Monday, 20 September 2010

Mary Bale Charged with Animal Cruelty

A bit of moderately good news is the 'cat bin woman' Mary Bale has now been charged with animal cruelty. Bale has been charged with causing “unnecessary suffering to a cat” as well as “of not providing the animal with a suitable environment” - you don't say!

The investigation has been carried out by a charity, the RSPCA, because clearly it is not the police's job to investigate crime. No, clearly it is a non-profit charity that is funded by donations job to investigate crimes – wouldn't want to divert tax money from defending our corporate masters, would we now?

Hell, as far as the police are concerned throwing a cat in the bin isn't even against the law! As a police spokesperson put it at the time “we have not arrested the woman because she has not committed a criminal offence.” But then again neither is it a criminal offence for man to hit a woman with a baton or kill a newspaper seller when it comes to the cops, so no wonder they are so confused about the law. Poor things!

Anyway, now all that is left is for some Magistrate or Judge to dish out some insignificant slap on the wrist and  everyone will be happy, right?! Don't you just love our justice system?


  1. Actually it's useful for the RSPCA to prosecute because it can result in jail time and they can prevent her keeping a pet.
    I don't know what the woman being hit by baton or murdering newspaper sellers is about but both of those things would be against the law >>

  2. @ Anonymous

    The article is not suggesting it is not useful for the RSPCA to prosecute, it is suggesting it would not be necessary if the police enforced the law and conducted a proper investigation into this crime. Of course, in the absence of any law enforcement body the RSPCA is very necessary.

    The woman being hit by a baton and the murder of a newspaper sellers refers to the actions of the police at the G20 – where the officers got off scout free.

  3. What is also unacceptable is that the RSPCA is a charity. This is wrong for both sides. First of all very poor people and the elderly are pressurised into giving money to the RSPCA to enforce the law. People who care about other animals therefore pay twice for law enforcement once in taxes and again to charity. Secondly the RSPCA are not an impartial organisation, how the hell are a charity involved directly in law enforcement even to the point of interviewing and prosecuting suspects? (I know that the police are not impartial,but surely the law is the law as we are often told, surely their role is to enforce it?)
    I think that the RSPCA should stick to homing animals and advice and stop dumping animals on small local charities/sanctuaries who are struggling to cope. The inspectors should either be some sort of specialist police unit paid for by the state or advisors. It's ridiculous to have to fork out for a charity to do police work a bit like the NSPCC having to fund a child rape case.
    I also think whilst this case is obviously appalling that it is regrettably nothing compared to what happens to cats in labs or when they are used to train up fighting dogs. They were right to prosecute this but it is a sad reflection that so many people have vent their spleen at a sad middle aged woman who is being dealt with and punished rather than hunting, the meat industry, vivisection ad infinitum. Mary Bale is a convienient distraction as a hate figure, personally I think that there are far more important targets.

  4. I do think police women are more cockier than the men... I had one the other day with her other woman (arrogant) collegue, and they just looked snarky and sniggered.

    I like your referral to baton and woman. I would love to go around domestic voilence orientated places, and ask them if they think this is a crime!


Please leave a message after the tone...