RSPCA accused of double standards over hunt prosecutions

From the Daily Telegraph

The RSPCA is more interested in social class than animal rights, it has been claimed, after the charity failed to prosecute members of the travelling community who were shown on television cock fighting and hunting deer with dogs.

The charity is accused of putting a political agenda ahead of the welfare of wild animals after no action was taken against a gang of Gypsy men shown hunting, while spending £350,000 to prosecute a fox hunting club linked to David Cameron.

In Channel 4 documentary Gypsy Blood, cock fights are organised for entertainment and young boys are taken along to watch the illegal hunting of deer with dogs.

In one scene a bird is shown on the verge of death as another pecks away at its head during a cock fight.

One man watching shouts:"Kill him then, you f---- useless c---. Oh, he's gone, finish him son, finish him."

The film, by award-winning photographer Leo Maguire and billed as an examination of violence in the Gypsy community and its impact on the young, was first screened a year ago and was broadcast again last night.

But despite launching an investigation into the allegations of animal cruelty in January 2012, the RSPCA has failed to secure a prosecution one year on, claiming there was a lack of evidence.

The charity said they approached several police forces to obtain warrants to search for further evidence but were denied these in at least one instance. It then decided against launching a private prosecution.

"It was decided as the evidence in the documentary alone was not strong enough to secure a successful prosecution in court, no case would be taken by the RSPCA," the charity said this afternoon.

The animal welfare charity already faces allegations of political bias after spending £350,000 prosecuting members of the Heythrop Hunt, with whom Prime Minister David Cameron once rode.

The hunt and its members were fined £6,800 after admitting four charges of unlawfully hunting a wild fox with dogs. The judge in the case drew attention to the fact that the private prosecution cost nearly 10 times more than the defence costs of £35,000.

“Members of the public may feel that RSPCA funds can be more usefully employed,” District Judge Tim Pattinson suggested.

Lord Heseltine, the former Cabinet minister, has reported the organisation to the Charity Commission, claiming it may have breached its “duty of prudence” in how donors’ money is used.

Today rural campaigners said the RSPCA is applying one rule for traditional English hunts and another for bloodsports organised by members of the travelling community.

Tim Bonner, campaigns director for the Countryside Alliance, said the RSPCA had “minimal interest” in prosecuting the “clear animal cruelty” exhibited in the programme.

“You’ve got the RSPCA spending £330,000 prosecuting one hunt,” he told the Daily Telegraph. “Where as we all know that offences are being carried out openly, blatantly and on a daily basis by other communities, which they have minimal interest in.

“Clearly cockfighting is not defensible in any form in terms of wildlife management, it’s simply animal cruelty. If the RSPCA was really interested in animal welfare rather than pushing a political agenda, we believe they would have focused their resources on that sort of activity rather than the Heythrop Hunt.”

The documentary filmed a gang of men deer coursing, where bets are placed and dogs race each other in a bid to catch and kill their prey.

Screeching and whimpering noises can be heard in the film as one dog eventually reaches the deer and catches it in its jaws.

In another scene a young boy is seen kicking a bird as it lies dying, having been shot by the family because of poor health.

Mr Bonner claimed the “only reason” the RSPCA chose to prosecute the Heythrop hunt was because it operated in Mr Cameron’s constituency.

“The real standards are about people, not animals,” he added. “You’re choosing to pick on one group rather than another. In doing so you’re ignoring real issues of animal welfare.”

The RSPCA said it did not prosecute because it was “not granted access to the evidence required”.

It said: “Despite attempts by our inspectors, the RSPCA was not granted access to the evidence required to put together a successful prosecution case.

“The only material available to the RSPCA – footage broadcast in the actual programme – failed to pass the evidential test as it did not specify exact times, locations and individuals.

“For this reason, after serious consideration, the RSPCA chose not pursue a prosecution in the wake of allegations rising from Gypsy Blood.”

It said it wrote letters of complaint to OFCOM and Channel 4 “to express concern at the illegal activities shown in the programme” and the “gratuitous nature of the ill-treatment of the animals.”

According to Channel 4, Gypsy Blood is “an intimate portrait of two Gypsy families, their fight for respect and the price they pay in cycles of revenge that can erupt into sudden and terrifying violence.

“Gypsy Blood is a haunting study of masculinity, violence and the uneasy relationship Gypsy and Traveller men have with their bare-knuckle traditions, and an insight into people living amongst a wider society but sometimes with values that are a world apart.”