RSPB Press release:
RSPB Scotland has expressed its frustration and disappointment after another prosecution of an individual charged with alleged wildlife crime offences was discontinued by the Crown Office in Scotland.
The latest case began on 9th July 2015 when RSPB Scotland staff, walking on the Brewlands Estate in Glen Isla, Angus, discovered an illegally set spring trap placed on top of a pheasant carcass that had, in turn, been placed a post just a few metres inside a pheasant pen. The trap was in effect a baited “pole trap”, which has been illegal since 1904, and is designed to snap shut and break the legs of a bird of prey, holding the victim until it can be dispatched by the trap operator.
The RSPB team, having no mobile phone signal to allow contact with the police, made the trap safe to ensure no birds would be caught. They then deployed a video camera focussed on the area, with a view to securing the evidence until the police could attend and recover the trap.
A few days later, RSPB Scotland staff accompanied a police wildlife crime officer to the scene, where it was found that the trap had been reset. The police seized the trap as evidence, and the camera was recovered.
Review of the footage filmed by the camera showed an individual resetting the trap twice in the days after which it had been found. On the first occasion it was set, it was seen to later fall off the pheasant bait and trigger itself.
The footage was passed to the police, who subsequently identified the individual setting the trap, and who later charged him with four alleged offences, contrary to the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981, and sent a report to the Procurator Fiscal, who marked the case for prosecution.
The case was first called, at Forfar Sheriff Court, on 31st March 2016, with subsequent hearings on 22nd April and 12th May 2016, during which the accused plead not guilty to the charges libelled. Following two further hearings, the Crown Office Procurator Fiscal Service recently notified RSPB Scotland that following consideration of the case by Crown Counsel, the prosecution could not rely on the RSPB video evidence and would be discontinued. No reason for this decision was provided. The case had been scheduled for a trial beginning on 15th May 2017.
RSPB Scotland’s Head of Species and Land Management, Duncan Orr-Ewing said: “For one case, where there was excellent video evidence to support the prosecution, to be discontinued inexplicably by the Crown Office so close to the trial was baffling. For a second case to be discontinued, again with no explanation from the Crown Office, and again without the opportunity for the evidence to be tested in court, is deeply concerning, and significantly undermines our confidence in the ability of Scotland’s justice system to bear down on the criminals who continue to target our protected birds of prey.”
Ends
[registration_form]
Unbelievable…. Now its clear why Lochhead needed to get up during question time!
COPFS is becoming an embarrassment…. just let the COURT decide.
Following on from the Cabrach video effidence,this is quite unbelievable, smacks of a coverup from by the Establishment. Most interesting this incident was an item on the BBC1 Scottish News just before 7am this morning but was not on the next bulletin just before 7:30, obviously the Establishment had got to the BBC in the intervening time!
Not much more that can be said about this case and the Hen Harrier shooting last week.
But spare a thought for the incredible RSPB Investigations Team. They work tirelessly to get these cases to this stage, and to have them dismissed like this must be soul destroying. Keep up the fantastic work. Let’s get behind them and give them our support. #wewillwin
I met one of them a few years ago..absolutely determined despite being deeply frustrated and angry. On top of it all RSPB field staff of all descriptions are regularly ridiculed and derided (without any evidence why?) by the brotherhood of bile. Disgusting what they have to put up with.
With video footage so clearly indicating criminality isn’t it time to stop talking about “alleged crime” and start referring to “alleged inadmissibility” instead? Forget murderous crimes, footage like this is regularly used to convict in cases of petty property crime the only distinction seems to be that in one case the accused (or their associates) can afford QCs and the other cannot. The partisanship of the system is a disgrace.
It’s time to start sacking corrupt judges. You can’t have rich posh toffs judging other rich posh toffs. It’s the same as having car thieves trying car thieves.
Perverse though Judges – and juries – sometimes appear from a seat in the Clapham omnibus, these cases are not getting as far as judgement, but are stymied by people paid from the public purse who are pre-judging the outcomes. Instructed by persons unknown.
Agreed, Filbert. It is very frustrating that the evidence does not get as far as being tested in a Court of Law.
I would like to see the RSPB publicize the names of the people who have “allegedly” perpetrated these crimes as widely as possible and likewise names of the estates they work for and where the offences occurred. Effectively, challenge them to sue and let the evidence be assessed in a civil court or tacitly admit to the offence. We members provide the RSPB with deep pockets and I don’t see why it cant risk some of its £££ in this way – there is much to gain and little to lose.
It’s not unbelievable. It’s routine.
Where I believe we need to focus is on the RSPB and the National Trust ~ as long as they continue to condone driven grouse shooting this stuff will go on.
It is nothing to do with Judges or procurators as they seem to be called in Scotland, it is down to people in the crown office deciding video evidence is inadmissible based on some very strange rules and it is those rules that need examining and probably changing. Quite simply even under the current rules the court SHOULD be seeing the evidence and then deciding on its admissibility. To my mind all video evidence should be admissible and all those convicted of wildlife crime should be banned from having shotgun and firearms certificates for life or keepers should be licenced to operate and the licence withdrawn on conviction, first offence 3 years, second offence for life. Estates too should be licenced to shoot game and the same rules applying. If we don’t truly hit these people where it hurts these crimes will continue ad nauseum.
Also the two estates featured in videos this week should have their right to use the general licence to control crows etc. withdrawn.
I am wholeheartedly sick and tired of fighting this routine and widespread criminality depriving many of our natural heritage with one arm tied behind our backs. It is way passed gloves off time.
It almost as if they have been waiting for a time that the media are busy reporting constantly some other big story, like say an election, in which to drop the cases and have them slip under the radar of the public…
It may be entirely irrelevant to either of these cases but it’s interesting to note that the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service had a new head appointed in March 2016. Perhaps recent decisions not to admit evidence, despite similar cases, all stem from a different interpretation of the law by those in charge. If so then shouldn’t any new interpretation be open to challenge in court?
Are we talking about David Harvie?
It is a bloody fix up.
They’ve got a new bod in and their job is to go through the wildlife crime pile and drop every case. Bloody blatant.
UK as a nation is as corrupt as many others that crow about democracy and democratic ideals that we may well condemn. Use your votes next month and choose a less-likely-to-thrive on corruption option. (suggestions on a postcard please)
My fear is that the Turkeys will vote and then Christmas will come and we will blame the EU anyway.
Can RSPB bring a private prosecution?
Why doesn’t the RSPB just do a private prosecution, it would have to go to court then and if the person is found guilty the RSPB could then claim back any cost from the Crown Office as it would be clear there was enough evidence and they wrongly discounted the trail, it would also make them think twice in future to drop cases with such good evidence
There are very strict rules about covert surveillance to protect all of our freedoms. If investigators ignore these or simply get it wrong then the evidence is simply not admissible in court. Take away the video evidence and you don’t have a case. Simple.
Monstrous but we can’t blame the system.
This is apparently another case of the RSBP falling foul by not doing it right. There is no cover up, the law is simply being applied. We all know the guy did it but we also all know the law is, and always has been, an ass.
The RSPB need to invest in some RIPA training for their investigators to make sure this does not happen again. It is very difficult to have any faith in the justice system but the decision makers cannot be criticized for applying the law as it is.
Question:
Why are they saying the individual has been charged with *alleged* wildlife crimes? Surely they are being charged with the crimes! You don’t hear of the police charging someone with the crime of *alleged* murder, do you? A person is charged with a crime they did our did not commit. It seems to me this wording is unnecessary (legally speaking) and could have the effect of weakening the case against the individual in the eyes of those who read the press release. Yes, this person *allegedly* committed the crime but he wouldn’t be charged with *allegedly* committing it, he’d be charged with committing it.
Perhaps this is just semantics and not important, but in some cases, words do matter.
Seems the RSPB needs a more robust approach. Publicise the estates, the owners and the alleged perpetrator. Challenge them to sue. At least then we could see a list of the worst offenders in terms of those estates that have wild life crime carried out upon them, whetehr those owners have other estates where alleged crimes take place.
I agree that the UK is one of the most corrupt countries in the world, it is just so institutionalised, right back to the days of the original robber barons, that it looks “normal”.
A few years ago I was photographed driving in the bus lane in Brighton. I was not aware I was in a bus lane. A few days later a letter arrived with the photo. I was fined £30. I was guilty. I paid up. Why are these cases any different? They have been videoed, their guilt is apparent for all to see. Still no prosecution. Yes this country is corrupt. These landowners and their powerful allies can do as they please.
Even if you didn’t see the sign saying you will be filmed there will have been one. If however there wasn’t one and you could prove it then you could have challenged the fine, in the same way the defence challenged the “evidence” in these recent incidents. No matter how much people might wish for a cover up from those on high, the fact is that investigators have to abide by the law themselves and if they don’t they lose. The positives in these cases are more publicity for the fight against driven game shooting and (hopefully) a wake up call for the RSPB so they don’t muff it up again.
Allegedly. Unless you know something we don’t?
The law needs to be changed or at least the interpretation of it . Video evidence should always be admissible, don’t want to be videoed committing a crime then don’t do the crime, simple really.
Let us suppose that rather than be caught resetting the trap, the culprit( there is no alleged here) found the RSPB employee resetting it and was videoed seriously assaulting that person or even killing them. Would the video evidence still be not admissible, I rather doubt it. If it is admissible in one case it is admissible in all, end of.
My advice to the ones making these decisions, you are making the law a laughing stock literally in this case, get it sorted and lets get these criminals in court and sentenced.
All very well saying video evidence is not admissible but just what corroborating evidence could RSPB investigators gather to support it? We all know that it is going on, often in remote places at odd hours but the chances of getting video coverage plus additional evidence to support is virtually unattainable – and that’s the card that is being played just now by the estates and their friends in high places!
When showing videos of criminal acts, the RSPB have clearly been advised to refer to these events as “alleged” for fear of being sued.
If that happened- would it be so bad?
The evidence would have to be viewed in a civil court where the burden of proof (as we are always told) is lower.
Frankly, given the blatant content, I doubt that any of the people who could feign offence would take the risk of effectively putting themselves on trial. But if they did, RSPB could simply run a crowd funder to cover their risks.
When the evidence is strong, lets defame the criminals who “get off with it”.
They are just marking time until it’s legal again.