Holy Fucking Shit

This is utterly staggering.

image

A pet shop owner has been ordered to wear an electronic tag for selling a goldfish to a 14-year-old boy.

Great-grandmother Joan Higgins, 66, was caught by council bosses in an undercover investigation after she unwittingly sold the fish to the boy, breaching new animal welfare laws.

She was subjected to an eight-month court ordeal and threatened with jail before being fined £1,000 and ordered to abide by a nightime curfew and wear the tag so the authorities can monitor her movements.

And that’s not all.

Mrs Higgins and her son were caught out by a new bill passed in 2005 which makes it illegal to sell goldfish to under 16s and threatens offenders with up to 12 months in prison.

In July 2009, Trafford council sent a 14-year-old boy to the shop to do a test purchase and after failing to ask the boy for identification, the pair were summoned to court.

Mr Higgins labelled the incident ‘entrapment’, saying the boy looked older than 14.

He added: ‘The council sent the 14-year-old into us – in my book that’s entrapment.

‘And besides which is it hard to tell how old a lad is these days. He looked much older than 14.’

And her son’s in the net too.

Joan’s 47-year-old son son Mark, who was also fined £750 and ordered to complete 120 hours of unpaid work.

Why? Wha..? Oh for fuck’s sake.

Presumably these are people of bad character and this is something they had coming to then, right?

Mrs Higgins, a grandmother of three and great-grandmother to one, has been running the shop for 28 years.

"She volunteers for the shows for PDSA (Peoples Dispensary for Sick Animals) and donates food for free to them – what has she ever done to anyone?”

So, you sell a fucking goldfish to a young boy. Fines totalling £1750, a 7pm-7am curfew and 120 hours of slavery?

And what happens if you sell them cigs or booze? Probably not that.

It’s just utterly fucking sickening. And just to rub it in,

“My Mum just wants it to be over. She has been worried sick about it. She wobbled over in the dock when they said she could go to prison.”

The judge held the threat of prison over a 66 year old woman. For selling a goldfish.

Prison for selling a goldfish. Are you getting this, you Labour voting retards?

AJ

H/T Ambush Predator (via Twatter)

Advertisements

About Al Jahom
Anti-social malcontent, misanthrope and miserable git.

14 Responses to Holy Fucking Shit

  1. I would reply to this. But I can’t. Words fail me.

  2. hesspartacus says:

    I have lost the will to live.

  3. omg what a joke! glad i am not on the receiving end. We need to completely reduce the size and power of government especially at a local level. Its all out of hand.

  4. “Are you getting this, you Labour voting retards?”

    Trafford Council has been under Tory control for about seven years.

    You have neglected to mention that they previously sold a gerbil to an unaccompanied 14-year-old girl with learning disabilities, who proceeded to suffocate it by putting it in a coffee cup with a sealed lid, and that a cockatiel in their care was in such a poor state of health (a broken leg, eye problems and laboured breathing) that it had to be put down.

    I also notice that you’ve opted not to include the only available picture of them coming out of the courthouse, in which they look a bit chavvy.

    • Al Jahom says:

      Trafford Council didn’t write a law that leads to a year in prison for selling a goldfish though, did it?!

      I don’t see what the alleged episode with the gerbil has to do with anything either. The court heard that Mrs Higgins had possessed a licence to sell animals for many years and had never had any problems before.

      As for the cockateel. If there are animal welfare problems here – and I’m not denying that – then fine, deal with it, but that’s not the issue here, and it’s not what’s resulted in a ludicrously disproportionate meting out of so-called justice.

      Can you not see that there are so many laws about so many things now, that we break them daily and unwittingly while going about our middle class business, and the result is that we may live peacefully for many years, but any time the cunts want to pluck one of us off the streets, for whatever reason, there’s bound to be some bullshit infringement we’ve committed?

      As for the photo of them coming out of court, they look like perfectly average denizens of Sale to me.

      P.S. Trafford are okay by me as long as they still have grammar schools.

    • JuliaM says:

      If’looking a bit chavvy’ is to be considered a crime now, we are going to need lots more prisons!

  5. Jonathan says:

    I’ve had dealings with Trafford Council, and can honestly say they are lying, thieving, bullying cunts of the first order. I hope they all die horribly of rotting genitalia. Fuck ’em.

  6. hamsterbait says:

    Is it really a “new bill” when it’s been law for five years? It’s a bit rich for her to cry ignorance (not a defence, in any case) when she’s worked in the industry for 28 years and the law in question has been in place for half a decade.

    I’ve never visited your site before, but your wilful framing of the facts is both biased and completely transparent. Are you the Daily Mail?

  7. JuliaM says:

    I’ve never seen a comment by you before, hamsterbait, but you seem quite happy with the idea of a council-ratepaying shopkeeper being issued a draconian punishment for infringing a pointless piece of NuLabour animal rights loony-appeasing legislation while people who assault, burgle and defraud the Exchequer get away with a slap on the wrist.

    Are you the Guardian?

  8. hamsterbait says:

    > I’ve never seen a comment by you before, hamsterbait

    No, as I said, I’d never seen your site until just now.

    > but you seem quite happy with the idea of a council-ratepaying shopkeeper

    This is a bit irrelevant, surely? What has rate-paying got to do with anything? I pay my rates – does that mean I can do what I want, regardless of the law? Of course not. “Rate-paying” is just another piece of reactionary code, like “tax-payer’s money” – it’s rarely relevant to the topic at hand; rather, it’s used simply to raise the excitement level of those people to delight in being outraged. See also: Daily Mail.

    > being issued a draconian punishment for infringing a pointless piece of NuLabour animal rights loony-appeasing legislation

    It’s hard to judge whether the punishment is draconian without further background to the sentencing. Perhaps it is, perhaps it isn’t.

    > while people who assault, burgle and defraud the Exchequer get away with a slap on the wrist.

    This is a classic strawman argument. It’s hardly either/or, and I can’t believe you honestly think it is. I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt, in terms of intelligence, and assume this is simple hyperbolic rhetoric. Either way, it hardly requires rebuttal.

  9. JuliaM says:

    ““Rate-paying” is just another piece of reactionary code, like “tax-payer’s money” – it’s rarely relevant to the topic at hand…”

    Actually, it’s supremely relevant. As the shopkeeper points out, she’s run that shop for years and there’s never been a problem with it. Don’t councils have better things to do with their (claimed) valuable time than run sting operations for goldfish?

    “It’s hard to judge whether the punishment is draconian…”

    Really? Only if you are a little bit dim.

    She has a tag restricting her movements during the hours her shop (where she committed the heinous act) is closed. In what world would that ever be considered suitable punishment? An ASBO yob prone to getting drunk and hanging around the streets at night, fair dos. An elderly lady who breached trading standards laws? Insane!

    “Either way, it hardly requires rebuttal.”

    And yet here you are, rebutting for all you are worth…

  10. hamsterbait says:

    > And yet here you are, rebutting for all you are worth…

    Point taken. It’s obviously best I expend my energies elsewhere, as this place is clearly a sanctuary for the sorts of values and reasoning I find utterly bewildering. Carry on, I suppose! Cheerio.

  11. JuliaM says:

    Cheerio – ‘Libtard Conspiracy’ site is thataway *points*

  12. hesspartacus says:

    It’s obviously best I expend my energies elsewhere….

    Good idea. Go and see if someone’s wheely bin is facing in the right direction, or if their hedge is the right height, or intercept a few emails.

    ….as this place is clearly a sanctuary for the sorts of values and reasoning I find utterly bewildering.

    I recommend a home for the bewildered then. If there are any places left.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: