Starve a dog and pay only $1750

weeziepops 19 July 2012 32

The Canberra Times reports that a Canberra woman has been fined $1,750 in relation to animal cruelty and neglect.

Over a period of time the RSPCA sought to assist the woman to care for the animal appropriately, ultimately leading to a decision to take the dog from her.

Seeing the pictures of the animal, its condition is apalling – emaciated seems like an understatement and it must have taken some time to get to that state. I am wondering – if this woman is receiving government benefits, will she have to pay the fine from that or use it as an excuse to get out of paying this pathetically low sum of money?

She cites mental illness as a reason for her cruelty so perhaps court ordered counselling might also ensure she understands her responsibility for this crime. In any case, I think the $1,750 should go to the RSPCA and she should be banned from ever owning another pet.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
32 Responses to Starve a dog and pay only $1750
Filter
Order
Tooks Tooks 7:19 am 21 Jul 12

EvanJames said :

If it was a kid, citing “mental illness” wouldn’t get her out of it, so I am buggered if I know why an animal that depends on her is different. It’s a shame the RSPCA didn’t take stronger action sooner. That poor animal, day after day after day, jesus.

Many a parent has gotten off on mental illness grounds for mistreating kids.

NoImRight NoImRight 4:15 pm 20 Jul 12

The RSPCA arent Police. They dont have magical powers of adjucation that lets them stroll in and out of peoples house snatching animals and meting on punishments based on their fancy.

longshanks longshanks 4:03 pm 20 Jul 12

weeziepops said :

It’s interesting how often people require those with strong views about a specific issue to justify what they do for the greater good. Suffice to say that I am confident I do more than the average bear in contributing to the battle against child abuse, famine, social inequity and (of course going by my original post) animal cruelty.

I don’t think you read my comment carefully – I wasn’t talking about preventing child abuse/famine/etc. I was talking about your feelings towards those who harm other people, as opposed to those who harm animals.

Canberra’s a pretty quiet and protected place, but we do get the occasional murder (well, manslaughter anyway), numerous serious assaults, we get child neglect and abuse, we get drunken/criminal/recidivist drivers killing pedestrians and other drivers – in short, there’s a certain amount of human suffering in this town, a lot of which is caused by other humans. And then there’s the rest of the world, where there’s more, and worse.

Now, you have taken quite a bit of time to unleash your anger and indignation at the actions of Mrs Ward, who is without doubt not in the best mental or physical health (and I’m not saying that this is an excuse, mind – just that it forms part of the facts of this case.) So my question is this – do you spend a similar amount of time being angry and indignant at those who cause human misery, suffering and death in Canberra and throughout the world? Or could it be that in your eyes, mistreating an animal is actually a more serious affair?

colourful sydney racing identity colourful sydney racing identity 3:38 pm 20 Jul 12

farnarkler said :

Kellie Ward of Ainslie. Prime candidate for a king hit.

Assaulting women. Brave.

Holden Caulfield Holden Caulfield 3:35 pm 20 Jul 12

weeziepops said :

And “pseudo death threats”? Puh-leeze.

Well, what would call this, given the current news from Sydney?

farnarkler said :

Kellie Ward of Ainslie. Prime candidate for a king hit.

Androyd Androyd 3:15 pm 20 Jul 12

Weezie @22 – good to hear your compassion spreads widely, keep it up! Jethro @23 – possibly a fair point there. I agree it’s not an either/or issue, i guess just my own personal view is that preventable human suffering is much worse than preventable canine suffering. But others will have their own take on this…

weeziepops weeziepops 12:46 pm 20 Jul 12

When someone harms someone you love and cries “duress” I am sure you will jump pretty quickly off your high horse when it comes to sympathy, Holden. And “pseudo death threats”? Puh-leeze.

Holden Caulfield Holden Caulfield 12:09 pm 20 Jul 12

Ms Ward, reportedly under duress at the time of the mistreatment of her pet, has accepted the blame, faced the courts, copped a fine and agreed to never own a pet again.

Yet, the people wanting sympathy for the dog, a perfectly honourable aim, are showing none for Ms Ward. Worse, in some cases, those fighting for the welfare of the dog have gone as far as to make pseudo death threats against Ms Ward, who, I’ll repeat again, was unwell at the time of her wrongdoings.

Now, I’m guessing nobody here has actually had access to read and understand Ms Ward’s medical reports, so how about you take some of the compassion shown to the dog and extend it to a fellow human being.

There’s this thing called society. Some of you would do well to understand how it is supposed to work.

candelabra candelabra 11:32 am 20 Jul 12

Anyone who does that to a living creature they have responsibility for is scum. DO NOT get a pet if you can’t care for it and don’t know if its hungry!

Jethro Jethro 6:58 am 20 Jul 12

Androyd said :

Sorry Weezie, I’m with Longshanks at #18. I’m not favouring animal cruelty by any means, but if you’re this motivated about a Canberra puppy, i hope you’re sparing a thought for child famine victims in the sahel and other actual people. After all, “it’s a smaller step than you might think” from a puppy to a child, apparently.

So…. no-one should care about any other issues until famine in Africa is solved for good? We need people who care about all things in our society that need improving.

weeziepops weeziepops 6:06 am 20 Jul 12

It’s interesting how often people require those with strong views about a specific issue to justify what they do for the greater good. Suffice to say that I am confident I do more than the average bear in contributing to the battle against child abuse, famine, social inequity and (of course going by my original post) animal cruelty.

Androyd Androyd 11:13 pm 19 Jul 12

Sorry Weezie, I’m with Longshanks at #18. I’m not favouring animal cruelty by any means, but if you’re this motivated about a Canberra puppy, i hope you’re sparing a thought for child famine victims in the sahel and other actual people. After all, “it’s a smaller step than you might think” from a puppy to a child, apparently.

EvanJames EvanJames 8:37 pm 19 Jul 12

weeziepops said :

Not double standards at all. She deliberately owned a pet which she mistreated. She didn’t accidentally injure it. She starved it. She had help from the RSPCA and she starved that dog.

And I bet her mental problems didn’t prevent her from ensuring that SHE ate. And if her mental problems were so profound, why the flap didn’t the RSPCA bloody do something sooner? There’s two wrongs here. Was the RSPCA being all PC because she had mental problems? I have a massive problem with that, their focus should be the welfare of animals, not people. That poor bloody dog.

bundah bundah 7:19 pm 19 Jul 12

Is it not the responsibility of the RSPCA to immediately remove animals from an irresponsible owner once it has been established that cruelty is apparent??

longshanks longshanks 6:55 pm 19 Jul 12

weeziepops said :

Boo, Holden – this person deserves no sympathy and no second chance. If the dog survives this abuse it will suffer from health problems, physical and mental, for the rest of its life. Would you have compassion for this poor soul if it had been a child? It’s a smaller step than you might think.

Hey weeziepops, you might not know, but we do actually live in a world where children are treated this badly. Worse in fact.

I mean sure, let’s feel sorry for the dog and all. But let’s try and keep a sense of perspective shall we?

Out of interest, given your response to this situation, how much time, energy and indignant anger and judgement do you direct at those who are responsible for the deaths of millions of people? Or do you genuinely feel more compassion for this dog than for the thousands of children currently starving to death throughout the world? (Of course, most of them are black, and not in our backyard, and even if they were they wouldn’t have the cute factor of an ill-treated animal. But still – as kids they surely have some appeal?)

Just wondering…

farnarkler farnarkler 6:53 pm 19 Jul 12

Kellie Ward of Ainslie. Prime candidate for a king hit.

Holden Caulfield Holden Caulfield 5:19 pm 19 Jul 12

weeziepops said :

Not double standards at all.

Nah, ‘course not.

weeziepops weeziepops 5:05 pm 19 Jul 12

Not double standards at all. She deliberately owned a pet which she mistreated. She didn’t accidentally injure it. She starved it. She had help from the RSPCA and she starved that dog.

Holden Caulfield Holden Caulfield 5:00 pm 19 Jul 12

weeziepops said :

Boo, Holden – this person deserves no sympathy and no second chance. If the dog survives this abuse it will suffer from health problems, physical and mental, for the rest of its life. Would you have compassion for this poor soul if it had been a child? It’s a smaller step than you might think.

Okay, I’ve no dramas at all with the sympathy for the dog, which we now understand is on the way to recovery thanks to the RSPCA.

Yet, if we take the CT article at face value, the defendant was involved in a car accident and has subsequently suffered mental health issues for 18 months. Yet, according to you, she deserves no sympathy or understanding that her health concerns could have contributed to her mistreatment of the dog.

Double standards much?

Jethro Jethro 4:46 pm 19 Jul 12

“Over a period of time the RSPCA sought to assist the woman to care for the animal appropriately.”

So they new the animal was being mistreated but let her keep it anyway? Surely this could have been avoided if they had properly intervened earlier.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site