Judges jailing Just Stop Oil protesters are reactionary establishment figures

British judges are currently jailing Just Stop Oil protesters. Quite severe punishments. Sometimes utterly unreasonable punishments for peaceful protests. I wrote about that recently when Hallam, an organiser was jailed for five years and a couple of charming young ladies were jailed for four years each for chucking Heinz tomato soup on the frame of van Gogh's 'Wildflowers'. Yes, they were jailed for four years for chucking some Heinz tomato soup on a picture frame in a gallery.

So why are they doing this? It's because they are reactionary. Nearly all British judges come from the middle, middle/upper, upper classes in the UK. They are excellently educated. They go to the best schools and they go to Eton or Harrow after which they go to Oxford or Cambridge.

They become very successful barristers and KCs. They earn lots of money but if they want to become a judge they will have to accept less money but they enjoy the status of becoming a High Court judge or better. They receive a knighthood when they become a High Court judge.

They have high status. But they are part of the establishment. They are firmly part of the British establishment. And I believe a lot of them do not actually believe in climate change. A lot of people in the establishment in Britain don't firmly believe in climate change. They don't want their way of life altered which helps them to not believe in climate change. Their life is too good. They don't want anything upsetting them or their lifestyle. Climate change does negatively impact their lifestyle or will do for future generations.

And so because they want things to remain as they are, they don't like protesters who upset their way of life and tell them that things are going to get worse unless strong action is taken. And if they do have the temerity to upset their way of life in protesting they hammer them as hard as they can and issue overly zealous prison sentences for peaceful protests.

Another judge has done the same thing. He is judge Shane Collery KC (Kings Counsel). He sentenced George Simonson and Theresa Higginson to 2 years in jail apiece. Other protesters he's jailed for 22 months and 20 months. They pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to causing a public nuisance after they caused mass destruction by climbing gantries on the M25 motorway on November 9, 2022.

The judge said that the protesters were blasé about what they did. He thought the protests were a "curious way of seeking to influence the public opinion."

He added that "[You] considered you knew better than everyone else". Well, I'm gonna say that they do know better than everybody else and they have the courage to scream it from the rooftops. And it is judges like Shane Collery KC who don't understand what's going on. And if we could look back retrospectively in 50 years time at this judgement I think we would all agree that he was terribly wrong. 

That's because in 50 years time time global warming will be impacting the planet far worse than it is now and people at that future time will understand how brave these protesters were in providing the public with a warning for the catastrophe to come.

----------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Animal hoarding. Addiction. Lying. Imprisonment.

NEWS AND VIEWS - OREGON, USA: Cat hoarding is not that uncommon. We need to be both sympathetic to cat hoarders and more so to the animals that they hoard and therefore there comes a time when the cat hoarder needs to be punished as well as provided with treatment if they are the victims of a genuine addiction as is the case with this woman.

Note: the picture below depicts a fictional character and not the woman featured in this story. This image was created by a computer. Good isn't it? Although it is somewhat sanitised. True cat and dog hoarders live in incredibly filthy places.

The story concerns a woman in Portland, USA. Her name is Samantha Miller. She has a long history of repeated offending and being somewhat let off by judges until this last case when she was imprisoned for two years because the criminal court system grew tired of her and the judge in this case saw through her lies.

The history of this woman's addiction to rescuing and caring for cats and dogs began formally in terms of first coming to the attention of the state authorities about five years ago. That's when the State Department Of Justice shut down their dog rescue and barred them from opening any further non-profit rescue operations as part of a 2019 agreement (settlement). At that time there rescue centre was called Scappoose.

Miller and her partner Torrance Head apparently then set up another non-profit business in which they promised to save dogs from high-kill California shelters. That rescue operation was also raided in 2020 by animal control officers who seized 122 cats and dogs living in filthy kennels. This couple again were abusing cats and dogs under cover of a rescue operation.

Apparently last August, Miller was also in breach of parole conditions for changing her address without permission and generally being untruthful. The judge let her off with a warning.

Her partner, Torrance Head, pleaded guilty in 2023 of doctoring phony certificates for rabies vaccinations.

Moving forward, Miller then set up another operation called Woofin Palooza which resulted in Miller receiving a 270-count indictment against her with respect to the mistreatment of animals. She then entered into another settlement agreement in which he promised to stay away from cat abd dog rescue which kept her out of jail.

Moving forward again, a parole officer for Samantha Miller made a surprise visit to her home in Tillamook County in March to ensure that she was sticking to her agreement. They found seven dogs locked in a trailer. And cat litter boxes, cat toys and cat food in her home. She had broken her agreement.

This led to a trial in which she was imprisoned for two years as mentioned. The state prosecutor said that she had "never taken full responsibility for the harm that she inflicted on animals and humans".

You can see that here is a thread running through this story which is Samantha Miller and Torrance Head's untruthfulness and Miller's addiction to rescuing cats and dogs. And she simply doesn't want to abide by the law or her agreement to stay away from animal rescue on the basis that she simply can't cope with it.

That's why I say this is a good example of how cat and dog hoarding can become an addiction and it also hints I would argue with mental health issues in cat hoarders. 

It's a known fact that, in general, cat hoarders are borderline mentally ill for the major reason that they simply fail to see that what they are doing is not cat and dog rescue but cat and dog abuse. 

They hoard the animals under the guise of rescuing them because they are hoarders generally and in being hoarders and living chaotic lives they neglect the animals' welfare which is animal abuse. That's why this woman ended up in jail.

They invariably defend themselves by lying all the time about their activities.

And I would strongly suggest that when she is released from jail she will go back to doing the same thing again.

--------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Obstructive behaviour by Warrington Animal Welfare (WAW) rescue centre causes an injustice against cat's owner

WARRINGTON, UK-NEWS AND VIEWS: This is one of those typical and rather complex stories which we see from time to time on the Internet. It's a sad story of a tussle over cat ownership and in the middle is a rescue centre.

What happened is that a ginger tabby cat called Bobby escaped his home. Warrington Animal Welfare (WAW) found him. They uploaded his photograph with some details onto their Facebook website. Patricia Donegan, Bobby's owner, saw the Facebook post and contacted the animal shelter immediately. In the meantime the animal shelter had renamed her cat George. Patricia believes that she provided WAW with adequate proof that she was Bobby's owner.  

Bobby. Images: Facebook.

The shelter refused to return Bobby to her because he wasn't microchipped or neutered. Apparently they branded her as irresponsible. It seems that they got off on the wrong foot at the very beginning WAW has been obstructive ever since. WAW appears to have taken a prejudicial stance against Patricia for some reason. They have dug themselves in and are defensive and unhelpful. The more Patricia pesters them the more they dig in.

It seems Patricia took the matter to the County Court for the return of Bobby and the judge advised that they try and reach a resolution. The problem is that Patricia took Warrington Animal Rescue to court and not the new owner. She had to because at the time she did not have the new owner's details.

WAW offered £100 to settle the matter which Patricia rightly refused because all she wants is her cat back. The centre had rehomed Bobby with a new 'owner' and Patricia had found out the name and address of the new owner from unredacted court documents. A lucky break.

In my opinion, she could sue the new owner for an injunction for the return of Bobby or a declaration that she is the true owner. The new owner says that Bobby escaped from her possession when she decided to take Bobby back to WAW. However, her story sounds fanciful and she has changed it twice apparently. Patricia does not believe her. I believe that Bobby is still with the new owner and a full-time indoor cat.

Patricia also believes that Bobby has not been lost and that the new owner is lying. Warrington Animal Rescue say that they raised £1000 for the care and treatment of Bobby but it transpired that only £90 of the thousand pounds raised was spent on veterinary treatment. Although it appears that the rescue implied that they had spent the £1000. 

My FB message to Patricia.

I have messaged Patricia with my thoughts for what they are worth. She is the legal owner in my book. As far as I am concerned WAW have misbehaved and in doing so has caused an injustice against the true and original owner.

Source: Metro.co.uk. and Patricia.