It never ceases to amaze us that, even though you would expect that people would own a dog for the love and rewards you get from being a dog owner, there are people like Alan Davidson who was caught on camera viciously attacking his dog.
Alan, unfortunately, is a dog owner, he was caught beating his dog repeatedly with a pole, not one, not twice, but nine times he was caught!
The neighbor filmed his actions and was thoroughly disgusted by what was happening, over and over again.
A witness to the beatings was so incredibly shocked by the way this dog owner was beating the dog that she screamed at him to stop and called the police immediately!
The Magistrates court listened to how this guy treated the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, the consensus is that the poor doggie will have permanent psychological damage after such beatings.
Maybe even worse than hearing this was to then find out that the dog owner Alan avoided time in jail and got a suspended sentence…
Perhaps to try to balance the scales of law in some small way, by the court’s standards, he was banned from owning a dog for ten years, but we think even forever is a day too soon for this guy!
The association for the protection of animals called the RSPCA was involved in the case and prosecuting on their behalf was John Ellwood.
Mr. Ellwood said:
“The basic facts are that he caused suffering to his Staffordshire Bull Terrier by hitting, kicking and frightening the dog.”
“The defendant’s conduct came to light as a result of the caring conduct of a neighbor, who lives out the back of the defendant.”
“She saw the defendant in his back garden, abusing his dog and reported it to the police. The police delegated the investigation to the RSPCA who visited the defendant.”
“At that time the evidence from the neighbor was merely a complaint and as a result, the defendant was warned about his conduct and given advice.”
“He claimed at the time that he was merely reprimanding his dog.”
Mr. Ellwood went on to describe that Davidson ignored the neighbor, at that point the neighbor had already witnessed him beat the dog several times before, regularly.
The prosecutor said:
“These videos show the defendant kicking his dog, hitting his dog, throwing water on his dog and threatening his dog with weapons.”
“The behavior is most bizarre. On some of the videos, it can be seen that the dog is being hit and then being coaxed back to the defendant and then being hit again.”
“On occasions, it has been seen that the dog has been thrown into the house and has been yelping.”
“The defendant’s conduct is contradictory and confusing to the dog and must have had a severe psychological impact upon it.”
“It hardly needs a vet to say that this conduct caused suffering, but a vet has viewed the videos and has commented that the physical abuse would have caused soft tissue trauma of bruising, pain and discomfort, but the ongoing fear would be psychological suffering, which some dogs never recover from.”
“As a result of all this, the RSPCA interviewed the defendant, who at first denied that he had done anything wrong, but then when he was told there were videos, he admitted he was in the wrong.”
Alan Davidson was a no-show at his earlier hearing but in his absence, he was found, with the evidence presented to have caused unnecessary suffering to the dog, in addition to the two counts of failing to ensure animal welfare between June and July of 2017.
Alan was defended by Tony Southwick who made his case that he suffers from mental health issues and is getting help from the local doctor.
“Given the matter before the court it will no longer be possible for him to have an animal and he regrets that because, in his words, that was his only company at the time.”
“He accepts the animal can’t return to him and he is more than happy for the dog to be signed over, but he regrets not having the company.”
“I was surprised to see the level of his problems in the pre-sentence report. These were actions borne out of his condition.”
Alan Davidson was given an incredible 3-month sentence, suspended for 12 months!
He was also banned from owning a dog for ten years, but after five years he could apply to the court to have it lifted ?!
He was lastly told he must participate in an unpaid work for 25 days, the work would be specified by the authorities and he must pay £300 in costs and a further £115 surcharge!
We still maintain that this is not enough, what do you think?
Should penalties in the UK for this kind of case be much more severe? Tell us what you think in the Comments below?