Guest guest Posted June 16, 2006 Report Share Posted June 16, 2006 Re the article posted by yitzeling concerning the cat cruelty case in Malaysia: this is the first prosecution there of its kind. There are earlier articles about this case which reveal what the SPCA(MY) and the Veterinary Services Department are having to go through to prosecute this case. Strangely, after all this, one of the articles quotes Dr Hawari of the Department as saying that fines imposed on offenders “would be deterrent enough”. The articles have more details of the 'breeder', Abdul Rashid Mohd Othman, and the events. See Nov. 2005 articles following yitzeling's posting below. The wheels of justice turn slow: This began in Sept. '05. There were two court hearings in Nov. '05, at least one in Jan. '05, at least one in June '06. Court will meet again for two days in Sept. '06. ------------------ (MY) cat cruelty Posted by: " yitzeling " yitzeling Fri Jun 16, 2006 1:27 am (PST) Vet careless, says counsel Malay Mail 16th June 2006 SANGEETHA NAIR NEGLIGENCE by the Veterinary Services Department caused the death of two Persian cats. This was the issue at the Kuala Lumpur magistrate’s court during a trial involving cat breeder Abdul Rashid Mohd Othman yesterday. Department director Dr Norhaliza Abdul Halim told the court that two of four cats died while under her care. She also agreed that she had not prepared a medical report the day the first cat died. Defence Counsel Robert Devan put it to her that the reason she prepared the report a day later (Oct 5, 2005) was because she did not want fingers pointing at her. Robert: Do you agree that you were afraid that the cat’s death would reflect on your carelessness and this was the reason you decided to prepare the report? Dr Norhaliza: I disagree. Robert: I also put it to you that out of fear, you prepared an exclusionary liability clause which reads ‘the death of the cat was not due to the negligence of this department’? Dr Norhaliza: I disagree. The doctor agreed, however, that her report had stated that the cat had died of ‘immuno suppression’ which she did not state in her earlier report. Robert: I put it to you that the medical report which you prepared on Oct 5 was an after-thought. At this point, the doctor asked Robert to rephrase the question. Magistrate Azniza Mohd Ali interjected saying that there was no point harping on the issue since the outcome was clear. “Her testimony is already leading to that (that the medical report was an after-thought). “If you ask her, she is going to say ‘no’,” said Azniza. After two hours of cross-examination, Robert asked the court to fix another date for him to continue. Azniza then asked Robert how many more questions he had as the trial was taking too long. When Robert said he had 60 more questions, Azniza replied: “Why so many? It is only a cat, not a murder trial. This is a cross-examination, you can ask direct questions. Don’t beat around the bush.” Abdul Rashid is alleged to have caused unnecessary misery to four cats by not giving them proper care at No 65 Jalan Wan Malini 1, Seri Petaling, here, at 11am on Sept 21, 2005. Trial continues on Sept 7 and 8. http://www.mmail.com.my/Current_News/mm/Friday/Hotnews/20060616103830/Article/in\ dex_html ===================================== Charged with neglecting cats Star Oct. 19, 2005 BY M. MAGESWARI KUALA LUMPUR: Three Persian cats stole the limelight at a magistrate’s court here as their owner faced a charge of neglecting the felines and causing them misery. ACCUSED: Abdul Rashid being asked to confirm if the cats brought to the court premises were his Friday. Cat breeder Abdul Rashid Mohd Othman, 50, was accused of failing to give proper treatment to the cats, resulting in them suffering skin disease and conjunctivitis. A fourth cat, which had similar symptoms, died on Oct 4. The two-month-old cats, kept in separate cages, were brought to the court in a Veterinary Services Department pick-up. At the onset of court proceedings yesterday, Abdul Rashid admitted to the charge, statement of facts and a medical report of the cats. But when the prosecution tendered eight photographs of the cats to the court, he pleaded innocence. “The cats were not in that condition when they were taken away from me,” Abdul Rashid told the court. Abdul Rashid is charged with committing the offence in his house in Sri Petaling here on Sept 21. If convicted, he can be fined a maximum RM200 or jailed up to six months or both for each charge under Section 44(1)(d) of the Animal Ordinance 1953. Magistrate Azniza Mohd Ali set Nov 23 for trial. Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals animal inspector Sabrina Yeap said this was the first time a person was being prosecuted in relation to cruelty to cats. http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2005/10/29/courts/12461848 & sec=courts ----------------------- Witness: Cats were sick Star Thursday November 24, 2005 BY M.MAGESWARI KUALA LUMPUR: A veterinary enforcement officer painted a picture of horror when he related what he saw at the home of a cat breeder here following complaints of cruelty against the felines in September. Four of the cats were suffering from skin disease and had swollen eyes, Zairol Hisham Abu Hassan told a magistrate’s court here. One of the cats died a month later, he said. He said he met the owner’s son Faizul Azhar Khusairi, 24, who told him that they did not have any medical records for the animals. Faizul’s father Abdul Rashid Mohd Othman, 50, is facing a charge of neglecting the cats and causing them misery. [Photo] NOT CATERED FOR: The sick cats, now under the care of the veterinary services department, being brought to the magistrate's court in Kuala Lumpur Wednesday. The cat breeder is also accused of failing to give proper treatment to his pets, resulting in them suffering from skin disease and conjunctivitis. Abdul Rashid is charged with committing the offence at his house in Sri Petaling on Sept 21. If convicted, he can be fined up to RM200 or jailed up to six months or both for each charge under the Animal Ordinance 1953. In the first day of the trial yesterday, Zairol, an assistant enforcement officer at the veterinary services department, said he had gone to Abdul Rashid’s house at noon on Sept 21 with his team. Faizul was alone at home. “I found 30 Persian cats of various ages. Four were suffering from skin disease and also had swollen eyes, “ he said, when questioned by prosecuting officer Tee Thian See. He said he recorded Faizul's particulars and took photos of the sick cats. He then lodged a police report on the matter and submitted documents and the photos to investigating officer Roziman Awang Tahrin. He said the animals were kept in a “cats section” of the house, about the size of a bedroom. To a question, he said, Faizul had contacted Abdul Rashid but refused to divulge his father’s number. The hearing continues today before magistrate Azniza Mohd Ali. Source: TheStar http://www.catzmedia.com/spca/news/theStar-241105.htm ----------------------- Animal Neglect: Counsel stuns the court with conspiracy theory JOTHI JEYASINGAM Malay Mail, 25 Nov 2005 KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 25: The trial of cat breeder Abdul Rashid Mohd Othman took a twist when the defense counsel accused the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) and the Veterinary Services Department of framing his client. Defense counsel Robert Devan contended that the charges against Abdul Rashid, 50, were a conspiracy by the society and the department to make his client look bad. Devan made this contention when cross-examining the department’s enforcement assistant Zairol Hisham Abu Hassan. It was Zairol, the first prosecution witness, who rescued four diseased felines from Abdul Rashid’s home at 65, Jalan Wan Malini 1, Sri Petaling, after the department received a complaint about cruelty to cats. Abdul Rashid is on trial at the magistrate’s court here for allegedly neglecting his four cats until they contracted skin and eye diseases. Referring to the photographs of the cats yesterday, counsel contended that the cats in the photographs did not belong to Abdul Rashid. Zairol Hisham, however, confirmed that the diseased felines in the photographs were the ones he took from Abdul Rashid’s home. Robert: The SPCA and the department did this to tarnish Abdul Rashid’s good name? Witness: I don’t agree. Robert: In fact, this is a plot by the SPCA and the department. They took photographs of other cats suffering from skin and eye disease, and are alleging that these animals belong to Abdul Rashid. Witness: I don’t agree. Robert: Do you agree that these photographs do not look like they were taken at the room where the cats were placed? (There is a room attached to the side of Abdul Rashid’s house where his 30 cats are housed.) Witness: Agree. Robert: So you did not take any photographs of the four cats at the house? Witness: I do not agree to that. Robert: These six photographs you took of the four cats; I put it to you that you did not take them at that house. Witness: I do not agree. Robert: Do you have an explanation for this? Witness: I removed the cats from the room and placed them in cages before photographing them. Since I had run out of film after taking two photographs, the remaining four were taken at the department. Robert: Do you have proof that these cats were taken from Abdul Rashid’s home? Witness: Before taking the cats out, I notified Faizul Azhar Khusairy, (Abdul Rashid’s son who was at home at that time) and jotted down the details of the case in my inspection form, which was confirmed by Faizul Azhar. Under re-examination by DPP Affifudin Hafifi, Zairol Hisham said the area in which the cats were kept looked like it was in neglect. Asked to explain further, the witness said there was a strong stench of urine and faeces. He also said the cats’ food containers were empty and the felines looked as if they were starving. The witness also said before taking the cats away, he told Faizul Azhar that if the family had any medical documents to prove that the cats had been treated, they could bring them to the department. This, however, was not done. Under Section 44(1)(d) of the Animal Ordinance 1953, Abdul Rashid is liable to be fined not more than RM200 or six months’ jail or both. Trial before magistrate Azniza Mohd Ali continues on Jan 3. Amended law will be ‘comprehensive’ The public can expect a comprehensive amended Animal Ordinance 1953, with guidelines incorporated into it. In acknowledging the delay in its implementation, the Veterinary Services Department said the Ordinance would cover the entire spectrum of animal cruelty. Yesterday, department director-general Dr Hawari Hussein attributed the delay to its lawyers wanting the amended ordinance to be “detailed”. He was commenting on a public call for stiffer penalties following an increase in the number of cases involving animal cruelty and negligence lately. Under the current law, those convicted face a maximum fine of RM200 or six months’ jail or both. Over the past few years, the department had said it was amending the Ordinance to give it more bite. Dr Hawari repeated what he had told The Malay Mail in the recent past, that fines imposed on offenders “would be deterrent enough”. The Malay Mail had reported last month that the department was in the process of amending the law (Animal Ordinance 1953). http://www.jphpk.gov.my/English/Nov05%2025.htm ----------------------- Witness: Stench was intolerable Star Friday November 25, 2005 BY M.MAGESWARI KUALA LUMPUR: The odour of faeces and urine at a cat breeder’s house was so overpowering that an enforcement official had to repeatedly go outside for fresh air, a magistrate’s court here heard yesterday. Veterinary services assistant enforcement officer Zairol Hisham Abu Hassan said his unit chief Zainuddin Isma Yassin could not stand the stench that filled a section of the house in Sri Petaling, where 30 Persian cats were kept. The two were at the house on Sept 21 following complaints that Abdul Rashid Mohd Othman, 50, was being cruel to the animals. Abdul Rashid is facing charges of neglecting four of his cats and causing them misery. He is accused of failing to give them proper treatment, resulting in the cats suffering from skin disease and conjunctivitis. He is charged with committing the offence at his house on Sept 21. If convicted, he can be fined RM200 or jailed six months or both under the Animal Ordinance 1953. Questioned by DPP Afifuddin Hafifi, Zairol said if a cat’s excrement is not cleaned in the cage, the stench involving many cats “could not be described.” Asked about the complaints of cruelty against the cats, Zairol said: “I just took four of the 30 cats, as they had symptoms of skin and eye disease. Zairol said he had asked for the owner to visit or contact their office to produce any medical records for the cats but he did not get any feedback. “Abdul Rashid also failed to produce these documents to investigating officer Roziman Awang Tahrin,” he said, adding that during the inspection he did not find any cat food where the cats were kept. At the onset of the hearing, Zairol said he only photographed two cats at the house as his Polaroid camera had enough film for just two shots. He added that he took four more photographs of the cats at his office. When defence counsel Robert Devan pointed out that one of the cats in the photographs had thick fur, Zairol said: “If you observe properly, you can see that the cat has fur just in front of its body. On its back, one can see just skin. I had only two films. Therefore, I focused on that part. He refuted suggestions that it was a plot by his department and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals to frame Abdul Rashid and that the department had substituted the cats with others that had the diseases. The hearing before magistrate Azniza Mohd Ali continues on Jan 3. Source: TheStar http://www.catzmedia.com/spca/news/theStar-251105.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.