View Full Version : Role of the PF
rogermellie
10-Nov-16, 22:57
if the role of the Procurator Fiscal is ....
Procurators Fiscal are civil servants qualified as Solicitors, Solicitor-Advocates, or Advocates and are independent prosecutors, constitutionally responsible to the Lord Advocate. They receive and consider reports from the Police and over 40 other agencies and decide whether or not to raise criminal proceedings in the public interest. The Procurators Fiscal (and Procurators Fiscal Depute) prosecute all criminal cases in the sheriff courts.
then how did this case ever get to court ? (http://forum.caithness.org/showthread.php?258616-Dog-must-behave)
and how can you 'sustain' a small scratch ? people sustain injuries, not scratches
Are you in favour of large dogs jumping on people?
rogermellie
10-Nov-16, 23:38
Are you in favour of large dogs jumping on people?
now you're using donalsin's language :roll: the dog didn't jump on the 'victim', it jumped up at her
the 'accused' (the owner, not the dog) apologised at the time, but the victim was so 'annoyed' that she called the Police ?
is that what we should all do when we get annoyed ?
Kevin Milkins
11-Nov-16, 00:28
I did wonder the same thing myself when I read about it.
I have two large dogs that like to make a fuss of people they meet and its hard to temper the border line between what some folk interpretations between a mad dog and a daft dog that wants to say hi.
It's all down to the training of the dog.
It's all down to the training of the dog.
And the ignorance of the owner who thinks it's 'just a bit of fun' to have their animals slevvering all over your clothes and putting dirty paw prints all over you and scratching you.
You wouldn't do that yourself to a passing stranger so why let an animal do it ?
I did wonder the same thing myself when I read about it.
I have two large dogs that like to make a fuss of people they meet and its hard to temper the border line between what some folk interpretations between a mad dog and a daft dog that wants to say hi.
I don't think it is borderline at at all. Unless you know the person is okay with it then don't let the dog do it. I am an animal lover, including dogs, but for several reasons having a dog jump up to say hi makes me really uncomfortable. I am too polite to say anything but if the owner took one look at my face instead of gushing about how cute their dogs are and how they must like me they would see that.
Saying that I agree the case mentioned is crazy and thought as much when I read it.
Kevin Milkins
11-Nov-16, 10:34
Saying that I agree the case mentioned is crazy and thought as much when I read it.
That was the point I was making, I understand that not everyone shares the same liking for dogs and a good recall is the most important training for any dog.
I was just very surprised that this got to court when you consider all the bad things that go on without justice being dealt.
Think its an absolute joke to be going to court over something like that, if the dog had bitten and was aggressive fair enough.
No matter how much training you try to give to an animal sometimes they just get excited, god it was a wee scratch no like she got rabies from it or anything, complete over reaction and waste of police and joe public time and money.
Think its an absolute joke to be going to court over something like that, if the dog had bitten and was aggressive fair enough.
No matter how much training you try to give to an animal sometimes they just get excited, god it was a wee scratch no like she got rabies from it or anything, complete over reaction and waste of police and joe public time and money.
It is against the law to have a dog dangerously out of control in a public place.
"Dangerously out of control" is defined as if it "injures someone" or if it "makes someone worried they might be injured".
Whatever your views on what constitutes fair use of court time, the dog was out of control, the law was broken and the owner admitted the law was broken.
I wonder what the owners reaction had been if the person in fear of the dog kicked it square in the face to make it retreat?
kicked it square in the face
The owner or the dog ? Maybe if they'd done it to the former, then they'd think more carefully about properly controlling the latter in the future.
The owner or the dog ? Maybe if they'd done it to the former, then they'd think more carefully about properly controlling the latter in the future.
im not sure assaulting a fellow human being would solve anything
but if you are threatened by a dog then fair enough
personally i think there was an underlying tension here and one prob saw the opportunity to get one over on the other party, pathetic it coming to court as there i am sure more pressing matters to be heard
personally i think there was an underlying tension here and one prob saw the opportunity to get one over on the other party, pathetic it coming to court as there i am sure more pressing matters to be heard
what has made you come to this conclusion?
there is nothing in the report to suggest that there has been any previous between them
rubber_duck
14-Nov-16, 13:44
Ridiculous that this ever went to court. Like someone else has already said, it was a total overreaction and waste of public money.
Ridiculous that this ever went to court. Like someone else has already said, it was a total overreaction and waste of public money.
not if the dog left the victim afraid for their safety it wasnt
Some people are to quick to judge.
As the owner of the dog plead guilty at the last minute, the female, who was "scratched" as she was trying to stop the Dalmatian attacking her small dog, nor her friend who also witnessed the attack, were allowed to give evidence and the journalist who wrote this story only heard the accused side. Unfortunately another misleading article from the local press.
Nothing misleading about it. The dog owner knew they were guilty so pled guilty.
Nothing misleading about it. The dog owner knew they were guilty so pled guilty.
Jings here we go again!
This went to trial and wasted all our money and some peoples time as the dog owner at the first hearing plead "not guilty". As I said the press only reported a small portion of this case hence my statement "Unfortunately another misleading article from the local press".
Jings here we go again!
This went to trial and wasted all our money and some peoples time as the dog owner at the first hearing plead "not guilty". As I said the press only reported a small portion of this case hence my statement "Unfortunately another misleading article from the local press".
So the dog owner was the one wasting time by going to trial yes, I agree they should have put a guilty plea forward at the first instance
So the dog owner was the one wasting time by going to trial yes, I agree they should have put a guilty plea forward at the first instance
Going by the information I have been given. Yes. Thank you.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.