|
Post by brandykins on Jul 14, 2012 13:18:35 GMT
Hope they boot out that BCC at the next election!
|
|
|
Post by parsonsmum on Jul 14, 2012 13:19:12 GMT
Channel4 have said if they receive enough emails wanting BCC to be investigated, they will consider it. Send an email to....
despatches@channel4.co.uk
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2012 15:21:06 GMT
Will do Parsonsmum... ..xxx
|
|
|
Post by parsonsmum on Jul 14, 2012 16:58:08 GMT
Oooops1 Sorry I think I got the email addy wrong I'm trying to find out what it is....... Spelling mistake dispatches@channel4.co.uk
|
|
|
Post by brandykins on Jul 14, 2012 18:12:22 GMT
Thank you Sharon. I saw this somewhere earlier on and I forgot to take the e-mail addy! So I will now send in an e-mail to them!
Take care:)
|
|
|
Post by hooch on Jul 15, 2012 0:00:41 GMT
i`ve gone to reply on this thread so many times, hit the reply button then deleted my posts because i just don`t know how to get myself across without coming across as nasty anyway , i have come across this 11 second clip tonight which does show lennox 'snapping' at one of his assessors s1119.photobucket.com/albums/k623/truthordare1/?action=view¤t=c0006a53.mp4&newest=1also another factor , the first ever assessor brought in by the family , madeleine forsyth , her evidence against lennox was so damning the family couldn`t use it in court , they were forced to suppress it. here are her credentials. personally i think this whole case is one big fat mess , and has done much more harm than good. i totally support the abolishing of BSL what i don`t support and condone is the threats to harm human life , lennox was one dog among many awaiting a decision and i can`t help but think this will lead to more doggie deaths than people can actually save
|
|
|
Post by parsonsmum on Jul 15, 2012 9:11:20 GMT
I've watched that clip a few times, and it's difficult to see exactly what's going on. Yes Lennox did snap but there are other clips of Lennox with that assessor, which clearly shows him taunting Lennox with treats trying to get him to react. I agree with you the whole thing is a big mess and it's for that reason the BCC need to be investigated. It's immoral and unethical way they have gone about things in their treatment of Lennox. If we, joe public following all this on-line, can read about the familys 1st assessor and her damning report.......why wasn't this brought out in court? The judge could have ruled she testify it wound have been in BCCs interest to do so? Why were the Barnes family denied any visits to Lennox, not allowed to have his body for burial? Could it be that Lennox was in such an unhealthy state after being in the 'care' of BCC for so long? That a skin condition the family treated and kept under control had been allowed to manifest itself in huge bald areas on Lennox with open sores? That his nail bed was bleeding? That he had a wound on his neck?
|
|
|
Post by hooch on Jul 15, 2012 9:49:59 GMT
If we, joe public following all this on-line, can read about the familys 1st assessor and her damning report.......why wasn't this brought out in court? The judge could have ruled she testify it wound have been in BCCs interest to do so? Why were the Barnes family denied any visits to Lennox, not allowed to have his body for burial? Could it be that Lennox was in such an unhealthy state after being in the 'care' of BCC for so long? That a skin condition the family treated and kept under control had been allowed to manifest itself in huge bald areas on Lennox with open sores? That his nail bed was bleeding? That he had a would on his neck? i can only put forward the 'facts' as i find them. from what i have read , the barnes family chose to suppress the evidence of the first assessment in court , why ? because madeleine forsyth deemed him to be unpredicatble. as for not being allowed to see lennox , UK law is quite clear. www.direct.gov.uk/en/homeandcommunity/inyourhome/animalsandpets/dogs/dg_180098the barnes family have been treated no differently to anyone else who had their dog seized.
|
|
|
Post by brandykins on Jul 15, 2012 10:00:12 GMT
Still don't believe BCC did right by Lennox! Their so-called "expert", according to what I've read, had no qualifications and that Dog Warden committed perjury. I am with the owners in this case! I sent in an e-mail to Channel 4 and hope they do investigate. I would put a lot of doubts to rest and, hopefully, bring out the real truth! www.northcountrygazette.org/2012/07/14/tallack_shakedown/There are families where I live here in Johnstone who have American Pit Bull Terriers and they are allowed to keep them, as long as when they are out they are muzzled and not off lead. They are beautiful animals. There are loads of pit bulls here and Staffies but never heard of any problems with them, except for the two that attacked Loki a few years ago - and that was down to the irresponsible owners who let them both out in their garden and both jumped the hedge!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2012 10:26:21 GMT
The truth will come out in the end...and the BCC will get whats comming to them!!...the most important thing here is Lennox was not being looked after properly...the people looking after him at the council pound...im sure were told of his skin condition...why was he not treated for that!!...and what about his neck and paw so many questions need answered...should their not been an indpendent vet making sure he was being taken care of...
|
|
|
Post by parsonsmum on Jul 15, 2012 10:30:04 GMT
Sorry I wasn't aware of this ruling. So why didn't the court issue a subpoena to get Madeleine Forsyth into court to reveal her findings? The thing is now, there's so much about this case, flying around on the web, and as far as I know none of us know the family or knew Lennox, to be making any judgements really. Whether the right course of action was taken with Lennox is still very debatable. From my point of view, the whole case was badly conducted and there needs to be an enquiry into BCCs handling of it.........the public need to know. I've watched that clip again and as I see it........ Lennox is onlead, is approached by the assessor with a treat and he turns his head away towards the wall. The assessor then moves nearer to Lennox.......the dog is trapped. Not really surprising that he lunged
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2012 11:34:07 GMT
I would like to know why owners of dogs that are seized are not allowed to visit them and make sure they are being looked after...a murder in prison are allowed visitors...why not these poor dogs...so so unjust from start to finish... ..xx
|
|
|
Post by hooch on Jul 15, 2012 11:51:35 GMT
see this is where the whole thing is wrong , the family would like everyone to believe their side of the whole case and their side only , yet in reality they have been treated no differently to anyone else that has had their dog seized, those are the facts as i know them, under UK law. see , i view the clip very , very differently , 3 minutes prior to that Lennox was quite happily sitting accepting treats from his assessor his family appointed which is a 3 minute video readily available on the internet which was infact leaked, his assessor carries on with the positive reinforcement and treats then attempts to grab lennox`s lead, which is met with a lunge, then a snap which quite clearly unnerves both his assessor and the dog warden responsible for overseeing his care, shortly after that, i am lead to believe by some that was when the assessment stopped, whether that is actually the case , remains to be seen because i don't know and can`t honestly say whether that is the case at all. what i can tell you is [which is merely my own opinion and no one elses] no `bombproof` dog would resort to such behaviour in such a short space of time, yet that clip would have been when he was being medicated with amitriptyline to help keep him calm , so what was he really like prior to being medicated with this drug ? no one can honestly say can they i don`t `buy` the families stories sorry i don`t , there are so many holes in their story and so many facts that they`ve hid from the public
|
|
|
Post by hooch on Jul 15, 2012 11:53:29 GMT
I would like to know why owners of dogs that are seized are not allowed to visit them and make sure they are being looked after...a murder in prison are allowed visitors...why not these poor dogs...so so unjust from start to finish... ..xx because that`s the law whether we like it or not.
|
|
|
Post by parsonsmum on Jul 15, 2012 12:53:47 GMT
That's fair enough. I don't know much about the family or where their story falls down........so I can't really comment on that. Surely that's another reason that there should be an investigation, so BOTH sides can be aired.
|
|