blonde poker forum

This is a shocking story, but I am fairly sure nothing will be done, it will be swept aside.  This kind of thing infuriates me.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/6289925.stm

Heard about this on the news, bit shocking really. 

This is sad, but not a malicious.
If anyone is to be blamed/prosecuted it should be the original owner who abandoned it.

I agree with the original poster. As an animal lover, I find that story deeply upsetting :(

Jeezus. How can someone just forget about the dog? That incompetence, whether malicious or not, has caused an animal extreme pain and suffering. Pretty inexcusable I think, and should result in a jail sentence.

Terrible....

How one can forget about the dog locked into the room?

As the biggest dog lover in the world (could much more easily kill a human than a dog!!), i think its disgusting. Its someones bloody fault and they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. ******* idiots! Cant believe in incompetence of the police sometimes! They'd better check the other cells. There might be PRISONERS in there they might have forgot!

I apologize for the original title to the thread, it just makes me angry.

\

Don't

I'Ve just done a reply to this and it was removed because of one bad word. lolololololololololol This forum makes me laugh sometimes. They just cant delete the word. The forum police there within the minute, what an interesting life they must lead. As far as l'm concerned the police officer/s responsible for this should be called bastrads.

I just find it sad that if this was a paedophile or rapist who had been put in a cell, there would be a whole bunch of do-gooders there all the time making sure they were comfy and happy. This poor dog was forgotten about. The dog was in kennels next to where the police officers park their cars, they must have been walking past him for nearly 2 weeks without any of them having the decency to do anything about it. The World is a F..... up place sometimes, but this is the worse I have seen for a while.

I think that's taking it a bit far Sark. I very much doubt that many police men would walk by a startving dog and do nothing about it. It reads as if one cop put the dog in the kennels and didn't tell anyone, so they didn't know it was there.

Ok, but the Officer concerned should be sacked.  I admit to having no knowledge of how the disciplinary procedures work in the Police force, but I would be very surprised if he gets more than a slap on the hand and called a bad boy.

It's disturbing people get more upset over this than humans dieing in cells after police give them a ruffing up, happens alot.

Michael

If it had been a proper deletion you would have been contacted.

To the best of my knowledge no mod has deleted your post. However as I was active changing titles with Sark then I may have clicked the wrong button accidentally. If so, sorry.

We're not as bad as all that. After all if we looked too closely at all your posts we'd be very very busy!!  ;) ;D

That's a bit mean, Mick. I don't think anyone deleted your post. Are you sure you didn't do it accidentally yourself?

Sry Adam and Rich but it was a long and emotional post about dogs that u both know l love (greyhounds). I might have done it, no disrepect mean't lads, l know u do a great job.

No Mike, I certainly did not delete that..at the time I was editting there were only short posts

If you would like to post it again, I am sure it would make great reading given your knowledge of dogs. 

Zebediah l will have to disagree with you m8. We do not know why this dog was a stray or the circumstances of how he was loose. As for his history that will be quickly established as the National Greyhound Racing Council have brought in new measures in the last 7 months after two very bad P.R incidents with greyhounds in the last year. The dogs Earmark (something 99% of Greyhounds have to identify) will lead to detailed record of where and what this poor animal had done. If the last registered owner just disregarded the dog or even gave it away to someone to go flapping (racing on small independant unlicensed tracks), he will be prosecuted and forbidden to own a racing greyhound for life.

The bare facts are, this animal was found healthy and locked in a holding kennel were whilst probaly thirsty would have finished his water that night if he had any. He then died a horrible, painful death which would have involved many hours of suffering. All because some Policeman was in a rush to get home or into the station for a Bacon Sarnie. This Bastard has to pay for this with his job or the highest punishment that can be handed out by the magistrate.

We have 34 of these lovely animals at the kennels. I have 3 that live in the house with me, and they make each day on this planet that much more enjoyable. They are noble, sweet, loving and obedient always wanting to please and recieve your affection. I would die for these lovely animals and when l read stories like this it almost makes me cry thinking of that dogs last moments. This is something l feel strongly about, make no mistake.

In all fairness, the article doesn't say why the dog was left and forgotten (does it?  I'd better recheck but I don't recall reading it)

Perhaps something more urgent than a bacon sandwich turned up and his attention was distracted.

I read an article recently about a Lady who runs a voluntary sanctuary for retired sheep dogs. She said that she is often told of stray sheep dogs wandering the streets by members of the public from various parts of the UK.  She said some farmers dump the dogs after they become too old to work, they are seen as a burden. I am sure the numbers of such dogs are small, but I found this terrible. After years of companionship and faithfulness to their masters, to just dump them is the most heartless thing imaginable. I think volunteers such as these deserve recognition for their efforts. She is giving an old dog a second chance. 

I knew an old herd who shot his when they got too old. By his reckoning the training sheepdog gets is training in basically hunting behaviour, and while able to work they are content with it. Once too old they don't get the 'hunting' they are used to & if they escape they are very likely to go on a worrying spree, he killed them to save the risk. I'm not saying I agreed with him, but that was his theory.

As for greyhounds I was very near to adopting a couple of them from the Greyhound Awareness League, I'd just about got the girlfriend to agree to it. Thankfully I didn't as we broke up & I had to move into a flat, I couldn't have forgiven myself if I'd had to hand them back.

There you have the other side of an often controversial but never dull guy. A truly moving Post from one who knows a great deal about dogs.

No problem, but please be assured, as far as we can tell, the Mods never removed it, at least not intentionally.

There you have the other side of an often controversial but never dull guy. A truly moving Post from one who knows a great deal about dogs.
[/quote]


Thankyou Mr Kendall

There was an old sheep dog that lived on a farm near where I stay. He was the grandfather and used to sit there and watch his Sons and Grandsons go off to work in the morning. Sadly he is gone now, but his place on the doorstep has been taken now by his Son who is around 10 yrs old. I imagine I will see him on that courtyard doorstep for a good few years to come and then his Son will take the place.  The farmer has many generations of the same family of dogs.

What a lovely little story.....has helped to ease the sickening feeling the main story of this thread has left in my stomach.

It looks like there's a lesson to be learned with regard to procedures and the checking of kennels etc. on a daily basis. This is a sad case but I don't think there was any intent. Looks like the officer made an honest error (for whatever reason) that led to terrible consequences. As a result, I wouldn't want him/her sacked or brought before the law.

I disagree with you here. Although it may be an 'honest' mistake, it is police incompetence that has lead for this to happen. Someone has to pay for this. As someone posted earlier, what would happen if they locked a human up and forgot about him/her, causing them to die a slow painful death of starvation/dehydration. I don't think the 'honest mistake' excuse would wash there.

Well said mucker.   :goodpost:

There are measures in place to prevent this happening. If cells aren't checked then heads roll. Seems obvious no such measures are in place with regard to 'animals' so this highlights a procedural problem. This is why I say there's a lesson to be learned. Namely the need to put checks in place.

The wellbeing of an animal shouldn't rely on the memory/competence of any single officer. If the officer that took custody of the dog was killed 'on the job' the same day then 'everyday procedures' should prevent outcomes like this. As is the case with detained humans.

One time I was given permission by a farmer to walk his land with my dogs. Someone reported me, and the police arrested me on suspicion of tresspass in persuit of game. I explained that I had permission, and that all they had to do was ask the farmer, but instead they locked my dogs in the car and put me in a cell for 18 hours.

When they finally got around to asking the farmer, he confirmed that I did indeed have permission to be on the land in persuit of game. They released me without apology and left me to make my own way back to my car where my dogs had been left without food, water, shade or the opportunity to relieve themselves..

I heard on the news that Greyhounds don't bark a lot? . I had a Lurcher who was collie/greyhound and he barked a fair bit  :D. Anyway, on the news, it said if the dog had come from a bad home, he would be too afraid to bark to attract attention incase he was hit by his owners presuming he came from a bad home . This makes the story sadder as he was unable to bark to attract attention.  Poor little guy

Thats terrible.  I bet this sort of thing happens a lot

This phrase suggests retribution is your motive - what do you suggest?

Not sure what you mean by that. Are you suggesting that nothing is done at all?

What I'm saying is that someone should be brought to account for what happened. If someone simply has their wrists slapped, or worse still, nothing at all is done, then what message does that give?

My point was the phrase 'Someone has to pay for this'. You didn't say 'brought to account' or 'they should ensure this can't happen again' - phrases which would suggest appropriate punishment and action.

'Someone has to pay for this' is overly aggressive language - this suggests revenge, which is not the correct basis for a justice system.

Fair enough. It does appear to be clumsily phrased by me.

I agree that revenge is a poor basis for a justice system, and certainly don't believe in 'an eye for an eye', no matter how insidious the crime.

I guess I was angered so much by the story that I didn't keep my tongue in check. Will re-check my posts before submitting next time to ensure that I am getting the correct meaning across and not using overly emotive language.

I'm not having a go or anything - it's just that I've often noticed that discussions about bad things happening to animals seem to have a greater amount of knee-jerking than those about bad things happening to humans.

I think it is just because animals get a worse deal than another victim .  We feel we have to protect them as they can't argue their own defence. We should protect them, they have as much right to be here as anyone.

I know it's a whole different discussion but, for me, people >>> animals.

If I'd been temping in a different office fom my usual base, and made a cock up that killed a dog I'd be heart-broken. I'd also be expecting censured by my work for it. I'd not expect my familly more affected than my upset = me getting sacked would be too much IMHO and I'd be sueing for all i could, for them at least.

This seems like a protocol error rather than anything malicious.

In cases where owners have intentionally mistreated and abused their dogs, punishing these people for their cruelty is right.This is a far cry from that situation though. It's a sad situation that the dog died but the nature of some of the responses suggesting retribution are ridiculous.

Update procedures so that measures are in place and punish any officers whose negligence led to this APPROPRIATELY  to ensure this doesn't happen again.

Saying that humans are afforded better protection than dogs is right. Human rights are more important than animal rights in my view.

You hear the stories of animal rights activists setting up bombs to target people working for vivisection organisations. To me these people have mental health issues and a severely damaged moral compass.

I would get flushy to open all the mail for the next few days mate, just to be on the safe side ;)

So thats what the pile of paper by the door is....

As long as the bombs aren't triggered by a fish proximity device, we should be ok.

Isn't this what everyone who has posted is calling for above? In this case, it would appear to be appropriate that whoever is utimately responsible for this loses their job. I don't see that as ridiculous.

IMO it is gross negligence and criminal proceedings should be brought upon the guilty party.

I say ship the dog to Korea and make someone's day!

I agree that the police officer (temp they say) who didn't let anyone know about the dog what a chimp, but I refuse to believe anyone at that station would wish harm to a defenceless dog...and my opinion of the police is not high.

I am not ignorant of the greyhound world, and trust me, you must be the exception that proves the rule regarding greyhound racing.
I bought a racer about 11 years ago and 3 months later she shattered her hock.
The kennels offered to "take care of it" and give me another (not so good) dog free to keep me into greyhound ownership.
I took one look at her expecting to see a forlorn dog in pain, but when she saw me (we had built up a relationship in the 3 months as I would see her each weekend) she was up (leg in cast) and wagging her tail trying to run to me.
I said I can't let an animal like that be destroyed, so turned down the free racer and took her home.
She is quite frail now but all being well she will be 14 years old this June, and have never regretted my decision.
A few family members also have homed ex racers due to being so impressed with her, though none have been as good as her...bit of false advertising lol.

But I saw enough behind the scenes at the racetrack (that being an owner allows you to see) to know that it is not a kind animal loving industry, and I would only ever consider another dog if I had the room to re home at retirement.
Greyhounds are abused every week by their owners..murdered...abandoned etc. So why are we wanting a police officer sacked for a mistake, when so many are being starved, beaten, drowned etc by their "loving" owners.

Maybe this greyhound did had a loving owner, and I am heartily sorry for them if so. But they could just as easily have driven to a remote location and dumped it.
My point is that these are the real greyhound criminals.

Also, in case people weren't aware, the owners who murder their greyhounds cos they're not useful any more and they can't be arsed to pay for a humane death with a vet.

They cut their ears off so they can't be traced back to them.

Why do you use the word murder.


"The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice."

Because he is in a position of trust and authority, and has failed in his job.

Well if we work on that principle we will lose about 90% of the current police force...and NHS...and civil service etc

Or do we only act when it is tabloid worthy?

I can understand why animal rights activists go to extreme measures to get their point across to be honest. In cases like the one you mention, it is fairly obvious that the people guilty will get called a bad boy and slapped on the wrist if the authorities can be bothered doing anything about it. At least animal rights activists dish out a real punishment whether that be an emotional/financial punishment caused by destroying property or another punishment deemed too severe by some people.  My point is, if you are capable of doing that to a dog, then you have no human rights and should be dealt with like the majority of people feel animals should be treated, without respect.

So what do you suggest ? Let the guilty party off ?

Regardless of "tabloid worthiness" it was an act of gross negligence and as such should be punished under the terms of the police forces internal disciplinary procedure at the very least.

His actual mistake was a one that had bigger consequences than an identical error elsewhere may have caused.
I've always felt that the punishment should fit the crime, not the consequences.

The crime is causing death through negligence .... so lets hope the punishment DOES fit the crime.

Death of a dog.

Last night I ate part of a cow. Deliberately. Knowing full well it had been killed purely so that I, and others, could eat it. If people like me didn't indulge in cow-eating, it wouldn't have been killed.

Surely that makes me worse than the copper whose actions accidentally led to the death of a dog? What punishment do you suggest for me?

A lesson in how to avoid making daft analogies in debates ;)

Good post.

By not passing on the information about the dog, he has obviously failed to some extent in his duties and should get some form of punishment.

But maybe he had good reason, such as his colleagues brought in a gang of rowdy prisoners and he had to deal with all of them all at once in which case his mistake is lesser and his punishment should be slighter. Or maybe he didn't pass on the information because he is consistently negligent, in which case he should probably be sacked. The circumstances surrounding the case should define the punishment to some degree.

Saying he should be sacked because the dog died is results orientated, something we shouldn't be as poker players!

A guy decides to randomly shoot people out of his window with his sniper rifle. He shoots a man dead. The police arrive and discover the dead man had a bomb in his rucksack which he intended to explode on a packed london bus. Should the man be rewarded or receive a lesser punishment for inadvertantly saving possibly 100s of lives? Of course not.

It's an extreme example but illustrates the principle.

Yes, the one's who dug up the old lady's remains and stole them were real pillars of society!

I am not sure if I agree with their methods or not, but it did get their message into the media. I can see why they feel they have to take such measures to be heard. Holding a banner outside a building does little to bring their beliefs into the homes of the public, but this act certainly did. I am sure they would have preferred to voice their beliefs in a  more respectful way, but nobody pays any attention, unless it is shocking. In some respects this can be seen as being the same as terrorism. Shocking acts make headlines and as a result gain public attention. 

By the way, the dog wasnt forgotten for a few hours, it was 10 DAYS !!

I think that fact has been forgotten.

It publicises their message but do you think it gives their beliefs any more credibility in the public eye? If anything they undermine their own message by taking these actions.

I agree that this and other acts committed in the name of anti-vivisectionism (car bombs etc) are terrorism, and principally no different in methodology to other forms of terrorism.

Not quite sure what your point is here, Sark. I was about to make the terrorism analogy until I read you'd already done it. Is getting their message into the media valid justification for what they do?

There are better ways to get people's attention - http://www.peta.org/feat/stateoftheunion/ (http://www.peta.org/feat/stateoftheunion/) - Warning, not safe for work (as it includes rude lady bits).

It may not give them credibility, but most people think of these people as weirdos anyway and they are ignored. These extremists just have a more physical method of putting their beliefs across that gain far more attention. I have thought about this before and I am divided over whether or not I support these actions.  It may be terrorism, but it is not terrorism in the conventional sense. It is hard for any of us to feel any sympathy with terrorists such as the 9/11 idiots, but I bet a lot of people will have a bit of sympathy for animal rights activists.

Peta is a great organisation and I donate to them and I also think this is the way to show support for animal rights, however there is a large body of people who feel that actions that are within the law move along too slowly. Their method of gaining attention is by more physical methods. It does gain public attention, but it is illegal. As a result it is wrong.

Wow .... Interesting beliefs.

So in your opinion taking of lives and destruction of property is acceptable on animal rights issues, but not on religeous ones ??

I would have thought that they were equally abhorrent.

Not a single bloody laugh!

Not taking lives. I am strongly against this in any way, even the death penalty for the most extreme criminals is wrong.

I am not in favour of any form of terrorism, but I can understand the viewpoints of the animal right activist when destroying Labs, etc. However, as I have no religious beliefs, I find it hard to understand the motivations behind those responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

I don't share the beliefs of animal rights activists, but I do respect that they should be allowed to have an opinion. It is like Booders thread the other day that touched on the BNP. I don't like the BNP, but people should not be condemned for supporting it.

Freedom of speech is what is all about  :D

Comedy's about timing flushie and you made a right dog dinner out of that one :)

But surely vivisectionists are allowed to have an opinion? Aren't they allowed to go about their business without having their offices firebombed, or death threats against their family?

LOL @ JungleCat

Really...I assumed he had died and started to stink in about an hour....

The fact that it was 10 days and not a matter of hours points to it being a flaw in procedure rather than malicious intent. Like I said way back in the thread, if it was routine to check kennels, as it is to check cells, then the oversight of any single officer wouldn't lead to a similar outcome.

I don't believe the officer should lose his/her job over this unless we're going to start applying the same standards across the board. May work on a theoretical level but not in the real world.

btw. I didn't think AndrewT's analogy with the mass slaughter of animals was silly at all. Far from it, smells of double standards and hypocrisy to say that an honest mistake should lead to someone losing their job/facing criminal charges and social stigma while munching on a mouthful of carcas.

True, I always find it a little puzzling that a lot of animal lovers also love to eat meat, and aren't bothered whether they eat free range eggs etc. I've been a veggie ever since I was 10, due to the cruel methods in factory farming etc - though that's another discussion altogether.

I think if animals are killed humanely in the name for food, then that's a different thing altogether than allowing an animal to starve to death in agony. There is no purpose behind the latter whereas at least the former is providing a 'use'...?

It was a mistake. A dreadful, tragic mistake. A tragic mistake & a non-tragic mistake begin with the same thing - poorly thought out or poorly implemented procedures.

That's all it was - a very tragic mistake.

Forgot retributuion - it won't stop it hapening again. Look at revising the procedures to ensure it never happens again.

A train driver passes a signal at Danger - a "SPAD" - & causes a crash. He made a mistake, that's all. Punish the offender if you want, but that won't prevent a repeat of the problem - Changing the system is the way to do that.

As to the poor, wretched dog - that's just a terrible way for a noble animal to die. Sacking the copper won't change that though.

 :goodpost: ;iagree;

If the cop's any kind of decent bloke he'll be punishing himself with the guilt of causing this.

He should, however, go through the police disciplinary procedures &, should the SSPCA decide a charge of cruelty is applicable, he should be charged.