Posts: 2,510
	Threads: 110
	Joined: Nov 2013
	
Reputation: 
28
	 
	
	
		It looks like a legal error on the part of OSPCA. From the article you cited:
"A Crown lawyer told St. Catharines court Friday that the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals started the investigation and received a warrant without a complaint."
It would seem that four employees complained to the veterinary body but not to the OSPCA, which started legal processes on the strength of the videos alone. The OSPCA should have got the employees to lodge statements first, before launching a legal case.
This doesn't show the OSPCA legal officers in a good light. They should have known how to proceed.
	
	
	
	
		
	
 
 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 5,151
	Threads: 419
	Joined: Nov 2013
	
Reputation: 
33
	 
	
	
		I wonder if it is possible this could be appealed?
	
	
	
	
		
	
 
 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 313
	Threads: 13
	Joined: Nov 2016
	
Reputation: 
7
	 
	
	
		You mean to say this sorry excuse for a person is free to carry on?
	
	
	
	
		
	
 
 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 18,478
	Threads: 6,828
	Joined: Jan 1970
	
Reputation: 
80
	 
	
	
		He got off on a technicality!
There is video proof that he did it. There are witnesses that he did it. He doesn't deny it. 
Because of a technicality he gets off and is free to practice veterinary medicine and do it again.
And then they wonder why people don't trust the legal system.
He will do it again. They need to handle it right the second time.
	
	
	
![[Image: IMG_9091.JPG]](https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-rtQnRVnpHuw/Upv4HXYM20I/AAAAAAAAAqo/K5MmSTvkZdA/w296-h229-p-no/IMG_9091.JPG) Catherine
Catherine