What’s next now the Government’s consultation on the Animal Cruelty Sentencing guidelines in England and Wales has closed?

The consultation for the Animal Cruelty Sentencing guidelines for England and Wales closed on the 1st of August 2022.

What happens now?

The guidelines produced by the sentencing council are used by Magistrates when deciding what punishment to give to a convicted animal abuser. They have the option to award up to one year in jail (this has recently changed) or refer the matter to the Crown Court.

Aggravating or mitigating factors

If they keep the case, they look at what are ‘aggravating’ factors and what may be mitigation.

I’d personally agree that any mitigation for hurting an animal is a difficult concept, but these include someone with no previous convictions or perhaps a mental disorder.

Aggravating circumstances might include the animal being a service dog or the offence being committed whilst the person is on bail.

The outcomes for animal abusers

The Magistrate then works through a loose algorithm of these factors and comes up with a sentence, which in many cases animal lovers say is too lenient. Of course, the Magistrates‘ job is not just about a sentence – they can also issue a banning order for the offender not to have animals in the future.

Rarely though are any of the offenders in England and Wales referred for assessment as to what threat they may pose to society in the future, as would happen with a sex offender for example. Certain other offences are automatically referred to this process. Assaulting someone protecting a shipwreck is one such example, systematically torturing a puppy isn’t.

That’s where Naturewatch Foundation aims to step in

Protect animals – protect people

Our training in Ukraine, Moldova, Canada, Italy, Australia, India etc. explains that when animals are protected from abuse, people are too. Academic studies and real-life cases have evidenced this for over 200 years.

This concept is known as the ‘link’

The ‘link’

As a retired detective, I know that when animal abuse is committed in front of children it has an impact on their development and, indeed, when children commit cruelty, it can because they are victims of violence in their own home.

Animals too can be used to inflict psychological harm on their owner as part of ‘coercive control’. This is appropriately reflected in Scotland’s new domestic violence legislation.

Sadly, our investigation work has also corroborated the connection between those who sexually abuse animals and those who sexually abuse children.

So, we are asking that crimes against animals are taken more seriously, especially those that all the studies show connect to the abuse of vulnerable people.

This could be the badger digger who takes his child to teach him to kill a wonderful creature, or the callous abuser who tortures an innocent animal because he (and yes, most are men) knows the psychological impact it will have on his partner, child or elderly relative. These are individuals who pose a real danger to their communities.

Understanding cruelty to animals is crucial Only when animal cruelty is understood for the relevance it has within society will it then be taken more seriously.

This isn’t a new project for Naturewatch Foundation.

Ukraine, where we have helped with new laws, already reserves the toughest jail sentences for those offences committed in front of children. Part 3, Article 299, of the Ukrainian Penal Code allocates three more YEARS when the abuse is committed in the presence of young people. We want England and Wales to listen too.