Woman puts kitten in bin - it's ok it's not hurt!

Lesley wrote:
On 26 Aug, 15:18, Adrian wrote:

I'd like to know which bank Mary Bale works for so if she keeps her job
there people know to boycott it.


Royal Bank of Scotland and they have already said they would not
discipline her as she hadn't committed anything bad work related

Lesley

Slave of the Fabulous Furballs

Maybe they'll change their mind if they start losing customers.

--
Adrian (Owned by Bagheera & Shadow)
Cats leave pawprints on your heart
http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk

wrote:
jmcquown wrote:

I'd be delighted, too! That kitten was obviously looking for some headbutts
and scritches, extending a paw of friendship. Then this nutjob pretends to
be her friend and gets dumped in a trash bin. How cruel. And she has the
nerve to say she thought it was funny? She's a grown woman, not a kid
thinking this is cute. She knew better but she did it anyway.

Confession time. I once did something similar as a child. I was playing
with a boy down the street and we decided to put his dachsund in a hole
in the yard, which was used for weekly garbage collection. It had a heavy
metal lid with a pedal that you stepped on to open it. On that day, the
hole was empty and we thought it was funny to put his dog in there.

Before the lynch mob arrives, here are some important differences:

1. We didn't just dump him in and then go off and leave him there. We
continued playing in the yard and were going to take him out soon, but
my friend's mother came out and caught us, and that was that. It was a
mean thing to do, for sure, but at least the dog was unhurt, and I
definitely learned my lesson!

2. I WAS A CHILD. Not a 45-year-old adult. Sheesh.

Joyce


Stuff happens. I remember my little sister giving the cat a bath. I
dressed them up in baby clothes and rocked them back and forth. The
cats were probably psychotic by the time they died, but those were also
kid pranks. This woman was 45, seems to have some variety of aspergers'
syndrome, and knew what she was doing was wrong, or she wouldn't have
checked for witnesses before hand.

I don't agree with the death threats etc, but I do think that a public
outcry is needed to change the law so this sort of act is considered a
form of cruelty.

Pam S who also did childlike forms of animal torture, but was also a child.

Lesley wrote:

"MaryL" wrote:

And the fact the video clearly shows her looking around first also proves
(IMO) that it wasn't even a "spur of the moment" impulse.

She's trying to say she doesn't know what came over her but on the
video she clearly looks round to see if anyone is watching her so not
only was it not a spur of the moment thing but she plainly knew she
shouldn't be doing it!

The fact that she looked around to see if she was being observed shows
that she knew what she was doing was wrong, or would get her in trouble.
But I don't think it proves "premeditation". She could have had the
sudden urge to put the cat in the bin, and still known it was wrong.

Joyce

--
Once upon a time, the world was young and the words "mackerel" and
"pudding" existed far, far away from one another. One day, that all
changed. And then, whoever was responsible somehow thought the word
"fluffy" would help. -- Hilarious recipes at: www.candyboots.com

wrote in message
...
Debbie Wilson wrote:

wrote:

Why do they keep saying "she has not committed a criminal offence"? Are
they saying that this action doesn't constitute cruelty to animals?

That's all I can assume - it is probably up to the RSPCA to gather the
evidence to prosecute her, as they are the 'official' body. :-(

Sounds like it doesn't bode well, then. I gather from both you and
Christina that the RSPCA isn't well thought-of by people who have serious
concerns about animal welfare.

What people do not seem to realise is that the RSPCA is a charity. To
prosecute anyone for animal cruelty they have to take out a "private
prosecution" like any member of the public would have to do.
They portray themselves as "the animal police" but have no more powers that
I have myself. I think they've done this for so long now that even the
"real police" believe that they can just leave it to the RSPCA.
If the police say there is no crime committed here that they can act upon,
it's probably true. Throwing a cat into a wheelie bin where she might have
got crushed if the lorry had come along to collect it before she was found
*should* be a crime in my book.
It seems that under UK law as it stands atm, it isn't.
She's a bank clerk for the Royal Bank of Scotland - hmm, I bet they took her
off the front desk for now!!

Tweed

"outsider" wrote in message
...
wrote in
:

outsider wrote:

No one has taken the law into their own hands first of all.
Secondly the cat was in a bin in hot summer weather for hours and
she apparently crapped on herself. I guess some people would
consider that plenty hurt. If the owner had not heard the cat it
would be dead.

That's the thing - this cat was lucky, her people heard her crying and
found her. It could have ended much worse for her. So even if the
woman's actions didn't end up with a dead cat, she certainly
endangered the cat. That itself is a crime.

I have to agree with Cheryl that death threats aren't appropriate, but
I certainly understand the anger.

Joyce



Sad to say, making death threats is almost a hobby for some people these
days.

Death threats are not appropriate, of course, but I would certainly like her
punished in some way.
I'm not sure that under UK law as it stands that anyone can do anything
about it in any sort of legal way.
It does not seem to be a crime, but maybe if the police were pushed a lot
about it, they might find something to pin on her, in some obscure act of
the law.
For example, it is still (apparently) dodgy here to go out without money in
your pocket (Vagrancy Act from god knows when, never repealed)

When I used to take my elderly neighbour out she always insisted on putting
some coins in her pocket.

Tweed

Christina Websell wrote:

Death threats are not appropriate, of course, but I would certainly
like her punished in some way.

Public shame and embarrassment is a good punishment - and in this case,
it's *very* public. She doesn't appear to be shamed by it, but who knows?
If she did feel that way, would she say so?

Joyce

--
Taxes: Money you complain about giving the government, to pay for
services whose absence you would complain about. -- John O'Hanlon

"Donna M." wrote in
:

On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:29:04 -0500, MaryL wrote:

"Sharon & Smudgie" sharonand wrote in message
newsYyco.127342$Nu2.82590@hurricane...
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20100823/...-cctv-dumping-
kitten-870a197.html

I was disgusted by this. Poor little thing was there for 16 hours
before someone heard it and rescued it!

Sharon


What a scummy thing to do. They have good evidence--that video is
very clear, and it is also clear that the woman looked around several
times (undoubtedly to be sure that no one was watching) before
dumping the poor little kitty. I hope the publicity forces law
enforcement to take strong action and "throw the book at her," if
they were not going to do so originally. She is first shown petting
the cat as if to make friends, then deliberately dumping it in the
trash can. Poor little kitten.

MaryL

MaryL

This story made me want to throw that lady in a bin for 16 hours. Poor
little cat. Thank God the cat's owners got their kitty back.

Wanton cruelty is disgusting. I'm not sorry that she's facing some
backlash from animal lovers. It's good when karma kicks in almost
immediately -- the lesson stands a better chance of sticking that way.
Let her keep the @#$& away from cats (and any other creature that
can't defend itself) from now on.

Donna


Yep. I have less than zero sympathy for this piece of crap. This is not
something that just happened to her. This was not a fight that got out
of hand or anything that anyone helped cause but herself. It is, at
least, a small consolation to imagine that wherever she goes people will
point at her and ask how she would like to spend 14 hours in an airtight
box in the summer heat.

"Donna M." wrote in
:

His defense was that his sentence was stricter than the punishment of
some people who harmed a human being. But that was also a case of
abuse on a HUMAN, not just the dog. The dog had belonged to the
perpetrator's mother, and he hurt the dog to get back at his mother
for not letting him use her car. So basically, this guy was abusing
HIS OWN MOTHER as well as the dog. If he'd do something heinous to
lash out as his mother in any way possible, what would he be willing
to do to other people? Thank God he's slated to be off the streets for
nine years. Too bad it's not longer. I hope he flunks every parole
hearing and has to serve every last second of those nine years.

Anyway, I've got that story on the brain and it's a clear example of
why we need to take animal cruelty seriously as a society. There needs
to be a strict set of laws against cruelty to animals. This behavior
is unacceptable, to put it mildly.

Donna

Certain foul acts stand on their own without consideration of who or what
the victim was. Having said that I think hurting an animal carries more
onus than hurting a person in many respects since a person can, at least,
understand what is going on.

Christina Websell wrote:
"outsider" wrote in message
...
wrote in
:

outsider wrote:

No one has taken the law into their own hands first of all.
Secondly the cat was in a bin in hot summer weather for hours and
she apparently crapped on herself. I guess some people would
consider that plenty hurt. If the owner had not heard the cat it
would be dead.
That's the thing - this cat was lucky, her people heard her crying and
found her. It could have ended much worse for her. So even if the
woman's actions didn't end up with a dead cat, she certainly
endangered the cat. That itself is a crime.

I have to agree with Cheryl that death threats aren't appropriate, but
I certainly understand the anger.

Joyce


Sad to say, making death threats is almost a hobby for some people these
days.

Death threats are not appropriate, of course, but I would certainly like her
punished in some way.
I'm not sure that under UK law as it stands that anyone can do anything
about it in any sort of legal way.
It does not seem to be a crime, but maybe if the police were pushed a lot
about it, they might find something to pin on her, in some obscure act of
the law.
For example, it is still (apparently) dodgy here to go out without money in
your pocket (Vagrancy Act from god knows when, never repealed)

When I used to take my elderly neighbour out she always insisted on putting
some coins in her pocket.

Tweed



I fully expect that woman to become a pariah in her neighborhood. Would
you want to associate with her? Would you want to admit that you even
knew her? I can safely predict a lonely future for the stupid skank.

Pam S.

wrote in message
...
MatSav wrote:


wrote in message
...
...
What's CCTV, by the way? Is it a security camera installed on
private
property?

Closed Circuit TeleVision - a local circuit of cameras, monitors,
and recording equipment that doesn't "broadcast" - that is, it's
in a closed circuit, and images can't be seen by anyone who
doesn't have access to the circuit of cables (or wireless
network).

Yeah, I figured that's what it stood for. I've seen it mostly in office
buildings. I was just wondering whether it was on private property or
was some kind of public security (ie, spying) system installed by local
government. I found out the answer in a subsequent article on the
incident - this camera was on the property of the people where the cat
lives.

Joyce


And thank Bast they had it! Otherwise that woman would never have been
caught.

Jill