Huntsman cleared of GBH

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Syl wrote:

Does this suit you better?

Taken from IFAW...International fund for animal welfare

"Isn’t it easy for hunts to say they killed a fox ‘by accident’ whilst trail hunting?

Under the cover of the false alibi of trail hunting, unfortunately yes. However, if video evidence is obtained of the hunt’s behaviour during the alleged accident, it is possible to prove that it was not really an accident. If hunts are exercising their hounds or following a scent, and the hounds follow a fox, then the hunts must call the hounds back. The control of hounds is a crucial point. The whippers-in, the hunt master and others are responsible for the hounds and they must be controlled either by whip, horn, or voice command. Hunts that allow their hounds to follow a fox are breaking the law."

curious how no one's been prosecuted under the anti hunting legislation, it's almost as if it was designed to be unenforceable.

Syl wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
curious how no one's been prosecuted under the anti hunting legislation, it's almost as if it was designed to be unenforceable.

Or for  fox hunting....some very powerful people take part in hunting though don't they?

magica wrote:He  probably got away with it as the judge could be a fox hunter too.  Bet they're Masons aswell.

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Syl wrote:

The Devil, You Know wrote:
curious how no one's been prosecuted under the anti hunting legislation, it's almost as if it was designed to be unenforceable.

Or for  fox hunting....some very powerful people take part in hunting though don't they?

no, the legislation was deliberately made unworkable by blair and only included as a sop to the left of the labour party.

Tommy Monk wrote:Not a lot for fox hunting though...


Your link only lists a handful of cases... and only half are fox hunts....