TALLACK Radio Interviews

Tallack Radio Interviews

»» BBC Radio Ulster Nolan Show 31 March 2011 ««

»» Nando Brown Radio Show 14 July 2012 ««


11 thoughts on “TALLACK Radio Interviews

  1. Now this Tallack guy seems to have a lot to say considering all he needs is a measuring tape and a sheet of paper to record his findings. His opinions should not have carried any weight in a court of law considering his very unprofessional verbal and agitated bluster…now why would a judge take his opinions and no notice of the true, qualified experts,…seems mighty strange to me.

    • my sentiments exactly, haybob! and mind you, the experts were dissed as well, despite mr Ryan’s report on lennox being positive and him NEVER saying the dog was dangerous or untrainable, Sarah’s report was ignored and her experience with bully breed dogs downplayed both in and out of court by the anti Barnes crowd… one may wonder why they felt the need to diss a renowned TTouch specialist… so much still doesn’t make sense. meanwhile does any good samaritan have a batch of anti-constipation pills for the poor souls still stuck on their lavatory, the poor buggers must have hemorroids the size of small planets judging by the time they spend on there!

      • They dissed her report because she was credible and they didn’t like that. Sarah Fisher has dealt with lots of Pit Bulls and Pit Bull ‘types’ but because Pits are banned in this country, she dealt with the real things abroad. Considering Tallack has probably never met a real Pit Bull in his life and bases his judgements on a set of out of date measurements which they’ve been asked NOT to use, her report was far and away more credible than his twisted version of events.

        This case was definitely fixed from start to finish. There appears to have been a lot of back scratching going on during the court case and, if proven, there may be a lot of people whose pension plans go out of the window.

        • I agree Karmabus, the genuine experts were ignored. If this man had nothing to hide then why all the sweating and mumbling when he took the stand. It strikes me that if you are telling the truth, then you would stand up there and tell it like it is with no fear of who is ‘looking at you; Sarah Fisher, and Caroline Barnes had no such difficulty despite being watched closely by the likes of Tallack and his buddy Lightfoot. When you consider that Lightfoot had also told Sarah that Lennox had bitten someone already and was then forced to admit in court that that statement wasn’t true either, it beggars belief that any judge could accept Tallack or Lightfoot as being even remotely credible. Those two and their little fan club made sure from the start that poor Lennox was never going to get out of there alive purely to justify their own twisted agenda. Its no surprise that since this blog highlighted just some of their disgraceful behaviour their so called quest for the ‘truth’ no longer seems to hold as much importance for them. One by one they seem to have crawled back under their little rocks… but they haven’t gone away they certainly will NOT be forgotten.

          • A bit like the hate campaigners then summersdays. All mouth when the case was on and they could do harm but their ‘truth’ speeches all disappeared when this blog started exposing their lies. It doesn’t get much more hypocritical (or hipocritical for dear Heather who has the intelligence of a flea) than a liar proclaiming to speak the truth.

            I wonder if they learnt how to have no integrity from their friend Tallack? He is blatantly considered an expert. I think it’s tragic that they are swanning around FB (which is the only place they’ll ever get their ‘glory’ fix) proclaiming to be animal lovers when they spent so long commenting, bitching and supporting those working to damage the case in order to feed their own bloated egos. Every one of the people on those hate pages (and we know a lot of their actual ids 😉 ) will get their time on this blog and their 15 minutes of fame. Sadly for them it won’t be the type of attention they wanted. They should have thought of that before they jumped on the hate bandwagon.

            By the way ‘Heather’, is it true you got kicked out of law school for being an idiot? You failed to tell your fan club that didn’t you.

  2. To be honest I’m still baffled at how that man, who was brought in only to say whether Lennox was type yes or no, could put in so much weight in the case giving his ‘expert’ opinion (which is, as both ladies from a certain organisation and the honourable law student slash accomplished lawyer have also pointed correctly out on many occasions, just that: an OPINION, not a fact) on Len’s behaviour in the first place… After his answer type yes or no the judge should have said ‘thank you’. No elaboration needed or wanted. This case is so warped… the defense has to prove the dog is not dangerous. They did. Even BCC and their cronies proved the dog wasn’t dangerous, as in those 2 years of incarceration, Lennox hasn’t bitten ANYONE. NO blood was ever shed. Not even in a crowded parking lot. All they ‘got’ was that ‘lunge’ and Tallack’s story of Lennox jumping to his head…. How they ever got away with claiming Lennox was dangerous and unpredictable when he had at best some anxiety issues (as have many other dogs including big breed dogs) – the case should have been clear: exemption.

    • Tallack gave his unasked for opinion because 1) he thought it would put some oomph in his c.v, it actually did the opposite and he’s become a laughing stock 2) he was being paid to find the dog dangerous, BCC couldn’t afford to lose all that money on a cock up by a malicious dog warden 3) the dog warden and he had time to discuss how to ‘play’ the case when they had their cosy little chats before the trial. That’s my opinion anyway.

  3. There are some serious discrepancies there it seems. How does the saying go? Oh yes, ‘you have to have a good memory to be a liar’ 😉 There he goes offering his unqualified opinion on behaviour again as well and trying to distract from the questions being asked by changing the subject (another tactic liars use regularly) and who was the argumentative, ugly sounding female trying to discredit Victoria Stilwell on the Nando show? She came across as a complete idiot trying to blow her own trumpet and failing miserably.

    • Yes Karmabus, ‘ ugly sounding female trying to discredit Victoria Stilwell on the Nando show’ – seems that was definately her motive, bet she wishes she hadn’t ‘rushed’ in so quick – lol

      • It’s very worrying that she was so desperate for her 15 minutes of fame the she chose to make herself look like a fool on air. I can imagine her running off ‘chortling’ to herself and her cohorts about how clever she was when actually she came across as a self important, militant idiot to thousands of listeners. That pretty much sums her and her friends up though doesn’t it.

Leave a Reply..

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s