I do agree that the severity of the case determine whether charges are brought or not, the problem here is that the RSPCA have a conflict of interest that is increased the more vunerable the person being prosecuted.

There are numerous cases on the rspcainjustice.blogspot.com where the RSPCA have prosecuted either the elderly, mentally ill (this is a particulary lucrative area) or the disabled.

The issue is that the RSPCA get loads of publicity from a prosecution (whether they win or lose) this publicity send their local, and even national donation rates soaring, they effectively are getting paid for prosecuting people. The more sensational the case, or the more vunerable the defendant, the more media exposure equates to more donations, the RSPCA have a very highly oiled PR & media dept that swing into action, issuing press releases to local and national newspapers based on individual prosecutions.

Prosecutors should all adhere to the CPS full code test, the most important aspect of this is the public interest test, the RSPCA often put their own interpratation on this, they take the public interest in the contect of overall animal welfare, not based upon the merits of the individual case, as I believe its suppossed to be interpreted.

The bottom line is that the RSPCA are not regulated by anyone, they claim they are just a charity when it suits them, the reality is that they are one of the richest and most powerful organisations in the UK and they think that they can get away with anything (like impersonating Police Officers) and do anything.

Until the powers that be wake up and smell the coffee, the RSPCA will continue to do so.