-stinky leo shit ? Really ?


----------



## adam151082

Reminds me of a place in Sunderland, Emerson pet centre:censor:.

went in the other day to but some crix and it stunk of urine and dirty animals, prob half the fish where dead or dying, and the staff where just sitting about. There was a leo with sh1t all over his tank. needless to say i left the crix. i'll get some pix of the place of im passing the weekend (once ive had a tetnus jab).


----------



## wohic

Julie&James said:


> .
> 
> 
> 
> I've done neither. I've simply answered several points raised by another poster in the thread. Kindly point out where I've been personal or insulting. I have simply a) pointed out that 99% of snake keepers on these forums use rubs. and b) that the claim that leopard gecko shit doesn't stink is ridiculous. Forgive me for using a mocking tone in replying to that particular point but .. come on .. non-stinky leo shit ? Really ?


at the very least flippant replys...... I used to breed leos and no their poo is no smellier than any other reps, if anything less so than most, if it was offensive i would be concerned about parasites....... anywho thats by the by, what is being discussed here is in response to a link to a story in a paper about 2 people that have been found guilty of several charges and not guilty of others due to insufficient evidence.
As it is claimed that an appeal is to be lodged (once sentencing has been delt with one presumes) that would infer that new evidence has come to light as a appeals can not be put forward without new evidence.


----------



## mask-of-sanity

Julie&James said:


> And you're taking your opinion from a 5 paragraph SENSATIONAL story in the local press. All the local press report is what sells papers. Headlines and gore. They're not in the slightest bit interested in the details of the case. For my part, I have a good deal more information on which to base my opinion
> 
> *my opinion was formed by reading numerous articles not just one paragragh*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You should have bred from them, because leo's with non-smelling shit would certainly have been a big hit. Maybe your nose is dysfunctional ?
> *there is nothing wrong with my nose thankyou*
> 
> 
> 
> Now you're actually diagnosing a medical condition from a single photograph? The leo in the photo is emaciated. That could be as a result of persistent non-feeding. Perhaps due to a medical condition, perhaps due to maltreatment, who knows. All we know is, it's skinny, and was like that when it arrived at their shop. Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that it's "obviously ill" ?
> *so what i asked why the gecko wasnt at vets and got a reply from the shop owner, exactly what that has to do with you i dont no*
> 
> 
> And all the sick animals in this case had got vet visits, and she has the vet reports dating back years during the time she owned the shop. What you're just not getting here is that this person CARES ABOUT THE ANIMALS, and whatsmore is a very knowledgable and responsible keeper. You're judging based on faulty information. Also, your original post didn't mention vet VISITS, you asked "if the leo came to you in that state why wasn't it with your vet". Like I said, beyond a visit, do you HOUSE sick animals at the vets ?
> *my original post was regarding a pet shop prosecution, and once again you no the owners personally do you , what i do with any animals is frankly none of your bussiness*
> 
> 
> No, but you're able to help people who might have animals who are having difficulty eating right ? Non feeders and the like ? Thats akin to a rescue, since without help, the animal might possibly die. The fact that you return them to the owner is incidental.
> *i am not a rescue, do you not understand that i help friends only with non feeders,*
> 
> 
> 
> So, I say "you keep snakes in rubs", and you say "NO I DONT ... (except for this one and that one and those other ones)". So basically, as I said .. YOU KEEP SNAKES IN RUBS. That, in the case of this prosecution, was considered to be ANIMAL CRUELTY, and you would have been convicted, just as this person was. Just as I would be. Regardless of whether the tub is placed in a viv, the snake being confined in a tub is considered to be keeping a snake (even a hatchling) in a tub. My facts are straight, perhaps yours aren't.
> 
> Maybe now the penny might drop.


*your facts are you no nothing about me or my animals, so you telling me you would put your corn into a viv as a hatchling, now *
*your corn without my help would not be here today *


----------



## Julie&James

Firstly can I just point out, politely, the difference between the words "know" and "no". It took me 5 minutes to work out what you were trying to say in your reply.

Lets take it one line at a time ..



mask-of-sanity said:


> *my opinion was formed by reading numerous articles not just one paragragh*


Then why don't you link to the other articles, so that everyone can share the amazing new evidence about this case that they reveal. That way perhaps your opinion would be better understood.



> *there is nothing wrong with my nose thankyou*


Then you're surely aware that leo shit stinks (as wohic said, not usually any more or less than any other reptile, but the fact remains that opening a rub which has been shat in by a leo, you detect a stink. Which was my point. I'm still a bit incredulous that you tried to claim that your leo's shit didn't stink. Are you planning to retract that yet ?



> *so what i asked why the gecko wasnt at vets and got a reply from the shop owner, exactly what that has to do with you i dont no *


Are you questioning my right to respond to a post in the thread ? You asked why the emaciated leo wasn't WITH THE VET. I simply asked you whether you house every animal that comes to you which you suspect might be sick at the vet's surgery. You admitted that you don't. End of point.



> *my original post was regarding a pet shop prosecution, and once again you no the owners personally do you ,*


Actually, yes, we do. Do you ?


> *what i do with any animals is frankly none of your bussiness*


But you make it your business to make assumptions about other people and how they keep their animals based on spurious stories in the press. Then you post online about these assumptions, in a forum I participate in. Then I reply. That's how these things work.



> *i am not a rescue, do you not understand that i help friends only with non feeders, *


I guess you're splitting hairs about the difference between a "rescue" where someone takes ownership of an animal to save that animal suffering, and then keeps the animal (or sometimes rehomes or sells it on), and someone who helps people with an animal (keeping it at their home until it is fit to be returned) and then returning it to the owner. Frankly, it doesn't matter at all whether you're a rescue or not. I simply asked you whether you kept snakes in rubs. You said you didn't, and then admitted that you do. So you do.



> *your facts are you no nothing about me or my animals, so you telling me you would put your corn into a viv as a hatchling,*


And *STILL* you don't get it. WE WEREN'T SAYING IT'S WRONG TO KEEP A SNAKE IN A RUB, HATCHLING OR NOT. The point was that the council, in this prosecution, accused the pet shop owners of animal cruelty for keeping snakes in rubs. Which you do, and so do we, and so do many other people, because it's fine to do that.


> *now maybe i should of not fed that one*


:gasp::gasp::gasp::gasp::gasp::gasp::gasp:

So, now you're saying that because we disagree with your opinion in this thread, you think it would have been better if you hadn't helped a snake we now own to get feeding, at the risk of it dying ? Are you really saying that in this thread ? Because if that IS what you're saying, and it sure reads that way, that's pretty outrageous frankly.


----------



## Julie&James

mask-of-sanity said:


> *your facts are you no nothing about me or my animals, so you telling me you would put your corn into a viv as a hatchling, now *
> *your corn without my help would not be here today *



Nice stealth edit.

Good job I quoted you in time eh ?


----------



## mask-of-sanity

Julie&James said:


> Nice stealth edit.
> 
> Good job I quoted you in time eh ?


i have no problem with you seeing what i put, i myself didnt like it which is why i edited it, my spelling has nothing to do with you either....i decided one link was enough for people to read after all i was just pointing out that at last a pet shop didnt get away with any neglect..........your miss perfect are you ? and maybe my gecko didnt smell because it was in a viv and not a rub, my beardie and snake poo stinks and to me the gecko didnt so why should i retract it , i have my opinion just like you do


----------



## AuntyLizard

First of all i'm not defending or throwing stones at the people who are involved in this case,but i do know that the RSPA do not always know the full details of each animal they are investicating.I have a good friend who keeps & breeds show pigeons(he was also was employed by the council to remove nuicense pigeons) and a number of other breeds of birds/fowl.After a complaint from the people next door he recieved a visit from the rspca who looked at all the animals he had,they decided to remove one pair of chickens(and report on the welfare of all the other birds) as the rspca officer was concerned about the lack of feathers around the neck area(even though my friend provided written and photographic proof that the chicken should look like that).Well to keep it short my friend provided more proof that the birds in question were supposed to look like that from DEFRA,the chickens were returned and no further action was taken.So all i'm saying is that even sometimes the experts get it wrong
Mark


----------



## cooljules

Liz_n_Mark said:


> First of all i'm not defending or throwing stones at the people who are involved in this case,but i do know that the RSPA do not always know the full details of each animal they are investicating.I have a good friend who keeps & breeds show pigeons(he was also was employed by the council to remove nuicense pigeons) and a number of other breeds of birds/fowl.After a complaint from the people next door he recieved a visit from the rspca who looked at all the animals he had,they decided to remove one pair of chickens(and report on the welfare of all the other birds) as the rspca officer was concerned about the lack of feathers around the neck area(even though my friend provided written and photographic proof that the chicken should look like that).Well to keep it short my friend provided more proof that the birds in question were supposed to look like that from DEFRA,the chickens were returned and no further action was taken.So all i'm saying is that even sometimes the experts get it wrong
> Mark


but the rspca are far from experts (altough in a pm from sparkle it was the local auth not the rspca this time)


----------



## Julie&James

mask-of-sanity said:


> i have no problem with you seeing what i put, i myself didnt like it which is why i edited it, my spelling has nothing to do with you either....i decided one link was enough for people to read after all i was just pointing out that at last a pet shop didnt get away with any neglect..........your miss perfect are you ? and maybe my gecko didnt smell because it was in a viv and not a rub, my beardie and snake poo stinks and to me the gecko didnt so why should i retract it , i have my opinion just like you do



I think we're done here. 

James


----------



## mask-of-sanity

Julie&James said:


> I think we're done here.
> 
> James


yes i think we are..


----------



## mask-of-sanity

Liz_n_Mark said:


> First of all i'm not defending or throwing stones at the people who are involved in this case,but i do know that the RSPA do not always know the full details of each animal they are investicating.I have a good friend who keeps & breeds show pigeons(he was also was employed by the council to remove nuicense pigeons) and a number of other breeds of birds/fowl.After a complaint from the people next door he recieved a visit from the rspca who looked at all the animals he had,they decided to remove one pair of chickens(and report on the welfare of all the other birds) as the rspca officer was concerned about the lack of feathers around the neck area(even though my friend provided written and photographic proof that the chicken should look like that).Well to keep it short my friend provided more proof that the birds in question were supposed to look like that from DEFRA,the chickens were returned and no further action was taken.So all i'm saying is that even sometimes the experts get it wrong
> Mark


i understand that they can get it wrong but what about the pm's i recieved after this thread was getting personal towards me, anyone that has sent me a pm i have asked for them to put what they have told me on here.....i do not have a vendeta towards the shop owners i just linked a thread that anyone could of found on the net


----------



## cooljules

mask-of-sanity said:


> i understand that they can get it wrong but what about the pm's i recieved after this thread was getting personal towards me, anyone that has sent me a pm i have asked for them to put what they have told me on here.....i do not have a vendeta towards the shop owners i just linked a thread that anyone could of found on the net


could you pm if the url's to what you found on the web, if you wont put them up here, would like to know a little more, and see for myself...as with what has been said so far, a lot, like illigal to keep in rubs n tubs etc isnt good legally for most people


----------



## mask-of-sanity

cooljules said:


> could you pm if the url's to what you found on the web, if you wont put them up here, would like to know a little more, and see for myself...as with what has been said so far, a lot, like illigal to keep in rubs n tubs etc isnt good legally for most people


all i did was google it tbh , more than happy to do it again, just got to feed the snakes first as they smell food


----------



## cooljules

mask-of-sanity said:


> all i did was google it tbh , more than happy to do it again, just got to feed the snakes first as they smell food


please when you can, cheers


----------



## kato

*The Law*

Are People really that Stupid, that they think that because people discuss what is in a local newspaper, that these peolple are only basing the information on those articles?

All these snippets in the papers are available for all to see and for all to digest how they wish. But at the end of the day it means nothing at all what the papers say - or does it? 

The fact of the matter is, these Papers have all reported what the Courts have decided. That Court decided a GUILTY Verdict. So do we all say hay hoe lets not listen to what the Law says or the Papers say and live on Cloud Cuckoo - No Chance!!! They have made a mistake and in the eyes of this Country they are Guilty of numerous counts of cruelty. It does not matter whether it is the Council or the RSPCA, a guilty verdict is a guilty verdict.

Yes they can Appeal. Anyone has the Right To Appeal - but only if New Evidence comes to light. The Law is quite clear on this. Personally I fail to see what New Evidence can be submitted for an Appeal.


----------



## Julie&James

kato said:


> Are People really that Stupid, that they think that because people discuss what is in a local newspaper, that these peolple are only basing the information on those articles?
> 
> All these snippets in the papers are available for all to see and for all to digest how they wish. But at the end of the day it means nothing at all what the papers say - or does it?


Right, it means very little what the papers say because most of the time they make up whatever they want if they think it will sell papers.



> The fact of the matter is, these Papers have all reported what the Courts have decided. That Court decided a GUILTY Verdict. So do we all say hay hoe lets not listen to what the Law says or the Papers say and live on Cloud Cuckoo - No Chance!!! They have made a mistake and in the eyes of this Country they are Guilty of numerous counts of cruelty. It does not matter whether it is the Council or the RSPCA, a guilty verdict is a guilty verdict.


Would you like me to google a list of miscarriages of justice, or cases where the british legal system, or the courts, made a huge mess of someones life unjustly ? I'd be happy to do so, but I warn you that the list will probably span several pages.


----------



## cooljules

kato said:


> Are People really that Stupid, that they think that because people discuss what is in a local newspaper, that these peolple are only basing the information on those articles?
> 
> All these snippets in the papers are available for all to see and for all to digest how they wish. But at the end of the day it means nothing at all what the papers say - or does it?
> 
> The fact of the matter is, these Papers have all reported what the Courts have decided. That Court decided a GUILTY Verdict. So do we all say hay hoe lets not listen to what the Law says or the Papers say and live on Cloud Cuckoo - No Chance!!! They have made a mistake and in the eyes of this Country they are Guilty of numerous counts of cruelty. It does not matter whether it is the Council or the RSPCA, a guilty verdict is a guilty verdict.
> 
> Yes they can Appeal. Anyone has the Right To Appeal - but only if New Evidence comes to light. The Law is quite clear on this. Personally I fail to see what New Evidence can be submitted for an Appeal.


did you read what they were found GUILTY and NOT guilty on? some things found guilty of is what 99% of people do, and is recomended .....


----------



## kato

Julie&James said:


> Right, it means very little what the papers say because most of the time they make up whatever they want if they think it will sell papers.
> 
> 
> 
> Would you like me to google a list of miscarriages of justice, or cases where the british legal system, or the courts, made a huge mess of someones life unjustly ? I'd be happy to do so, but I warn you that the list will probably span several pages.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they can Appeal. Anyone has the Right To Appeal - but only if New Evidence comes to light. The Law is quite clear on this. Personally I fail to see what New Evidence can be submitted for an Appeal.


[/quote]

You can Google as much as you like, what ever tickles your fancy. But I think that it is about time that some folk realise the truth.

Yes, miscarriages of justice happen (I don't need Google to tell me that), but do you honestly think that this is a Miscarriage of Justice?


----------



## Andy

I never keep snakes in RUBs, its not something I personally agree with. But thats by the by, these people by their own admission kept animals in filthy conditions and it has bitten them on their arse. If people cannot keep the animals they have clean and watered then they are keeping too many.


----------



## cooljules

You can Google as much as you like, what ever tickles your fancy. But I think that it is about time that some folk realise the truth.

Yes, miscarriages of justice happen (I don't need Google to tell me that), but do you honestly think that this is a Miscarriage of Justice?[/quote]
on what they have been found guilty of, a lot yes, like rubs n tubs etc, which if you had read


----------



## sparkle

OK guys... I am not commenting on ANYTHING about this... I just want to re-iterate what Sarasin said at the beginning of this thread.. as there is a clear distinction and quite an important one...


IT WAS NOT THE RSPCA PROSECUTING, IT WAS THE LOCAL COUNCIL


----------



## debcot1

If the facts about this shop arent true then I dont understand why this shop would be targeted when there are lots of shops that keep there animals in bad conditions. There is one local to me that is appalling but they havent been prosecuted, which leads me to believe that there has to be some truth in this story for it to have gone this far.


----------



## Julie&James

debcot1 said:


> If the facts about this shop arent true then I dont understand why this shop would be targeted when there are lots of shops that keep there animals in bad conditions. There is one local to me that is appalling but they havent been prosecuted, which leads me to believe that there has to be some truth in this story for it to have gone this far.


Logically, that's one possible reading. But essentially you're just quoting the same old "no smoke without fire" fallacy, just wording it more subtly.

Another possible reading is that councils, by and large, are both incompetent and unpredictable. In one case, a shop which you believe deserve prosecution are ignored, and in another case, one which may only have been messy (and yet in no way harmful to the animals), can be prosecuted.

As has been said in many posts in this thread, the "animal cruelty" case here was based on flimsly and illogical evidence, much of which 99% of this forum would also fall foul of, but in the end the judge (who in cases like this is basically the law unto him/herself) decided to convict based on the fact that at the time of the council visit, the house was messy.


----------



## wohic

Julie&James said:


> Logically, that's one possible reading. But essentially you're just quoting the same old "no smoke without fire" fallacy, just wording it more subtly.
> 
> Another possible reading is that councils, by and large, are both incompetent and unpredictable. In one case, a shop which you believe deserve prosecution are ignored, and in another case, one which may only have been messy (and yet in no way harmful to the animals), can be prosecuted.
> 
> As has been said in many posts in this thread, the "animal cruelty" case here was based on flimsly and illogical evidence, much of which 99% of this forum would also fall foul of, but in the end the judge (who in cases like this is basically the law unto him/herself) decided to convict based on the fact that at the time of the council visit, the house was messy.


sorry but non of that defends the amount of dead animals found.. the animals (mamals not reptiles) that were without water and the smell........... the smell was admitted on this thread, it should not have been dirty, spot cleaning on a daily basis is all thats needed.


----------



## cooljules

debcot1 said:


> If the facts about this shop arent true then I dont understand why this shop would be targeted when there are lots of shops that keep there animals in bad conditions. There is one local to me that is appalling but they havent been prosecuted, which leads me to believe that there has to be some truth in this story for it to have gone this far.


i know a shop, a really bad one for having a huge amount of young snakes in tubs (clear) that have not eaten, refused, and the stinking rotten remains left...

yes i know some refuse, i breed the odd clutch, but never left a 2nd day...these were days left in.

lots of things these were done for, as its been said, almost everone does, and if they said keeping snakes in rubs n tubs (which i hate, i dont like) is illigal, how you going to set up 30 vivs for a hatching each? they wouldnt like it, and you cant do it..


----------



## Andy

I dont see how people can keep saying 99% of the forum are guilty of keeping animals in the same way. I have never been to any shop or house where animals have been kept in filthy conditions.


----------



## debcot1

Julie&James said:


> Logically, that's one possible reading. But essentially you're just quoting the same old "no smoke without fire" fallacy, just wording it more subtly.
> 
> Another possible reading is that councils, by and large, are both incompetent and unpredictable. In one case, a shop which you believe deserve prosecution are ignored, and in another case, one which may only have been messy (and yet in no way harmful to the animals), can be prosecuted.
> 
> As has been said in many posts in this thread, the "animal cruelty" case here was based on flimsly and illogical evidence, much of which 99% of this forum would also fall foul of, but in the end the judge (who in cases like this is basically the law unto him/herself) decided to convict based on the fact that at the time of the council visit, the house was messy.


 I understand that councils love their 'statistics' and can be very unfair as I have been a victim of their system but about different matters. Did I read right that there was good evidence from a vet in the shops favour and they had a good solicitor? So why even with this were they prosecuted? Surely any solictor would get the info about the house being unclean dismissed as irrelevant about the case?


----------



## Julie&James

wohic said:


> sorry but non of that defends the amount of dead animals found.. the animals (mamals not reptiles) that were without water and the smell........... the smell was admitted on this thread, it should not have been dirty, spot cleaning on a daily basis is all thats needed.


To be honest, I think you've just failed to read the thread. As has already been stated ...

NO evidence was put forward that any animal dead or alive within the shop had suffered neglect. 
NO evidence whatsoever showed that any animal was dehydrated or had been left for a significant time without water.
NO evidence whatsoever was offered that showed that neglect was a contributory factor to the ill health or death of any animal in the shop.

In fact, the only animal harmed as a result of this entire case was a gecko that the council homed so badly that it almost burned its pads off.

But let's suppose you're right. How about we do random spot checks on every pet shop in the country, and any of them we find smelly, or where there might be the odd animal without water (even if we raid at 8am on a monday morning), let's shut them down and prosecute.

How many pet shops do you think we'd have left ?


----------



## cooljules

Andy said:


> I dont see how people can keep saying 99% of the forum are guilty of keeping animals in the same way. I have never been to any shop or house where animals have been kept in filthy conditions.


i was on about the rubs etc etc...

remember the cali king that got dumped on us, HUGE tumour lump...died 20 min after arrivng (the one i did the home pm on?) imagine if the rspca or local auth insp had turned up then...

or seen the mass load of skinny as hell tokays....that 5 died, following someones advice (and the vets) that all died and the ones now almost a year later that look like my other LTC....

had many a skinny animal come in, and if a BD or a snake does a huge dump...your not watching it 24/4..of course you clean in the same day etc.


----------



## debcot1

I think spot checks would be a good idea. I dont believe that if water was topped up everyday that it would be gone by the morning. In my experience that doesnt happen unless there is severe overcrowding which shouldnt happen anyway. Good pet shops would not need to worry and it might make bad ones better in the fear of being 'caught out'.


----------



## stephenie191

THIS SHOP WAS NEAR ME!

I NEVER WENT IN BUT I KNOW SOMONE WHO KNOWS THE COUPLE (IF THAT MAKES SCENCE)

THEY REALLY JUST DIDN'T GIVE A :censor:!


----------



## cooljules

stephenie191 said:


> THIS SHOP WAS NEAR ME!
> 
> I NEVER WENT IN BUT I KNOW SOMONE WHO KNOWS THE COUPLE (IF THAT MAKES SCENCE)
> 
> THEY REALLY JUST DIDN'T GIVE A :censor:!


but thats 3rd have opinion...you didnt see it


----------



## cooljules

debcot1 said:


> I think spot checks would be a good idea. I dont believe that if water was topped up everyday that it would be gone by the morning. In my experience that doesnt happen unless there is severe overcrowding which shouldnt happen anyway. Good pet shops would not need to worry and it might make bad ones better in the fear of being 'caught out'.


yes, but it takes a 2nd for a water dish to have sand, substrate knocked in, kicked over etc...it happens.


----------



## stephenie191

cooljules said:


> but thats 3rd have opinion...you didnt see it


Now in english? :whistling2:

And so what if i didn't see it? 

You don't get arrested over a few dirty Vivs - leo's died etc


----------



## cooljules

stephenie191 said:


> Now in english? :whistling2:
> 
> And so what if i didn't see it?
> 
> You don't get arrested over a few dirty Vivs - leo's died etc


ok 3rd hand....

and glad you have stopped shouting.

i have had sick leos etc come in, even with treatment died...and that skinny lep in the foto, its been said was putting on weight and getting better if im not mistaken


----------



## stephenie191

cooljules said:


> yes, but it takes a 2nd for a water dish to have sand, substrate knocked in, kicked over etc...it happens.


 
I've read MANY articles on this pt shop - 

They had vivs with half dead Leo's in, Most cages and vivs without water, food, beeding

They even found reptiles at their home in similar conditions 

I think you should search the shop and see what articles you do find on them


----------



## mask-of-sanity

i have recieved pm's saying that although they knew there stuff the vivs cages ect had more than a few days filth in them, now i have asked those people to add to this thread but wether they do or not i cant say


----------



## mask-of-sanity

stephenie191 said:


> I've read MANY articles on this pt shop -
> 
> They had vivs with half dead Leo's in, Most cages and vivs without water, food, beeding
> 
> They even found reptiles at their home in similar conditions
> 
> I think you should search the shop and see what articles you do find on them


problem is some of the articles you cant view now as they have been removed,


----------



## wohic

Julie&James said:


> To be honest, I think you've just failed to read the thread. As has already been stated ...
> 
> NO evidence was put forward that any animal dead or alive within the shop had suffered neglect.
> NO evidence whatsoever showed that any animal was dehydrated or had been left for a significant time without water.
> NO evidence whatsoever was offered that showed that neglect was a contributory factor to the ill health or death of any animal in the shop.
> 
> In fact, the only animal harmed as a result of this entire case was a gecko that the council homed so badly that it almost burned its pads off.
> 
> But let's suppose you're right. How about we do random spot checks on every pet shop in the country, and any of them we find smelly, or where there might be the odd animal without water (even if we raid at 8am on a monday morning), let's shut them down and prosecute.
> 
> How many pet shops do you think we'd have left ?


I think you are over simplifying things, so the animals all died of old age ? come on get real....
It was not just a couple of water bowls that were empty though was it ? not just one or two dead animals ?
I have been told (again rather like your and other statements hear say though) that a lot of what was presented in court rested on the huge amount of photographic evidence, photos of the dead animals and the dirty cages and vivs, etc.........

I will not pass judgment as i do not know the facts, how ever you are not making things sound any better with your arguments, pet shops are spot checked, are inspected, do have local and national laws to comply to etc... yeh some are not great, i know of several that are working under the constraints of local council in that they are getting more visits than is the norm , that are having to make improvements and show that they are willing to work with the inspectors or they to will be prosecuted, it does happen, has happened and will continue to happen........


----------



## Andy

I think performing your own PMs is illegal so you would of probably been prosecuted. If the RSPCA or local council visited and you had all clean, well looked after vivs in a clean room they would overlook a dirty water bowl or a smelly turd but if they go into a stinking, squalid room and find a few vivs of cages that are dirty they will get suspicious if you know what I mean.


----------



## Julie&James

debcot1 said:


> I understand that councils love their 'statistics' and can be very unfair as I have been a victim of their system but about different matters. Did I read right that there was good evidence from a vet in the shops favour and they had a good solicitor? So why even with this were they prosecuted? Surely any solictor would get the info about the house being unclean dismissed as irrelevant about the case?


Having had some dealings with county courts, let me explain how this works. Unlike the Higher court system (Crown court, High courts etc), the county court is adjudicated by a single Judge, who sits alone, and essentially decides the case based on their own whim. If they choose to, they can effectively ignore all the evidence in a case, and just toss a coin. There is no jury, no panel, and no capability for legal representatives (solicitors and barristers) to object, or raise points of law (other than verbally, which the judge has the power to dismiss or overrule). 

Think of Judge Judy. Only it's not telly, and it's not funny.

From wikipedia ..



> The County Court system in its present form has existed since 1847, when the County Courts Act 1846 was brought into force. The County Courts generally hear matters with a financial value of £50,000 or under.
> 
> 
> County Court matters can be lodged at a court in person, by post or via the internet in some cases through the County Court Bulk Centre. Cases are normally heard at the court having jurisdiction over the area where the defendant lives. *Most matters are decided by a District Judge or Circuit Judge sitting alone.* Civil matters in England (with minor exceptions, e.g. in some actions against the police) do not have juries. Judges in the County courts are either former barristers or solicitors, whereas in the High Courts they are more likely to have formerly been a barrister.


So, as you rightly surmised, in this case the defendants were represented by solicitors, and also by an expert witness who happens to be the senior RSPCA prosecuting vetinarian for the region. Despite this strong defence the judge chose to throw out the mass of evidence in their favour, and rule against them. That's her right, but it doesn't make the DECISION right.


----------



## debcot1

cooljules said:


> yes, but it takes a 2nd for a water dish to have sand, substrate knocked in, kicked over etc...it happens.


You can usually tell if a bit of substrate has got in by accident. Dirty empty water bowls look dirty and empty if you know what I mean.


----------



## brian

debcot1 said:


> I think spot checks would be a good idea. I dont believe that if water was topped up everyday that it would be gone by the morning. In my experience that doesnt happen unless there is severe overcrowding which shouldnt happen anyway. Good pet shops would not need to worry and it might make bad ones better in the fear of being 'caught out'.


Spot checks would be a good thing aslong as the person doing the checks did know what thay are looking at as a small bit of knolage can be dangerous 

The water thing yes it can dry up extro terra do a small one and in a viv at 85deg all day long the ruddy thing dose dry up ( so ill get a bigger one lol)

I have kept hatchling corns ( 200+ a year ) in a crix box how many of us do that and is it right........:whistling2: or have i been doing wrong:bash:


----------



## stephenie191

As stated above somwhere 

ALOT OF THE ARTICLES HAVE BEEN PULLED OF THE WEB


THEY DID FIND LEO'S THAT WHERE STARVING AND SEVERAL DIED AFTER THEY TOOK THEM OFF THE PET SHOP AND OUT OF THE OWNERS HOME!


It was in the evening gazzette too : victory:


----------



## cooljules

Andy said:


> I think performing your own PMs is illegal so you would of probably been prosecuted. If the RSPCA or local council visited and you had all clean, well looked after vivs in a clean room they would overlook a dirty water bowl or a smelly turd but if they go into a stinking, squalid room and find a few vivs of cages that are dirty they will get suspicious if you know what I mean.


well....i actually removed the lump and had it sent off to a lab to find out what it was (made good reading actually) so it wasnt a pm as such...

but yes i know what your saying, i went out today for a few hours, and came back to some nice healthy dumps from snakes, BD's etc...but not left for days etc etc

My BD's love making a mess, digging, shifting stuff, can look untidy but not dirty. same goes for some other stuff


----------



## brian

I was once told that one can be prosicuted for probing....And iv done this 1000s of times..........in the past : victory:


----------



## Meko

stephenie191 said:


> As stated above somwhere
> 
> ALOT OF THE ARTICLES HAVE BEEN PULLED OF THE WEB


 
so for them to be pulled off the net i'm guessing they were factually incorrect and slanderous so they had to be withdrawn for legal reasons?


----------



## wohic

ouch..............

Animal expert tells of shock - Billingham - TS23


----------



## stephenie191

Meko said:


> so for them to be pulled off the net i'm guessing they were factually incorrect and slanderous so they had to be withdrawn for legal reasons?


They were pulled off because when they were posted they were still gathering evidence and they trial hadn't tacken place yet


But once the trial happen'd they had a big write up in the even gazzette and it stated what the RSPCA found, what they were charged with

It listed all the animals that had died, i think it was around 5 Leo's, a few Chams ( EDIT IT SAYS MONITORS ABOVE, I KNEW IT WAS SOMTHING LIKE THAT)

i can't remember the rest but it was somthing like that


YEAH AS THE ABOVE ARTICLE SAYS


----------



## debcot1

All I can say is that if there has been a miscarriage of justice of then I wish them luck in their appeal, if not then they get what they deserve. I'm a firm believer in karma and life has it's own funny way of serving it's own justice.


----------



## cooljules

Meko said:


> so for them to be pulled off the net i'm guessing they were factually incorrect and slanderous so they had to be withdrawn for legal reasons?


ummm i come to that concusion too

im all for slagging bad shops, and no excuse for dead/dying animals but there seems to be lots of holes...even if some of the things found where wrong and needed action

also 2.5 years to bring to court? something is wrong there


----------



## cooljules

wohic said:


> ouch..............
> 
> Animal expert tells of shock - Billingham - TS23


now agreed BUT

Two out of five rescued Monitor Lizards died and all three Leopard Geckos starved to death, the court heard.


if they starved to death, in the care of the 'rescuer' whats that show..just curious


----------



## Julie&James

stephenie191 said:


> They were pulled off because when they were posted they were still gathering evidence and they trial hadn't tacken place yet
> 
> 
> But once the trial happen'd they had a big write up in the even gazzette and it stated what the RSPCA found, what they were charged with
> 
> It listed all the animals that had died, i think it was around 5 Leo's, a few Chams ( EDIT IT SAYS MONITORS ABOVE, I KNEW IT WAS SOMTHING LIKE THAT)
> 
> i can't remember the rest but it was somthing like that
> 
> 
> YEAH AS THE ABOVE ARTICLE SAYS


Here's a good idea.

Before posting in a thread. READ IT FIRST.


----------



## stephenie191

cooljules said:


> ummm i come to that concusion too
> 
> im all for slagging bad shops, and no excuse for dead/dying animals but there seems to be lots of holes...even if some of the things found where wrong and needed action
> 
> also 2.5 years to bring to court? something is wrong there


It takes just as long for most people to go to court.

I don't think 2.5 years is a long time, - espeshially round here :whistling2:

They seem to take forever to get people in court, theres LOTS of crimes in Teesside you see :whistling2:


----------



## sparkle

cooljules said:


> ummm i come to that concusion too
> 
> im all for slagging bad shops, and no excuse for dead/dying animals but there seems to be lots of holes...even if some of the things found where wrong and needed action
> 
> also 2.5 years to bring to court? something is wrong there


for some perspective it took FOUR yrs for the council to close a horrific pet shop down where I live... only for it to re-open 3 days later as the STUPID council re-isued the liscence... absolute idiots... they dont know what one office or section is doing from day to day...

it depends how u look at that though.... total inadequecy of council... plus four long years and taxpayers money to actually get the closing sanctioned.. shows how messed up things can be ..

the pet shop in question was bad i will admit that... but they have now totally scaled the reptile side down.. we went in thursday when i was over that side of the city... things still arent good though


----------



## cooljules

stephenie191 said:


> It takes just as long for most people to go to court.
> 
> I don't think 2.5 years is a long time, - espeshially round here :whistling2:
> 
> They seem to take forever to get people in court, theres LOTS of crimes in Teesside you see :whistling2:


but this case, means they have sat watching animals suffer for 2.5 years...and obviously not the same animals. but to take 18 months to bring round a snake as said in that last article.....mmmmmm

that means they had the animals for at least 18 months, and lots died in the care...like starved to death lep gex. if they were totally unable to eat after being seen by a vet, then should be PTS not left to starve to death..

that 2nd link looks bad, but reading it how i did, those things stick out to me...but i could be wrong, i often am


----------



## stephenie191

Julie&James said:


> Here's a good idea.
> 
> Before posting in a thread. READ IT FIRST.


 
I read the articles about a year or so ago so SORRY IF I CAN'T REMEMBER EVERY DETAIL

AS I SAID I WAS WRITING IT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD


----------



## cooljules

sparkle said:


> for some perspective it took FOUR yrs for the council to close a horrific pet shop down where I live... only for it to re-open 3 days later as the STUPID council re-isued the liscence... absolute idiots... they dont know what one office or section is doing from day to day...


yes i know what you mean, i still see bad ones years later, after complaint after complaint etc. but now it looks like the animals have been taken in long ago....and a long time to complile a case.


----------



## Julie&James

stephenie191 said:


> I read the articles about a year or so ago so SORRY IF I CAN'T REMEMBER EVERY DETAIL
> 
> AS I SAID I WAS WRITING IT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD


I didn't say read the article. I said READ THE THREAD.

Half of the things you're talking about have been discussed. The animals which were malnutritioned were RESCUES. They came into the shop in worse condition and had been improving. The RSPCA didn't raid, in fact an RSPCA vet was helping with the defence.

Just read the thread.


----------



## kato

Julie&James said:


> Think of Judge Judy. Only it's not telly, and it's not funny.
> 
> quote]
> 
> Quality. But your dealings with County Courts and the Judicial System are(and I am making an educated guess here) nothing like the case In Question. Anyone can Google these things up, but as in this Case it's down to HARD FACTS, not what is published in the Press.
> 
> I come into daily contact with High Court Judges, Magistrates, Recorders etc. etc. etc. Most are very close friends of mine. I spoke to one today(Friday) about this in passing and he basically said "No Good Judge,will ignore good evidence". He basically went on to say that lots of evidence will be collated, but only the best used.
> 
> Judge Judy? More like Judge Dredd.


----------



## stephenie191

I don't understand why people are almost defending this petshop

If 3 leo's
were found to have STARVED TO DEATH not just died of unrelated diseases then surely that alone sets of alarm bells?

If any animal dies of Starvation in a pet shop then it should be shut down


- no excuse for that is there really? Thats all i'm saying :whistling2:


AND I DONT NEED TO READ THE THREAD AS I READ MANY OF THE GAZZETTE ARTICLES ON THIS AND HAVE MADE MY OWN MIND UP!

LIKE HOW THE RABBIT PENS WENT WITHOUT HAY OR FRESH SHAVINGS FOR MONTHS AT A TIME AND HOW THE SHOP STUNK!


----------



## Julie&James

kato said:


> Quality. But your dealings with County Courts and the Judicial System are(and I am making an educated guess here) nothing like the case In Question. Anyone can Google these things up, but as in this Case it's down to HARD FACTS, not what is published in the Press.
> 
> I come into daily contact with High Court Judges, Magistrates, Recorders etc. etc. etc. Most are very close friends of mine. I spoke to one today(Friday) about this in passing and he basically said "No Good Judge,will ignore good evidence". He basically went on to say that lots of evidence will be collated, but only the best used.
> 
> Judge Judy? More like Judge Dredd.


So you spoke to a Judge in a county court who defended county court judges. 

COLOUR ME SHOCKED.

You know, I was chatting to my GP the other day about medical matters, and he said "Doctors are fine fellows, and can be trusted".

ERGO, NO DOCTOR IS EVER WRONG.

Seriously, your faith in the "system" is heartwarming, if misplaced.


----------



## Julie&James

stephenie191 said:


> I don't understand why people are almost defending this petshop
> 
> If 3 leo's
> were found to have STARVED TO DEATH not just died of unrelated diseases then surely that alone sets of alarm bells?
> 
> If any animal dies of Starvation in a pet shop then it should be shut down
> 
> 
> - no excuse for that is there really? Thats all i'm saying :whistling2:


You still haven't read the thread. Why would you post in a thread you haven't read ?


----------



## kato

Julie&James said:


> So you spoke to a Judge in a county court who defended county court judges.
> 
> COLOUR ME SHOCKED.
> 
> You know, I was chatting to my GP the other day about medical matters, and he said "Doctors are fine fellows, and can be trusted".
> 
> ERGO, NO DOCTOR IS EVER WRONG.
> 
> Seriously, your faith in the "system" is heartwarming, if misplaced.


So little you know.


----------



## wohic

Julie&James said:


> I didn't say read the article. I said READ THE THREAD.
> 
> Half of the things you're talking about have been discussed. The animals which were malnutritioned were RESCUES. They came into the shop in worse condition and had been improving. The RSPCA didn't raid, in fact an RSPCA vet was helping with the defence.
> 
> Just read the thread.



the rspca were not helping with the defense, a vet that has represented the rspca helped with the defense............ 

through out this thread its been said that the prosecution did not have any experts ........ so what is a qualified zoologist ?


----------



## Meko

stephenie191 said:


> I don't understand why people are almost defending this petshop


 
possibly because.... if i remember rightly from reading it all today; weren't 13 of the 21 charges against them dropped? that sounds a bit strange if it's as bad as it's meant to be. Plus the 'animal expert' in the link said



animal expert said:


> Mr Bowes said that initially he thought the cramped plastic boxes the reptiles were being kept in were just for transportation. But he was shocked to learn they were permanently housed in the tubs by the couple, who live in Weardale Crescent.


doesn't sound like that much of an expert.


----------



## cooljules

stephenie191 said:


> I don't understand why people are almost defending this petshop
> 
> If 3 leo's
> were found to have STARVED TO DEATH not just died of unrelated diseases then surely that alone sets of alarm bells?
> 
> If any animal dies of Starvation in a pet shop then it should be shut down
> 
> 
> - no excuse for that is there really? Thats all i'm saying :whistling2:
> 
> 
> AND I DONT NEED TO READ THE THREAD AS I READ MANY OF THE GAZZETTE ARTICLES ON THIS AND HAVE MADE MY OWN MIND UP!
> 
> LIKE HOW THE RABBIT PENS WENT WITHOUT HAY OR FRESH SHAVINGS FOR MONTHS AT A TIME AND HOW THE SHOP STUNK!


if you read it...they starved to death ONCE TAKEN IN by the rescue place...

and the thing about being kept in tubs....im not defending the shop, i dont know enough but those 2 things and a couple of others i read....


----------



## Meko

stephenie191 said:


> AND I DONT NEED TO READ THE THREAD AS I READ MANY OF THE GAZZETTE ARTICLES ON THIS AND HAVE MADE MY OWN MIND UP!
> 
> LIKE HOW THE RABBIT PENS WENT WITHOUT HAY OR FRESH SHAVINGS FOR MONTHS AT A TIME AND HOW THE SHOP STUNK!


 
the ones that were deleted?


----------



## cooljules

wohic said:


> the rspca were not helping with the defense, a vet that has represented the rspca helped with the defense............
> 
> through out this thread its been said that the prosecution did not have any experts ........ so what is a qualified zoologist ?


he let stuff die, lep gex starved to death ONCE removed from he was shocked stuff was kept in rubs n tubs...did i read that right on the web page?


----------



## cooljules

Meko said:


> possibly because.... if i remember rightly from reading it all today; weren't 13 of the 21 charges against them dropped? that sounds a bit strange if it's as bad as it's meant to be. Plus the 'animal expert' in the link said
> 
> 
> 
> doesn't sound like that much of an expert.


i know we dont usually agree and you dont like me, but i agree with you on that


----------



## wohic

do any of us have any idea how big the tubs were though, in comparison to the snakes ?

RUBs can be fab and roomy or cruel and cramped, it all depends on how they are used and what sizes are used.......


----------



## Julie&James

cooljules said:


> if you read it...they starved to death once taken in by the rescue place...
> 
> And the thing about being kept in tubs....im not defending the shop, i dont know enough but those 2 things and a couple of others i read....


she doesnt need to read about that thankyouverymuch she has read articles in the newspaper which never gets anything wrong and she has made her mind up so she doesn't need to read the thread of anything because she just wants to post

ok ?

Oooooookkkkkkkkk ????!!!!!!!


----------



## kato

Meko said:


> doesn't sound like that much of an expert.


So your saying that a Zoogist is not an expert? This Thread really is getting crazy.

The Facts are simple whether they took two and a half days or two and a half years to Prosecute - Guilty on numerous accounts for Animal Cruelty. Evidence collated by EXPERTS and put in front of a Judge who is no idiot who finds them Guilty.


----------



## wohic

The reason that a lot of the charges were dropped is that, as in the course of a business animals come and go it could not be proved how long they had been in the care of the shop..........


----------



## Meko

cooljules said:


> i know we dont usually agree and you dont like me, but i agree with you on that


where'd you get the idea from i don't like you, i think you're alright.? i just think you should give a bit more info in some of your replies on the advice threads as to why or why not people should do something..


----------



## stephenie191

Julie&James said:


> she doesn't need to read about that thankyouverymuch she has read articles in the newspaper which never gets anything wrong and she has made her mind up so she doesn't need to read the thread or anything because she just wants to post.
> 
> Ok ?
> 
> Oooooooooooookkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk ????!!!!!!!


 
She has a name 

and what i've just read there - is pretty much 10% of it, i read every article, since the pet shop was first reported right up until the trial and prosicution.

I also know people in my local rep shop, that dealt with this pet shop and witnessed alot more than the article's state !

A hell of alot more ! :whistling2:



kato said:


> So your saying that a Zoogist is not an expert? This Thread really is getting crazey.
> 
> The Facts are simple whether they took two and a half days or two and a half years to Prosecute - Guilty on numerous accounts for Animal Cruelty. Evidence collated by EXPERTS and put in front of a Judge who is no idiot who finds them Guilty.


THANKS YOU! 

JUST WHAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY


----------



## Meko

kato said:


> So your saying that a Zoogist is not an expert? This Thread really is getting crazy.
> 
> The Facts are simple whether they took two and a half days or two and a half years to Prosecute - Guilty on numerous accounts for Animal Cruelty. Evidence collated by EXPERTS and put in front of a Judge who is no idiot who finds them Guilty.


apparently the judge is an idiot from some of the links put up from her previous cases.

and is a zoogist an expert? no! plain and simple. To be an expert you need to know EVERYTHING about the subject and i doubt anybody knows EVERYTHING about their chosen career.. especially zoology as its far too vast a subject.
I don't think anybody is an expert in any field personally.


----------



## Julie&James

kato said:


> So your saying that a Zoogist is not an expert? This Thread really is getting crazy.
> 
> The Facts are simple whether they took two and a half days or two and a half years to Prosecute - Guilty on numerous accounts for Animal Cruelty. Evidence collated by EXPERTS and put in front of a Judge who is no idiot who finds them Guilty.


Maybe you'd like to explain her bizarre rulings on the other cases I linked ?

Also, as has been said numerous times in this thread, there is CLEARLY additional evidence that the court failed to address, since the case has been taken to appeal.

Maybe when some of this evidence comes to light, you'll be eating word pie about the infallability of the justice system as seen in this case.


----------



## PSYCHOSIS

Excuze my Words but in total they are ....................................


----------



## debcot1

PSYCHOSIS said:


> Excuze my Words but in total they are .............................................


You can't just say that without expaining why?

Intrigued.....


----------



## wohic

Julie&James said:


> Maybe you'd like to explain her bizarre rulings on the other cases I linked ?
> 
> Also, as has been said numerous times in this thread, there is CLEARLY additional evidence that the court failed to address, since the case has been taken to appeal.
> 
> Maybe when some of this evidence comes to light, you'll be eating word pie about the infallability of the justice system as seen in this case.



how the hell can it have been taken to appeal when sentencing has not even taken place....... solicitors may well be putting an appeal together how ever it would not have been considered as yet as the case it not completed.


----------



## xXFooFooLaFluffXx

PSYCHOSIS said:


> Excuze my Words but in total they are ....................................


 
most construtive post ive read ............ :banghead::lol2:


----------



## Julie&James

wohic said:


> how the hell can it have been taken to appeal when sentencing has not even taken place....... solicitors may well be putting an appeal together how ever it would not have been considered as yet as the case it not completed.


You don't usually appeal a sentence, you appeal a verdict. It is possible to accept a verdict but appeal the sentence if your brief feels that sentencing guidelines haven't been adhered to, but it's far more common to appeal a case to a higher court to have a Judges decision overturned, especially on new evidence.


----------



## stephenie191

xXFooFooLaFluffXx said:


> most construtive post ive read ............ :banghead::lol2:


I possiblly have to agree :lol2:


----------



## debcot1

stephenie191 said:


> I possiblly have to agree :lol2:


Still intrigued though!


----------



## Nic B-C

Cant comment on the case other than to say I have been to the mothers house and everything was in order however I can comment on court cases.

They can take a bloody long time to come to court fully with adjourmnments lack of presented evidence etc etc etc.

County Court can almost be delayed indefinitely if both sides cant agree on times to be together etc etc.

aLSO PAPER REPORTS ARE USUALLY SENSATIONAL AND WILL ALWAYS READ FROMT HE PROSECUTION SIDE OF THE STORY AS IT ALWAYS READS BETTER.

I was in court several years ago for having a crash in my school car park at 5 mph into my ex whos new partner swerved in front of me causing me to crash.

Now this case was delayed and delayed like mad in magistrates think I went in 11 times before it was finally decided to go to Crown Court.

Now a cruel twist of fate governed that a major child murder case was in the next court and all the nationals were there and jury was out deliberating. Hence the journos were all bored and piled into my court....a traffic offence!


All of the sudden I was plastered over every national paper as a teacher in Love triangle who viciously rammed ex lover off the road 100 yards folding their car in two!!!!!!!

Instead of a 5mph impact in a car park.

They only eveer heard a brief extract from the prosecution and never reported on the rest of the case.

Under reporting laws they are supposed to be balanced and I actually took action against each and every paper and got published retractions from each and every one of them.

What was weird though is I was found not guilty of dangerous driving but ultimately found guilty of criminal damage through dangerous driving!!! Even the judge was at a loss and handed me down a suspended sentence as this was all he could do to placate me as logic would determine I could not have caused the damage criminally if I had not been dangerously driving...must add Id actually paid for the car in question as well so I had actually damaged my own property which was the funny thing!

So read as many articles as you want but dont always believe everything you read in print.

Also as others have mentioned County Courts are a weird system with only a judge presiding and if they know one of the solicitors case usually sways that way....oh did I really say that.

I was taken to County Court over an engine a couple of years ago. Judge wouldnt even listen to my evidence and lo and behold I was found against. Weird how I saw same judge in the pub with the solicitor later inb the day isnt it!


----------



## Nic B-C

Julie&James said:


> You don't usually appeal a sentence, you appeal a verdict. It is possible to accept a verdict but appeal the sentence if your brief feels that sentencing guidelines haven't been adhered to, but it's far more common to appeal a case to a higher court to have a Judges decision overturned, especially on new evidence.


Exactly what i did in Magistrates, had no faith in the judge took to Crown Court and it was thrown out instantly as the judge who had found me guilty actually summed up saying I wasnt but still found against me


----------



## stephenie191

22 dead animals where seized at both petropolis and their home


enough said really


----------



## Nic B-C

What I find totally weird about this case is the shop prosecution and the Home searches surely these would be two totally different investigations unless it was an RSPCA investigation about a persons suitability to own animals?


----------



## Julie&James

stephenie191 said:


> 22 dead animals where seized at both petropolis and their home
> 
> 
> enough said really


How did they die ?

Was it the fault of the shop owners ?

How long had they been dead ?

Under what circumstances were they found ?

It's up to you if you want to take the shallowest possible reading of any information you're given and jump to half-assed conclusions about what it all means, but all it proves is your inability to fully understand and analyse cause and effect.


----------



## Nic B-C

stephenie191 said:


> 22 dead animals where seized at both petropolis and their home
> 
> 
> enough said really


Ive read a number of your replies and these all seem based on 

Newspaper reports
3rd hand witness
testimony from a rival petshop

I dont hold any store from any of those I suggest unless you have personal experience its probably best to shut up otherwise you could be facing slander charges yourself!


----------



## kato

Julie&James said:


> You don't usually appeal a sentence, you appeal a verdict. It is possible to accept a verdict but appeal the sentence if your brief feels that sentencing guidelines haven't been adhered to, but it's far more common to appeal a case to a higher court to have a Judges decision overturned, especially on new evidence.


The chances of this case being overturned is thinner than an anorexic bean pole. No Judge in his right mind would give "Leave to Appeal" before Sentencing. 

An Appeal can only be sought with new evidence - if the couple in question had this evidence then it should of been submitted at the original Hearing, where it would of ben taken more seriously than if it is used at Appeal. For the Right to Appeal you have to convince a panel of three Judges that you have sufficient evidence to overturn the decision - if an appeal is granted and you go on to lose, there are far far worse consequences than the original sentence.

I will quite gladly eat my hat if the convictions are quoshed


----------



## stephenie191

OHH I DIDN'T REALISE THIS WAS THE ACTUAL TRIAL :gasp:


OMG! I HAVN'T EVEN HAD TIME TO PREPARE OR GET WITNESS STATEMENTS OR ANYTHING:whistling2:


WELL, YOU ALL HAVE CLEARLLY SPOCKEN TO THE OWNES OF PETROPOLIS, BEEN ABLE TO EXAM THE DEAD REPS AND READ ALL THE STATMENTS.

HERES ME THINKING YOU ALL GET YOUR INFOMATION FROM ARTICLES TOO . . . . 


WOW! YOU'VE OPENED MY EYES :whistling2:


----------



## cooljules

stephenie191 said:


> OHH I DIDN'T REALISE THIS WAS THE ACTUAL TRIAL :gasp:
> 
> 
> OMG! I HAVN'T EVEN HAD TIME TO PREPARE OR GET WITNESS STATEMENTS OR ANYTHING:whistling2:
> 
> 
> WELL, YOU ALL HAVE CLEARLLY SPOCKEN TO THE OWNES OF PETROPOLIS, BEEN ABLE TO EXAM THE DEAD REPS AND READ ALL THE STATMENTS.
> 
> HERES ME THINKING YOU ALL GET YOUR INFOMATION FROM ARTICLES TOO . . . .
> 
> 
> WOW! YOU'VE OPENED MY EYES :whistling2:


its fun shouting.....you might want to try it some time............


----------



## Nic B-C

From quote of sarasin id also be very concerned about a number of things

expert asking what animals were
same expert stating about temps animals kept at
burns to a rhacs feet probably due to same expert housing Rhacon a heat mat as all reptiles need heat mats dont they!
Amount of animals owned by the couple which could not be returned as they had supposedly died in care (read put down as dont know how to house them or have anyone able to house that number of animals)

By the way Im not defending the pair here although my only dealings with them has been through buying a crestie and found conditions to be excellent.


PS if any council came to visit my house they would probably condemn the place but the care of my animals is tantamount.

My house would smell of dog urine as i have a 20 year old incontinent dog does that mean Im not caring for it?

Will this affect the care of the reptiles?

Much of my house is also stripped for renovation and I have an engine workshop in my house as well does this make my pet care any the less.

Laurens house not shop was found to be squalid you could claim mine is the same but this should not be in question its ones ability to care for the animals. Weirdly enough the only animal which would be affected by a squalid house being the pet dog was not removed!!

I think its these questions which all need to be answered


----------



## Nic B-C

kato said:


> The chances of this case being overturned is thinner than an anorexic bean pole. No Judge in his right mind would give "Leave to Appeal" before Sentencing.
> 
> An Appeal can only be sought with new evidence - if the couple in question had this evidence then it should of been submitted at the original Hearing, where it would of ben taken more seriously than if it is used at Appeal. For the Right to Appeal you have to convince a panel of three Judges that you have sufficient evidence to overturn the decision - if an appeal is granted and you go on to lose, there are far far worse consequences than the original sentence.
> 
> I will quite gladly eat my hat if the convictions are quoshed


Absolute rubbish there are many ways for a case to be accepted for an appeal and new evidence is only one of them.


----------



## stephenie191

Who keeps 22 dead animals lying about? :gasp:

If i had a reptile shop and a Leo looked the slightest bit ill i would remove it and keep a close eye one it

Not leave, after its dead just lying about


----------



## Julie&James

kato said:


> The chances of this case being overturned is thinner than an anorexic bean pole. No Judge in his right mind would give "Leave to Appeal" before Sentencing.
> 
> An Appeal can only be sought with new evidence - if the couple in question had this evidence then it should of been submitted at the original Hearing, where it would of ben taken more seriously than if it is used at Appeal. For the Right to Appeal you have to convince a panel of three Judges that you have sufficient evidence to overturn the decision - if an appeal is granted and you go on to lose, there are far far worse consequences than the original sentence.
> 
> I will quite gladly eat my hat if the convictions are quoshed


What interests me about your posts in this thread are that you've totally failed to address several key points which make this an evidently unsafe conviction .. including ..

1. The expert testimony of the vet acting for the defence (which was blatantly ignored by the court).
2. The lack of any scientific evidence from the prosecution showing that the defendants were provably liable for any direct cruelty or neglect towards the animals in their care.
3. The fact that the entire conviction is, in the judges own words, based on the fact that the defendants house was messy.
4. The fact that of the original number of charges brought against the defendants, a large number were thrown out due to no evidence whatsoever being brought.

You seem to be almost revelling in the fact that the court system is so horribly skewed in this country that it falls to the whim of a single person (in this case one with a track record of bizarre decision making) to choose whether to disregard compelling evidence and make a ruling based on some arguably arbitrary "gut feeling". What axe do you have to grind in all this ?


----------



## Julie&James

stephenie191 said:


> Who keeps 22 dead animals lying about? :gasp:
> 
> If i had a reptile shop and a Leo looked the slightest bit ill i would remove it and keep a close eye one it
> 
> Not leave, after its dead just lying about



Last attempt.

If you actually READ THIS THREAD, you'd be making yourself look a lot less of an idiot right now.

Just trying to be helpful.


----------



## kato

Julie&James said:


> What interests me about your posts in this thread are that you've totally failed to address several key points which make this an evidently unsafe conviction .. including ..
> 
> 1. The expert testimony of the vet acting for the defence (which was blatantly ignored by the court).
> 2. The lack of any scientific evidence from the prosecution showing that the defendants were provably liable for any direct cruelty or neglect towards the animals in their care.
> 3. The fact that the entire conviction is, in the judges own words, based on the fact that the defendants house was messy.
> 4. The fact that of the original number of charges brought against the defendants, a large number were thrown out due to no evidence whatsoever being brought.
> 
> You seem to be almost revelling in the fact that the court system is so horribly skewed in this country that it falls to the whim of a single person (in this case one with a track record of bizarre decision making) to choose whether to disregard compelling evidence and make a ruling based on some arguably arbitrary "gut feeling". What axe do you have to grind in all this ?


Well when the conviction is overturned, you just let me know and I'll eat my hat. lol

The information that you are on about is upto the Defence to Submit, not the prosecution. If the defence failed in making this evidence submitable at the original hearing, then this Evidence CANNOT be submitted at an Appeal. The evidence was already available, therefore it is not new evidence and not admissable at an Appeal - remember only new evidence can be used at an Appeal.

You have more chance of a rocking horse pooing than a neutral Judge saying that the Judge in question's decision was "Unsafe". Especially without new evidence or evidence which was not collated or supplied by the defence. I think that they need a change of Solicitor and Barrister.


----------



## kaimarion

sparkle said:


> for some perspective it took FOUR yrs for the council to close a horrific pet shop down where I live


Can you PM me the name/location of the shop? Also have you been to the other Pet shop that is very close to the Neon Gecko in Paisley, just wondering as no-one ever mentions it.

As for this topic I think if the people are having trouble looking after themselves(photo) then I doubt the animals were getting treated much better.


----------



## sparkle

kaimarion said:


> Can you PM me the name/location of the shop? Also have you been to the other Pet shop that is very close to the Neon Gecko in Paisley, just wondering as no-one ever mentions it.
> 
> As for this topic I think if the people are having trouble looking after themselves(photo) then I doubt the animals were getting treated much better.


 
yup sure can...

and as for neon gecko paisley theres not many people on here I know who rate that shop anything above dreadful  but hey.... i tried expressing my concerns in there before.... as have other people I know.. even some with actual Uni training... they dont listen...

tis a real pity


----------



## stephenie191

kaimarion said:


> Can you PM me the name/location of the shop? Also have you been to the other Pet shop that is very close to the Neon Gecko in Paisley, just wondering as no-one ever mentions it.
> 
> As for this topic I think if the people are having trouble looking after themselves(photo) then I doubt the animals were getting treated much better.


The shop shut down!: victory:


----------



## sparkle

stephenie191 said:


> The shop shut down!: victory:


 
no he means the glasgow one


----------



## Nic B-C

The judges summing up for his wholecase is that if lauren cant look after her house how can she possibly look after her reps.

This is a judgment based on a social order and totally disregarding any facts on animal welfare and yet the bloody dog was still allowed to stay....the only animal which would be affected by lack of personal care!!!!

This case has every ground for appeal and If I were lauren i would be letting it go to Crown Court on Appeal.

I can bet your bottom dollar it would be thrown out immediately.

Already says the case has cost a five figure sum well all I can say is its going to get a lot bigger.

What pisses me off about this sort of thing is the pet shop at the bottom of my road has been shut down at least five times yet he is still trading and neglecting his animals!

Once again will reiterate i cannot comment on this case as have not seen the shop in question but from what little I have read and heard from presumably both sides is there is still a case to answer.

The breaches of the licenece were minor and should have been sorted out on the spot with a warning either verbal or written


----------



## cooljules

kaimarion said:


> As for this topic I think if the people are having trouble looking after themselves(photo) then I doubt the animals were getting treated much better.


thats crap


----------



## Julie&James

kato said:


> Well when the conviction is overturned, you just let me know and I'll eat my hat. lol
> 
> The information that you are on about is upto the Defence to Submit, not the prosecution. If the defence failed in making this evidence submitable at the original hearing, then this Evidence CANNOT be submitted at an Appeal. The evidence was already available, therefore it is not new evidence and not admissable at an Appeal - remember only new evidence can be used at an Appeal.
> 
> You have more chance of a rocking horse pooing than a neutral Judge saying that the Judge in question's decision was "Unsafe". Especially without new evidence or evidence which was not collated or supplied by the defence. I think that they need a change of Solicitor and Barrister.



Thanks for totally not answering my question. I asked why you'd ignored these facts, and why you seemed to be comfortable with the result of the case so far. 

I'm not sure why you chose to talk about the appeals process in your answer since I'm well aware of the requirements, and I'm sure the defendants brief (who will be running the appeal) does too.

The main question was, why do you seem so GLEEFUL that this lame state of affairs exists within our legal system ? 

I somehow doubt you'd be so smug if you were ever on the receiving end.


----------



## Nic B-C

Im looking at the pic of her living room and to be honest all enclosures look in good shape, and theres some clutter on the floor, bloody hell my house has stripped walls, no carpets and car parts everywhere, just because thats not how most people would live doesnt impact on the way in which I would care for my animals in one iota.

Its just a stereotypical statement, Im suprised he didnt mention that the mother lives in a poor council house area of a downtrodden ex industrial heartland city which is polluted by smog from industrial furnaces and all the children have six toes just for the record!!!!!


----------



## wohic

Nic B-C said:


> The breaches of the licenece were minor and should have been sorted out on the spot with a warning either verbal or written


apparently there were several previous visits where things were recommended, and the warnings were ignored.......... that has been stated not only on this thread but in reports .
I admire that you are standing up for your friends, but you keep coming back to minor points that really have little relevance, the dog was left as he was a personal pet , animals believed to be stock were removed (again this is hearsay but I have no reason to doubt it) the judge use the state of the house in the summing up, but that was just part of it not the whole reason for the prosecution, which was based on much photographic evidence, plus statements from a zoologist and other professionals. 
I would actually be careful about making bold and accusing statements about the judge in question :whistling2:


----------



## kato

Julie&James said:


> Thanks for totally not answering my question. I asked why you'd ignored these facts, and why you seemed to be comfortable with the result of the case so far.
> 
> I'm not sure why you chose to talk about the appeals process in your answer since I'm well aware of the requirements, and I'm sure the defendants brief (who will be running the appeal) does too.
> 
> The main question was, why do you seem so GLEEFUL that this lame state of affairs exists within our legal system ?
> 
> I somehow doubt you'd be so smug if you were ever on the receiving end.


Im comfortable with the case because they have been found guilty, I'll say it again so you understand, THEY HAVE BEEN FOUND GUILTY on multiple counts of animal cruelty.

Animals died needlessly because they were cruel. Now if your happy with 22 dead animals in a short space of time and more which died later because they were not seen by a Vet early enough, thats your perogative.

Myself I am an Animal lover and hate to see an animal under the care of someone die due to bad husbandry. The people in question know how to keep animals, no one doubts that - but on these instances they made a bad mistake and if you are happy with this, so be it.

Oh, and I am gleeful because this prosecution may send a message out to all those other Pet Shops which are not upto scratch with there husbandry and the conditions in those shops might well improve.


----------



## Julie&James

wohic said:


> apparently there were several previous visits where things were recommended, and the warnings were ignored.......... that has been stated not only on this thread but in reports .
> I admire that you are standing up for your friends, but you keep coming back to minor points that really have little relevance, the dog was left as he was a personal pet , animals believed to be stock were removed (again this is hearsay but I have no reason to doubt it) the judge use the state of the house in the summing up, but that was just part of it not the whole reason for the prosecution, which was based on much photographic evidence, plus statements from a zoologist and other professionals.
> I would actually be careful about making bold and accusing statements about the judge in question :whistling2:


Wohic, it's unlike you to be this blockheaded about an issue.

Photographic evidence ? Of what ? Animal cruelty cases SHOULD be prosecuted on scientific evidence. Animal biology is a science. If this was such a simple case (as you seem to want to suggest it is), then why was no evidence presented which proved that any of the animals were suffering neglect as a result of the actions of the defendants ? Why was the defence evidence ignored ? Why was expert witness evidence for the defence overlooked in favour of an "expert zoologist" :whistling2: for the prosecution. In all, why were the actions of the council and their officers such a shambolic and ignorant mess from the word go ? Why were the defence denied access to the animals for evidential purposes ? 

And I don't particularly care for your veiled threat about expressing my opinion about the judge in this case. She's made bizarre judgements before and wound up in the press for it. The only difference this time is that the press is too busy extracting the juice from the PET SHOP PROSECUTED story to actually pay attention to the dreadful way this case has been handled.

What's your interest in this anyway ? Personal friends of the judge perhaps ? Maybe you should make it clear one way or the other.



kato said:


> Im comfortable with the case because they have been found guilty, I'll say it again so you understand, THEY HAVE BEEN FOUND GUILTY on multiple counts of animal cruelty.


How many people have been found guilty in British courts and later proven innocent ? You speak as if the system is perfect. If you've paid attention to ONE DETAIL of this case you'd be far less arrogant about the INFALLABILITY OF A GUILTY VERDICT. Especially in County court.



> Animals died needlessly because they were cruel. Now if your happy with 22 dead animals in a short space of time and more which died later because they were not seen by a Vet early enough, thats your perogative.


None of that has been proven by any means and the fact that you're stating it borders on libellous. The guilty verdict was based on THEIR HOUSE BEING MESSY. How many times does that have to be repeated. If it's not true, please tell me ONE SCIENTIFIC PIECE OF EVIDENCE that was presented to the court that proved the charge of animal cruelty. If this was an open and shut case with solid scientific evidence WHY WAS AN RSPCA VET HELPING THE DEFENCE ?



> Myself I am an Animal lover and hate to see an animal under the care of someone die due to bad husbandry. The people in question know how to keep animals, no one doubts that - but on these instances they made a bad mistake and if you are happy with this, so be it.


Then maybe you should be more concerned that the authorities spend their time and OUR MONEY persuing people who really are causing cruelty to animals rather than putting up trumped up cases like this and relying on terrible judges to get the case through. Justice should be neither a lottery nor a numbers game.



> Oh, and I am gleeful because this prosecution may send a message out to all those other Pet Shops which are not upto scratch with there husbandry and the conditions in those shops might well improve.


The message it sends out is "Beware for whom the bell tolls" because as has been said many times in the thread, any one of us could have ended up on the wrong end of this prosecution, and THAT is why im passionate about it.


----------



## Nic B-C

They are not my friends and the judge I have commented on is one I faced in a County Court and I will go on record commenting on their behaviour...its actually been reported to authorities.

I have met Lauren and her mother on one occasion only when I purchased a crestie from her mothers house and as I have stated previosuly everythng was n order. I have never seen the shop in question so therfore cannot comment on it.

Ive just read a report stating that a complaint was made about shop in the August and then several visits were made in following month and they were uncooperative.

It also states its a follow up about a detention on a ferry to hull for possums, doesnt state an outcome on that but lauren has already stated she has DEFRA papers for them...never saw an outcome on that one.

Believe you me if I thought Lauren was keeping her animals in shit conditions i would be the first to report her so please dont state Im defending a friend, dont believe I have defended her once on here


----------



## stephenie191

It must hurt your head to feel like you have to be right all the time

i say

CHILL OUT MUCH?


----------



## Julie&James

stephenie191 said:


> It must hurt your head to feel like you have to be right all the time
> 
> i say
> 
> CHILL OUT MUCH?


Better that than to be wrong all the time and not know it.

Did you ever hear the old story about empty vessels ?


----------



## Nic B-C

Julie&James said:


> Better that than to be wrong all the time and not know it.
> 
> Did you ever hear the old story about empty vessels ?


You talking about me again!:lol2:


----------



## sparkle

Guys I really dont think this petty arguing is helping.. irrespective of what side you choose to lay your flag here.. it is pointless and its all becoming very childish..

maybe if the debate can be more about the issues .. and views etc on what has happened and less about one-up-manship in posting style or ability.. it may help overall..

who knows... dont knock it till you try it eh??


----------



## sarasin

stephenie191 said:


> As stated above somwhere
> 
> ALOT OF THE ARTICLES HAVE BEEN PULLED OF THE WEB
> 
> 
> THEY DID FIND LEO'S THAT WHERE STARVING AND SEVERAL DIED AFTER THEY TOOK THEM OFF THE PET SHOP AND OUT OF THE OWNERS HOME!
> 
> 
> It was in the evening gazzette too : victory:


Oh well if it was in the papers it must be TRUE!!
When this first happened it also said there were 100's of dead and dying animals removed? What happened to them, they were certainly not prosocuted for these.
And I would still like an answer from someone about how when there were dead reptiles they were not found guilty on any of those charges.
Also the council are whiter than white are they? they wouldn't lie.
I will tell you how thick they are, they complained that one of the parrot cages was too small (they had already licensed these cages) the cage in question was black, so the owners swapped it for a white one (exactly the same size) and when the council saw it they said that one was fine? Huh!!!


----------



## sarasin

cooljules said:


> now agreed BUT
> 
> Two out of five rescued Monitor Lizards died and all three Leopard Geckos starved to death, the court heard.
> 
> 
> if they starved to death, in the care of the 'rescuer' whats that show..just curious


The monitors had been with Lauren for a few years, it is funny how they suddenly died. Some of the animals died after about 18 months or longer in his care (so he says) If they did in fact die its his fault, after that amount of time. The spider geckos have already been explained, after the vet said they were skinny, they were taken to her own vet and pronounced fit and healthy.


----------



## sarasin

Nic B-C said:


> From quote of sarasin id also be very concerned about a number of things
> 
> expert asking what animals were
> same expert stating about temps animals kept at
> burns to a rhacs feet probably due to same expert housing Rhacon a heat mat as all reptiles need heat mats dont they!
> Amount of animals owned by the couple which could not be returned as they had supposedly died in care (read put down as dont know how to house them or have anyone able to house that number of animals)
> 
> By the way Im not defending the pair here although my only dealings with them has been through buying a crestie and found conditions to be excellent.
> 
> 
> PS if any council came to visit my house they would probably condemn the place but the care of my animals is tantamount.
> 
> My house would smell of dog urine as i have a 20 year old incontinent dog does that mean Im not caring for it?
> 
> Will this affect the care of the reptiles?
> 
> Much of my house is also stripped for renovation and I have an engine workshop in my house as well does this make my pet care any the less.
> 
> Laurens house not shop was found to be squalid you could claim mine is the same but this should not be in question its ones ability to care for the animals. Weirdly enough the only animal which would be affected by a squalid house being the pet dog was not removed!!
> 
> I think its these questions which all need to be answered


Thank you, the gargoyle in question died as a result of this, but thats ok 'cos they are the 'experts' and obviously know better than me how to look after my animals.


----------



## mask-of-sanity

julie& james...have you been made spokes person for the shop owners.....you constantly belittle what others are saying, how about you let the shop owner reply and get off that pedestal you have put yourself on .............i made this thread as i thought it would be of interest for animal lovers, people have said about the dead animals ect but i have yet to hear why the cages stank of urine ect, this is not just something i have read but pm's i have recieved from a few people that shopped there, may i just also add they stated that although the shop owners knew their stuff the place was filthy,


----------



## wohic

I am trying to see both sides of this I really am, we have a mother supporting her daughter and that I can empathize with 100% , we have people who can only go one press reports, people that have a little more insight and people jumping on the band wagon... I am not being block headed and I am more than aware that there are travesty's of justice , it happens time and time again........
If we could only stick to cold hard facts then what would the facts be ? Not I heard in court, I read in the papers.......... solid 100% facts ?

The only facts I can glean from the thread are..... these people have been prosecuted despite having a vet on their side
They were not found guilty on several counts due to lack of evidence (which was due to not being able to prove how long the animals had been in petropolis' care ? )
It has been admitted the house was squalid (how ever even I fail to see how that is a crime.... ) 
The prosecuted partys HAVE admited that some things could have been far better , how ever they strongly believe that there has been misrepresentation and a miscarriage of justice.
Believe it or not I will remain on the fence until the outcome of the appeal process, I have had pm's from people who claim to have first hand evidence that that they would be willing to disclose in court, pms from people that have had first hand experience of the shop etc (for and against, and in the middle) these people are not willing to post on the thread though so I will take my opinions from whats been said here ONLY. 

I have said before and I will repeat If there has been a miscarriage of justice I wish the defendants and their family every success in getting the right outcome.


----------



## uroplatus

I have read what everyone has put in respect of this and as I said on my last post everyone is entitled to their own thoughts and opinions but all I can ask for is that everyone keeps an open mind until after the appeal. I refuse to argue with anyone about this matter as I have enough on my plate to be worrying about things like this.
Wohic - the zoologist you keep referring to had his 'evidence' dismissed by the court for reasons I cannot legally disclose but suffice to say he may not be able to take part in any more court cases any time soon. I have not asked Julie&james to say anything on my behalf but I do appreciate it to be honest otherwise this thread would just be a witch hunt after me.
Stephanie - I would be intrigued to know which pet store used to deal with us? Almost all of the rival pet stores didnt like us due to opening near to them and the rest dealt with us supplying them trade on a weekly basis; none of these stores complained at all about us to the council in respect of cleanliness? I find it hard to believe these people who have PMd about the apparent filthy state of the shop didnt report us back when we were open - surely if they are animal lovers and had concerns they would either have mentioned it directly to us or taken action against us - its funny how these people suddenly emerge from the woodwork afterwards.

I will not make any rude comments about anyone and I will be watching this thread but as I said I will not be argueing with people on their own thoughts and opinions as it will be a pointless excercise, people will believe who and what they want and no matter what I say in my defence it will not change that.


----------



## LFBP-NEIL

How many animals were actually found dead on the day of the raids - (fresh deaths) and how many were pulled from the freezer? (old and unknown deaths)?.

The paper report makes it sound like 21 fresh deaths and 1 frozen parrot

The shop owners suggests it was a couple of dead rats and a bird or two (fresh deaths) - the rest were taken from the freezer?

I am a little concerned if the shop owner was prosecuted on dead animals in the freezer?


----------



## sarasin

wohic said:


> I am trying to see both sides of this I really am, we have a mother supporting her daughter and that I can empathize with 100% quote]
> 
> I am not just a mother defending her daughter, I am someone who was victimised by the council too. The warrent was for illegal animals WHY?
> Also my animals were removed because the vet said she didn't like the way they were housed/looked after. Yes I got them back after 2 days, but if they were removed in the first place because the vet was unhappy with the way they were kept, why was I not prosocuted?
> SIMPLE because they realised they were not Laurens animals, proved by the fact that I didn't get the 4 boa's back (Laurens) which were in my care.
> 
> 
> [quote -They were not found guilty on several counts due to lack of evidence (which was due to not being able to prove how long the animals had been in petropolis' care ? ) quote]
> The reason they were found not guilty on the reptile charges is because the council didn't provide enough expert evidence BOLLOCKS. Its already been shown through a link that the expert has 30 yrs experience and is a zoologist, so how come he couldn't provide evidence?


----------



## mask-of-sanity

uroplatus said:


> I have read what everyone has put in respect of this and as I said on my last post everyone is entitled to their own thoughts and opinions but all I can ask for is that everyone keeps an open mind until after the appeal. I refuse to argue with anyone about this matter as I have enough on my plate to be worrying about things like this.
> Wohic - the zoologist you keep referring to had his 'evidence' dismissed by the court for reasons I cannot legally disclose but suffice to say he may not be able to take part in any more court cases any time soon. I have not asked Julie&james to say anything on my behalf but I do appreciate it to be honest otherwise this thread would just be a witch hunt after me.
> Stephanie - I would be intrigued to know which pet store used to deal with us? Almost all of the rival pet stores didnt like us due to opening near to them and the rest dealt with us supplying them trade on a weekly basis; none of these stores complained at all about us to the council in respect of cleanliness? I find it hard to believe these people who have PMd about the apparent filthy state of the shop didnt report us back when we were open - surely if they are animal lovers and had concerns they would either have mentioned it directly to us or taken action against us - its funny how these people suddenly emerge from the woodwork afterwards.
> 
> I will not make any rude comments about anyone and I will be watching this thread but as I said I will not be argueing with people on their own thoughts and opinions as it will be a pointless excercise, people will believe who and what they want and no matter what I say in my defence it will not change that.


this thread was not made as a witch hunt it was made by an animal lover for interest to others, i understand that this must be a really tough time for you and if it was a wrong verdict then you end up with the right one, but people are allowed to say what they think without getting belittled by your friends........i want this thread to stay open as point of disscusion but your welcome to have it locked but people still want a few questions answered so maybe its best to stay open


----------



## wohic

sarasin said:


> wohic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am trying to see both sides of this I really am, we have a mother supporting her daughter and that I can empathize with 100% quote]
> 
> I am not just a mother defending her daughter, I am someone who was victimised by the council too. The warrent was for illegal animals WHY?
> Also my animals were removed because the vet said she didn't like the way they were housed/looked after. Yes I got them back after 2 days, but if they were removed in the first place because the vet was unhappy with the way they were kept, why was I not prosocuted?
> SIMPLE because they realised they were not Laurens animals, proved by the fact that I didn't get the 4 boa's back (Laurens) which were in my care.
> 
> 
> [quote -They were not found guilty on several counts due to lack of evidence (which was due to not being able to prove how long the animals had been in petropolis' care ? ) quote]
> The reason they were found not guilty on the reptile charges is because the council didn't provide enough expert evidence BOLLOCKS. Its already been shown through a link that the expert has 30 yrs experience and is a zoologist, so how come he couldn't provide evidence?
> 
> 
> No matter what sort of an expert he was, they were found not guilty on those charges as it could not be verified how long the reptiles had been in the care of the shop...... in other words they could have come in to the shop in that condition (and may well have )
Click to expand...


----------



## Julie&James

mask-of-sanity said:


> julie& james...have you been made spokes person for the shop owners.....you constantly belittle what others are saying, how about you let the shop owner reply and get off that pedestal you have put yourself on .............


You need to read your own thread. You seem to have a victim complex because the thread went in a direction you suddenly didn't like. You're fine posting a thread which lead to a shitstorm for OTHER forum users, but if people start referring to *you* in some way you get defensive and aggressive. If you read back to page 8, it wasn't me who personalised the conversation. Your first reply to me on this thread did that. If you don't like arguments, don't start them.



> i made this thread as i thought it would be of interest for animal lovers, people have said about the dead animals ect but i have yet to hear why the cages stank of urine ect, this is not just something i have read but pm's i have recieved from a few people that shopped there, may i just also add they stated that although the shop owners knew their stuff the place was filthy,


Personally I think you made this thread to share a juicy bit of gossip, but I guess we can give you the benefit of the doubt. As to the many many people sending PM's, well they either need to grow a pair and post in the thread, or their comments are worthless. The commonest bullshit line ever heard in a forum argument is "well, I have tons of PM's supporting my side of the story". It's worthless, and in debate it's a form of Fallacy Appeal to Authority.

If the worst you can come up with is "Some people who claim to have shopped there sent a PM saying it was dirty and smelly" then you need to think about all the reptile shops in the country, and whether that objective definition is grounds to have their owners dragged into court and prosecuted. Like I said much earlier in the thread, I've been to NUMEROUS shops which were dirty and smelly, many of which have threads about them in these very forums SINGING THEIR PRAISES. Should the owners of those all be prosecuted too ?

This case was SUPPOSED to be about animal cruelty, and so far we have a prosecution based on the tidyness of someone's house.

So I'm sorry I spoiled your flaming torch and pitchfork party, but that's life.



> people are allowed to say what they think without getting belittled by your friends


You know what, instead of criticizing me for pointing out where someone's argument is illogical, or weak, or they have come to false conclusions, it might be better if you focus your attention on the people who shitted up your thread with unparticipative posts, offensive attacks on the people who are the subject of the thread, and illegible nonsense. I have done nothing other than point out where someones post is incorrect.


----------



## mask-of-sanity

Julie&James said:


> You need to read your own thread. You seem to have a victim complex because the thread went in a direction you suddenly didn't like. You're fine posting a thread which you know will lead to a shitstorm for OTHER forum users, but if people start referring to you in some way you get defensive and aggressive. If you read back to page 8, it wasn't me who personalised the conversation. Your first reply to me on this thread did that. If you don't like arguments, don't start them.
> 
> Personally I think you made this thread to share a juicy bit of gossip, but I guess we can give you the benefit of the doubt. As to the many many people sending PM's, well they either need to grow a pair and post in the thread, or their comments are worthless. The commonest bullshit line ever heard in a forum argument is "well, I have tons of PM's supporting my side of the story". It's worthless, and in debate it's a form of Fallacy Appeal to Authority.
> 
> If the worst you can come up with is "Some people who claim to have shopped there sent a PM saying it was dirty and smelly" then you need to think about all the reptile shops in the country, and whether that objective definition is grounds to have their owners dragged into court and prosecuted. Like I said much earlier in the thread, I've been to NUMEROUS shops which were dirty and smelly, many of which have threads about them in these very forums SINGING THEIR PRAISES. Should the owners of those all be prosecuted too ?
> 
> This case was SUPPOSED to be about animal cruelty, and so far we have a prosecution based on the tidyness of someone's house.
> 
> So I'm sorry I spoiled your flaming torch and pitchfork party, but that's life.
> 
> You know what, instead of criticizing me for pointing out where someone's argument is illogical, or weak, or they have come to false conclusions, it might be better if you focus your attention on the people who shitted up your thread with unparticipative posts, offensive attacks on the people who are the subject of the thread, and illegible nonsense. I have done nothing other than point out where someones post is incorrect.


but its in correct in your eyes and not who posts, not everyone will agree....also how was i aware that they are forum users......juicy gossip ffs a pet shop owner was found gulity of neglect to me that is of interest to others, we read so many times about crap pet shops so why cant we read about this one....because they are your friends does not mean we will all agree but you seem to think that other peoples views are wrong and your the only one thats right........as i have said to the shop owner if the verdict was wrong then i hope they get it over turned but if after appeal its still a guilty verdict then who are we to argue with that....at the end of the day this thread isnt about me its about a pet shop


----------



## Nic B-C

Think in the first insatance we need to wait till 24th and then whatever date is set for an appeal if it is granted!

No one on here will ever know the true facts etc, personally I would like to see the pictures from the case and other evidence.

As Ive also stated previosusly i can only go on what I have seen at laurens mothers house and nothing else.

I do however find it interesting that Her mothers property was indeed raided as part of this case when in reality she has nothing to do with it.

She does state 4 snakes but surely an order should have been made for these 4 snakes only and a search warrant should not have been issued.

More questions on due proceeedings which need to be questioned.

id also like to know an outcome on the opposums....were they legal, were they DEFRA sanctioned, did they need quarantine etc etc.

Seems weird she was arrested before the boat had landed for not putting them in quarantine pre the fact. I dont know how the system works on this, does it have to be pre arranged perhaps someone can enlighten me.

I do know that there has been a lot of friction in that area between different shops though but once again I cannot comment on that as all hearsay.


----------



## sarasin

Nic B-C said:


> I do however find it interesting that Her mothers property was indeed raided as part of this case when in reality she has nothing to do with it.
> 
> She does state 4 snakes but surely an order should have been made for these 4 snakes only and a search warrant should not have been issued.


Why should an order have been made for the 4 boa's? they had mites, but apart from that they were perfectly healthy, and were in my care at the time.
They were in rubs (as it was easier to treat for mites, and keep the encloser clean) however so was another snake (which was returned) because it wasn't Lauren's ?


----------



## Julie&James

mask-of-sanity said:


> but its in correct in your eyes and not who posts, not everyone will agree....


That's fine. Everyone can post what they think. Including me.



> also how was i aware that they are forum users......juicy gossip ffs a pet shop owner was found gulity of neglect to me that is of interest to others, we read so many times about crap pet shops so why cant we read about this one..


I didn't say we can't. I merely commented on my opinion of your motives for posting the thread. Which is my opinion.



> ..because they are your friends does not mean we will all agree but you seem to think that other peoples views are wrong and your the only one thats right...


Not everything in the world is objective. If an object is black and you believe it's white, you're entitled to your opinion but it's still wrong by any measurable scientific metric. Over and over again I have asked for people to focus on the FACTS of this case. Many have been mentioned in this thread. Let me sum 20 of them up for you ..

1. The shop opened in Dec 05' and was licensed with all enclosures in place.
2. In August '06 the council visit recommends changing the rabbit enclosure due to "overcrowding". Problem rectified satisfactorily.
3. Throught the next 2 years, the council vet would inspect, ask for identification of certain reptile species (i.e. Oooh, what's that?) and then claim they were being wrongly housed. 
4. At the same time, the council vet requires the shop to send some species to vets to check health (including a spider gecko which they claimed was "skinny"). The Vet gives all animals a full clean bill of health.
5. The shop freezer contained a dead parrot, several snakes, a lizard, a tortoise and as would be expected a large quantity of rats, mice, chicks etc as snake food. Most of these dead animals had arrived dead from the supplier and were being kept as evidence.
6. The Council inspected first thing Monday morning, which was cleaning day (as they had previously been informed).
7. After extensive inspection of the house, they arrived at the shop at 4pm. By this time, several animals were without water (since they would have been replenished in the morning had the owners been permitted to visit the shop).
8. The inspectors found 2 dead rats (who had been fighting) and several dead birds.
9. The council vet did not examine ANY animals during the inspection.
10. The shop owners had full documentary evidence of vet visits for all animals dating back to 1999.
11. Rescue animals who had arrived at the shop emaciated but were now gaining weight were taken as "evidence of maltreatment".
12. The council attempted to charge the owners for having snakes in rubs.
13. The council attempted to charge the owners for having snakes without food in their enclosure.
14. The council attempted to charge the owners for having desert lizard species and certain arborial geckos without standing water. 
15. The council attempted to charge them for an open-topped rabbit run design which is in use across the UK by Pets at Home to this day.
16. The council vet admitted in court that she knew very little about reptiles.
17. The council prevented the defence team (legal and vetinerary) from gaining access to all but 19 of the "siezed" animals.
18. The council presented ZERO scientific evidence of provable neglect during the case.
19. The "expert" acting for the council has had a large number of the siezed animals die while in his care (animals who were healthy up until the date of siezure).
20. In her own words, the judge summed up the case by saying "if their house was so dirty, how could they look after animals" ?

So, those are FACTS. It would be really nice if people would stick to discussing FACTS, or questioning the owners for more information. That way we'd all learn more. Instead, they stick to posting OPINIONS mostly based on 3rd hand word of mouth, or articles in the press.

If I'm wrong, and my friends the shop owners are wrong, and the animals were neglected, then how about someone offer some evidence or some proof, rather than just referring to the fact that the judge convicted. Judges, as has been shown many times, are not infallible. Some are less infallible than others.



> .....as i have said to the shop owner if the verdict was wrong then i hope they get it over turned but if after appeal its still a guilty verdict then who are we to arue with that


If the appeal is fair and the evidence is taken into account.. nobody. Of course, even that doesn't always happen. Ask someone who has been through the system.


----------



## Nic B-C

sarasin said:


> Why should an order have been made for the 4 boa's? they had mites, but apart from that they were perfectly healthy, and were in my care at the time.
> They were in rubs (as it was easier to treat for mites, and keep the encloser clean) however so was another snake (which was returned) because it wasn't Lauren's ?


Im pointing out that you were not involved int he case and the only possible connection would be the fact you had 4 of her snakes in your care, ulotimately I think they are on questionable grounds full stop in searching your property when you were not even being investigated


----------



## Nic B-C

I think the proof is in the undisclosed PMs


----------



## Julie&James

Nic B-C said:


> I think the proof is in the undisclosed PMs


But but ... I have received 25,567,363 PM's, all from different people, which proves they are innocent !!!


----------



## uroplatus

Nic B-C said:


> Im pointing out that you were not involved int he case and the only possible connection would be the fact you had 4 of her snakes in your care, ulotimately I think they are on questionable grounds full stop in searching your property when you were not even being investigated


I am not having a go at you, its just thay people seem to be ignoring the fact that I was raided too, and inspite of the fact that the vet was not happy with my care of the animals, they were returned. The point I am trying to make is either the vet thought they were looked after propery or she didn't. I was in such a state when this happened I had to go on the sick from my job, as I couldnt sleep. They can't do one thing and then another, messing around with peoples lives.
Do you realise if you have a petshop in Middlesbrough the person who comes around to inspect it is a DOG WARDEN, how ridiculous is that.
SORRY JUST REALISED I AM SIGNED IN AS LAUREN.
Sarasin


----------



## mask-of-sanity

Julie&James said:


> That's fine. Everyone can post what they think. Including me.
> 
> I didn't say we can't. I merely commented on my opinion of your motives for posting the thread. Which is my opinion.
> 
> i posted a thread that interested me and others, we all read posts/threads on shops its public interest.....however they got a not guilty on the reptiles but guilty on other charges....we will wait and see the outcome of the appeal and if they are innocent then i hope they get a not guilty verdict as i have said before
> what i would like to know is that "CLEANING DAY" keeps being reffered to , did the animals not get spot cleaned daily ? or was this refering to home and not the shop, although most spot clean at home also


----------



## Nic B-C

Believe it or not social services is exactly the same ive been special needs techer and carer for over twenty years and done numerous case meetings where they are supposed to know the child most have never met them or even read the notes and are there making a decision on the childs future!!!!!


----------



## stuartdouglas

reptile_man_08 said:


> I just want to know why a parrot was in the freezer:lol2:.


It was pining for the fjords...................it's not dead, it's sleeping:lol2:


----------



## wacky69

i just want to ad one thing. One newspaper says 8 dead animals another says 22 so why does everyone believe the one that says 22? is it cos you all like to think the worse about someone. This in itself shows how in-acurate newspaper articals can be


----------



## Nic B-C

wacky69 said:


> i just want to ad one thing. One newspaper says 8 dead animals another says 22 so why does everyone believe the one that says 22? is it cos you all like to think the worse about someone. This in itself shows how in-acurate newspaper articals can be


Thought just that myself, it was actually 468 dead animals all in the freezer if only they had all been piled up in the snakes rubs everything would have been fine!


----------



## boromale2008

out of the papers the evening gazette from my experience is the most reliable paper in this area and doesnt fabricate stories.


----------



## Nic B-C

boromale2008 said:


> out of the papers the evening gazette from my experience is the most reliable paper in this area and doesnt fabricate stories.


They may not fabricate but can only goon details given as I said frommy case they usually only put details from prosecution not defence as they get all the information they want in a 30 minute snippet as opposed to sittin through a complete trial.

In this case there seems to be conflict on expert witnesses.

The whole reptile thing was thrown out due to this side of things, could be there was no case to answer could also mean a cock uip on that side of the prosecution at the end of the day we will never know unless we were there to actually witness what was found.

Ive been to literally hundreds of pet shops in my life and i can gauruntee I would find at least two dead, ill or even part eaten animals in each and every one of them.

Animals die for a number of reason neglect being just one of them.

All seems very starange that from a complaint on a rabbit run and subsequent visits this escalated into a raid.

Could be due to bad practice could be due to rival businesses putting on pressure, could be due to local authority doing a clamp down and wanting to make an example but we simply dont know and probably never will.

At the end of the day it makes no ecenomical sense to mistreat animal that you want to sell as at the end of the day you lose an animal and you lose your profit margin.

tropical fish for example have a massive morbidity level and ive noticed amphibians to be just as bad especially if moved during winter.

My local shop lost nearly two shipments in entirity during cold shipment.

Ive helped out in a large tropical fish shop as well and seen whole shipments die within two days of arrival, this wasnt neglect either unless you include the transporter.


----------



## jack_rep

Ive dealt with the couple in question a few times over the years, mainly when they were working at another pet shop in the area. In each dealing with them i didnt experience any problems if im honest. The care of the animals in that shops was far from perfect, but equally it did not seem negligent. The shop in question in the article that was shut down (which i think is the one the couple went on to set up?) however i wasnt impressed with at all. I dont recall details so i cant comment much. I do remember tho making a note however not to visit again.

Anyhow when people are moaning how it took 2.5 years to be prosecuted, that isnt to say it took this long for the animals to be siezed - it simply took this long for them to appear in court The shop in question was closed down very shortly after opening. 

Regarding people saying you shouldnt read everything you read in the paper. The evening gazette isnt a daft tabliod. Its a respectable local paper. Many times it writes on issues I have a personal knowledge of, and ive never know it to lie or exagerate. 

Many of the points raised in the article can be wished away with excuses, eg the sick leo could have easily been brought in by a neglectful customer. But that many animals being found dead on the one day? How can anyone excuse that? If you have so many animals that you dont have the time to even check if they are dead or not... ur probably not giving the animals the care they need.


----------



## uroplatus

stephenie191 said:


> I don't understand why people are almost defending this petshop
> 
> If 3 leo's
> were found to have STARVED TO DEATH not just died of unrelated diseases then surely that alone sets of alarm bells?
> 
> If any animal dies of Starvation in a pet shop then it should be shut down
> 
> 
> - no excuse for that is there really? Thats all i'm saying :whistling2:
> 
> 
> AND I DONT NEED TO READ THE THREAD AS I READ MANY OF THE GAZZETTE ARTICLES ON THIS AND HAVE MADE MY OWN MIND UP!
> 
> LIKE HOW THE RABBIT PENS WENT WITHOUT HAY OR FRESH SHAVINGS FOR MONTHS AT A TIME AND HOW THE SHOP STUNK!


*BEFORE YOU READ THIS, I WAS SIGNED IN AS LAUREN, ITS SARASIN WHO HAS POSTED THIS.*
You want to get your facts right, I guess I know who's shop you use (wouldn't be in Billingham by any chance?)
If pm's had been done on the animals they then would know what they died of wouldn't they. But they thought it was ok to say they died of starvation, well they would wouldn't they it cost money to do pm's.
In fact their 'vet' said in court it would have cost too much do do pm's. Hang on a minute this is someones life they are :censor: with so they should have damn well done them. As for the fact that the rabbits went without hay or fresh shavings for months, that is total crap. I should know I helped out in the shop enough, so are you calling me a liar.


----------



## sarasin

boromale2008 said:


> out of the papers the evening gazette from my experience is the most reliable paper in this area and doesnt fabricate stories.


*Bloody hell an honest paper *you must be bloody joking. Unless you have someone who works for them, if so tell them to get an honest job.


----------



## cooljules

uroplatus said:


> *BEFORE YOU READ THIS, I WAS SIGNED IN AS LAUREN, ITS SARASIN WHO HAS POSTED THIS.*
> You want to get your facts right, I guess I know who's shop you use (wouldn't be in Billingham by any chance?)
> If pm's had been done on the animals they then would know what they died of wouldn't they. But they thought it was ok to say they died of starvation, well they would wouldn't they it cost money to do pm's.
> In fact their 'vet' said in court it would have cost too much do do pm's. Hang on a minute this is someones life they are :censor: with so they should have damn well done them. As for the fact that the rabbits went without hay or fresh shavings for months, that is total crap. I should know I helped out in the shop enough, so are you calling me a liar.


how many times do i have to say this....geez...the lep gex that died...died AFTER the were removed from the shop, same as the monitors...god some people cant read or just dont want too. if they cant be bothered to read it all then they shouldnt comment

i spoke to a rep shop owner yesterday who knows her, knows the zoolologist and someone else involed in the prosectution side etc. and expects them to win on a appeal....


----------



## sarasin

cooljules said:


> how many times do i have to say this....geez...the lep gex that died...died AFTER the were removed from the shop, same as the monitors...god some people cant read or just dont want too. if they cant be bothered to read it all then they shouldnt comment
> 
> i spoke to a rep shop owner yesterday who knows her, knows the zoolologist and someone else involed in the prosectution side etc. and expects them to win on a appeal....


*Is this comment aimed at me or Steph? sorry if its not me. Just had to edit this post.*
I can read, so what difference does it make when the leo died. It doesn't prove shit without a pm, could have had a disease etc, the monitors died 12 - 18 months after the event, so what does that tell you. If they were so ill when removed they should have had veterinary treatment shouldn't they. *But not one animal was treated by a vet*, that in itself is cruelty in my opinion. What about all the rest that suddenly died 12-18 months later? I suppose that was the shops fault too !!!


----------



## boromale2008

so you saying the gazette is just full of lies then?? or just every paper that has posted this article?? the gazette prints local news not national bullshit.


----------



## neep_neep

boromale2008 said:


> so you saying the gazette is just full of lies then?? or just every paper that has posted this article?? the gazette prints local news not national bullshit.


We have a local newspaper. Nice and respectable. They came to our school on results day - I opened my results when they were there and they asked for my name and what I was going to study at Uni.

Lo and behold, the very next day, they 'quoted' me as saying 'I'm so shocked, it's such a relief', etc. etc., when in fact all I had told them was my name and chosen course. If they were so keen to make things up for such a minor 'story' - it makes you wonder what they must do for the stories that are actually trying to sell the paper in the first place.

Papers embellish stories - fact. 

It doesn't matter if they are national tabloids or local papers - they're all journalists, they probably all took the same courses, they learn all the same techniques.

Not taking sides here, but I do truly believe that newpaper stories, _especially _local newspapers (they are accountable to fewer) are rarely to be taken at face value. This is not a comment on the case in question, just a general newspaper observation : victory:


----------

