Naughty Nanna

[raptorrex]

Ha! How ridiculous.
I agree with the fine as she did break the law and that'll certainly make her think twice in future (ignorance is not a defence). But tagging her and imposing a curfew? Seriously... who spent 5 years and law school and then further years training to become a judge to give out that sort of sentence?!

And a second offence could result in prison...I mean err what... How about second offence = bigger fine and animal selling license taken away. But hey what do I know...lol.

ok so, what type of law breakers should be prosecuted? it seems she was known for selling to under16's. so, could be assumed to have been a repeat offender. though only one case was tried.

if fines, and sanctions, were used like this more often. greedy unscrupulous LFS/petshop owners might, actually, follow the law. she got caught, deal with it. or else, don't break the law. simple's really.

here's to a few more copping it! well done magistrates.

Bright spark..

It's more the fact that they felt the need to tag her which is the issue. You might not have been able to see that though, so high on your horse.

who is on a high horse?
she was found guilty, and given a sentence. nothing unusual. the sanctions were laid down, by law, not by the judge. he just decided which were appropriate.

the high horse is used by those, who feel they are better placed to judge her, than the court system.
her fine was 1 /20th of the maximum, so not too bad. tagging would only be used. if, other, sanctions could not be applied.

if she had followed the law, she would be in the clear. and the excuse "they looked old enough". is no excuse or mitigation. neither should it be. as an ex pub landlord, i knew i was responsible for policing the licensing act. as such, even if they look 40, should they turn out to be 17, i had to take the fall (never did though).

she said in an interview she was always careful about selling to children

so careful in fact, that her trading had been brought to the attention of the council. and yes that would have been mentioned, in court, during the hearing. she was not the butt of some one off "sting". designed to catch unwary traders, she was specifically targeted.

 

[WILDER]

If you break the law you should be prepared to take the punishment.
If you can't do the time don't do the crime. LOL.

 

[dave_oddballs]

anybody is equally placed if not better placed than a judge, everyone and anyone can make a judgement on a 'crime' be it right or wrong, the judge did it, because in his position you'd feel the need to. but this is definitely not the right situation to start making examples of people, nor is it the right kind of people.
if the law was so strict on the selling of animals to people under the age of 16 you'd of thought this was for the animals welfare right?
but its not against the law to keep a fish in a tub if you want to, who would back that in court? the judge who tagged an oap for selling a goldfish to a 15 year old?
its a joke, some 15 year olds and less would take much better care of a fish than people above the legal age.

there is fairgrounds all over the country still, that give goldfish to anyone, in fact last year i watched a fair ground attendant pass a goldfish to a girl in a pram, now is it me or would that fella be facing the death sentence or what?

which ever way you put it, or what ever point your trying to prove, the policing in this country is a disgrace, and for the policing industry and courts (well us tax payers actually) to spend the amount of money that it takes to do these 'stings' is simply pathetic, no wonder this country is going to poo.
and you getting on your vertically unchallenged donkey because some one disagrees with the result of this incident is simply stupid.

 

[Curiosity101]

Different paper
Also the cockateil must've been pretty bad to have to have been put down.

Thanks Peggers

Though there is a worrying phrase along these lines 'let this be a message to all other pets shops'. I might be completely reading too much into it, but it makes it sound like they think this was a particularly severe punishment and that they wouldn't be giving equivalent sentences out to other people.

 

[stoneagedinosaur]

Just to spark a bit more debate... what about winning goldfish at the funfair? How often do they get tagged / prosecuted? (The funfair folk - not the fish ) Hugley cruel and still goes on for some reason

Oops Dave - just saw that you just wrote that! Valid points tho

 

[dave_oddballs]

i think thats the point we are making, yes, as said 'if you can't do the time, don't do the crime' its right everyone and anyone who breaks the law should be punished, but in this case its just excessive, its like they was making an example of her and the situation when i don't agree this should be, there are far worse crimes going on of which people are let off very lightly.

 

[WILDER]

A Judge did not hand this sentence down, the Magistrates Court did. Magistrates are not Judges or lawyers they are normal people from the community like you or I.

The £1,000 was for selling to an underage person - completely acceptable punishment for such an offence. She was then also found guilty (by her peers in the community) of cruelty to animals - that is what the curfew is for. Being found guilty of cruelty to animals is usually punished with a prison sentence, hence the curfew. The Magistrates didn't want to send this old lady to prison so they opted for the curfew instead. 7 weeks on curfew or 7 weeks in prison - you decide?

 

[raptorrex]

you getting on your vertically unchallenged donkey because some one disagrees with the result of this incident is simply stupid.

you see, I'm not the one on a high horse. i mealy said i agreed with the punishment. the ones making the noise, are those who disagree with me, and the Magistrates.

the punishment was fair, especially considering the evidence in the extra link provided. imo, the reason this country is going to the gutter. is because so many think only, certain laws, should apply, and then, only to a defined section of society.
Laws apply to all, as do punishments.

 

[kelly528]

While I think a 200 pound fine plus fines for the cruelty towards the cockatiel would be sufficient, is it really necessary to squander 20 000 pounds on prosecuting this low life? After hearing what happened to the poor cockatiel as well as how she sold a goldfish of all fish without advising on proper care I won't be shedding any tears for this witch but the money they are wasting by tagging her is kind of sad.

The law about not selling pets to the underaged also seems a bit bass-ackwards... 75% of the time it is ignorant parents buying a goldfish and a bowl to teach their kids 'responsibility'.

With any luck any other owners running seedy pet stores will be scared straight by this story.

 

[spectrum]

I'm 14 and have been to buy fish unaccompanied Does that make me a criminal as well or is it just the shop that sold to me?

I think a fine for poor conditions in which the cockatiel was living is fair, but a tag for an old lady for such a minor offence is ridiculous.

 

[plecoperson]

She seemed to be relying on the fact that she is a great gran to excuse her behaviour. I would rather have seen her put in prison for 7 weeks. From what I understand the cockatiel had a broken leg and other issues and was still on sale. She shouldn't be anywhere near animals let alone advising other people on the care of animals. It's her responsibilty to make sure the animals in her shop are fit for sale and those buying animals are over 16. That's the law whether she likes it or not. What other sick animals and dodgy practices might be goinng on in her shop?

 

[raptorrex]

The law about not selling pets to the underaged also seems a bit bass-ackwards... 75% of the time it is ignorant parents buying a goldfish and a bowl to teach their kids 'responsibility'.

then, vote, if you are old enough. insist that this law is repealed. until then, its the law, whatever your view. lol, all the woman needed to do, was make sure some "Ignorant Parents" where in the shop, when she sold the fish. too greedy to wait, would be my guess.

but you make a good point. I'm a fan of licensing, all keepers should have one. then, the responsibility is ours. and "Ignorant Parents" cant buy fish (without one) for their Ignorant Children.

 

[dave_oddballs]

A Judge did not hand this sentence down, the Magistrates Court did. Magistrates are not Judges or lawyers they are normal people from the community like you or I.

The £1,000 was for selling to an underage person - completely acceptable punishment for such an offence. She was then also found guilty (by her peers in the community) of cruelty to animals - that is what the curfew is for. Being found guilty of cruelty to animals is usually punished with a prison sentence, hence the curfew. The Magistrates didn't want to send this old lady to prison so they opted for the curfew instead. 7 weeks on curfew or 7 weeks in prison - you decide?

i know the magistrates courts like the back of my hand, and personally know a JUDGE that works at lancaster magistrates court in the next city to me. JUDGES DO 'JUDGE' in magistrates courts. the jury are members of the public.

you getting on your vertically unchallenged donkey because some one disagrees with the result of this incident is simply stupid.

you see, I'm not the one on a high horse. i mealy said i agreed with the punishment. the ones making the noise, are those who disagree with me, and the Magistrates.

the punishment was fair, especially considering the evidence in the extra link provided. imo, the reason this country is going to the gutter. is because so many think only, certain laws, should apply, and then, only to a defined section of society.
Laws apply to all, as do punishments.

"the reason this country is going to the gutter. is because so many think only, certain laws, should apply"

no, the reason why only 'certain' laws are applied is because of the courts, they are the ones who dismiss cases, not me or members of the public, as i said i know a lad who nearly beat a guy to death and got tagged for 6 months, i know a lad who lives in the next city who got found guilty of death by dangerous driving, killed a two year old kid, he didn't have a license and was speeding through a housing estate, he got community service.
is that your idea of justice? and the courts spend money and time on a granny who sold a fish to a kid and had a cockateil in bad condition?

now thats a joke.

 

[meguro]

The article I read said that the son, Mark, sold the goldfish, not the old lady. She recieved a fine for that offense because she is co-owner.

 

[Tom499]

What kind of ID do 16 year olds have these days? I had nothing till I got my drivers licence at 17.

A sad case really, very unlucky to get caught. Shame they couldn't try this at pets at home instead, they could actually make a difference then.