http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20090909/tuk-court-hearing-on-police-dog-deaths-6323e80.html
Policeman in court today, but I see he hasn't attended the first hearing.

Yes I read this he has a "sick note" from the report I read.

It is understood his solicitor will apply for an order giving him anonymity.

But they name him at the start of the item

He had already been named anyway, a picture of him was shown on the local news, a few weeks ago?

it means that his home address will not be revealed

Latest is that he will not stand trail at all due to his illness and the liklihood of not getting a fair deal!
Um dogs didnt get a fair deal either IMO

His address was in the news report together with his name - so a little late to ask for (anomminity?) spelling is not my best point at times. 

he will stand trial- ithe hearing has just been adjourned. he wont get any different treatment than any member of the public would get.

in that case they are breaking the law by revealing his address

it said in the paper he had a sick note stating stress. Shame on him for not being man enough to take responsibility for what he done to those 2 poor dogs, he thinks his stressed, imagine what they went through.

Im sure he is stressed. Yes, leaving the dogs in the car was wrong and im sure he is in no doubt at that now but the backlash he has had since then is enough to get anyone signed off

He shouldn't of been a selfish idiot and left his 2 dog to cook in his car.
Now he's making out his ill and stressed over this incident- most probably he's mostly worried he's going to be kicked out of the police force!

I would feel more for this person if he stood up for what happened and excepted blame for what he did- not hide away and plead sickness.

> I would feel more for this person if he stood up for what happened and excepted blame for what he did- not hide away and plead sickness.

How has he not accepted blame for what happened?