[Mrluvaluva]

I am sure most of us have seen this....


"A GREAT-grandmother has been electronically tagged, placed under curfew and fined £1,000 for selling a GOLDFISH to a 14-year-old boy.
Pet shop owner Joan Higgins, 66, landed the punishment after mistakenly selling the tiny fish to a schoolboy.

The pensioner failed to spot that the lad was under the age of 16 as required by law to buy a pet and fell foul of a sting by trading standards officers.

Married mum-of-two Mrs Higgins, who has run a pet shop for more than 28 years and never been in trouble before, was hauled before the courts and left distraught by the triple-whammy sentence.

The 6pm to 7am curfew means she won't be able to babysit her great grandson, go to bingo, or attend a Rod Stewart concert her nephew - TV actor Will Mellor - bought her as a treat.

Mrs Higgins slammed the court ruling, saying: "It's just ridiculous. I honestly can't believe what's happened. I don't think the punishment fits the crime. I thought tags were for people who did naughty things at night not great grandmothers.

"I've made an error of judgment and was happy to pay a fine but this just all seems over the top.

"The boy I sold the goldfish to looked over 16 but now I ask for ID every time.

"I get kids coming in the shop all the time in the summer with fish they've won from the fair but it seems to be one rule for them and one for me.


"I'm devastated at missing Rod Stewart - I've been waiting years to see him and now I'm going to miss it."

Joan's son Mark today labelled the £20,000 prosecution a "judicial joke".
Mr Higgins, 47, said: "I think it's a farce and legal lunacy and I told the council that.

"What gets me so cross is that they put my Mum on a tag — she's nearly 70, for goodness sake.

"They told her they would come and fit the tag last night so she missed her regular bingo night with her sister waiting for them to turn up, but they didn't come.

"But once it's fitted she'll be on a curfew from 7pm until 7am until June.

"She won't be able to go out with her sister to Bingo every week, and she's been bought tickets to see Rod Stewart so she won't be able to go to that.

"She's a great grandma - so she won't be able to babysit a new born baby, all because of this tag. You would think they have better things to do with their time and money.

"Mum has been running the shop for 28 years and this is the first time anything like this has ever happened.

"My argument was that people selling tobacco or alcohol to under age customers get two warnings before they get taken to court.

"We didn't get that. The system is a judicial joke."

Mrs Higgins who runs Majors Pet Shop in Sale, Greater Manchester, with her son, was brought to court by Trafford Council after breaching the 2006 Animal Welfare Act which bans children under 16 from buying pets unless accompanied by an adult.

The offence took place in July last year and Mrs Higgins spent eight months with the threat of jail hanging over her before being hauled before Trafford Magistrates Court on Monday.

The grandmother-of-three, who also carries out charity work for the Peoples Dispensary for Sick Animals, pleaded guilty to selling the fish to a person under 16.

She was also fined for causing unnecessary suffering to a cockatiel bird which had a broken leg and required the care of a vet.

Mr Higgins was also fined £750 and ordered to complete 120 hours of unpaid work.

His mother was tagged because she was deemed unfit to complete voluntary work.

The court's decision was last night slammed by politicians and "Big Brother" watchdogs.

Dylan Sharpe, campaign director of Big Brother Watch, added: "The judge should be ashamed. There is simply no justification for putting an electronic tag and a night-time curfew on a 66 year-old woman for this non-crime.

"There are many better ways of sorting out bad pet shops than lengthy prosecutions that waste time and taxpayers' money.

"This decision criminalises someone who has never committed an offence before, yet serial offenders seem to get away with dozens of crimes before being punished so severely."

A spokesman for Trafford Council defended the decision to bring the case.
Iain Veitch, Head of Public Protection, said: "The evidence presented for this conviction clearly demonstrates that it is irresponsible to sell animals to those who are not old enough to look after them.

"We have many responsible pet shops in the borough who provide adequate advice and care for animals however let this conviction send out a message that we will not tolerate those who cause unnecessary suffering to animals.

"The council will always try to support pet and business owners so that they are able to care for their animals properly, but where they continually ignore the advice they are given, we will not hesitate to use our statutory powers."


The Sun


Thoughts?

[\PJ/]

It made me lol it's totally pathetic.

[ILoveTRW]

lock her up and throw away the key

its cases like this where we need the death penalty back