Wednesday, August 4, 2010

SHAC burn bunnies alive

In yet another spectacular own goal SHAC have callously killed 8 of the very same bunnies they were supposed to be protecting....

EIGHT rabbits burned to death during an arson attack on a Lincolnshire farm for which animal rights activists claimed responsibility, it has been revealed.
As reported in the Echo, Highgate Farm in Normanby-by-Spital, near Market Rasen, was targeted by arsonists at about 2.20am on Monday, July 19.
A white Mercedes Sprinter van was destroyed.

Farm owner Geoff Douglas said whoever set the van on fire neglected to first check inside.No thought was given to what might have been in the van - it could even have been a driver having a sleep before going on his journey," said Mr Douglas, 64.

Before the police took the vehicle for examination, I was asked to remove the dead rabbits and it was one of the most upsetting things I have ever had to do.

Those poor rabbits, eight of them, while subjected to heat and toxic fumes, would have had hot, melting plastic dropping on their backs, leading to an agonising and terrifying death.

No animal should ever have to suffer like this."

If anybody has any information that could lead to the arrest of these disgusting animal abusers Shacwatch urges you to contact the police.

SHAC - torturing rabbits to death.


Medawar said...

The assumption is that they didn't know the rabbits were in the van.

Remembering the pig breeding unit that was torched by the older generation of AR extremists "to set them free", Medawar wouldn't bet on this.

I wonder if NECTU have any idea whether or not AR activists from Tebworth have been travelling lately, either to Lincolnshire or Austria, because there have been quite a few fires.

Anonymous said...

"No animal should ever have to suffer like this."
Rather ironic as he supplies the animals for torture. Before you say anything, that is exactly what it is.Driven by money and nothing more.When a farmer has enough money to buy a luxury sports car, something's not right. Mr Douglas should stop painting himself as a humble farmer because he is far from it.
Also,why would he be allowed to interfere with a crime scene? Obviously, this whole thing will be looked upon as domestic terrorism given the ridiculous response from the police when a few youngsters simply trespassed. Those rabbits should not have been removed before examination of the vehicle. If they do hold anyone responsible for this, it'll be interesting to see if there is any evidence to support the presence of rabbits during the fire.

Anonymous said...

P.S I don't agree with starting fires

Medawar said...

Standard AR response to psychopathic actions by one of their own: look for a way to pretend it didn't happen.


Yes -it's Glayds Hammond all over again - SHAC don't want to believe that their members are sick enough to do such things because if they are what does it make them?

It makes you SHAC - a sick twisted but thankfully almost dead, criminal conspiracy.

Anonymous said...


Well you obviously don't like accepting some things either.
I repeat: I DO NOT agree with starting fires. It's irresponsible but I do find it very suspicious that the police would allow him to disturb a crime scene. That is unacceptable and breaks police conduct.However, you officers may know more about that than I do.
I have no affiliation with SHAC whatsoever and disagree with tactics employed that do not comply with our laws. Is that a fair stance to take? Given your aggressive attitude towards anyone who disagrees with you, this is probably not the case.You should avoid coming to the assumption that anyone who does not share the same view as yourself has a part of SHAC or any animal lover for that matter.
It's incredibly irrational and immature.
Anyhow, like I said, we'll see if there's any evidence to support this claim. You're obviously anticipating an arrest.


Oh Grow up Anon:-

Your initial response was hardly neutral.

Yes - SHACWATCH does know more than you regarding SHAC

No we don't regard anybody who disagrees with us as SHAC but we take a dim view of those who use vexatious language to deflect criticism of them. (Yes - You)

Yes - we are expecting those disturbed individuals that committed this crime to be arrested - as you have alluded to everybody else SHAC sent has been nicked and most went to prison.

And YES - we do expect the animal cruelty charges to form part of the charges (probably reckless due to incompetence).

thelemur said...

My, you are a bitter bunny. Acceptance that there are extremists that support any cause does not in itself discredit the basis of an organisation. I'm sure that many scientists that experiment on animals are not sadistic killers. Similarly, many supporters of SHAC are concerned about the cruelty to these animals and not as mindless as you make out. It is always a mistake to assume that your enemies are either fools or knaves.

Medawar said...


Lucy was not a member of SHAC, MFAH or PETA.


The Lemur - you are aware that the founders and leaders of SHAC are serving decades in jail having ADMITTED their guilt?
Anybody still supporting such an organisation is indeed either a fool or a knave.

thelemur said...

It is difficult to know how to deal with the inaccuracy in your reply to me. With your extensive knowledge of this case you will know that Heather Nicholson did not plead guilty. To be true to the principle I was trying to suggest to you, I must assume that you were not deliberately trying to deceive nor were you too stupid to get your facts right. You merely made a person who made a mistake. According to your own logic, this should mean that you stop regarding SHAC supporters as knaves or fools. I'm not sure it will but I live in hope.


Yes - this is what we mean about vexatious language and in this case deliberate misrepresentation.
No Heather didn't plead - she was found guilty BUT Greg and Nat - the founders and leaders of SHAC - according to Heather, pleaded guilty, without reservation to the charges of Blackmail.
Your response suggests you are a fool but in fact you are a knave.

BTW - 15 days to go before the next trial - you can educate yourself at that.

thelemur said...

Your necessity to resort to insult so quickly is disappointing but no worry. I think all I will learn from future trials of SHAC activists is that the Government of the time was eager to show the industry that its opponents would be harshly dealt with. I think this is why, even if what these people did could be described as blackmail, it was certainly not the most serious form of this crime but sentences near the maximum were given. More, in fact, than those involved in more straightforwardly criminal blackmail cases involving abduction with demands for money have received.
I suspect that, given this perception, SHAC activists on trial must be tempted to plead guilty to reduce such draconian sentences.
What do you think about the unique imposition of indefinite ASBOs for Heather, Gregg & Natasha preventing them from ever expressing their views about vivisection?

Medawar said...

Have any victims of harassment by SHAC and similar "organizations", been subsequently befriended by a "Frances McQueen" who appears to be on their side and very helpful, but is really manipulating them in odd ways, or pumping them for information about their lives and contacts?

Medawar isn't sure he'd be surprised if supporters of SHAC might have had this experience, too. Not knowing what her game is, Medawar has a completely open mind about who she might have targeted.

Let's hear of similar experiences, even if the name is different, because the person involved might not be.

Anonymous said...

The increasingly lame and poorly attended so called camp at Highgate Farm goes from bad to worse. Owner Geoffrey Douglas has been targeted for SHAC high level intimidation for some time because he stands up to SHAC attacks and if needed confronts them face to face (something SHAC is always scared off).
SHAC planned the camp to coincide with the summer holidays in the hope of getting a strong turnout but numbers are simply so low its become a joke in the activist community.

Douglas drives in and out at various times of the day laughing at the pathetic SHAC turn out just one week after he had been told by a SHACtervist that they would,
"block his farm, close him down and ruin his life".

So poor has been the turnout that the local police apart from making a couple of low level arrests of some SHAC cannon fodder have not been needed.

Local people have long regarded SHAC has a minor irritation and one resident interviwed by the local paper was clear in her view.

"These animal rights extremists are losing. All of us localy have received letters saying the most disgusting and hateful things about Geoffrey Douglas but they forget that we know him, his family and his workers. He is liked and respected so their campaign has achieved nothing."

Other people were more blunt,
"These animal rights nutters are pathetic, complete scum. I know that some of the local lads are planning to go to the camp Friday night, they might well be getting some local justice."

Anonymous said...

Erm, post 2? A Mercedes sprinter van is a type of van, not a sports car. The hint is where it says mercedes sprinter VAN.
Also, the average farmer owns multi-millions in land and equipment. A tractor costs more than a ferrari. Why do farmers have to be poor?