TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
MAGISTRATES COURT
STROFIELD, Magistrate
BRIS-MAG-00006213/08
GERALDINE FOOI FONG ROBERTSON
Applicant
and
DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY INDUSTRIES AND
Respondent
FISHERIES and RSPCA
BRISBANE
..DATE 15/08/2008
..DAY 06
WARNING: The publication of information or details likely to lead to the identification of persons in some proceedings is a criminal
offence. This is so particularly in relation to the identification of children who are involved in criminal proceedings or proceedings for
their protection under the Child Protection Act 1999, and complainants in criminal sexual offences, but is not limited to those
categories. You may wish to seek legal advice before giving others access to the details of any person named in these proceedings.
1
15082008 D.06 T01/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
THE COURT RESUMED
1
LAURIE STAGEMEN CONTINUING:
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF:
10
HIS HONOUR: Good morning, would you please be seated.
MS MELLIFONT: Good morning, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Good morning, Ms Mellifont.
MS MELLIFONT: Just two matters, if I could quickly raise
them? Inspector Stageman is deaf in his right ear and has a
20
hearing aid in his left ear so you might find him turning
away. That's in order to have the ear facing us best.
BENCH: You've - you've confirmed what I - I made an
observation yesterday and you confirmed what I had assumed.
MS MELLIFONT: And I'll try to keep my voice up. The other
matter, your Honour, is I just wanted to canvas with your Honour the possibility of a break at 11 o'clock for 15
minutes, I need to make a phone call.
30
BENCH: No, that's fine. That probably fits in with - oh, it
does fit in with what I am happy to do, have a break at 11 for
15 or 20 minutes, so that's fine. And you're still able sit
until 12.30 today?
MS MELLIFONT: Yes, I am.
BENCH: Very good.
40
MS MELLIFONT: Thank you, your Honour. So, we return to
playing-----
BENCH: Yes, thank you.
MS MELLIFONT: -----the remainder of the tape?
TAPE PLAYED
50
MS MELLIFONT: Is that the end of the tape as you recall it? Is there more coming?-- No, I think that should be it.
Your Honour, I tender that tape recording.
XN: MS MELLIFONT
2
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T01/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
BENCH: It's Exhibit 25.
1
ADMITTED AND MARKED "EXHIBIT 25"
MS MELLIFONT: Inspector, what caused you to apply for a
warrant for Mrs Robertson's property on the 8th of January
10
2008?-- We had received a complaint that two animals were-----
Sorry, keep going, there's a fire alarm.
BENCH: Don't be concerned by the fire alarm, it's a - a
weekly practice that occurs.
MS MELLIFONT: Thank you, if you could start again
please?-- Yeah, we received a complaint regarding two animals that were boarded at the property and they were returned to
20
the owner with pusy eyes, smelling very strongly of urine and with burnt pads of their feet which is caused through urine.
And also the complainant stated about the smell of the property and he did take the animal to a vet and the - the vet
did say that the animal had pusy eyes, had infection eyes.
So, because of previous complaints of Geraldine's property
that complaint gave me ground for a warrant.
In the tape recording you make a reference to there have been
- there having been a dog with matted hair in the past, what
30
were you referring to?-- I attended the property with Senior Inspector Col Chapman in October last year and we had a
conversation with Mrs Robertson. Mrs Robertson denied us entry into the property. While repeated attempts to ask for
entry she denied it. The door was ajar a bit and I did notice a Poodle in that I could see through the ajar of the door,
which was badly knotted and I didn't make reference to it to Mrs Robertson that the dog needs clipping. And Mrs Robertson
said that the dog's up for clipping now.
40
Can you please go to Exhibit 18, the photographs? The witness
already has a collection of all the photographic evidence. Mr
Stageman, before taking you to those photographs, what do you
say to the proposition that the conditions of the kennels on
the 9th of January were - was due to rains in the previous
couple of weeks and flash floods in the previous few
days?-- Yeah, well, on our - on our assumption of the property
was that it wasn't maintained, it wasn't cleaned properly.
There was too much faeces laying around in some of the pens.
Because of the condition of the - of some of the dogs and the
50
- the smell that come from the property it was really
repugnant.
So, do you agree with that proposition or disagree with that
proposition?-- I agree with that.
The proposition was-----?-- Yeah.
XN: MS MELLIFONT
3
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T01/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
-----do you - what do you say to the proposition that the
1
conditions of the kennels were due to the rains in the
previous couple of weeks and-----?-- No, I don't agree with
that.
-----the flash - and the flash flood-----?-- Yeah.
-----in the previous few days, do you agree with that
proposition or disagree with that proposition?-- I disagree
with that.
10
All right. Now, in your affidavit of the 4th of August 2008,
you describe some of the conditions you saw on the property;
I'd like to take you, please, to Exhibit 18 and for you to
point out some of the features that you saw on that day which
lead to the information in the affidavit. And also some of
the features which cause you say you disagree with the
proposition I've just given you. If you could start, please,
at photograph number 2, do you have that there?-- Yeah.
20
All right. Can you tell the Court what you observed on that
day by reference with the photograph in respect of the matters
I've just spoken of?-- Well, the - the state of the dog's coat
and the build up of the matted hair tells me that the dogs
have been like that for a long period of time.
Can I just ask you also, you said yesterday that you'd worked
with the RSPCA for a number of years?-- Yes.
Some as an inspector and prior to that as an
30
animal-----?-- Animal Ambulance Officer.
Thank you. Now, how many years as an animal ambulance
officer?-- Three and a-half years.
And what did that job require you to do?-- To go out to attend
to injured animals, injured stray animals, rescue animals and
to feed and water animals that had been abandoned.
All right. Have you had any training in respect of the care
40
of animals, or that - and the identification of animals that
seem to be at harm?-- Yes and no, a lot of it has come from
experience working with the RSPCA. Observing, asking
questions to your superiors, just common practice if you're
not sure ask questions.
50
XN: MS MELLIFONT
4
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T02/LJP(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
All right. So, photograph number 2 is - you made reference to
1
the condition of that animal. Photograph number 3,
please?-- When - when I had a look at that and the build up of
faeces around that compound and if it had been flash flooded
in a couple of days, there wouldn't be a green mould on top of
the ground.
Okay. And in this photograph, are you able to see the green
mould?-- There's green mould down at the end near the gate.
10
Can you just hold up the photograph and point to where you're
pointing to, please? So, towards the back of the photograph
under - under the - under the gate?-- Yeah.
And along the back fence?-- And along the back fence and you
can see where it's starting to go. There's probably a little
bit of mud there, a little bit of dirt there but most of that
is just faeces.
Okay. Anything else about this photograph?-- That the yard
20
hasn't been cleaned for a while.
Right. Photograph number 4, please. Where was this in the -
in the - in the premises?-- This was - picture was taken
inside the lounge room of the house.
All right. Can you recall anything in terms of odour?-- The
odour was overwhelming where it made your eyes burn.
Odour of what?-- Of urine and faeces mixed together.
30
What did you observe to be at the - the base of the cage?-- In
the base of the cage, it looked like it was compounded faeces.
Can you see there's a dust looking substance or a dirt looking
substance outside the cage? Did you observe what that
was?-- A lot of it was dust but you could see there was faeces
that - that had spilled out over the side and where parts of
it had been damped where the urine had gone out there as well.
40
Photograph number 5, please. Is this the same or a different
location?-- The same location, it's the - the pen next to the
other one.
Any particular observations in respect of what's depicted in
this photograph?-- That the inside of the cages hadn't been
cleaned and there was compounded faeces on the floor of that
and there was a pungent smell coming from there as well and
the dogs, they were really smelly.
50
Photograph number 6, please?-- That cage is in the same
vicinity as the other two.
All right. Do you recognise the animals in the right-hand
cage?-- They were the - the pups that were in that - in that
one cage. In the right-hand cage, the - the pomeranian and
the - and the poodles, yes. They also had tramped in faeces
into the newspapers.
XN: MS MELLIFONT
5
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T02/LJP(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
In respect of those dogs, was - were there later conversations
with Mrs Robertson as to what was to happen with them?-- Yeah,
Mrs Robertson said, "That they were going over to Singapore.".
Photograph number 9, please. What observations did you make
in respect of this pen?-- These were the kennels that were
right down the back of the property. There was a build up of
faeces out in the yards and inside the enclosure, where also
the yard area there was green with mould. That tells me that
10
they haven't been cleaned out for quite a while.
Photograph number 10, please?-- That was also one of the pens
at the back compound. The - the dogs were - had faeces all in
their feet. In the - in the corner of the fence line there,
you can see that there was a build up of faeces all trampled
in.
Photograph 11, please?-- That was taken inside the enclosure
of the back kennels. The last pen where there was a - a few
20
standard breed poodles, that was outside and that was about
four - four inches high and that was just faeces that had been
pushed in there and just set in one big clump.
Now, can you just hold up the photo, please, and show us the
extent of the clump you refer to as being the faeces?-- And
that was just - it was like rock hard.
All right. So, just to try to indicate for the record, you're
indicating the motley coloured material at the base of the
30
fence-----?-- Yeah, of the pen area there - all around there.
-----which extends into around the centre of the photograph,
is that correct?-- Yes.
Photograph number 12, please. Where was this?-- This was also
in the pens out the back. We took a photo of this because of
the - the state of the floor and by the bowls that were in
there, it looked like they haven't had anything in there for a
while.
40
Did you see any dogs in this pen or not?-- There was two dogs
in that pen.
Photograph 13, please?-- That was also in the pens out the
back.
All right. What-----?-- It was - the dry - the bit of dry
area inside, you could still see that there was faeces around
the ground. The dogs were just absolutely covered in
50
dreadlocks on the bottom and their feet were all built up with
faeces.
You can see two bowls in that kennel. Can you recall what was
in there?-- There was a bit of water in one bowl and nothing
in the other one.
XN: MS MELLIFONT
6
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T02/LJP(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Photograph 15?-- That was also in the back pens. As you can
1
see by the photo, there was a small amount of faeces outside
but where there was also faeces that had been compacted but
not as bad as the others and that was green with algae as
well.
You'll see there's a dog there in the centre of the
photograph. It's a rear view so not particularly clear. Do
you have any particular recognition of that dog?-- That dog
was badly knotted with matted hair and part of the dreadlocks
10
on the dogs was - was still like compacted with faeces where
the dogs had been laying in it.
Photograph 16, please?-- That was also one of the pens out the
back and that had - that was a great deal of faeces in the
back of that.
Do you have a recollection of whether or not there were dogs
or a dog or dogs in this pen?-- There were dogs in that pen.
They were in the - in the front enclosure.
20
Photograph 17?-- This photo was taken just inside the office
door area. There was that cage area with the female dog in
there and the newspaper was fairly thick on the bottom and you
could see by the photo there was a lot of faeces and that was
just trampled into the dirt - trampled into the newspapers.
How deep would you say the build up on the bottom of the cage
was?-- Probably about three or four inches thick.
30
Photograph 19, please. Sorry, can I take you back first.
Photograph 18 - no, I'm sorry, that's a duplicate. We'll go
photograph-----?-- These - these were photos taken of - of
dogs in the cages in the lounge room.
Yes. All right. So, photograph 22 then, please?-- This was
taken as you first walk in through the doors. Just past the
office there was a - a bit of a channel in between the walkway
and it was barricaded off at both ends and there was numerous
dogs in there and there probably would have been a little bit
40
of mud in there but the majority of that was faeces. All
their pads to their feet were just caked in faeces. They had
nowhere for these dogs to lie, they were just laying in their
own faeces.
50
XN: MS MELLIFONT
7
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T3/SEF(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Can you just go back one photograph to photograph 21, a
1
photograph of two buckets?-- These buckets were down at the
bottom kennels just outside the door.
And the bucket in the left, can you recall what was in
there?-- No, I can't.
Okay. Twenty-four, please?-- That was taken down in the back
kennels. The majority of the kennels had just the wire frame
for a bed but no bedding in it.
10
Did you see any frames that had bedding in them?-- There was
some frames there and a lot of the bedding had sort of like
rotted away or been torn around. There was nothing really
substantial for them to lay on.
Photo 25, please?-- This is a photograph of the compound just
behind the house with all the faeces built up in there.
And 27?-- This is a bit of a compound area just as you walk in
20
through the main entrance on the left-hand side opposite the
office. These poodles were in that area there where there was
a bit of a shed area where I think Mrs Robertson did the
washing and that - washing the dogs.
What can you recall of the - as to the state of the animals
coats?-- The coats weren't really too bad but underneath their
feet was all where they had been brought up.
Where they had been, sorry?-- Where they'd been brought up
30
from somewhere else. They still had caked faeces in between
the pads.
Now, photograph - can you look at 31, 32, 33 and 34 and tell
me when they were taken?-- Is that thirty-----
Thirty-one, 32, 33 and 34?-- I think they were taken on the -
in February, when we went back the second time.
Mmm. How did the state of the rooms depicted in these
40
photographs compare with how they were on the 9th of January,
2008?-- Hadn't changed.
Photograph 35, when was that taken?-- That was taken in
February as well.
And where was this cage?-- That was a cage in the front
office.
Okay?-- That was the case that held the chocolate covered dog
50
in the previous photos.
Okay. And just to photograph - sorry, 46 please, the last
one. When was that photograph taken?-- Is that 46?
Yes, the last one?-- That was taken in February.
XN: MS MELLIFONT
8
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T3/SEF(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
And the room depicted there, how did that compare with the
1
condition on the 9th of January?-- It hadn't changed.
Now, it's back to the 9th of January 2008, please. As dogs
were being transported to the vehicles by the RSPCA and
council officers, did you observe any mistreatment of
them?-- No, I didn't.
Did you mistreat any animals?-- No, I didn't.
10
Did you plant any maggots on the dogs?-- No, I didn't.
Did you see anyone plant maggots on the dogs?-- No.
Was there any overcrowding on the vehicles?-- No, all the
vehicles are specifically built for transportation of animals.
Most of the cages that the council had were 900 by 900. Our
cages in our dog trailer are 900 by 900. The dogs had ample
room to move around. If there was - probably one or two dogs
more in there it was only a short distance that they were
20
being transported to, but I didn't sort of see any
overcrowding. We made sure that the dogs had freedom of
movement.
Did Mrs Robertson take any dogs to the vehicles?-- Mrs
Robertson helped up when we waited for the other trailer to
come back and Mrs Robertson put - I saw her put one dog in the
trailer, but she was helping us - she was getting the dogs
from the compound behind the house and bring them out to us.
30
Was a count done at the premises as to a number of dogs
seized?-- Yeah, each - two other inspectors that were helping
us were counting the dogs and gave us the number of 104.
You attended that day, who attended with you?-- There was two
other inspectors, Inspector Barron, Inspector Goodfellow, two
volunteer RSPCA inspectors and two police officers from
[Indistinct] Police station.
How many police cars?-- One.
40
How many RSPCA cars?-- Two.
Did either of the cars use flashing lights?-- No.
Was there any media present?-- There was a film crew that
accompanied us who are filming RSPCA Animal Rescue. We also
involve them into coming onto properties with us filming
evidence.
50
Okay. Now, did Mrs Robertson have to deal with a media
contingent?-- I did - the only film crew that were there were
Imagination.
Are they the RSPCA Animal Rescue people?-- Sorry?
Are they the RSPCA Animal Rescue people?-- Yes, they were
there for a short time and then they left.
XN: MS MELLIFONT
9
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T3/SEF(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
Did counsel employees later attend?-- They did.
How many vehicles did they bring?-- Four vehicles I think.
And how many council employees altogether?-- Would be six.
Did Shane Towers-Hammond attend?-- Shane turned up roughly
about after lunch time. We'd contacted the shelter and asked
for our eight dog trailer to be brought up and that was
10
brought up by Inspector Heaton and Inspector Towers-Hammond
accompanied her.
Is that Katie Heaton?-- Yeah.
Now, while you were there did Mrs Robertson make any telephone
calls?-- She did and Mrs Robertson tried to contact her
veterinarian. This is when we were at the front.
What did you hear of that?-- The vet wouldn't come out.
20
Did she, to your knowledge, contact anyone else?-- I think Mrs
Robertson was trying to contact her solicitor.
Okay. Did the solicitor attend?-- No.
In the tape recording we hear about half way through, you
discussing the potentially giving an Animal Welfare Direction.
Now, what is that?-- Well, what I was - the whole point of it
was, as I said to Mrs Robertson, "I'm going to seize some of
30
the dogs. I was going to let her keep some of her dogs and
give her an Animal Welfare Direction to tidy the place up and
to clip these dogs, bring them back up to scratch and then
after we saw a lot more of the property there in consultation
with the other inspectors, it was agreed that for their
welfare they should all be seized.
Why did you come to the decision to seize all of
them?-- Because of the living conditions that they were in.
The dogs down the back, the dogs in that middle compound, the
40
amount of dreadlocks that were on their - their coats, and the
thick coats, that it would be impossible for a single person
to bring all those animals in that pen back up to scratch -
that whole area back up to scratch.
50
XN: MS MELLIFONT
10
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T4/RAK(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
What was your concern if you left them there?-- That they
would be prolonged - be in the condition they were and that it
was decided to seize the animals for their welfare.
Now, can we please - please have Exhibit 2 played.
EXHIBIT PLAYED
10
MS MELLIFONT: Can we re-wind it please, to the beginning.
EXHIBIT PLAYED
20
MS MELLIFONT: No, no, I'm sorry, right to the very beginning.
EXHIBIT PLAYED
MS MELLIFONT: Can we just pause it. Mr Stageman, have you
30
seen this video before?-- Yes.
Who took it?-- I did.
You'll see there it's got a date, 10th of January 2008 and it
starts around 11.13. Was this video taken on the 10th of
January 2008?-- No, it was taken on the 9th.
And do you know the time at which you started to take the
video?-- Well, we initially walked through the pen areas and
40
had a look at everything and I took a few still photographs
and then when we went back up, I grabbed the video camera and
started taking videos of the whole property.
Do you know why it says the 10th of January?-- Yeah, I had
trouble with the camera - the video camera, it was - I
couldn't get the date set up properly.
Can we please go forward to 11.27.40.
50
BENCH: 11.27.40 was it?
MS MELLIFONT: Yes, please.
BENCH: Yes.
XN: MS MELLIFONT
11
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T4/RAK(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
EXHIBIT CONTINUED TO BE PLAYED
1
MS MELLIFONT: It's a lot too far, you'll need to go way back.
About eight minutes earlier or thereabouts. Okay, stop it
there - just pause it there, please. Do you know that name -
that dog by any particular name?-- No.
Okay, all right. Can we fast forward please till we see a
10
blue bucket with liquid being put into it. There, please,
we'll just play that section, please.
EXHIBIT CONTINUED TO BE PLAYED
MS MELLIFONT: Don't stop there, just let it play, thank you.
20
EXHIBIT CONTINUED TO BE PLAYED
MS MELLIFONT: That little tiny clip at the end, when was that
taken?-- That was taken on the 9th.
30
Where?-- Not too sure, I think it was in that laundry area,
that bit where Mrs Robertson washes the dogs. That was her
hydro bath.
Okay. And what were you observing there?-- The - the
condition of the water that was in the bottom of that.
Right. You say - you say it was the consequence of something;
what was it the consequence of?-- Of all the dirt on the dogs,
the flea dirt. When - when you put a dog in a hydro bath and
40
wash it, it all goes into that section to be cleaned out, but
by the look of that, it hasn't been cleaned out for a while.
Thank you, that's the end of that video. Can you just have a
look at this Hi 8 video cassette, please. Do you recognise
that cassette? Yeah, that came out of my video.
All right. Is that the video we've just watched?-- Yes.
All right. Your Honour, I tender that, please.
50
BENCH: That's Exhibit 26.
ADMITTED AND MARKED "EXHIBIT 26"
XN: MS MELLIFONT
12
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T4/RAK(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
MS MELLIFONT: Inspector, at paragraph 17 of your affidavit,
you say that you showed Dr Michael Shane Kennedy, a Hi 8
video. Which video was that?-- That was that one.
After the count, when you were told there was 104 dogs, and
between then and the time that you all left the premises, was
there any opportunity for Mrs Robertson to hide dogs?-- Yeah,
probably at the end when we waited for that other trailer to
come. The dogs were a bit skittish, Mrs Robertson was
10
bringing the dogs out to us from the compound. We never went
in there with her because the dogs knew her and they came out
with her, probably at that point.
Could we have please, the DVD Exhibit 20 played. Number 2,
please.
20
30
40
50
XN: MS MELLIFONT
13
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T05/KMW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
EXHIBIT 20 PLAYED
1
MS MELLIFONT: Stop it there, please. Who took that
video?-- Yes, I did.
And when did you take it?-- Took it down at the back of the
compound at the RSPCA where they were clipping the dogs.
10
On what day?-- I think it was the next day.
Okay. Did you attend again at Mrs Robertson's property on the
22nd of February 2008?-- Yes.
For what purpose?-- Went there with Inspector Towers-Hammond
to seize documents.
Were documents in fact seized?-- Yes.
20
Did anyone attend at that - on that day to assist Mrs
Robertson?-- I think there was a - a lady there, Margaret
Watts.
Did Mrs Robertson contact anybody?-- Mrs Robertson contacted
her solicitors.
Did - did they attend?-- They did, yes.
And how many of them?-- There were three of them.
30
In respect of the property that was located was there any
exchange of receipts on that day or did that occur at a later
point in time?-- Yes, there was. At the end of collecting
documents that were put in the back of my car Inspector
Towers-Hammond filled out a receipt to seize property and
handed it to Mrs Robertson's solicitor and he accepted it on
behalf of her.
Can you have a look at photographs from Exhibit 23?-- Now,
40
they were taken in the back of my car.
All right. Now, just go through those and have a look through
them. You see there's a number of items with blue tags with
handwriting on them?-- Yeah.
What are those items?-- Those items are all the documents that
we had taken out of Mrs Robertson's office.
What do - what do you say to the suggestion that the material
50
taken from Mrs Robertson's house on that day filled three and
a-half trucks?-- No.
You say they went into your car, do you?-- Into my car, yes.
And what's the size of the area that they filled in your
car?-- Nine hundred by 900.
XN: MS MELLIFONT
14
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T05/KMW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Mills?-- Yep.
1
Of the property seized, Inspector, did you take any of it out
of the property bags or property room? Did you remove it or
take it way?-- From?
From either the property bags or the property room. Did you
take it away and not return it?-- No.
During the 22nd of February 2008 did you look in Mrs
10
Robertson's freezer?-- No.
Anywhere on the property did you see any dead body of a
puppy?-- No.
Did you see a - a dog at Mrs Robertson's property on that
day?-- I did, yes.
When you first saw the dog where were you?-- We were out the
back checking the other kennels and then came in through the
20
back way of the back of the compound.
Who were you with?-- Inspector Young.
What did you see of the dog?-- We saw the - the dog just up
behind the house and we went and had a look at her.
And what did you see of the condition of the dog?-- The dog
body condition was fine. The only issue was the swollen eyes
and there was pussy and crust - crustiness all around the
30
eyes.
Were the eyes open or closed?-- Her eyes were open but the one
that was badly swollen it was - it was - the eye was open but
it was just badly swollen around it.
Right. Did you stay with the dog throughout the entire period
you were there?-- No, we didn't.
All right. Did you see the dog again at a later point in
40
time?-- Yep.
How much later do you think?-- Probably an hour later or a
couple of hours later. We went back and all the pus and junk
had been wiped out of the eyes but the eyes were still pretty
swollen. We spoke to Mrs Robertson about it and Mrs Robertson
said that the dog needed an eye operation.
Did you have a conversation with her about who owned the
dog?-- I didn't. Inspector Towers-Hammond did.
50
Were you present for that conversation?-- Part of it I was,
yeah.
And what did you hear?-- Inspector Towers-Hammond asked Mrs
Robertson who owned it. Mrs Robertson then said that at first
it belonged to Mrs Watts.
XN: MS MELLIFONT
15
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T05/KMW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Did you hear any further conversation about the ownership of
1
the dog that day?-- No.
All right. Can you go please to Exhibit 18 and turn to
photograph 36?-- Which photograph?
Photograph 36?-- That was the dog that was at the back of the
house.
Okay. Where was this photograph taken?-- While the dog was at
10
the back of the house.
Okay. And is - is this on the first occasion or on the second
occasion you saw the dog?-- This was on the first occasion.
Can you have a look please at photograph 37. Can you tell me
whether this photograph was taken before or after the dog's
eyes appeared to have been wiped clean?-- That was before.
And photograph 38?-- That photograph was taken after the dog's
20
eye had been wiped.
Okay. Was a decision made to seize the dog?-- Inspector
Towers-Hammond decided to seize it.
If it was up to you to make the decision on that day, what
would your decision have been? If it was up to you to make
the decision on that day, what - what would your decision have
been?-- I would have seized it because the dog needed
attention to the eyes.
30
Why not just leave it there and give an animal welfare
direction?-- I didn't - I didn't do that because it wasn't my
case. It was Shane - it was Shane's - Shane's decision there.
He was the inspector in charge.
What I'm asking you is if it was your decision. It's this the
case where you would have issued an animal welfare direction
or a decision to seize the dog?-- No, I would have seized the
dog.
40
Because?-- Because of its eyes, because of the discomfort and
because of the other dogs.
Which other dogs?-- The other dogs that were on the property
that weren't treated.
At what time are you speaking of?-- When we were there on the
9th.
50
Can you have a look, please, at this document. One for the
Magistrate. It's a document headed "Written consent to
seizure.", dated the 11th of January 2008. Can you tell me on
how this document came into being, please?-- Yes. We received
a call from a Mr Vlahos from Overland Driver in Edens Landing.
XN: MS MELLIFONT
16
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T06/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Did you take the call or someone else?-- No, the call centre
1
took the call.
All right. So did you speak with Mr Vlahos before attending
at all?-- No, I just went over to the property.
All right. And - all right, so you attended at the property.
And what happened?-- I spoke to Mr Vlahos and he informed that
he has four dogs there that belong to Mrs Robertson.
10
And he - did he then consent to you seizing the four
dogs?-- Yes, he did.
All right. Your Honour, I tender that written consent to
seizure.
BENCH: Exhibit 27. That consent seizure is dated the 11th of
January 2008.
20
ADMITTED AND MARKED "EXHIBIT 27"
MS MELLIFONT: Can I ask you, please, to have a look at
Exhibit 7? Can you look through those photographs, please,
and tell me whether you recognise the dogs depicted in - in
the photographs?-- Those are the dogs that were surrendered
from Mr Vlahos.
30
Thank you. What do you say Inspector Stageman to the
allegation that on the 9th of January RSPCA were snatching and
grabbing the puppies and shoving them into the dog
trailers?-- I don't believe that.
What do you say to the allegation that the RSPCA dragged one
of Mrs Robertson's dogs out, tightly choked by the choker
lead, the dog nearly blacking out?-- I never saw that happen.
40
Excuse me, your Honour?-- A lot of - a lot of those dogs that
were on the property weren't even used to a lead so most of
the dogs were carried out.
I have nothing further, your Honour.
BENCH: Thank you. Mrs Robertson?
APPLICANT: Yes.
50
MS MELLIFONT: Ms Williams will just take on the matter for
two minutes if there's any objections.
BENCH: Yes, certainly.
MS MELLIFONT: Thank you, your Honour.
BENCH: Mrs Robertson, Mr Stageman-----
XN: MS MELLIFONT
17
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T06/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
APPLICANT: Yes.
BENCH: -----as you know is hard of hearing.
APPLICANT: Yes.
BENCH: You have to speak up.
APPLICANT: Mmm-hmm.
10
BENCH: Okay.
CROSS-EXAMINATION:
APPLICANT: Shall I [indistinct] continue?
20
BENCH: No, no, that's fine. Instructing solicitor's here.
APPLICANT: Mr Stageman, I - I see that you've lied about the
statement you've given. All the evidence you've said you've
distorted the facts. What do you have to say about that,
about what happened?-- No, I haven't lied.
You haven't lied at all?-- No.
30
Right. Okay. Let's start. Where would you like to start? I
suppose anywhere. Let's see. The hydrobath in the video: you
believe it was - the hydrobath, the picture was taken on my
property of my hydrobath after we bath the pups. In the area
my - where the pups were, could you please, thank you, show
the video-----
BENCH: Video of the hydrobath.
APPLICANT: -----of the hydrobath, the kennel, the-----
40
BENCH: That's in Exhibit 2, isn't it, at the end of what
we've seen of Exhibit-----
APPLICANT: Yes, I think between where the maggots and the
hydrobath.
BENCH: Yes.
APPLICANT: Yes, please.
50
EXHIBIT 2 PLAYED
APPLICANT: You-----
XXN: APPLICANT
18
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T06/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
BENCH: Did you hear, Mr Stageman?-- Yeah, I did.
And sorry, and you also saw what was on the video?-- Yeah -
yeah.
APPLICANT: Was that your voice making that comment?-- That
was my voice, yes.
Yes. I put it to you that that hydrobath didn't belong on my
10
property or to me?-- That's very untrue, Mrs Robertson. That
hydrobath was on your property.
I have two hydrobaths in my property. Both the hydrobaths,
it's always been a practice for 20 years that after bathing I always take out the plug, flush it out clean. And on that day
we didn't have time to bath any dogs. In fact, for the whole day on the 9th that you were in attendance you were following
close to me. I couldn't move a step without you next to me-----?-- Yeah, some-----
20
-----would you say that?-- In some locations there I gave the video camera to Inspector Goodfellow to - to film.
Inspector Goodfellow was it?-- Inspector Goodfellow.
Goodfellow. How do you spell it, please?-- G-O-O-D-F-E-L-L-O-
W.
You gave the - the camera to him for him to film
30
and-----?-- Yeah.
Yes?-- In some circumstances he was filming on my behalf.
Yes. And - and I put to you now that you did not handle the
video camera or took any film other than - you might have used a camera, a hand held one, but I didn't think you did. I
would remember because you were next to me all the time. You were keeping an eye on me and following me every step of the
way, the whole - from the morning till you left - to almost
40
before you left?-- In some cases I weren't with you.
No, you were with me. Somebody had to keep an eye on me and
it was you, you choose to?-- No, though in some-----
And I can remember everything that happened-----?-- In some
cases I did take some video footage, other cases you were out somewhere else.
All right?-- You weren't with me all the time.
50
No?-- I had to come up and get you a couple of times to come
down and open gates.
No, you didn't come and get me anywhere. You were following
me?-- Yeah, I did-----
XXN: APPLICANT
19
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T06/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Because I remember?-- I did have to come and get you to come
1
down the back to open the gate-----
Shall we play your video tape?-- -----so we can transport the
animals out.
MS MELLIFONT: Sorry.
BENCH: Yes, there's-----
10
MS MELLIFONT: The objection is that Mrs Robertson needs to
allow the witness to answer and fully answer before she starts
speaking again, please.
BENCH: That's the first thing.
APPLICANT: All right, yes.
BENCH: The second thing is, it's being recorded and two
people speaking at once, all right, there's a legal - there's
20
a legal issue with you interrupting the answer but there's
also a technical issue with interrupting the answer.
30
40
50
XXN: APPLICANT
20
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T07/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
APPLICANT: Okay.
1
BENCH: So, do you want the video played?
APPLICANT: Yes, I apologise for that. Yes.
BENCH: Which part of the video, Mrs Robertson?
APPLICANT: The hydrobath, just the hydrobath.
10
BENCH: The hydrobath again.
APPLICANT: Would you please have a look?
VIDEO PLAYED
20
APPLICANT: Can we stop this. Yes, please.
BENCH: Do you want it to continue, Mrs Robertson?
APPLICANT: Mr Stageman, could you have a look. Now, they
look like to be a mat of some description on the side, would
you say?-- The mat-----
That looks like-----?-- -----yeah.
30
Mmm.
BENCH: That's - that's in the top right hand corner of the
video at 11.02:35?-- Yep.
APPLICANT: Now, we - I don't own any mats that look like that
and you wouldn't find one on my property today, yesterday or
on the 9th, or any - any - for any time, I've never owned any
mats like that. What do you say to that, Mr Stageman?-- That
- that hydrobath is - was on your place.
40
I put it to you that that hydrobath belongs - was on the
premises of the RSPCA, and that's where-----?-- No. No, our -
our-----
And the video showed, what, 11.02:35, the time I
guess?-- Could I possibly see the date on that - on that
hydrobath video?
BENCH: I'd - yes, we can play it but I don't think there is a
50
date there, Mr Stageman?
WITNESS: Because Mrs Robertson has a point because we have
mats in our hydrobath. The video could have been taken of our
- of our hydrobath after we washed the dogs. So, I
respectfully acknowledge that one. That would have to
probably be our hydrobath.
XXN: APPLICANT
21
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T07/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
APPLICANT: So, you - you - you acknowledge this is not my
1
hydrobath?-- Well, with the mats and we did - I remember I did take a video of the - the dogs after they were washed. I
apologise for that.
Thank you. Now, the - regarding Flirt, my brown all round
bitch that was removed by you or Inspector Towers-Hammond or Daniel Young, I'm not clear, but was removed from my premises.
You mentioned earlier that Flirt's eyes were swollen, both of them?-- Yeah.
10
On picture - photo 38. Can you see the photo of Flirt's close up shot on - would you say her eyes is inflamed or the red -
or is the third inner eyelid that is showing? They do have an inner eyelid when they are in shock or they're scared?-- Or
the third - the third eyelid is - is seen on the - on the - on the left eye looking at the photograph.
On both of them actually, left and right?-- Yeah, that the
eyes look - they do look a bit swollen to me.
20
The eyes are swollen you say and it's not the inner eye lid that is up-----?-- No, you did - you did say that on the day
and you said that the dog needed an operation. But when we first saw the dog it was covered in pus and crusty.
I said she had - you - you - you saw her eyes, it was crusty,
yellow?-- Pusy.
Pusy. Were you aware if I - if I tell you that I had in the
30
morning as prescribed by the vet, and I did try to explain that day also, that I had eye ointment applied to her eyes,
when I was asked, I had eye ointment applied to her eyes and the instructions were to rinse out the eyes three times a day
and to apply fresh ointment?-- I didn't - I wasn't aware of you - you saying that 'cause Inspector Hammond was speaking to
you regarding that issue.
Yes, I did explain that and he ignored it. And it wasn't the
pus, it was yellow eye ointment called Opticlox. And in fact
40
the eyes that looked inflamed, as you say swollen, if you have a good look at it again, please, and let me know whether you
still think it's inflamed, have a good look? It's a bad photo actually, there is another couple of photos.
BENCH: Which photo do you want him to look at then? Do you
want him to look at number 36 or-----
APPLICANT: Yeah, number 38-----
50
BENCH: -----38?
APPLICANT: -----first.
BENCH: 38.
APPLICANT: And then 36 perhaps. Oh, they're both nearly as
bad. Perhaps 37 would help also. If it was swollen and
XXN: APPLICANT
22
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T07/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
inflamed you would see the swelling, I would think, regardless
1
of - 36, 37 or 38?-- Yeah, 30 - 36, the way it's got junk
around the eyes.
He had ointment applied in the morning and then at lunchtime I
had to clean it out, which I did, and put fresh ointment on
it. Now, that was what actually happened that day and then
she left late in the afternoon, about 4, 4.30, something like
that. She was taken then but looking at those three photos,
do you still believe that her eyes looked swollen?-- Well, if
10
- if I - if I had of known that you were applying treatment to
the dog I wouldn't have - I personally wouldn't have taken it.
And what was her body condition like, did she look like
normally-----?-- No, her - she had perfect body condition.
Okay. So, if you had checked - you weren't aware because it
was Inspector Towers-Hammond actually who actually was talking
to me about Flirt. So, you would have - sort of - wouldn't
have taken her?-- Yeah, I - I - if it was me I wouldn't have
20
taken the dog 'cause you were treating the dog and I wouldn't
have taken it.
Yes, thank you. Now, did you - back to the day - back to 9th
of January, the Wednesday, we're finished with the 22nd now.
The - do you know how many trailers were - were available to
transport the dogs back to the RSPCA kennels?-- Well, we had -
we had the small trailer with us just in case. That was a
four dog trailer. And I had council trucks on standby that
were built for transporting dogs.
30
Yes?-- And we had our eight dog trailer at the RSPCA that I
requested to attend.
You had one, eight dog trailer belonged to RSPCA; one, four
dog trailer?-- Yes.
And council shire - Beaudesert Shire actually loaned one,
eight dog trailer as well. So, that means two, eight dog
trailers?-- Yeah.
40
And one, four dog-----?-- Nice of the council-----
-----trailers, that's for normal dog?-- Yeah.
50
XXN: APPLICANT
23
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T08/LJP(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Yeah, transportation. How many trips would you know - would
1
you remember, you heard or whatever?-- With - with our dog -
our eight dog trailer, we did two.
You did two with your eight dog trailer?-- Yeah.
The Beaudesert Shire would have done one or two
perhaps?-- They're only just - they did one.
They did one. So, that's three eight dog
10
trailers-----?-- Yeah.
-----and one four dog trailers?-- Yeah.
So, you must say when you - well-----?-- The - the-----
-----wouldn't that be - yeah, go on?-- The council cars also
have dog - dog cages on the back of their units as well and
there was three of them that they took dogs back to RSPCA.
20
The council cars had how many? I didn't see them, the cars.
I saw they were towing the trailer, didn't have compartments
at the back. I think they - they're Land Rovers, I think.
There was a couple of Land Rovers?-- No, they got Toyotas -
they have Toyotas.
Yes. And all like the - like the ones that - what did they
look like? Just-----?-- The ones I can remember, they were
enclosed cages, there was two of those. There was one with
one cage in the - in the front, another cage at the back. The
30
council did have a transportable cage on the back of one of
their units and that's all I can remember of what they had.
Well, there were only - how many council workers were on
loan?-- I think there would have been probably six came to
give us a hand.
According to the council, there was three. There were three -
three Beaudesert Shire officers-----?-- Yeah, three more-----
40
-----because they were not to give you a hand-----?-- Three
more came.
They were only to lend you transport?-- Yeah, that-----
That was what the mayor told me?-- Yeah, well there was -
there was-----
There was a direction from them to leave my dogs alone.
50
BENCH: Mrs Robertson, again-----
APPLICANT: Sorry.
BENCH: Let - let him answer.
APPLICANT: Yes, sorry?-- The - the council came on - on my
request to assist. Under our laws, we can request anybody to
XXN: APPLICANT
24
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T08/LJP(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
come and assist. They were required to transport animals,
1
which they did do. I wasn't with them all the time. I wasn't
aware of exactly how many vehicles they had - what they had on
their vehicles. I know that most of the council vehicles have
built in cages and they - they transported the majority of the
poodles with their trailer as well as with our other trailer.
There were two council office - I tell you, Mr Stageman, I put
to you that I saw two shire council officers there assisting.
According to their employer, the Beaudesert Shire Council, at
10
that point in time, it's now the Logan, there was - they were
only instructed to assist by lending the transport, in other
words, just not to touch the dog or whatever, however, they
did assist. Now, you are saying that there are three other
vehicles on top of the dog trailer and I was told there was
two officers assisting and one dog trailer loaned, to
transport-----?-- There was - there was more than three
Brisbane - Beaudesert Council officers there and they did -
they did help carry the dogs out and load them.
20
Do you have their names?-- Mark Duncan, John Lyons, Jim
Winfield, Lisa was there and Bob Warren came.
Did Mark Duncan, John Lyons-----?-- Jim Winfield.
Jim Winfield?-- And Lisa - I can't think of her last name and
Bob Warren.
And Bob Warren?-- Yeah, Bob Warren was only there for a short
period of time and then he left.
30
How short is short? How short is short, please? Ten minutes,
five minutes?-- He was only there probably - probably 10, 15
minutes, then he left.
So, I suppose he could - would he have taken a dog or two or
whatever or just-----?-- No, he went back to Beaudesert.
Went back to Beaudesert?-- As far as I know.
40
So, there was four of them. All of them had a car each or
they came together or what was the deal?-- Well, I - I wasn't
with them all the time, but they were helping-----
Because you were with me?-- Yeah. Well, you ask me questions
I - I - I can't answer because I was with you.
That's right. So, when - when did you take the video, because
I didn't see you with a video camera, Laurie?-- I did have the
video camera on a couple of occasions. Other occasions you
50
were up at the house, I was filming then I'd pass it over to
Jed, come and got you to come and unlock the gate and then I
remained with you for most of the time after that.
Mr Stageman, when you came in the morning, I went out to greet
you, you agree?-- Say again.
XXN: APPLICANT
25
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T08/LJP(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
When I came in the morning - when you came in the morning, I
1
went outside to greet you and you had just come down from the
vehicle, stepped out of the vehicle and walked down to the -
to the front of reception, I was by the side of the drive and
you came with two police officers and then another two police
officers came up and checked with the first two that it was
okay to leave, so he left. You got to have come with two
police cars, because you came from two locations?-- I only
noticed two - the - the two police officers that came with me
when I first went there.
10
Yes. But, two other police officers came up to the first two
and said, "Is it" - "Can" - "can we leave now?", and he - the
other grunted something and they went off. There were two
police vehicles. They pulled in one after the other, they
came into the drive with their lights blinking and that's what
alerted me. It was the flashing lights because it was still
overcast?-- Well, I didn't - I didn't see any of that, Mrs
Robertson.
20
You didn't?-- No.
Okay?-- 'Cause I was talking to you and I had the two police
officers from Jimboomba. I can't remember any other police
officers coming. I know that after the Jimboomba police
officer cautioned you, then he come out and said, "We've got
to go.", so they left.
He didn't caution me, Laurie. He didn't caution me?-- Pardon?
30
MS MELLIFONT: Again, the witness needs to be able to finish
his answer.
APPLICANT: Yeah. Okay. Could you please continue. He - he
- you got down from the car, you came towards me and-----
BENCH: I think we're up to the point where the police officer
cautioned you. We're up to the point where the police - you
say the police officer cautioned Mrs Robertson?-- Yeah. And
then that was after when you - he cautioned you after you shut
40
the door on us.
APPLICANT: Before that, that was about - about half an hour
after you arrived?-- Yeah. Well, when - when we first went
there you were on the phone trying to get your veterinarian to
come out.
No, that wasn't right. You got it a bit mixed up. No, we
start from, after you arrived I went outside and waiting for
you at the side of the drive and the car park was full of
50
cars?-- Yeah.
Yes. And you came up to where I was standing, in front of the
reception door, just near the side of the drive, okay, and two
policemen escorted you or came with you?-- Yeah.
And then within a couple of minutes the other two policemen
had already got out of their car and came towards the first
XXN: APPLICANT
26
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T08/LJP(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
two and they had a little conversation and then they left and
1
then you - I asked you what you were doing there and you
explained that you had complaint from someone some six months
ago regarding two dogs with sticky eyes and - and - and I
said, "It isn't that.", and you said you had a complaint. I
said, "It" - "It isn't" - "isn't that", you told me that and
then you asked me questions - the - the - about my - what is
my full name, you ask me; you ask me, what was my date of
birth; you ask me, where was I born; you ask me-----
10
MS MELLIFONT: Your Honour, I'm sorry to keep interrupting but
there's been about 10 propositions put. If Mrs Robertson
wants this witness to respond that these things did happen,
after each proposition he can respond, then she can go onto
the next proposition, otherwise the witness doesn't know what
he's supposed to be answering.
APPLICANT: All right. I'm sorry. I apologise again.
BENCH: All right.
20
APPLICANT: I'll try and remember.
BENCH: You - you're - you're point - you're - what you're
wanting him to comment on is how many police officers were
there, is that - is that the case?
APPLICANT: Yes. Yes, please.
BENCH: All right?-- Any time we issue a warrant, we always
30
have police officers attend to us to keep the peace.
APPLICANT: Then why was it unusual that day, because there
were two vehicles - police vehicles that came?-- Well, the
other police, I - I - I didn't see the other police there, I
can't remember any more than two police officers there. I do
know that the police officer I spoke to after we gained entry
and he did caution you, he came up to me and said, "Do you
require us any more? We've got to go, we've got another
job.", they've got to go to and I released them, and it was
40
just us there then.
50
XXN: APPLICANT
27
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T09/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
No. I - I - according to - to me the two policemen, as I
1
recall, came up with you. Another two policemen came up and
requested the first two policemen, said to them, "Do you still
need us?". They said, no, they could go. They said they had
another call and they left, right? And then you and I had a
conversation. Now, did you ask me my personal details at the
front of the house before we went in - before - mmm-hmm?-- No,
I don't think I did.
Yes, you did. I - I put it to you that you did because to
10
help you recall, perhaps you remember the two ladies from the
Sunday-Mail also came and stood by then in front of me on the
other side and do you - do you recall them saying to me or
asking - asking me I should - report my side of it. This
happened outside the house?-- I do remember the - the - the -
the media - the newspaper people that came.
Yes?-- I wouldn't let them - they wanted to come in with us
and I wouldn't let them come in with us because it's nothing
to do with them. They spoke to you and asked you something.
20
I'm not too sure what they asked you but you - I think you
denied them access into the property as well.
Yes, I asked them to respect my privacy and-----?-- Yeah,
well, I wouldn't let them in the-----
-----you know, and stay outside?-- I wouldn't let them in the
property as well.
Yes. Then I explained that I would have to - then you asked
30
me the personal questions, you know, my name? Would you -
would you say - would agree? You asked me my name?-- I asked
for your full name, yes.
Yes. My date of birth?-- I can't remember asking you that. I
- I asked for your full name and wrote it down. We don't
normally ask people their - their date of birth or where they
were born till we do records of interview with them.
Mr Stageman, you didn't write anything down that day. You
40
didn't carry any paper or pen. You asked me my full name, my
date of birth, where I was born, how long have I been in
Australia, whether I was living on my own, and whether anyone
else was living with me, in that order. I remember it very
quickly. What do you say?-- I asked you, "Are you here by
yourself?. Is anyone else living here with you?", and you
said, "No, there isn't.". I had a folder with me all the time
and I was writing things in the folder but I don't recall
asking you your date of birth, where you were born, your age.
I asked you for your name, which I had your name anyway, and
50
all I did while I was there, I served the warrant on you and
explained to you why were there. That I had a warrant to
enter your property. And as far as asking your name and
everything, that - and - and personal details, I did not - I
did ask you if you were here by yourself and I'm quite within
my rights to ask that.
XXN: APPLICANT
28
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T09/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Mr Stageman, I put it to you, the media was listening,
1
everyone else around as there was quite a crowd that morning,
they all heard what you asked. You still - and you didn't
write it down, I would remember that. Would you still sort of
- well-----?-- Well, the main thing was to - I served a
warrant which I did serve a warrant on you. I asked you if
you're here by yourself and you said, yes, you are. I'm quite
entitled to ask you that because that gives me a basis on - on
how many people are at the property looking after these
animals.
10
Right. I put it to you, you didn't serve me the warrant then
because you said you had a warrant for me - to serve a
warrant?-- I served you a warrant before I did anything else.
Yes, but not quite before you did anything else because I said
to you, "I have to get inside to secure the puppies.", which I
did. I went through the door. I didn't lock the door, I had
to shut it. And I put up a temporary fence. If - and - and
then later I came back out to open the door when you - I think
20
you or the police said, "Open the door.". Both of you said
simultaneously, "Open the door.", the police too. I think you
had a little discussion and you said, "Open the door.". You
and the police at the same time said, "Open the door.",
because there were two voices. And by then my hand was
already on the handle and I opened the door. Would you agree
to that?-- Yes.
Yes, okay. And the - and then we came into the office which
is just next - on the right hand side of the entry door, would
30
you agree?-- Yes.
Yes. And I was standing next to the desk and I took your
warrant. You had it in your hand. You served the warrant.
The police were still standing there at the entrance. And I
read the warrant and it all looked good to me. You gave me
the original so that was good. And you agree with
that?-- Yes.
And then I asked to ring my lawyers and I try - I did ring a
40
firm of lawyers and he said - and then I think Mr Towers-
Hammond came through the door shortly after while we were
talking about this?-- He - he didn't arrive until after lunch
time 'cause we had - I spoke to-----
You were still - okay. You - you - you - you recall he didn't
arrive till after lunch time. So what means is - what it
meant is, you and I had to be standing there talking for quite
a while because you were standing there talking when - I think
the - some of your RSPCA officers were coming through after
50
you and into my house and I did make some comment about, "Are
they allowed to go through the house?", I think. I think that
was on the tape recorder as well. Do you remember that? You
- you were talking to me about the warrant because I
was-----?-- Yep.
-----quite upset?-- Yeah, when-----
XXN: APPLICANT
29
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T09/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Yes?-- When a warrant's been issued it gives the inspectors
1
power to go anywhere on the property including a house.
Yes. That was what you were trying to explain to me and
meantime the other inspectors or RSPCA personnel were just
wondering into the house, pushed past us because we were sort
of in the passageway, remember?-- Yeah.
The desk is next to the door and you were standing there and I
was standing on the other side and I said I want to ring the
10
lawyers and, you know, he - he - he - I couldn't get onto the
person I wanted and then the other people were coming in and
out taking photos. Now, I believe that it was that time when
they - my white tiles in the house, came in with their - all
the - the - the - what they stepped in because it had been
raining that morning, would you agree?-- It had been raining,
yeah.
Yes. And they came in after and brought all the dirt along
with them as well. There was quite a few of them I remember
20
because it was still overcast, would you agree?-- It was
overcast-----
Yes?-- -----and there was a little bit of drizzle here and
there.
Yes, and they were using their cameras because there was a lot
of flashes, was - I was quite surprised, you know, and that -
would you agree to that?-- Yeah, there were - there was a few
cameras taking pictures of the dogs.
30
Yes. Okay. So you and I were talking and before we - you
left that room, you and I left or did anything, Towers-Hammond
came through the door because he stood there and I said he had
to disinfect his shoes I think. He couldn't - let me start
again. Now, because I was quite upset about so many people
coming through because I said, "This is a breeding kennel and
they must disinfect their shoes before they come
through."?-- Yeah.
40
Because Mr Towers-Hammond came in and he said, "I'm clean.",
and I told him it's his shoes. Can you remember that? And I
went and got a dish-----?-- I remember a conversation you had
with Inspector Towers-Hammond but-----
Because he wouldn't want to put his foot in?-- -----but
before-----
BENCH: Well - Mrs Robertson, please. Continue?-- But before
Inspector Towers-Hammond came you and I did a tour of - of the
50
whole kennels.
APPLICANT: We couldn't have?-- Well, there was you and I and
there was-----
Laurie?-- -----Inspector Goodfellow down the back and then
when I came back and then when I came up-----
XXN: APPLICANT
30
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T09/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
APPLICANT: Laurie, that was [indistinct]-----
1
MS MELLIFONT: Let him finish, please.
BENCH: Continue, Mr Stageman?-- And I asked you to accompany
me down the back where we had a look at the kennels and then
that's when I said to you that - that some of these dogs I'm
going to seize. And then we went back up to the house I
started organizing a couple of the council guys to remove some
of the animals. We went to the centre compound where you were
10
in there with a lot of those dogs with all the big dreadlocks,
and then I - I called - I called Katie Heaton at work to bring
the other trailers back, to bring the other big dog trailer so
we could transport animals and she brought Inspector Towers-
Hammond with her. And Inspector Towers-Hammond didn't arrive
until after lunch time.
20
30
40
50
XXN: APPLICANT
31
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T10/RAK(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Laurie, you and I couldn't have gone down to the kennels,
1
because there was only me there. There were pups at the
house, there were people coming in and out of the house, and I
had to make sure that before they came through the door, I've
always been neurotic about hygiene and that sort of thing, and
I was really concerned about - so I said, I need to have them
get a bit of - a dish of disinfectant, which I did get, a
plastic container to put outside near the door-----?-- Yes.
----- so that they could put their shoes in as they walked
10
through?-- Yeah, I instructed the other inspectors to do that.
Do you remember that?-- I instructed them to do that.
Yes. And at that time, I went back to the back, got a plastic
dish, got some bleach and water and I put it there. And
Inspector Towers-Hammond came through the door. He hadn't
gone down yet, and we couldn't have gone down to the kennels,
right? What - what - what - would you agree with that or
don't you agree?-- No, I don't agree, 'cause you and I did go
20
down the back and look in the back kennels and I informed you
what dogs I'm going to seize and you were pleading with me
about letting you have a dog back, which I agreed to at that
time. And then when we came back and I said what I'll be
doing is giving you an animal welfare direction, then when we
went back up to the house to - so I could organise the Council
- call the Council guys to come and so we could start removing
some of the dogs, and then when I rang the RSPCA and requested
the other dog trailer, Katie Heaton brought Inspector Towers-
Hammond. Inspector Towers-Hammond flew down from Rockhampton.
30
His plane didn't get in till probably about 12 o'clock.
When - when did you ring Inspector Towers-Hammond?-- I didn't
ring Inspector Towers-Hammond. I rang Katie Heaton at the
RSPCA to bring the other dog trailer. Inspector Towers-
Hammond flew in from Rockhampton 'cause he was working down
Brisbane for a couple of weeks or a couple of months, and
Inspector Towers-Hammond accompanied Katie Heaton out to your
property.
40
What time did you ring him, from which phone?-- I rang him on
my mobile.
BENCH: Mrs Robertson - sorry - Mrs Robertson, this officer
has said he didn't ring Mr Towers-Hammond.
APPLICANT: Yes, Mr - Inspector Heaton?-- I rang probably
about quarter to 12. I'm not too sure of the times, but I
know I rang them to request the other dog trailer to be
brought up. And I do know that Inspector Towers-Hammond flew
50
in from Rockhampton and he accompanied Katie Heaton to your
property. So he didn't arrive until - till mid-afternoon.
But he was the person that gave the order to seize all the
dogs, wasn't he?-- He was, yes.
XXN: APPLICANT
32
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T10/RAK(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
He came through the door and he was - I - I suggest - if you -
1
if you disagree, let me know, right - he came through the
door, would you agree to that, when he arrived?-- He did.
And I asked him to disinfect his shoes, can you remember
that?-- I can't remember you asking him that. I know that he
- we went through the door-----
And he wasn't happy about that?-- He wasn't happy about that?
10
Yes, about disinfecting his shoes, can you remember
that?-- No.
He came through - well, he wasn't happy about it and he asked
me - he told me he was clean and I explained to him that it -
it wasn't whether he was clean it was where his shoes had
been; can you remember that-----?-- No, I'm sorry, I can't.
Because everybody stopped?-- I'm trying to picture - I know he
come to the door with me. I don't know whether he stepped in
20
the - in the - in the basin or not. I can honestly - I can't
remember, Mrs Robertson.
Can you remember him giving the order to seize all the
dogs?-- Yeah.
Because everyone stopped and looked at him and then they
couldn't believe it because they came out from the house as
well where they were taking photos, and then he gave the order
again, "Seize all the dogs", would you agree?-- Yes.
30
Now, at that point in time, he couldn't have looked at any of
the dogs, could he?-- He did - he did come down and have a
look at some of the dogs, and I explained to him what I - I
was going to do, and because of the living conditions we had a
consultation and it was decided to seize all the dogs.
When - when - when did he come down to where - to
look?-- Well, we went down and had a look at the kennels
before he come back up to the house.
40
But you went down with me, didn't we?-- Yeah, I went down with
you earlier in the morning when we were there.
Yes?-- And we had a bit of a look down the back kennels and I
explained to you-----
That's right, we did a walk through, yes.?-- Pardon?
We walked through the kennels and all that?-- We walked
50
through the kennels and-----
Then we came back up the drive?-- Then we went back up to the
house and I was out at the car doing some stuff, waiting for -
for the trailer to come and then when it came, Inspector
Towers-Hammond came up to me, then we went for a bit of a walk
around and during a conversation and a consultation, it was
decided that all the animals were going to be seized.
XXN: APPLICANT
33
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T10/RAK(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
Now, back - back to the seizure, the taking of the dogs.
There was two trailers from RSPCA, a four dog and an eight dog
trailer?-- Yeah.
There was an eight dog trailer from the Shire, so that's three
trailers?-- Yeah.
Your trailer - which trailer did two trips, the eight dog
trailer did two trips?-- Say again.
10
How many trips did your RSPCA trailer did?-- How many-----
How many loads, like, how many trips?-- Two.
Two. So that's 16 and the four dog?-- There probably would
have been two dogs, two or three dogs into each - each - each
cage area.
So really, to - to take 104 that day, was a lot of dogs to go
20
in-----?-- It was a lot of dogs.
-----go in the trailer, so would you say they were sort of
packed in a bit?-- I didn't see if the dogs were packed in the
trailers or not, but I know they would have been carrying more
than one dog per kennel.
Yes?-- Per - per-----
Because you were spending quite a bit of time with me, you
30
couldn't have seen it?-- No, I couldn't have.
That's right. So, okay, and - now, I - I refer to your
affidavit about the complaint about the pus - pus in the eyes.
Was that a complaint made the year before?-- There was a
complaint made for - on the 28th of February 2007, of a mini-
Foxie that you had on the property.
I can't remember-----?-- Yeah, and the complainant stated that
the smell of the property was overwhelming and that his dog
40
had burnt pads on the feet, had a few issues. He couldn't
take the dog to a vet 'cause he couldn't afford it.
Did he give you a name or a phone number or an address?-- He
gave all of his details-----
And that was-----?-- -----on the complaint.
Yes?-- But I didn't follow the complaint through because he
never made any - never got any report from a veterinarian in
50
regarding the dog's condition.
I put to you there was no such complaint because there never
was any time in the history of the kennels, for 16 years I've
been there, that you would fine urine on the floor, the cement
floor, for the simple reason-----?-- Well, there - there was a
complaint made by the person. I can't tell you who the person
is.
XXN: APPLICANT
34
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T10/RAK(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
Yes?-- But there was a complaint made.
Mmm-hmm?-- And I didn't follow it through because I never had
any - any full report on the animal's condition.
Okay. There was only one complaint, a mini-Foxie?-- There was
- there's been a few complaints since 2002.
Do you have names and phone numbers or confirm that those
10
complaints were legitimate complaints and not
someone-----?-- Being malicious?
Oh, yes, that's very common, I guess, you would probably
know?-- Well, as you know, the RSPCA receives complaints. The
RSPCA inspectors have to follow any complaint that's made.
Some complaints can be unfounded. Some complaints can be
legitimate, some complaints can be just a hate session between
people. We go out and investigate the complaints. If the
complaints are unfounded, we caution the people who's made the
20
complaints that are unfounded. If they are founded well then
we take action and try to assist people in to looking after
their animals. So, every complaint the RSPCA gets in the
inspectorate, we have to attend to it.
30
40
50
XXN: APPLICANT
35
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T11/KMW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Mr Stageman, would you have confirmed that those complaints
1
were genuine? Like if in somebody takes a complaint or
somebody in the RSPCA would confirm that it's a genuine
caller? A genuine, valid complaint instead-----?-- Well,
we-----
-----of someone making mischief?-- Well, we do that - when we
get the complaints we go and attend the properties.
Attend the-----?-- I didn't attend your property on that
10
complaint on the 20 of 8 because there was no proof that the
animal was - was - was sick.
Mmm. So, in other words, you do confirm with the complainant
that it was a valid complaint but-----?-- I confirmed that was
a valid complaint but I didn't take any action against it
because he had no vet report to back it up.
All right. Now, then later on in your affidavit the - when
you were writing the statement you said it was a complaint
20
when you - at M6, I think, attach the affidavit of Fiona
Ferguson. It was a complaint made by a Mr Emanuel. And we've
got an address for him at Murarrie. Can you refer to your
affidavit? I think-----
MS MELLIFONT: Mrs Robertson, which one are you referring to?
BENCH: See, it's annexure 6 to the affidavit of Ms Ferguson
of the 29th of July.
30
MS MELLIFONT: Your Honour, [indistinct]-----
BENCH: It's the application for forfeiture.
MS MELLIFONT: Yes, thank you.
APPLICANT: You said on 3 January - shall I read out? You've
got it. "The initial information and warrant application on
the 3rd of January. Information was received by RSPCA
Queensland Animal Cruelty Complaints Call Centre from a Mr
40
Norman Emanuel of 38 Emerald Street, Murarrie. This
information was a complaint regard" - "relating to the
condition of two dogs. pomeranian and Australian silky cross,
when they collected them from Waterford Kennels after a
boarding period of 10 to 11 days."?-- Yes.
Did you confirm that?-- Yes.
Did he put it in writing?-- Pardon?
50
Did he - did he put that complaint in writing or-----?-- He
had to put it in writing for it to go through the RSPCA
system.
Did he or did he not?-- Well, he rang the call centre, the
call centre takes all the details and the details of the
complaint-----
XXN: APPLICANT
36
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T11/KMW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Yes?-- -----and then passes it on to our - our cruelty co-
1
ordinator complaint-----
Yes?-- -----and then she issues it out to the inspectors.
Yes. But did she - would she have confirmed it with - and
rang that number or contact or whichever-----?-- They don't do
that.
-----of Mr Emanuel - Emanuel?-- They don't do that, the
10
inspectors do that.
Yes. Did - did - did you do that? You did-----?-- I
contacted-----
-----find out?-- I contacted him, yes.
Yes. And did he put in a - he said it was the
complaint?-- Yep.
20
And that he also - he said - how did you contact him?-- By his
- his phone numbers.
His phone numbers?-- Yeah.
Did you go over to see the dogs?-- No, I asked him if he took
his dog to the vets and he said he did and I contacted the
vet.
You contacted the vet. Who was the vet?-- I can't really
30
recall the vet's name. He said that the dogs - the dogs did
have - it's like infected eyes caused through ammonia or
caused through urine. One of the other man reasons for the
complaint was the smell coming from the property.
Mmm?-- He also stated that you refused him entry into the
place to have a look.
Mmm. Anything else?-- And just mainly the - the - the smell
of the place and the condition that - what his dogs came back
40
on. So, that gave me grounds for the warrant because of
previous complaints made about the same issue.
Mr Norman Emanuel is not listed in the phone book?-- Well, it
could be a silent number but we request people to give us
their contact details when they make complaints.
Yes. And I also do not have - have not heard of a Mr Norman
Emanuel or his two dogs that supposedly were boarded with me.
You took the - the boarding cards, there was a whole stack of
50
them that - that went on the 22nd and there was no Mr Normal
Emanuel there I think because there's none here recorded in my
diary either. So, you know-----?-- Well, I've - I've
spoken-----
-----what's the basis?-- -----to the gentleman who is the -
his name and I've spoken to him in regards to his complaint
XXN: APPLICANT
37
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T11/KMW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
and the complaint that he made gave me the grounds for the
1
warrant.
It says here also he discovered that one of his dogs had pus
in its eyes and both animals had wet urine soaked
coats?-- Yep.
He also reported that both animals had vocalising
problems?-- Both animals had?
10
Vocalising problems. In other words sore throats or, you
know-----?-- Okay.
-----barking. Would you agree with that or did he tell you
that or?-- He - he told me - he told me something to that,
yeah.
Because silky terriers and pomeranians don't bark a
lot?-- Well, pomeranians can be real little yappers.
20
No. All - all the poms that I've known through the years they
never bark. They seem to be quite content. The - did you ask
him how did the dogs get urine burnt paws. I've never seen
urine burnt paws?-- We have. At the refuge we've had dogs
where they've - they've been brought in where they've been
standing in urine and it's burnt the pads of their paws.
Have you inspected my dogs that you took for urine burnt
paws?-- I never inspected your dogs. The veterinarians
inspected your dogs.
30
Okay. Mr Stageman, why did you apply for the warrant to enter
on the - on the 8th giving the reason as your grounds for the
warrant was the complaint from about 11 months before, right,
on the 28 of February 2007 and then in your subsequent - and
your application for the warrant to enter your grounds were,
"Received two complaints regarding two animals that bordered
at the facility for a period of time on two different
occasions. Last complaint was for two dogs returned to owner
with pussy eyes and not walking properly, a very strong smell
40
of urine on the dog and a strong urine odour coming from the
premises on the previous visit by an inspector, consent of
entry refused."?-- We were - the complaint-----
Can you explain - sorry, go on?-- The complaint made on the
28th of February '07 that was the complaint previous to Norman
Emanuel.
Previous to here?-- Yeah.
50
2007, you say, 28th of February?-- It was a complaint made on
the - on the - February 2007, the 28th, by another person
which I didn't follow that through because there's no-----
XXN: APPLICANT
38
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T12/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Mmm-hmm?-- There was no evidence-----
1
Why - mmm?-- -----to sustain that.
Yes?-- And then another complaint came in December of - I
think it was December, and then I - I acted on that.
You acted on the second complaint?-- Yes.
But why didn't you - why didn't you put that down because that
10
was the more current one on the-----?-- That was down.
-----application on the 8th, the day before - the day, you
know, when all the flash flooding was happening around
me?-- Well, when - when we - when we get a complaint it's -
it's not dealt with straight away in that sort of sense. I
had other jobs I had to do. Then I started to apply the
warrant. Because I've got to do the application to the
warrant and they've got to arrange a time with the - the JP.
20
And then you mentioned also that earlier on and as well as in
your application that you sort of - what was it, you - you -
you - on the previous visits you had seen a matted dog come at
the doorway or-----?-- Yep.
-----something like that?-- That was when I came to your
property with Inspector Col Chapman on - in October last year.
That would be-----?-- October 2005.
30
I put it to you that all those - seeing dogs at the entrance
door is totally untrue, because the dogs would be locked up
during the day and they are not allowed, especially into the
front entrance area, simply because-----?-- We were - we were
at the front entrance, Mrs Robertson, while you were speaking
with Col Chapman. The door was open ajar and I sighted a
Poodle there that was knotted and I did mention to you, I
brought it to your attention about the Poodle and you told me
that you've brought the dog up for clipping. 'Cause I said to
you this Poodle has to be clipped.
40
When the dogs are going to be clipped they do not wander
around the place, they're usually brought up on a harness and
kept on a harness because I don't want - I don't have time to
waste chasing him round the acreage. So, there's no
way-----?-- He wasn't - he was in that - he was in that area
to the left-hand side 'cause when that door was ajar and I
looked through he was in there.
That is-----?-- And I said to - "That dog needs clipping", and
50
you told me, "Yes, that's why he's up here so I can clip
him.".
All right. Now, why - were you aware that Poodles do not
smell? They don't have body - dog odours for starters and
they have a wool coat. They do not sweat, were you aware of
that?-- I'm aware of that, yes.
XXN: APPLICANT
39
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T12/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Yes. So - and soaking in urine; why would - have you thought
1
about why my dogs would be smelling of urine and faeces when
they - you've been to my kennels on many occasions over the
previous years?-- I have never been inside your kennels
because you've always refused us entry in there.
Since 1994, I think the maximum visits I had from RSPCA was
about seven visits a year continuous. And they all came
without - without warrants?-- The-----
10
There was video taken of my premises in 1997 without a
warrant. They said they came to have a look and they went
through my home as well. Were you aware of that?-- I wasn't
aware of that, I wasn't working for the RSPCA in '97. Records
show that an RSPCA inspector attended your property in 2002
which you get - let him have access to, and that was Inspector
Adrian Taylor.
MS MELLIFONT: Is it a convenient time, your Honour?
20
BENCH: Yes, it is, Ms Mellifont. We'll come back at 20 past.
MS MELLIFONT: Thank you, your Honour.
THE COURT ADJOURNED
30
40
50
XXN: APPLICANT
40
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T13/SEF(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
THE COURT RESUMED
1
LAURIE STAGEMAN, CONTINUING,
CROSS-EXAMINATION:
10
BENCH: Yes, Mrs Robertson, you were asking Mr Stageman some
questions.
APPLICANT: Yes. Mr Stageman, have you ever seen any cats on
my property?-- Have I?
Seen any cats?-- No, I haven't.
20
I had a complaint here about someone looking, the cats and
dogs running all over my property in the house. Incredible.
Mr Stageman, incidentally, this was the complaint received on
the 27 - 28th of February 2007 from a caller who says that he
placed his dog in the kennel from the 23rd of February and
collected the dog on Saturday the 24th, the dog has had
diarrhoea, caller has not taken the dog to vet due to
financial reasons. The caller is saying that he - that the
kennel facility is run by a Malaysian female at the front of
the house, there is a counter, he saw dogs and cats in the
30
house and there were a few dog kennels in the yard also. He
says the stench that comes from the property is overwhelming.
Do you know anything about this?-- That was one of the
complaints that we received and it's a complaint I never acted
on.
Laurie, this was the complaint that you used for your - on
your affidavit on your report?-- Okay.
FNF5, exhibit to the affidavit of Fiona Ferguson, that was the
40
reason for your application of the warrant, this
complaint?-- Not on that job it wasn't.
Well, it's the only job?-- It's a job I mention as previous
complaints and of previous investigations and visits by RSPCA
inspectors.
But there was no visit you said that because - there was
nothing and yet this was the only visit on that date, the
complaint was received on the 28th of February and that was
50
mentioned in-----?-- It was mentioned in the application for a
warrant-----
Yes?-- -----as other complaints that had been made regarding
the address and also on the warrant I mentioned that previous
visits refused entry by RSPCA personnel.
XXN: APPLICANT
41
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T13/SEF(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
But you knew it was a false complaint, didn't you?-- No, I
1
didn't say it was a false complaint. It was a complaint I
never acted on because the owner of the animal never seeked
veterinary advice from the dog.
But regardless of that I would think that it would still be
handled as a legitimate complaint if somebody made the
complaint as seriously as that in writing?-- Well, it was
still used as a complaint. A complaint has been lodged
against your premises.
10
So in other words, you are saying, tell me if I'm wrong, that
when a complaint like this is placed and there's virtually no
basis for the complaint, because you didn't investigate
it-----?-- No, we can still use that complaint as records.
Would you say this is a sound complaint?-- Well, any complaint
that we get is sound until it's investigated. I never
investigated it because the owner never took his animal to the
veterinarian. I didn't-----
20
But did you make sure - go on?-- I didn't pursue that
complaint.
Mmm. Then why - but you can still use it-----?-- I used it as
records.
-----as the reason for warrant to be issued to search and make
sure that this is not true?-- That complaint wasn't the basis
of the warrant.
30
That's what it said it was. It says here that was the basis
for your application for the warrant. Without this complaint
you couldn't apply for the warrant?-- That was part of the -
that was part of the application. We received two complaints
in regarding the condition of the animals. The second one was
the one that I used as the basis of the warrant which gave me
the grounds and of previous visits by RSPCA personnel being
refused entry.
40
What you're saying is, based on that complaint and another
complaint which is a name, that was the only one that was sort
of identified as such. In other words if any tax payer who is
a trouble maker could just sit around all day and ring up
RSPCA and says, "I'm complaining about my neighbour, John, the
woman down the road, Joan", and you would go out there and
take warrants to go and see them?-- No. It was based on
previous visits by RSPCA personnel re; you have refused entry
for RSPCA to enter your property to inspect it and also of the
complaints that we have received. It all forms grounds of -
50
for my application to apply for a warrant.
Okay. Now, Mr Stageman, I received a letter from Clayton Utz,
under section 184 asking me [indistinct] it says in this
letter to my lawyers, "Our client" which is you or RSPCA,
because you are the gentleman who took up the warrant to my
place, "seeks your client's written undertaking." They want me
to put in writing, "that pending the finalisation of our
XXN: APPLICANT
42
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T13/SEF(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
clients investigation into your clients maintenance and care
1
of the 104 dogs seized from your client, by our client on the
9th of January, she will not seek to re-establish herself as
conducting a commercial business from existing facility." In
other words, I can't do any business, I can't do anything,
just about. "Breeding dogs, boarding dogs, caring for dogs,
engage otherwise in the business of animal husbandry unless 14
days notice prior notice in writing has been delivered."
Right. Now, he wrote me this letter, so I assume you would be
the person authorising this sort of a thing.
10
MS MELLIFONT: Your Honour, can I ask first of all the date of
the letter?
BENCH: I'm trying to find it myself, Ms Mellifont.
APPLICANT: 29 of February 2008.
BENCH: Is it part of the material, Mrs Robertson?
20
APPLICANT: Of the affidavits?
BENCH: Of the - Mr Croll is shaking his head. Is it part of
the material that's been filed in the proceedings?
APPLICANT: No.
BENCH: All right. Okay.
MS MELLIFONT: May I have a look at the letter before any
30
questions are asked?
BENCH: Well, Mr Duong's on his feet.
MS MELLIFONT: Yes.
BENCH: We'll hear from him.
MR DUONG: No. I understand that it's probably an annexure to
the affidavit of Tony Dean dated in one of the interlocutory
40
applications, so it's not one of the materials relied on for
the purpose of this hearing.
BENCH: What was the date of the letter?
MS MELLIFONT: 29th of February 2008.
BENCH: Is it a facsimile from Clayton Utz to Burns Law Legal
Protection?
50
MS MELLIFONT: It is.
BENCH: It appears that it's ADJ3 to the affidavit of Mr Dean
dated 4 August, it appears, I'm not saying it is.
XXN: APPLICANT
43
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T14/LJP(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
MS MELLIFONT: No, it's not that one, your Honour.
1
BENCH: Not that one. All right. So, there's another letter
of the 29th of February, is there?
MS MELLIFONT: Yes. It might be just as well for, your
Honour, to see the letter. My submission will be that it's
irrelevant to these proceedings.
BENCH: Because it - it relates to some form of - some way -
10
type of resolution of the matter, does it?
MS MELLIFONT: I don't even know that it's that. It might
relate to a pending investigation for a prosecution, that what
it appears to relate to on its face.
BENCH: Is Mr Duong able to assist? Are you able to assist
what it-----
MR DUONG: As I understand it, your Honour, and I've only been
20
brought into this matter fairly late in the piece.
BENCH: I - I understand the difficulties that-----
MR DUONG: But - but Clayton Utz has - Clayton Utz has conduct
of possible criminal proceedings against the appellant. In -
once - once the investigations conducted by our clients, the
RSPCA, are completed so this letter would relate to those
investigations rather than these proceedings.
30
BENCH: All right.
MR DUONG: And - and - and so they're not directly relevant to
any of the issues here.
BENCH: All right. Mrs Robertson, in respect of the
letter-----
APPLICANT: Yeah.
40
BENCH: -----the suggestion is, that it's not relevant to the
- to the seizure proceedings. It's - it's relevant to other
proceedings.
APPLICANT: I - I think this-----
BENCH: Can you explain to me the relevance of the letter,
because it's not part of the material?
APPLICANT: The - I - I believe it is relevant, your Honour,
50
because-----
BENCH: Tell - tell me why.
APPLICANT: Well, they decided to seize all my dogs in
totality, you know, everything I owned and mentions have been
made to me - suggestions have been said or words have been
made - a few people have told me that they want to ensure that
44
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T14/LJP(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
I would never own another dog again for as long as I live and
1
in part somebody said they want to ensure that I'll never own
another animal, which is more or less the same thing and it
came from RSPCA sources and more importantly, there is a
petition that's still ongoing on the internet. I'm not sure
if I'm allowed to talk about it, but they say, save the
poodles campaign is run parallel by the members of the Poodle
Club of Queensland who are my competitors.
BENCH: Well, I'm not - I'm not concerned about what any club
10
might be doing, I'm not concerned about any prosecutorial
proceedings might - which might be on foot. What I am
concerned about is whether or not the decision of the - of the
delegate to the chief executive is one - which is the subject
of the proceedings is one which at the end of the evidence I
will take some - will give consideration to, as I'm required
to under the Act.
I'm not worried about who might be doing what on the internet.
That is not relevant.
20
APPLICANT: I believe it is related, your Honour. In the
sense that-----
BENCH: It's not relevant.
APPLICANT: If - if-----
BENCH: It's not relevant.
30
APPLICANT: Even if it means that by destroying my dogs, the
dogs have spent nearly most of my life trying to - to
better-----
BENCH: I can understand - I can understand that, but unless
you're telling me that your suggestion is that some club is
orchestrating the RSPCA, is that your submission?
APPLICANT: Well, they're not - I don't know how I could put
it. I mean, they're working - they - they helped - they get
40
themselves involved and they have been defending me for years
as a competitor, that's fine, I've worn that, but the fact is
it was a - it was a vendetta as shown in the exhibits in the
newspaper where the - the life member of a club who
specialises in standard poodles would make - make statements
in the press to say that it was I who alerted the council to
her some 10 years or so ago and she has continuously since
1992 been involved with RSPCA and supports in the fund raising
campaign and as the poodle specialist - standard poodle rescue
officer and they were the ones that was involved in fostering
50
out my dogs and placing them and selling my puppies.
BENCH: The evidence of Mr Stageman is that there was a
complaint received in February of last year, there was a
complaint received in January of this year and it's those two
complaints that he's acted on.
APPLICANT: Yes, but-----
45
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T14/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
BENCH: There's nothing - nothing in the material, there's
nothing before me to suggest that the RSPCA is being dictated
to by some club. Now, the material that you of - your - that
you have, does that relate to a - to another - to - to a - to
prosecutorial proceedings, does it?
APPLICANT: Well, there was no mention, there was hints and
threats about prosecuting me but to date they haven't -
well-----
10
BENCH: Well, there's a - there's a time period under the Act.
APPLICANT: Yes, 12 months they tell me. But the point is
there was never any cruelty, that's what I'm trying to prove.
And - or neglect.
BENCH: Well, it's animal - animal welfare as well, I think,
is what they're - what's being looked at. That may involve
cruelty. I'm not saying that - that - well, there's been no
20
allegations of cruelty, it's about the welfare-----
APPLICANT: Animal welfare.
BENCH: -----of the animal.
APPLICANT: But none of my dogs were sick, they were -
according to the vet which we need to talk to-----
BENCH: Well, we'll hear from them I'm sure.
30
APPLICANT: Mmm. And there are all these allegations, it's
like the vet that is - that I haven't used for over 10 years,
I've only used her for a brief period in between. I thought
she was going to be my permanent vet. I like to have a vet
with me all the time, like the same vet, if possible. And, I
mean, she's making allegations that were totally untrue and I
found it.
BENCH: Well, you had your opportunity as I said, to put all
40
those things to her if she comes to gives evidence.
APPLICANT: Oh yes, definitely will. The-----
BENCH: Well, I've ruled that the - the letter - that letter
that you're referring to of the 29th of February is not
relevant and I'm - I'm not going to alter that.
APPLICANT: Okay, thank you. Mr Stageman, what is the reason
for taking the dogs, the four dogs, that was left with the
50
Vlahos family?-- The - the dogs that were left with the Vlahos
family-----
Yes?-- -----he informed me that you had rang him.
I beg your pardon?-- The - the Vlahos family informed me that
you had rang him, he come and picked up the dogs from your
property, and-----
46
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T14/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
Yes, because they - yes?-- Yeah, and you stated that you
didn't want the RSPCA to get them.
Yes?-- Then you said he can have the dogs but you want to go
halves in the pups.
No, that's not true. Yes, but anyway, keep going?-- Okay.
And he was appalled with the condition of the dogs, and
that-----
10
Oh yes?-- And he decided to surrender the dogs to the RSPCA.
He told you that? Is there any reason that I can't have those
dogs back?-- Well, they'd been - because you had given them to
Vlahos and he-----
I have not-----?-- -----he stated that you had given him the
dogs.
20
Mmm?-- And he surrendered the dogs as guardian of the dogs.
But why wasn't - why didn't you let me know of that? Why
didn't you inform me that was happening? Because they told me
a different story. They said you forced them by threatening
to take their two dogs that they own.
BENCH: Well, where's the evidence of that, Mrs Robertson? I
haven't heard any evidence of that except from your - your -
you saying that at the Bar table.
30
40
50
47
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T15/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
APPLICANT: Well, that's what they said to me, that was the
1
case. Because - the - the Vlahos affidavit was delivered to
me by email yesterday and that was when I - I was - I didn't
have a chance to speak to them.
BENCH: Well, what's this about Vlahos affidavit?
APPLICANT: They were people I've known for many years, about
eight years. And I thought they were friends, and-----
10
BENCH: Yes, I think you've made that point in - in the
witness box but-----
APPLICANT: Yes.
BENCH: -----what's the affidavit you're talking about?
APPLICANT: The-----
BENCH: Do you have an affidavit or is there an affidavit?
20
MS MELLIFONT: Your Honour, it's an affidavit I had - proposes
to seek leave to read and file and make Lesley Vlahos
available for cross-examination. It was in fact handed to Mrs
Robertson by me personally this week I-----
APPLICANT: I think yesterday.
MS MELLIFONT: It wasn't - yes, I'm not sure. I can't
remember exactly when but in any event it speaks to the
30
circumstances by which Ms Vlahos came to be in possession of
the dogs and she'll be able to speak to the photographs which
have been tendered. I haven't obtained an affidavit from Mr
Vlahos, that can occur if it's required, most certainly. Can
I hand up - this is the original, your Honour.
BENCH: And what day was it sworn on, Ms Mellifont, it just
says "The 12th day of 2008. "Sworn at Beenleigh on the 12th
day of 2008.".
40
MS MELLIFONT: Yes, and I think it was collected on a public
holiday and then given to me yesterday, that might make sense.
BENCH: So, that would be yours, the 12th of August?
MS MELLIFONT: Yes, I'm sorry, 12th of August.
BENCH: Well, it seems that - well, it certainly needs to be
filed by leave and I think - well, just on that point, what
jurisdiction do I have to explore the return of those dogs,
50
they're not subject to - of a forfeiture order-----
MS MELLIFONT: They are.
BENCH: -----but I suppose the condition of the dogs is
relevant in respect of the other dogs. Is - is - because I'm
- I'm just thinking of - on what basis am I going to hear
evidence from Mrs Vlahos?
48
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T15/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
MS MELLIFONT: The respondent's case is that those four dogs
were part of the 104 dogs thought to have been seized on the
day and were in fact subject to the forfeiture made by Ms
Ferguson.
BENCH: Right.
MS MELLIFONT: So, they are part of the forfeiture order.
10
BENCH: All right, all right, I follow that submission. All
right, I'll hear evidence. Well, yes, all right. Ms Vlahos
can - can be called to give evidence and you can put all those
things to Mrs - to Mrs Vlahos-----
APPLICANT: Mmm.
BENCH: -----when she comes, Mrs Robertson, all right.
APPLICANT: Okay, thank you. Okay, Mr Stageman, I put to you
20
that the onus of proof is on you to prove a breach of a
custodian's duty of care under section 17 of the Animal Care
and Protection Act, because you are the person that has taken
out the warrant and took all my dogs.
MS MELLIFONT: This witness can't make a conclusion as to a
matter of law thus he can't answer this question, your Honour.
BENCH: It's a - a question of reasonable belief rather than
proof. There's two - what Ms Mellifont has said is correct,
30
Mrs Robertson.
APPLICANT: Then how do I get about it, your Honour?
BENCH: You need to focus on his - the belief of this officer
at the time the dogs were seized, in so far - in relation to
the dogs that he seized. What would - what - what caused him
to believe. You need to focus on what - on the words in the
Act, Mrs Robertson.
40
APPLICANT: Mmm, understand. Okay. The - yep, that's it.
The - could we have the tape played for the - the - yes,
please.
BENCH: Which ones, the - the video?
APPLICANT: The video, yes.
BENCH: The video, Exhibit 2.
50
APPLICANT: The video. Could you please-----
BENCH: And is there any particular part do you want him to
looked at?
APPLICANT: No, from the beginning onwards.
BENCH: Right.
49
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T15/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
APPLICANT: Can you can sort of turn up the volume a bit?
Organise it-----
BENCH: I think-----
APPLICANT: -----that we could hear-----
BENCH: -----it's probably the best we can do.
10
APPLICANT: Okay.
BENCH: And-----
APPLICANT: Thanks, Andrew.
BENCH: -----you want to - you want to go right through the
video?
APPLICANT: Yes, please. Yep, to then start from the
20
beginning, I think.
BENCH: Start right back to the beginning.
APPLICANT: Yes, please. We only need the first little bit, I
think, but we need the volume up to sort of see what the
acoustics is like. Now, the audio tape, I believe, is when
the inspection was being done and I think we've got some
dispute about who took the video but nevertheless it was early
and all the dogs would still be there. So, the noise volume -
30
what I wanted to do is compare the noise - the voice volume
between that and the tape.
BENCH: The-----
APPLICANT: Because-----
BENCH: The - the people speaking?
APPLICANT: Yeah, the people, the general - the dogs-----
40
BENCH: Okay.
APPLICANT: -----barking because my dogs just don't bark very
much.
BENCH: Well, there's a lot of barking on that tape.
APPLICANT: I know.
50
BENCH: On the audio tape.
APPLICANT: Yeah, and - and on the video will be the normal
barking. The other thing too is I live on a rural acreage.
BENCH: Yes, I understand that.
50
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T15/CSA(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
APPLICANT: The road in front of me which is not far from -
1
well, it's about - I think about 50 - maybe - let me think,
yeah, about 50 metres-----
BENCH: From the reception-----
APPLICANT: -----from the house.
BENCH: From the house.
10
APPLICANT: From the entrance to the-----
BENCH: Mmm-hmm.
APPLICANT: -----the holding pen, that's the closest.
BENCH: Mmm-hmm.
APPLICANT: Right, the house and then the holding pens
adjoining it.
20
BENCH: Mmm-hmm.
APPLICANT: Now, the - to show how little traffic we get. The
road that runs past my home, the speed limit used to be 100ks.
Recently it's been reduced to 80ks an hour. It's only
suburbia street distance, you know, sort of normal streets.
And because very little traffic we get. But from the voice
tape it sounded like it was in the centre of the Queen Street
mall, you know, with the traffic, you see, so, there is a lot
30
of difference-----
BENCH: All right, well-----
APPLICANT: -----and I'm quite surprised.
BENCH: Listen to the parts on the tape that you want - on the
video you want to listen to.
APPLICANT: Yes, please.
40
BENCH: Tell Andrew when to stop, then we'll go to the audio
tape, tell when you-----
APPLICANT: Yes.
BENCH: -----when you want him to stop and then put whatever
it is that you want to put to Mr Stageman.
APPLICANT: Yes, thank you.
50
EXHIBIT 2 PLAYED
51
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T16/KMW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
APPLICANT: Could we - thanks - thank you. Could we have a
1
listen to the - the other - the other tape, the DVD
because-----
BENCH: The tape of - that Mr Stageman-----
APPLICANT: Or the audio, yes. Yes.
BENCH: That one.
10
APPLICANT: Because that was about the same time the entrance
and the serving of the warrant.
BENCH: Need to play that through the - the handheld tape
recorder.
MS MELLIFONT: I don't know there's any easier way of-----
BENCH: I don't think there is either.
20
MS MELLIFONT: -----doing this. I'm just rewinding it back to
the beginning.
BENCH: I think it's seek and perhaps she shall find.
MS MELLIFONT: Yes. This is incredibly slow to rewind, your
Honour. I'm sorry. What I was doing the other day in Court,
in fact, while it's rewinding can I bring up another matter?
BENCH: Mmm.
30
MS MELLIFONT: Perhaps Mr Stageman could leave the witness
box.
BENCH: Yes, Mr Stageman, could you go outside for a moment,
please.
WITNESS LEAVES COURTROOM
40
MS MELLIFONT: Your Honour, will recall that I mention that
I'd be making an application to call Penelope Kirk, the vet.
She speaks of going to Mrs Robertson's property, a substantial
period of time ago, some 13 years ago, and having to euthanase
27 dogs.
It was not an affidavit sought or relied on as part of the
50
initial case but as the case has proceeded Mrs Robertson's
case theory appears to be that she has always looked after her
animals and it was in consequence of those statements that
this affidavit from Ms Kirk was sought.
The application is for the affidavit to be received and I can
make Ms Kirk available for cross-examination at the later
convened time.
52
60
15082008 D.06 T16/KMW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
BENCH: Mrs Robertson, do you have any - do you oppose Mrs
Kirk-----
APPLICANT: I do oppose because I believe we parted on very
bitter terms primarily because she brought Parvo. She tried
to conceal it and I had a choice of taking her to Court for -
it cost me a lot of money. She also had to put down a lot of
dogs because they were dying from Parvo and mostly they were
young dogs and puppies up to about five months of age.
10
Everybody had to be revaccinated.
When we got - she was my attending vet. So, I - I didn't know
anything about Parvo then or diseases like that and she
suggested to me it was Corona. She did tests on the dog, took
blood tests, and she came back with the results trying to
defer the verdict by telling me that it was - they got tested
for heartworm. I said, "What for?". Because we were - all
the dogs were always on monthly heartworm.
20
So, we had a dispute about that and the 20-odd dogs - I was
surprised that it wasn't 30-something were the pups that were
dying. So, it was terrible because - I didn't know, I slept
with them. They were healthy and running around one minute,
next minute they were diarrhoeaing, blood and sort of fresh
blood and next thing they just drop dead.
They were happy puppies that was eating, vomiting and a couple
of the bottles of drugs that they took, one was Parvaid and it
was in a bottle that she left for me to vaccinate the puppies
30
continuously and the Betamox which is to stop them vomiting
and they were the ones that were confiscated by - well,
surrendered to RSPCA when they found it in the old, disused
fridge which I used for storing.
It was always my intention anyway that a lot of the stuff
there - I do not have any dogs buried on the property.
Neither do I have any - any - I just don't throw needles and
things out, syringes. I usually - like, all drugs, I put them
together and go to my vet and leave it for them to dispose of.
40
I think they've got people carry - couriers that come out and
pick up all those things for disposal.
So, that was the - the thing and - but back to Penny Kirk. I
just let it go thinking that she was a very casual vet and she
seemed to me to be a very caring vet. She lived not far from
me down the road and like there was a couple of incidents
where we had hibiscus bushes and the pups sort of bite the
branches and break them off and when they run through - it's
like a tear in your shirt, you know, when it gets caught on a
50
nail or something like that. A - a flap.
And I use to worry because I remembered during that year or
the two or three years that she - I was using her as a vet a
couple of the pups I was running on went to these - these
hibiscus bushes and had a tear on their, you know, upper arm.
Like - like - like a cut on a shirt. Like, you know, when you
get caught on a nail. It comes up like a flat L-shape. And I
53
60
15082008 D.06 T16/KMW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
use to worry but because she was down the road she was
1
convenient. I would ring her and she was also a horse trainer
and she use to go trotting horses, you know, for training and
on the weekend I would ring her and I - I was worrying sick.
She says, "Don't worry about it.". So, I didn't worry but of
course I was worried because it was a flap of skin about - a
tear about, oh maybe, an inch to inch and a-half triangle.
And then she says, "I'll be back at 7.".
So, at 7 I would drive over to her place and she would use a
10
pair of scissors, cut it off and wash it off with salt water
and see that it's fine and I would look at it in horror. I
mean, here's this triangle about one and a-half inch triangle.
And she said, "It was fine.", and it was fine because the hair
grew back. That's when I learnt - I learnt a lot from my own
experience with my dogs that the - as long as you keep it
clean. The - the - the - the skin grew back on the flesh.
But it's very scary to anyone looking at it initially to see a
piece of flesh exposed. The skin grew back and in time the
20
hair grew back and the dog was back to normal. So, I did
learn that. That was a couple of things that she did. But
back to this, putting down the dogs was only because the dogs
were dying from Parvo and she came to put them down and
because I just couldn't stand the sight of them.
You don't know - I think the survival was less than one per
cent. And I slept with them and this went on for weeks, you
know, because when - when - because they were - it would
happen in the whelping room and for over 10 years we have
30
closed that facility down completely. It was a completely
renovated whelping room and they have never been near it or
used it ever since.
Now, to me, my way of thinking, because she hasn't been my vet
and everything had to be current like - like my affidavits
from my witnesses that was done a few - a couple of years ago,
yet they have since been in touch me but they hadn't seen my
kennels or my dogs. They - they were thrown out. I think DPI
and RSPCA legal counsels, they were different ones over the
40
period, and every one of them has been thrown out.
I think half of my affidavit, in some case, were left - it was
thrown out because it related to this affidavit, that
affidavit-----
BENCH: But - but-----
APPLICANT: -----and the Magistrates have thrown them out.
Now, because-----
50
BENCH: Well, Ms Mellifont's submission is that-----
APPLICANT: It's over 13 years - about 13 years.
BENCH: Yes, but your - your case before me is that you have
always maintained your kennels in a particular high standard.
54
60
15082008 D.06 T16/KMW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
APPLICANT: That's right.
1
BENCH: Including-----
APPLICANT: Always have.
BENCH: -----your - the - some of the questions that you asked
Mr Stageman was about people entering on the 9th-----
APPLICANT: Yes.
10
BENCH: -----having to go through-----
APPLICANT: Yes.
BENCH: -----a-----
APPLICANT: Yes.
BENCH: -----sterilization, if that's the right term,
20
process-----
APPLICANT: Yes, it is-----
BENCH: -----that you required.
APPLICANT: -----very important. Yes.
BENCH: All right.
30
APPLICANT: And therefore our dogs just don't get sick. I can
get records from my existing vet at the moment.
BENCH: All right.
APPLICANT: He's away. I've been trying to-----
BENCH: Well, if that's the case-----
APPLICANT: Mmm?
40
BENCH: -----will the vet give - give evidence about the state
of your - of your kennels-----
APPLICANT: She's hasn't been-----
BENCH: -----at the time?
APPLICANT: Mmm. She's hasn't been-----
50
BENCH: At the time she-----
APPLICANT: -----to my premises for-----
BENCH: -----was there.
APPLICANT: -----over 13 years. Right.
55
60
15082008 D.06 T16/KMW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
BENCH: Mmm.
1
APPLICANT: And we don't keep in touch.
BENCH: Mmm.
APPLICANT: I try to be friendly with her but-----
BENCH: Mmm.
10
APPLICANT: -----it's just - a lot of the breeders go to her
and I don't get on with the breeders. It's a - a jealousy
thing I think. You know, I personally don't feel any jealousy
towards them. But people who have bought dogs from me, with
are their foundation dogs, they run me down.
20
30
40
50
56
60
15082008 D.06 T17/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
BENCH: Yes, but - but isn't-----
1
APPLICANT: Derogatory comments.
BENCH: -----isn't your case about that you maintain a very
high standard of kennel.
APPLICANT: Yes.
BENCH: Right.
10
APPLICANT: I always have.
BENCH: Okay.
APPLICANT: Well, I do the best I can and always have and
therefore-----
BENCH: Over a long period of time?
20
APPLICANT: Well, ever since I've owned them-----
BENCH: Okay, and that's-----
APPLICANT: -----because that's how it is.
BENCH: That's how I understand your evidence to be.
APPLICANT: Yes, yes. And-----
30
BENCH: If this vet has visited your premises-----
APPLICANT: Not for over 13 years.
BENCH: But at the time that the vet visited the premises-----
APPLICANT: Yes.
BENCH: -----would-----
40
APPLICANT: It should be the same.
BENCH: Right.
APPLICANT: It should be up to the same standard.
BENCH: Right.
APPLICANT: It shouldn't be any different.
50
BENCH: Right.
APPLICANT: But the mere fact that the - I think - I think Ms
Mellifont questioned me when I was in the witness box. I was
shocked at the comments she said - she made because I mean
there's no basis for it as far as I was concerned. I only
knew because I used to go to Penny Kirk. For one of the
things I went to her and tried to retain her as a vet full
57
60
15082008 D.06 T17/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
time which I needed a vet full time that was available to me.
1
Somebody like even at night if there's an emergency. I mean
they are like children.
BENCH: Mmm. But you-----
APPLICANT: The dogs are like kids.
BENCH: But you used Ms-----
10
APPLICANT: Mmm.
BENCH: -----Mrs Kirk, didn't you?
APPLICANT: But - but the point was she was also a special -
she specialised also in hip x-rays.
BENCH: Mmm-hmm.
APPLICANT: So she did all my hip x-rays for that period. And
20
even I think prior to her being my full time vet I used to
have a vet closer to me.
BENCH: Well, as a full time vet surely she can give evidence
if she's been there about the state of your kennels and about
the welfare of your animals, couldn't she?
APPLICANT: But she was only there for a short time period and
then we had a fall out for - for some unknown reason.
Everything was - that was over 13 years ago, more than 10
30
years ago-----
BENCH: Well, have you had a fall out with the Vlahos's?
APPLICANT: -----in the past. Sorry?
BENCH: Have you had a fall out with the Vlahos's?
APPLICANT: I didn't think so. She still - I gave her 20
litres of shampoo.
40
BENCH: Mmm.
APPLICANT: I mean that cost a couple of hundred dollars and
that's wholesale because, you know, I bought 60 litres, she
had two dogs and they constantly have fleas. They live in a
suburb in allotment. She never told me anything like that.
she comes to me and, reading the affidavit, "The house stinks
of urine and - and - and faeces"-----
50
BENCH: Mmm.
APPLICANT: -----which is not true.
BENCH: Mmm.
APPLICANT: Because like Margaret who comes to see me in my
worst hour where I was so depressed and I was so down. I
58
60
15082008 D.06 T17/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
couldn't eat properly. I've lost so much weight. I've gone
1
down two sizes in my clothes and she didn't even know me from
a bar of soap. And she told me that she said, "All I can
smell is cigarette smoke in your home.". But the point was it
was dust and there's still - I've been trying to clean it but
- anyway, regardless of all that there was never any smell of
faeces or urine because we used disinfectant. Everything is
opened to four elements, like-----
BENCH: Yes.
10
APPLICANT: -----you know, they are under cover.
BENCH: All right.
APPLICANT: And I like my fresh air.
BENCH: All right. I want - I want-----
APPLICANT: And yet she would make statements to me-----
20
BENCH: I want to hear from Penny Kirk.
APPLICANT: Yes - fine, mmm.
BENCH: All right.
MS MELLIFONT: Your Honour, the other matter I wanted to raise
is in respect of Tracey Jackson. She's the person who
was-----
30
BENCH: The - the RSPCA inspector who was here last week, is
that the one?
MS MELLIFONT: Yes, and earlier in the week before the public
holiday.
BENCH: Oh - yes, I've lost track of time, sorry, yes.
Wednesday's-----
40
MS MELLIFONT: You might have observed she hasn't been here
today nor for most of yesterday. The reason for that is that
she is a continuity witness in the sense that she picked up
the documents from the RSPCA and delivered them into the hands
of Mr Dean at Clayton Utz. I asked for her - her to swear an
affidavit for that purpose and for her to remain out of the
Court until I raised it with, your Honour.
BENCH: Well, Mrs Robertson certainly put that in issue by
suggesting that many of the documents - there were many, many
50
documents seized and only a few provided to her-----
MS MELLIFONT: Yes.
BENCH: -----either by way of original copies.
MS MELLIFONT: Yes, so Ms-----
59
60
15082008 D.06 T17/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
BENCH: Yes.
1
MS MELLIFONT: -----Ms Jackson's affidavit, I'll hand it up,
your Honour. Merely speaks to her picking it up and
delivering it over to Clayton Utz.
BENCH: Mmm.
MS MELLIFONT: Then the affidavit which is already in evidence
is the affidavit from Tony Dean and he says that Mrs Robertson
10
was given copies of or originals of everything apart form the
things that she said could be discarded.
BENCH: Mmm.
MS MELLIFONT: Can I hand up that affidavit, your Honour.
BENCH: Yes.
MS MELLIFONT: It was sworn the 14th of August 2008. It has a
20
date error in it which Ms Jackson will have to correct-----
BENCH: Yes.
MS MELLIFONT: -----in the witness box. She talks about
delivering the documents on the 3rd of April 2001 rather than
8.
BENCH: Right.
30
MS MELLIFONT: It may be because the Act which is referred to
in the previous paragraph has the date 2001.
BENCH: Just looking at this, is there something there that I
shouldn't be-----
MS MELLIFONT: It's been photocopied on duplex so it's a - it
seems to be-----
BENCH: Oh, it's-----
40
MS MELLIFONT: -----just the first page again. I'll have a
proper copy with the amendment done and available.
BENCH: Oh, it's - it's a - what's on the back with the line
through it is, in fact, what's - is the front of the
affidavit?
MS MELLIFONT: Yes.
50
BENCH: All right. All right. Yes.
MS MELLIFONT: So, there's an application to-----
BENCH: Yes, that can be filed by me. Yes.
MS MELLIFONT: -----read and file that affidavit.
60
60
15082008 D.06 T17/PGO(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
BENCH: That - that application approved. Yes.
1
MS MELLIFONT: The tape recording is available now.
BENCH: Bearing in mind that - well, we need Mr Stageman back
and there is a timeline on today as well.
MS MELLIFONT: Yes.
BENCH: A timeline on today.
10
MS MELLIFONT: Yes - oh, yes, your Honour, so perhaps I'll
play it till 25 past 12.
BENCH: Yes, by the clock on the wall.
MS MELLIFONT: Yes, thank you.
BENCH: While we're waiting for Mr Stageman, to use what time
we've got: now we're back in Court on the 27th and 28th of
20
August.
APPLICANT: Mmm-hmm.
BENCH: What normally happens is all of these matters get
adjourned to Court 20 and then they're distributed to where I
- for example, where I'll be sitting.
APPLICANT: Mmm-hmm.
30
BENCH: I don't know where I'll - what Court I'll be in on the
- on the 27th.
APPLICANT: Mmm.
BENCH: It may be back in this Court, it may not be. But
rather than going to Court 20, even that's where the file will
be distributed from, if you check the board where you walk in
on the - in - into the Court complex downstairs on the ground
floor, there's a large board, a notice board, and it'll have
40
the matters listed, so you look on that board to see what
Court it's in and come to that Court even though I'll formally
adjourn it to Court 20 at the close today, if you can look on
the board, all right.
MS MELLIFONT: And we were going to have a look at a possible
third extra day, your Honour, or leave it just for the two
days?
BENCH: I'll have my clerk check between now and, well, I'll -
50
I'll get him to see if - if there is a third day available.
MS MELLIFONT: Thank you, your Honour.
BENCH: All right.
LAURIE STAGEMAN, CONTINUING CROSS-EXAMINATION:
61
60
15082008 D.06 T18/CXW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
TAPE PLAYED
1
BENCH: Yes, Ms Robertson.
APPLICANT: Yes, your Honour. There seems to be a lot of
static, you know, like in the tape, I think, by the sound of
it. You've already come through the front door and you were
in the office area and there definitely isn't - I can't
10
understand why there's so much difference in the noise levels.
The barking of the dogs were different.
BENCH: It may be the quality of the tape as opposed to the
quality of the
APPLICANT: Mmm.
BENCH: -----videorecording.
20
APPLICANT: Mmm, that could be it. Given - is there any
reason, Mr Stageman, you think, that could account for the
difference in the sounds-----?-- It-----
-----of the barking?-- It has surprised me as well 'cause that
hissing noise has - has - has got me puzzled.
It's not the hissing, it's the barking of the dogs?-- Yeah.
The dogs at the front entrance hardly bark. There's sounds
30
like small dogs barking, you know. Like continuously ... ...
...?-- Yeah, well, the dogs were barking when we were there.
Yeah, you were there. You heard the dogs bark on the video
that we saw. It's a different bark because what's up at the
house were the standards primarily that
would-----?-- Those-----
-----bark?-- -----yeah, those video - those audio-recorders
they're very sensitive. They pick up surrounding noises as
40
well.
But there's was no surrounding noises on - on the-----?-- But
the dogs down the back could be barking as well. I - I can't
really-----
But they weren't barking?-- -----yeah, I-----
We heard it on the video-----?-- Yeah.
50
-----because this - this one was taken about - before and
during the - the video-----?-- Yeah.
-----one. The video one was - there was a bit of barking but
other than that it was mostly silent. This one was barking
all the time?-- Yeah, I can't really explain that. I really
can't.
XXN: APPLICANT
62
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T18/CXW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
You didn't double-tape something on top of it?-- No, they -
1
they can't because they're digital recorders. Once you tape
on something it just tapes right over but most times when
we-----
BENCH: Mr-----
WITNESS: -----use those-----
BENCH: -----Mr Stageman, I think Ms Robertson is saying you -
10
the recording you had - the digital recording, when you put it
onto the audiotape did you - did you tape over something when
you recorded it - when you-----?-- No, it was a blank tape.
-----when you transcribed one to the other. It's a blank
tape?-- It was a blank tape.
New - new blank tape; was it?-- Yeah. It wasn't a - wasn't a
new one. I'd put it through the eraser.
20
Yes. Yes?-- The - the magnetic thing.
Yes. Yes. Yes.
APPLICANT: Okay. Thank you. Now, we'll go to the - the
photos-----
BENCH: We're probably running out of time today, Ms
Robertson.
30
APPLICANT: Uh-huh.
BENCH: I'm sorry.
APPLICANT: Okay.
BENCH: And I have got some dates for you to consider other
than the 27th and 28th, which is when we'll be back here. The
dates available at this stage are 23, 24, 25 - sorry, 23, 24
or 25 September.
40
MS MELLIFONT: I'm in a trial in the District Court, I'm
afraid.
BENCH: All right. Well, given what I said at the
beginning-----
MS MELLIFONT: Yes.
BENCH: -----as to my availability-----
50
MS MELLIFONT: Yes.
BENCH: -----3rd of October? No, 3rd October's no good
because I'll actually be in Charleville on the 3rd of October,
on that day.
MS MELLIFONT: Right. Your Honour said 23, 24, 25 September.
XXN: APPLICANT
63
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.06 T18/CXW(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
1
BENCH: Yes.
MS MELLIFONT: I have a - I have a trial starting on the 15th
of September in the District Court, the estimate for which is
five to six days. I've blocked out all of the balance of the
following week-----
BENCH: I see, mmm.
10
MS MELLIFONT: -----in the event that it fall - spills over.
BENCH: Mmm.
MS MELLIFONT: But it is probably - it's probably quite safe
to take the 25th. I'm a little bit at risk on the 24th.
20
30
40
50
XXN: APPLICANT
64
WIT: STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T19/HLC(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
BENCH: Well, that - that - that leads me to this; that we're
1
confident that we can - it'll be finished in three days?
MS MELLIFONT: In terms of leading oral evidence from the
witnesses, the two inspectors have been the longest ones.
BENCH: Mmm.
MS MELLIFONT: I would be very surprised if any of the
witnesses to remain to be called would have oral evidence of
10
more than to 15 minutes each.
BENCH: Yes.
MS MELLIFONT: And then I'm really in the hands of Ms
Robertson-----
BENCH: Mrs Robertson.
MS MELLIFONT: -----in terms of cross-examination.
20
BENCH: Yes, yes. What I was hopeful of was that 27 and 28
August would conclude the evidence - would finish the evidence
by the 28th and another day set aside for submissions.
MS MELLIFONT: Yes.
BENCH: Is there any chance that you might be available on the
24th if I was to block out the 24th and the 25th out of an
abundance of caution?
30
MS MELLIFONT: There is the - there is certainly a chance. I
would really hope that the trial, I mean, would be finished in
fact by the Monday of that week.
BENCH: Mmm, yes. Are you available or someone available?
MR DUONG: As a junior solicitor, I generally do as I'm told,
your Honour, so yes, I-----
40
BENCH: As it should be.
MR DUONG: So I should be available.
BENCH: Very good. Mrs Robertson, are you available on the
24th and 25th of September?
APPLICANT: Yes, should be available, your Honour. The sooner
this ends the better for me.
50
BENCH: Well, I - I'm of the view - of the same view in that I
think there has been - some - some time has passed and I think
an early conclusion would be in the interest of all parties at
the Bar table.
APPLICANT: It's not only that, I mean, they've destroyed
everything. I mean, I just can't hang around, what do I do?
65
STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T19/HLC(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
BENCH: That's my point, Mrs Robertson.
1
APPLICANT: Yes, Mmm.
BENCH: All right, well we'll lock in - we'll lock in the 24th
and 25th of September-----
APPLICANT: Yes.
BENCH: -----that becomes free.
10
APPLICANT: Yes.
BENCH: I'll tell the coordinating Magistrate that I'm free.
MS MELLIFONT: Thank you. Your Honour, can I ask for
possession of Exhibit 25 tape in order to have a transcript
made between now and the next occasion? I can arrange for a
copy to be made so that the original can be brought back to
Court Monday or Tuesday next week.
20
BENCH: I - I won't need it before then, I've - I have other -
other matters.
MS MELLIFONT: Thank you.
BENCH: I'm sure your instructing solicitor will take good
proper care of it. There are some facilities available where
you're able to - might not be available to your instructing
solicitors-----
30
MS MELLIFONT: Yes.
BENCH: -----where those background sounds can be erased and
the actual voices enhanced.
MS MELLIFONT: Can I - because Mr Stageman's under cross-
examination, I can't speak to him-----
BENCH: Yes.
40
MS MELLIFONT: -----about the original digital, but maybe -
but if that's able to be produced in lieu, we might be able to
sort out the problem with the background noise.
BENCH: He hasn't recorded over it?
MS MELLIFONT: Yes, your Honour, would be able to ask him
those questions now, if that's convenient.
50
BENCH: I'm going to. I'm going to ask you where the original
recording is; do you know where it is Mr Stageman, the - the
actual digital recording that you did on the - on the
day?-- I'm pretty sure I put on the - on CD.
Oh you think you might've put it on a CD?-- Yeah, I'm - I
downloaded a lot on - a lot on audio on the-----
66
STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T19/HLC(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
Yes?-- -----digital recorder.
1
Yes?-- And I did download a lot of it on to the CD.
Between now and the 27th of August, would you make some
searches to see whether or not you can find that
downloading?-- Yes, your Honour.
The quality's of the - the audio tape-----?-- Yeah.
10
-----leaves a bit to be desired?-- Yeah, no, I'll do that,
your Honour.
And - and produce it on the 27th or produce it to Ms
Mellifont's instructing solicitors?-- Yes, your Honour.
MS MELLIFONT: Thank you, your Honour. And I also seek leave
of the Court to have communication with Mr Stageman through my
instructors in this limited way; a draft transcript of the -
of the recording will be made-----
20
BENCH: Yes.
MS MELLIFONT: -----and forwarded to Inspector Stageman-----
BENCH: Yes.
MS MELLIFONT: -----perhaps for verification-----
BENCH: Yes.
30
MS MELLIFONT: -----and returned back to myself-----
BENCH: Yes.
MS MELLIFONT: -----those who instruct me, the second
respondent and a copy to Mrs Robertson.
BENCH: Yes, yes. Ms Mellifont, I - I would be extremely
surprised if there was any breaches of the rules in relation
40
to discussion about his evidence whilst under cross-
examination.
MS MELLIFONT: Yes.
BENCH: But out of an abundance of caution, I understand what
you're - what you're doing, but I have no difficulty with him
be - be spoken to, provided it's not about his evidence.
MS MELLIFONT: Thank you, your Honour.
50
APPLICANT: Your Honour, I like to submit the exit video which
came from DPI anyway as an-----
BENCH: I think we've got a copy of that though, don't we?
APPLICANT: Is it the same?
67
STAGEMAN L
60
15082008 D.6 T19/HLC(CAB) (Strofield, Magistrate)
BENCH: Isn't that - that was the - what you have is the-----
1
APPLICANT: Yes.
BENCH: -----the DVD-----
APPLICANT: Yes, that came from-----
BENCH: -----but the original tape itself is - has been
tendered as Exhibit 24.
10
APPLICANT: Is - is it the same, this is a video?
BENCH: Yes, that's - but that's been downloaded on to a DVD.
APPLICANT: Ah right.
BENCH: This is the actual - the actual tape itself.
APPLICANT: Is that right? I don't know much about this sort
20
of things, sorry.
BENCH: It's a bit hard to keep up with all the exhibits that
keep-----
APPLICANT: I mean it looks strange, from something big and
flat like that, it becomes - you show me a little tiny one.
Sorry.
BENCH: All right, is there anything else that anyone wants
30
to-----
MS MELLIFONT: No, your Honour, thank you.
BENCH: All right, we'll adjourn until the 27th of August.
MS MELLIFONT: Thank you, your Honour.
40
THE COURT ADJOURNED
50
68
STAGEMAN L
60