A Newcastle man who swung a dog in the air and hung it over a fence by its collar and lead has banned from owning or keeping any kind of animal for life.
Newcastle Magistrates’ Court was shown CCTV described as “sickening” by Deputy District Judge Katy Rafter of Jak Hurley hitting his dad’s six-month old Labradoodle puppy Bobby, dangling him in mid air by his lead and hanging him from a fence.
She described previous claims made by Hurley of Westgate Road, Newcastle, that his actions had been the result of a defective lead as “total rubbish”. And she added she was also “sceptical about how bad you feel about what you did because of what you said to probation in your interview; excuse after excuse, no apology.
Read more: RSPCA received 20 reports of cruelty against rats in the North East last year
“I have had to look at the sentencing guidelines in this case and I agree there is a deliberate and gratuitous attempt to cause suffering to that dog, what we call in the courts high culpability. It is fortunate for you, as well as the dog, that there wasn’t any serious harm caused to him, although as a matter of common sense he would have been in some considerable stress and discomfort.”
Hurley had admitted causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal and failing to ensure an animal’s welfare on October 26 last year in West Denton, at a hearing at Newcastle Magistrates’ Court in March. He was back in court for sentencing in the case brought by the RSPCA.
In the CCTV shown to the court by RSPCA prosecutor Alex Bousfield, the 27-year-old can be seen swinging Bobby around by his lead and then hanging him from a fence before he is carried away whilst still being suspended in the air.
Mr Bousfield said: “There appears to be no obvious build-up to it or obvious reason for what happened. The prosecution case is that this caused entirely unnecessary suffering. It appears to be a deliberate course of conduct.”
Mr Bousfield added there “seems to be some element of punishing Bobby for some unknown offence caused to Mr Hurley".
He told the court that on October 26 Hurley had been seen shouting at Bobby in an alleyway. The witness saw Hurley grab Bobby by the flesh and drag him along the ground before forcing the dog’s collar above his head. The witness suggested to Hurley that the collar must have come off because it was too loose, but was abused for intervening and told “the dog is a f*****g c**t.
Mr Bousfield said it was then that Hurley lifted Bobby into the air by his collar so he was hanging, and told the witness that the dog bit. “She then saw Mr Hurley put the dog down again as he walked off and some minutes later the witness again saw the dog swung into the air.
“She described how that made her feel sick and video evidence was then obtained from a house nearby.”
In a police interview Hurley claimed Bobby’s retractable lead had become jammed and he wouldn’t have hurt the dog. When shown the CCTV footage, Mr Bousfield said Hurley “didn’t think he had done anything wrong. He then said it’s not acceptable to do this to a dog, but the lead was jammed. He agreed he put the dog over the fence and held the dog suspended, to try an unjam the lead, and that is apparently how he believed that you could do such a thing".
Hurley denied in interview that he had abused Bobby. When he was told that a vet had certified that Bobby was caused suffering, Mr Bousfield said: “He (Hurley) claimed that it was necessary because the lead had jammed. When asked if he would do anything differently, in the interview he said he would use a different lead.”
He added that the vet who saw Bobby concluded that the dog’s welfare needs had not been met, that it hadn’t been protected from harm, and that it had been prevented from expressing its natural behaviour. He added: “It was caused to suffer unnecessary pain and fear, although the period is unclear.”
Adrian Ions, defending, said his client didn’t take the incident lightly and that the CCTV footage naturally and rightly provoked an emotive response. “That emotive response is shared by Mr Hurley. Mr Hurley is filled with self-loathing, he is filled with disgust.”
Mr Ions added that it was a one-off incident and that Hurley’s only explanation was “that he was carrying out what he believed to be chastisement of the animal. He accepts that that chastisement was not correct chastisement. He absolutely accepts that it goes well beyond that. He absolutely accepts that it was irresponsible and dangerous. He absolutely accepts that his actions were wrong.”
In sentencing Hurley to four months imprisonment suspended for 12 months, an indefinite ban on keeping or owning any animals, and imposing 20 rehabilitation requirement days, Ms Rafter said she gave credit to Hurley for pleading guilty at the earliest opportunity “but I am not impressed with you denying these offences when you saw probation and told them that the allegations were all lies".
She said it was conceded that Hurley should be disqualified from keeping animals. "The CCTV footage in this case was horrendous. Anyone who treats animals like that doesn't deserve to have the pleasure of owning or keeping animals ever in my judgement. The order for disqualification is going to be for an indefinite period."
Hurley can appeal for the ban to be lifted after 10 years.
