Prison Sentence For Animal Welfare Offences.

[j]

This is a good result - Courts in the ACT are generally very lenient

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/man-failed-to-get-help-for-dog-after-cooking-oil-caused-horrendous-burns-20150925-gjurwk.html

They're images harrowing enough to move Canberrans to tears, prosecutors say.

"Buster", a cross-breed, was left without veterinary attention after being covered in scalding cooking oil earlier this year, causing first and third degree burns to 15 per cent of his body.

The owner said the burns were not caused intentionally and that he hadn't realised the extent of the injuries, but pleaded guilty to failing to seek help for the animal in the ACT Magistrates Court.

The distress of the animal was first noticed when police were at the home for unrelated offences.

Buster was heard whimpering, and the RSPCA was notified. It is not known how long the dog had been left in such a condition, but the court found its pain would have been obvious to anyone.

When RSPCA inspectors arrived, the owner, Paul Muell, 20, met them at the door with a baseball bat, after hearing someone on his balcony.

He later drunkenly called senior inspector Catherine Croatto to demand the animal back and tell her he would be seeing her around, stating he didn't make threats, only promises.

Prosecutor Anthony Williamson, in pushing for a sentence of imprisonment, said there must be repercussions for such acts.

"People care strongly about animals, in my submission, and a lot of reasonable, temperate members of the community would be appalled, and would be moved to tears upon seeing these images," he said on Friday.

Mr Williamson asked rhetorically:

"If this doesn't warrant imprisonment, what would?"

Magistrate Lorraine Walker sentenced Muell to one year and 10 months imprisonment for failing to seek veterinary attention, common assault, threatening the RSPCA inspector, and an unrelated burglary and theft.

An 11-month non-parole period was set, meaning Muell will be eligible for release in May.

Buster, who was not taken to the vets after hot cooking oil caused first and third degree burns to 15 per cent of his body.

Ms Walker said anyone would have realised that hot oil spilling on a living being would have caused "great pain", and would require attention.

She said that there were options for help available, even if Muell couldn't afford vet bills.

"The way that a community treats its most vulnerable, including animals, is a reflection on the community as a whole," Ms Walker said.

The court heard Muell had a troubled and traumatic childhood.

He also lost his mother at an early age, leaving him without either parent.

Ms Walker said she had no doubt Muell was scarred by his childhood, and had reason to be angry.

His lawyer told the court Muell had openly wept when he had seen the images of his dog's injuries.

Ms Walker accepted he was genuinely remorseful.

In a statement to Fairfax Media, Ms Croatto said the injuries Buster sustained were "horrendous".

"When I first saw him, he was cowering, whimpering, unable to weight bear and in so much pain," she said.

"It was truly distressing and difficult to comprehend how much this dog endured before we were able to rescue him."

RSPCA chief executive Tammy Ven Dange said she was frustrated that offenders' pasts were continually being used as excuses for harming helpless animals.

"These pets are fully dependant on their owners for their well-being, and to allow an animal to suffer like this is appalling," she said.

"We are even more frustrated by the fact that this case sentencing seemed to justify the offender's actions because of something unrelated that happened to him in his childhood."

She said she was increasingly concerned about the safety of RSPCA inspectors, and called for tougher penalties in animal cruelty cases like Buster's.

"In order for this change, not only do we need for the magistrates to apply the law to its maximum potential, we need help from our lawmakers to give them greater penalties to work with for cases like this."

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/man-failed-to-get-help-for-dog-after-cooking-oil-caused-horrendous-burns-20150925-gjurwk.html#ixzz3n5ouRQnE

Follow us: @canberratimes on Twitter | CanberraTimes on Facebook

[Little Gifts]

People may not agree with me on this but I don't think imprisonment is the answer to some crimes against animals, particularly one off neglect cases. What is a person going to learn about caring for an animal in prison? I'd prefer they were forced to take animal care courses or undertake volunteer work at a refuge. I'd also prefer they were not able to legally own or care for an animal in their own home until they had done some rehabilitative work or study. I am more than happy for puppy farmers to go straight to prison as they do the same thing over and over and over again for money (not one off neglect) and will just find ways to work around the system if they remain in our communities. As for the guy above I suspect he got prison time for his other offences more than the harm to Buster. They are taking him off the streets so he is not a threat to human beings, not other dogs. Oh and he should be made to pay back the money spent on caring for, rehabbing and rehoming Buster. make the sentence mean something for Buster.

[Dame Aussie]

I'd normally agree re imprisonment for minor/non violent crimes LG, but for animal cruelty/neglect, lock them up.

They make me sick and I don't believe working in a refuge etc will do anything. Only a certain type of person can harm an animal and I don't believe they're able to be rehabilitated.

[Steve]

People may not agree with me on this but I don't think imprisonment is the answer to some crimes against animals, particularly one off neglect cases. What is a person going to learn about caring for an animal in prison? I'd prefer they were forced to take animal care courses or undertake volunteer work at a refuge. I'd also prefer they were not able to legally own or care for an animal in their own home until they had done some rehabilitative work or study. I am more than happy for puppy farmers to go straight to prison as they do the same thing over and over and over again for money (not one off neglect) and will just find ways to work around the system if they remain in our communities. As for the guy above I suspect he got prison time for his other offences more than the harm to Buster. They are taking him off the streets so he is not a threat to human beings, not other dogs. Oh and he should be made to pay back the money spent on caring for, rehabbing and rehoming Buster. make the sentence mean something for Buster.

Sorry telling him he should take animal care lessons or work at a refuge for me is like telling a child abuser to work at a child care centre. I agree that locking him up wont make any difference but ensuring he cant be in charge of an animal again might be a better alternative. He can come out in a year and do it all again!

[Little Gifts]

But how do people like this change if they don't learn something different? I don't want people like this to own animals again either unless they learn how to attend to their basic needs. He's a young bloke who probably thought the dog would just heal by itself. How will he learn otherwise? I suspect he'd use the same approach to raising a child too because he knows no better. He was probably bought up the same. I think there are quite a few neglect cases out there that happen for the same reasons - a failure to understand the needs of another living thing. Some relate to mental health issues and I do believe some offenders could treat animals differently in the future with education.

I'm basing this on my experiences in statutory child protection. Some people can and do change. Some people just have no clue how to care for another (and are also quite limited in how they care for themselves), particularly younger people. I've also seen what the prison system can do to young men and women who go in for minor offences (like traffic offences). They are changed by the crime and violence that exists within that environment to the point they become a further community risk once they are released. There is no deterrent and no personal growth. It is a really sad cycle.

But this young guy was already heading down the violence and crime path on his own so he is where he should be. I'm glad Buster has a brighter future.