manxst Posted December 27, 2019 Share Posted December 27, 2019 4 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: Maybe he suggested to her lovingly that the next thing he'd be strangling would be her. In which case, don’t withdraw the complaint and get him put into Jurby (and possibly excluded off the IOM) with both a criminal damage charge as well as a threat to assault charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gettafa Posted December 28, 2019 Author Share Posted December 28, 2019 So purely as an academic exercise, what would be the parallel procedure if it had been a 3 1/2 year old child that was found strangled in the shed? (and wrapped up in a plastic bag and that) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted December 28, 2019 Share Posted December 28, 2019 9 hours ago, gettafa said: So purely as an academic exercise, what would be the parallel procedure if it had been a 3 1/2 year old child that was found strangled in the shed? (and wrapped up in a plastic bag and that) plastic bag ?? you need lessons, i can't smell anything yet and it's been almost 8 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
display name Posted December 28, 2019 Share Posted December 28, 2019 4 hours ago, WTF said: plastic bag ?? you need lessons, i can't smell anything yet and it's been almost 8 years. Did you use a bag for life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hissingsid Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 The police are now threatening anyone saying nasty things about the strangler with a call....he has been whining to them that he has been threatened. So watch what you say , unbelievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 5 hours ago, hissingsid said: The police are now threatening anyone saying nasty things about the strangler with a call....he has been whining to them that he has been threatened. So watch what you say , unbelievable. Not really. It's illegal to threaten people. It isn't (as far as I can tell) illegal to kill a dog. The charges were "destroying property, namely a dog" and "causing unnecessary suffering to an animal". The first of these would only apply if the owner of the dog (presumably the wife) was prepared to object in court to the destruction. And we know that she has withdrawn her consent on that. The second charge would be difficult to prove based purely on the death - otherwise vets would be unable to put down sick animals. 'Unnecessary suffering' is much easier to prove when it's prolonged, like keeping animals for a long time in unsuitable conditions. The police are only enforcing the law as it is. That said, the references to texts in the newspaper piece makes you wonder if a prosecution could have been brought based on the texts - and possibly for other charges if he was also threatening his wife. But I get the impression that the AG's Office aren't very comfortable with prosecutions that rely on electronic communications - or indeed anything that's a bit difficult or outside the usual way of operating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxst Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 from UK law, which I suspect is the same as our own in this matter: “Animal cruelty is a criminal offence. Allowing a dog to suffer unnecessarily could land you in prison for six months, a £20,000 fine, and a ban on keeping animals. Note: the government has announced its intentions to increase animal cruelty sentences to a maximum of five years in prison. Law: Animal Welfare Act 2006, section 4” from recollection of the news reports, it had already been proved that the dog had been strangled, and that there was damage consistent to being hit on its back? This would not be difficult to ‘prove’ has happened, and is not ‘prolonged’ as the above poster states. Why this can not proceed on animal cruelty charges, God only knows. (I appreciate that the criminal damage charge couldn’t go ahead due to the woman withdrawing any complaint). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 Is it a issue maybe, after she withdrew her statement , proving it was him that did it ?? I know its obvious he has but would it stand up in court ? Genuine question ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 6 minutes ago, Numbnuts said: Is it a issue maybe, after she withdrew her statement , proving it was him that did it ?? I know its obvious he has but would it stand up in court ? Genuine question ? Yes. No evidence it was him. Not even circumstantial. She is his wife. There are difficulties with evidence by wife against husband. It’s only voluntary. Can’t be compelled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 2 minutes ago, John Wright said: Yes. No evidence it was him. Not even circumstantial. She is his wife. There are difficulties with evidence by wife against husband. It’s only voluntary. Can’t be compelled. Figured that might be the case ..thanks John . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxst Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 53 minutes ago, John Wright said: Yes. No evidence it was him. Not even circumstantial. She is his wife. There are difficulties with evidence by wife against husband. It’s only voluntary. Can’t be compelled. How do you know what the text messages said that were stated by the press as having been sent by the husband to the wife, about killing the dog? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 8 minutes ago, manxst said: How do you know what the text messages said that were stated by the press as having been sent by the husband to the wife, about killing the dog? Having done jury service it would seem text messages are dismissed out of hand by the judiciary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxst Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 From IOM today.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxst Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 1 minute ago, finlo said: Having done jury service it would seem text messages are dismissed out of hand by the judiciary. Unbelievable. From the report it sounds like he’s either admitted to, or threatened the dog. And people think that’s inadmissible or ‘circumstantial’. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted December 30, 2019 Share Posted December 30, 2019 All such cases should be properly post-mortemed by a qualified vet... and if required then investigated fully by the police. Most killers start on animals. If any case fails on available evidence, fair enough. If not, continue to investigate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.