Warnings
Pair Banned From Keeping Dogs After Rspca Investigation
28th April 2010
Pair banned from keeping dogs after RSPCA investigation
Two men have been banned from keeping dogs after they were convicted of confining three dogs in squalid conditions, in a case taken by the RSPCA.
Mr Murray was banned from keeping dogs for 10 years and handed a 225 hour community order after he was convicted of two charges of keeping three dogs in tiny cages. He must also pay £500 costs.
Milton Keynes Magistrates Court was told the three dogs were forced to live and sleep on newspaper soaked in their own urine and faeces.
The two mastiff type dogs and one Staffordshire bull terrier were being kept in the appalling conditions at the 34 year old’s home near Milton Keynes when the RSPCA and police carried out a warrant at the property on 27 March last year.
The Staffordshire bull terrier, called Niya, belonged to Murray’s cousin, who was also convicted of one charge of confining the dog contrary to its wellbeing under section 9 of the Animal Welfare Act.
The court decided Mr Murray's cousin, 20, of London, was still responsible for the welfare of his dog even though she was being kept at Murray’s house. He was sentenced to a two year ban on keeping dogs and a £100 fine at an earlier hearing. He was also ordered to pay £500 costs.
RSPCA deputy chief inspector Kirsty Hampton said
“These poor dogs were left in cramped, filthy conditions where they had absolutely nothing to occupy them.
“The pair clearly had no regard for the health and wellbeing of the dogs which were forced to live on dirty and smelly old newspapers. The Animal Welfare Act made it a legal requirement to keep pets in appropriate conditions, but that was something these men clearly failed to do.”
She welcomed the court’s decision to ban the pair from keeping dogs and said it sent a strong message to anyone who thought it was acceptable to leave animals in such atrocious conditions.
Mr Murray was acquitted of two charges of trimming the ears of the two mastiff type dogs, contrary to section 5 of the Animal Welfare Act.