magistrates’ court mock trial competition 2006/07
Case Outline - R v Sam Beatter
The following information is useful for all students. For further details, specifically for the
Legal Adviser, see pages 8-9.
Summary of the facts
Following a complaint, an RSPCA Inspector called at 4 Park Avenue, Rodley at 3pm on 8th
January. The house is owned by Sam Beatter and her/his daughter Ceri Beatter.
In the living room of the house was a white short-haired female rabbit. The rabbit was
unable to stand on its back legs and was taken to a vet. Both Sam and Jane Beatter claim
that the rabbit was left on their doorstep on the 7th January.
Outside the house were two sheds housing 50 rabbits. The rabbits were in dirty cages and
didn’t have access to the open air or the opportunity to exercise. The rabbits were in
reasonable bodily condition and had access to food and water. Sam Beatter admitted that
s/he is responsible for the care of the rabbits.
The white short-haired female rabbit was taken to a vet and had to be put down to prevent
further suffering.
The Charge
That Sam Beatter did cause unnecessary suffering to a certain animal, namely a white female
domestic rabbit, by unreasonably omitting to provide the said animal with prompt veterinary
treatment contrary to Section 1, Sub section 1 (a) of the Protection of Animals Act 1911.
© The Citizenship Foundation
Charity Reg. No. 801360
1
magistrates’ court mock trial competition 2006/07
The Law
Section 1 of the Protection of Animals Act 1911 (Act of Parliament) states –
“ (1) If any person –
(a) Shall cruelly beat, kick, ill-treat, over-ride, over-drive, over-load, torture, infuriate, or
terrify any animal, or shall cause or procure, or, being the owner, permit any animal to be
so used, or shall, by wantonly or unreasonably doing or omitting to do any act, or causing
or procuring the commission or omission of any act, cause any unnecessary suffering, or,
being the owner, permit any unnecessary suffering to be so caused to any animal; …
such person shall be guilty of an offence of cruelty within the meaning of this Act.
(2) For the purposes of this section, an owner shall be deemed to have permitted cruelty
within the meaning of this Act if he shall have failed to exercise reasonable care and
supervision in respect of the protection of the animal there from.”
RSPCA v Isaacs (1994) – Case Law
“When the suffering is not inevitable, in that it can be terminated or alleviated by some
reasonably practicable measure, then the suffering becomes unnecessary”.
In this case of RSPCA v Sam Beatter, for a guilty verdict under the Protection of Animals
Act, the prosecution must prove that: the animal suffered unnecessarily and that this
suffering was caused by the owner ‘wantonly or unreasonably doing or omitting to do any act’,
or, that the owner permitted cruelty by failing to ‘exercise reasonable care and supervision in
respect of the protection of the animal’.
© The Citizenship Foundation
Charity Reg. No. 801360
2
Prosecution Witness Statement 1
Name: Chris Jenner
Address: c/o RSPCA, Sunfield
Occupation: RSPCA Inspector
Date of Birth: 15th August 1969
Date of Statement: 8th January 2007
I was called to a house, namely 4, Park Avenue, Rodley on Monday 8th January at 3pm. A
concerned neighbour had called the RSPCA about the rabbits kept in sheds at the back of the
house.
When I arrived at the property there were two people, Sam Beatter and his/her
son/daughter, Ceri. In the living room was a white, short-haired adult female rabbit. She
was in a cardboard box. When I looked at her I could see that there was something wrong
with her back legs. I asked them who the rabbit belonged to and they both looked at each
other and Sam said that it had been left on the doorstep the night before. Sam said s/he
was going to take the rabbit to the vet to be put to sleep but s/he’d been too tired as s/he
worked long nights at the local hospital.
I asked if they had any more rabbits. They looked a bit uneasy but they took me outside and
showed me two sheds. The sheds were full of rabbit cages. In total there were 50 rabbits.
The cages were very dirty but the rabbits were in a reasonable body condition. They did have
access to food and water. I told Sam that they needed cleaning out and they needed some
time in the open air or in a run to allow them to exercise. The smell was overpowering as they
opened the shed doors.
I asked Sam who was responsible for looking after the rabbits. S/he said it used to be both
of them, however since Ceri started working irregular shifts at an old people’s home s/he had
been very tired. Sam admitted that s/he was looking after them on his/her own now. I asked
Sam if s/he was willing to relinquish ownership of the white rabbit in the living room so that I
could take it to the vets and s/he agreed reluctantly. I also asked him/her to think about
relinquishing ownership of the rabbits so that the RSPCA could find them new homes. S/he
agreed to think about it.
When I left the property I took the rabbit directly to the veterinary surgeon. He examined
her and it was decided that to prevent further suffering the rabbit should be put down.
3
Prosecution Witness Statement 2
Name: Francis /Frances Conolly
Address: 6, Park Avenue, Rodley
Occupation: Medical Receptionist
Date of Birth: 25th August 1966
Date of Statement: 10th January 2007
I have been a next-door neighbour to the Beatters for some years. They’ve kept dozens of
rabbits in their sheds in the garden, and the smell is sometimes awful. I’ve felt concerned
over the last few weeks about their condition and I just had to ring the RSPCA. I had gone
round the day before to complain about the smell and I told the Beatters that I didn’t like
the way they treated their rabbits as I hardly ever saw them going to the sheds with food. I
never saw the rabbits having a run in the garden. They replied that I was nosey and the
rabbits were fine.
I work in the local doctor’s surgery as a receptionist and my hours are regular with weekends
off, so I would know if anyone went into the garden on a regular basis. We have a low fence
between us so I would see anyone from my kitchen window. One of them works at night and
the other comes and goes at all hours.
Some time ago the son/daughter saved a dog’s life by pulling it out of the river and the local
paper took up the story and hailed him/her as a hero. The Beatters then took on a mission of
‘saving’ unwanted animals especially rabbits, and on a couple of occasions I have seen people at
the door with an animal. Why they didn’t take them to the local animal sanctuary, heaven
knows. They never turned away an animal. I didn’t see or hear anyone at their doorstep the
evening before I reported them and there was nothing on the doorstep when I went round in
the afternoon. Like the back garden, I can see who comes and goes in the front from my
living room.
I really don’t think that they are that caring, because if you own any animal you have a big
responsibility for their welfare.
4
Prosecution Witness Statement 3 (Section 9 Statement)
This statement is simply to be read out in court. Nothing in it is disputed and the defence
has no questions to ask this witness.
Name: Simon Penty
Address: c/o Rodley Park Veterinary Surgery, Rodley
Occupation: Veterinary Surgeon
Date of Birth: 17th June 1973
Date of Statement: 8th January 2007
I have been a veterinary surgeon for five years. On the 8th January the RSPCA Inspector
brought a rabbit to my surgery to be examined.
The rabbit was a white short-haired adult female. She couldn’t take any weight on her legs
and she was fairly thin. There were wounds on her ears. These wound were old and had
scabs. Both ears were filled with dirt and dried blood. The rabbit’s right eye was swollen and
inflamed. Both its back legs were caked in old and new faeces.
An x-ray of the rabbit showed no evidence of an injury to its pelvis. There was a fair amount
of muscle wastage to both hind legs, which would account for its posture. This is indicative
of a long period of enforced inactivity (weeks, possibly months). The results of a blood
sample I analysed showed that the rabbit had not been eating as much as it should have been.
In my opinion this rabbit had undergone unnecessary suffering for at least four weeks. It
was necessary to euthanize the rabbit to prevent further suffering.
5
Defence Witness Statement 1 (Defendant)
Name: Sam Beatter
Address: 4, Park Avenue, Rodley
Occupation: Nurse
Date of Birth: 2nd February 1966
Date of Statement: 9th January 2007
My son/daughter Ceri and I have looked after animals ever since s/he won an award for
saving a dog’s life ten years ago. Since then people have always brought us animals that they
have found or that they couldn’t look after any longer. Sometimes they knock on the door,
other times they just leave the animal in a box on the doorstep.
At the moment we’ve lots of rabbits. We keep them in sheds outside in the back garden.
Ceri and I usually take it in turns to look after the rabbits. However, s/he’s just landed a job
at the old people’s home after a long time on the dole, and the hours are very irregular which
makes it difficult to look after the rabbits, so I’m looking after them now. Every morning I
open up the sheds and give them clean water and food. Ceri normally cleans them out every
other day. We both really love animals and we’ve even won rosettes at rabbit shows. Of
course, not everyone appreciates the good work we do. Our neighbour had been round Sunday
afternoon and said something about the sheds smelling. S/he’s always telling neighbours how
they should run their lives.
I was leaving for work about 7.30pm on Sunday, 7th January when I noticed a cardboard box
on the doorstep. I had a look inside and there was a rabbit. I took it into the living room and
had a closer look. The rabbit didn’t look very well; it looked like its back end had gone. People
think we can work miracles when they leave animals with us! I didn’t have time to take it to
the vets because I would be late for work and the next day I was too tired. I couldn’t ask
Ceri to take it because s/he was still at work. I would have got round to taking it to the vets
if the RSPCA person hadn’t arrived. I’ve taken animals at 3am before now, so you can’t say I
don’t care.
6
Defence Witness Statement 2
Name: Ceri Beatter
Address: 4, Park Avenue, Rodley
Occupation: Assistant Care Worker
Date of Birth: 2nd January 1988
Date of Statement: 9th January 2007
My mum/dad and I have been looking after animals for about ten years, ever since I saved a
terrier dog’s life. It was in difficulties near the bank of the river as it was caught in some
floating branches. I grabbed hold of a branch as it came near the bank and I got hold of the
dog and pulled it out. My picture was in the local paper and everything! I asked my mum/dad
if we could start taking animals in and s/he agreed. I love seeing them get well. When I was
14 I did a course to learn how to look after animals.
In the past we’ve had a lot of different animals but it’s just rabbits now. I used to look them
every day. Ten weeks ago I got a good job at the Old People’s Home and I work odd hours,
and since then I‘ve been unable to help on a regular basis so mum/dad took over. I did go and
check on the rabbit a couple of days before the Inspector came and they seemed o.k.
On the 7th January I was sat watching the television when my mum/dad brought a cardboard
box into the living room. I thought she’d gone off to work so I was surprised to see her/him.
S/he said that someone had left it on our doorstep. I’d been in the house most of the day
and I hadn’t heard anyone ring the bell. I asked my mum/dad what was in the box. S/he said
it was a rabbit. I didn’t have a look at it until much later, at 10pm. It looked like it had
damage to its head and back. I didn’t think it needed to go to the vet that evening. I gave it
water and rabbit pellets and it seemed o.k. I would have taken it to the vets next day but I
had to go to work before they opened and it’s expensive out of hours.
7
The role of the Legal Adviser:
The following information is useful for the Legal Adviser. General information regarding the
case for all students is on pages 1-2.
At the end of the case it is your job to sum up for the magistrates the main issues and the
law in this case. Try, as far as possible, to use your own words in explaining the case and
make that explanation as simple and clear as you can. To do this, you need first to have
worked out in your mind what this case is all about.
The main areas you will need to cover are:
The Burden of Proof
Does the defence have to prove anything or is it the responsibility of the prosecution to
prove their case and, if so, to what standard?
An offence contrary to Section 1(1) Protection of Animals Act 1911 (see page 2) can be
committed in a number of ways. The prosecution is seeking to show that Sam was responsible
for unnecessary suffering being caused to the rabbit in either or both of two possible ways.
In the case of RSPCA –v- Isaacs it was stated that ‘suffering becomes unnecessary’ ‘when the
suffering is not inevitable, in that it can be terminated or alleviated by some practicable
measure’.
Firstly the prosecution are seeking to show that Sam caused unnecessary suffering ‘by
wantonly or unreasonably doing or omitting to do any act’. The word ‘wantonly’ is not defined
in the Protection of Animals Act and you may find it helpful to use the dictionary definition
of the word. The definition in Collins Concise English Dictionary of the adjective ‘wanton’,
from which ‘wantonly’ is derived, is ‘senseless, unprovoked, or deliberately malicious’.
‘Unreasonableness’ is a matter for the magistrates to decide after looking at all the evidence
before them.
Secondly the prosecution are seeking to show that Sam was the owner of the rabbit and that
he/she permitted unnecessary suffering to be caused to the rabbit by failing ‘to exercise
reasonable care and supervision in respect of the protection’ of the rabbit.
8
Elements of the Offence
What are the main elements of this offence? You may want to remind the magistrates of the
wording of the charge, the legal issues in the case and what has to be proved for a guilty
verdict.
Evidence
It is up to you to point out to the magistrates that in making their decision they must
concentrate on the evidence they have heard in court. Encourage them to make findings of
fact on those issues where there are disagreements between the prosecution and the
defence.
For example:
Did Sam do something to cause unnecessary suffering to the rabbit?
Was unnecessary suffering caused to the rabbit because Sam failed to do something
he/she should have done?
Was Sam the owner of the rabbit?
If Sam was the owner of the rabbit, did he/she permit unnecessary suffering to be
caused to the rabbit by failing to exercise reasonable care and supervision protecting the
rabbit?
You should be sure you just deal with matters in dispute. You are not expected to summarise
to the magistrates the evidence that each witness has given. Remember, it is their job to
consider that evidence and decide what a witness has said in evidence.
9