RTA casualty pickup?

Wapinschaw

Well-Known Member
There is no detail of deer species


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...London-suburb-and-eating-it-at-Christmas.html


The report states that he "sliced the deer's throat": Halal slaughter? The World Animal Protection UK (Never heard of them) statement links this to poaching, if it was an RTA casualty (there is no suggestion that he was involved in the RTA that injured it) then how is it a wildlife crime i.e. poaching?

I can only think that the guy was prosecuted because according to the report he took it away alive and killed it away from where it was found. If he had killed it on the spot would that still be an offence?
 
Last edited:
There was never ever going to be a prison sentence , there were a lot more options, seizing the car
 
The thread covering this is still rinning in the "Deer Stalking" section titled "Halal Venison" so I'm not bothering to post much on this thread. All I will add on this thread is that if post 20 by Sle on the "Halal Venison" thread is correct (I know nothing about the area but I have no reason to disbelieve Sle) and the land where he shot the animal with an air rifle is owned by the council then there is a very good chance that he did not have permission to shoot there - If this is correct then I am struggling to understand why he was not charged with "Armed Trespass".
 
I tend to agree FB, although maybe the CPS thought that it might be difficult to prove armed trespass?

he said on Facebook that he shot the deer with an air rifle, but that's the only proof we have that that is how he incapacitated it.

i understand that part of his defence in court was that he found the deer already injured, so all he would have to do in court would be to retract his Facebook statement (ie say he was just showing off and didn't actually shoot it), and armed trespass would be prettying unprovable, unless there was further evidence of it....
 
I tend to agree FB, although maybe the CPS thought that it might be difficult to prove armed trespass?

he said on Facebook that he shot the deer with an air rifle, but that's the only proof we have that that is how he incapacitated it.

i understand that part of his defence in court was that he found the deer already injured, so all he would have to do in court would be to retract his Facebook statement (ie say he was just showing off and didn't actually shoot it), and armed trespass would be prettying unprovable, unless there was further evidence of it....
I understand what you are saying and that there might be things that we don't know about or that weren't made "public knowledge" so it might be best that I don't say any more on the matter
 
A small matter but the deer is the property of the land owner on which it is at the time. If it was on the road or verge then it is most likely the property of the county highways or local highways. This could be where the poaching element comes from.
If he was to put the animal down humanely he could use a knife, hammer etc. but it should have been done at the time and site of location not have its suffering continued by removing to another location.
 
What's the pitcher of a red woodland stag for ?surely he didn't put that in the back of a nissan Micra lol
 
Last edited:
Back
Top