Thursday, September 21, 2006

Reward or no reward?

The reporter from the newspaper called to ask if we wanted to put up a reward for the person who was filmed kicking the cat in the video. Some of the committee discussed this via email and it was a tough decision with different members coming to different conclusions. We put it to a vote in the end.

On one hand, it might bring someone forward who saw it. On the other hand, who knows WHO will come forward? Besides the person filming the video who might decide to claim if the sum was great enough (though it could be worded to prevent that from happening), it just seems that the guy's face is so clear on the video. It would be good if someone came forward just because it is the right thing to do - not because there is a monetary reward. I suppose that generally in abuse cases, we find it so hard to find someone who saw it happening and a reward is necessary in that case because the chances of finding anyone who saw it is small. That person might be induced by a monetary reward for example. In this case, the guy's face is clear. If it's put in the newspaper, on the Net, etc - someone will recognise him, be it a friend, ex-school mate, colleague etc. I really hope that someone will just see it and come forward because it's the right thing to do, not because there was money involved.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, his friends, family and relatives probably WON'T turn him in, money or no money.

His enemies probably WILL turn him in to spite him, money or no money.

So the money will only work as a swing-vote for ... whom? Ppl like neighbours, acquaintences, colleagues, shopkeepers in his neighbourhood, etc who might have minded their own business but now have an incentive to rat on him?

So this reward MAY well target the biggest grp of ppl who may potentially know him and incentivise them to come forward actually.

21/9/06 9:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

sad to say but MONEY can work wonders. Esp if the informant can remain anonymous. You will have results within 24 hours.

21/9/06 10:40 PM  
Blogger Dawn said...

The person would probably need to testify. Then again, if they trace him back via SMS (which is how it was sent), then they'll be able to pull out his number.

22/9/06 12:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

is the police willing to go through all the trouble to trace the sms?


22/9/06 2:59 PM  
Blogger Dawn said...

Hi Ginette, I actually just emailed SPCA to ask about this because they're the ones liasing with the police. I would think it's possible - all those bomb hoaxes and the like have been traced back to the original person via SMS.

22/9/06 3:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yeah that was what i was thinking too. hopefully the police won't think it's too "leh-ceh" for such a "trivial" thing. grrr.


22/9/06 4:54 PM  
Blogger Guttercat said...

When most of the average copper off the street doesn't even know that the Animals & Birds Act exists?

Forgive me for my doubts.

23/9/06 3:48 AM  
Blogger Dawn said...

In this particular case I think two things are going for it. One, the added publicity of the press coverage. Two, the officer in charge likes animals too - apparently he was equally horrified by the video.

23/9/06 11:37 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home