Thank you. That doesn’t answer the question. You said that the post was made in collaboration with one of its officers. I need to know how you know that and what the circumstances are because the screenshot doesn’t say that.
If the PCSO how genuinely collaborated in this post (there is nothing in anything you have shown me that says he/she has) then you have a genuine complaint to make to the Chief Constable and I would do that in writing. In my opinion, if that has happened, it’s gross misconduct and it should lead to instant dismissal after the relevant disciplinary procedure.
Looking at screenshot 2, it says that there were 2 dogs but you haven’t mentioned that.
It does say that the dogs were running free and in a public space, that’s an offence. I can’t see anything in screenshot number three which is problematical except for the assumption about hunting in the last sentence. It’s something by the poster which says the police have issued a crime number (which they would do) and it’s only the word of the poster that the police are otherwise involved in urging people to inform them of the dogs are seen.
I cannot see anything from what you have sent me that say that the police were involved.
Because of the extent of the dogs injuries, and the fact that the dogs were not under control, there is a public safety issue here although that’s not something for a vigilante to take control of, that is a matter for the police to deal with privately from the injured party who presumably had your details.
Notwithstanding the fact that you may have committed an offence by not having the dog on a lead in a public space and not under control, it would appear that whoever the post up is merely venting their spleen and dressing it up as protecting other people. There is no benefit for the poster in doing this.
It was only one post, then it is not harassment but if there was more than one post, then you can make a complaint to the police (regardless of your potential offence or the circumstances) and ask for the poster to be warned under the Protection from Harassment Act. There are likely to be prosecuted but warned that if they did this again, they would face prosecution.
What you can also do if you wanted to spend some money is to take out a civil injunction for defamation and ask for an apology. Although you can be identified from the posts, I can’t see that there’s anything defamatory in those statements unless anything in there is untrue. It’s not something that I would be rushing to court over.
Can I clarify anything else for you?.
I’m happy to answer any specific points arising from this.
Please take a moment to look at the top right hand corner of the page and rate my service by clicking one of the stars at the top of the screen. It’s important you use the rating service because that gives me credit. It doesn’t just give me a pat on the head! (Although there is an incentive scheme where the more five-star ratings I get, I do actually get a pat on the head! :-)) All you need to do is press Submit. Thank you.
If you still need any point clarifying, I will still reply because the thread does not close.