R v Randell, [1989] AJ No 260 (ABPC)

The accused was charged with two counts; under the first count with unlawfully killing a dog under the former Section 401(a) of the Criminal Code, that’s now Section 445. And the second count, causing unnecessary pain and suffering to a dog under Section 402(1), the former Section 402(1) of the Criminal Code, that is now Section 446(1)(a).

The evidence was quite clear that the accused was kicking and beating his dog with a hockey stick. From the noise made by the dog the Court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that it was being caused unnecessary pain and suffering.

The court was of the view that Sections 495 and 946 must be read together, although, with a lawful excuse anybody may destroy their own animal. However, whatever animal, must be put down in a humane fashion. If it is not put down in such a fashion the individual involved then may be charged under Section now 446(1)(a).

The Court concluded that the accused had killed the dog, and the dog was also caused unnecessary pain and suffering by the accused, finding the accused guilty of both Counts.

The accused was fined $1,000 with community sanctions, however, a prohibition order was not.

Source: Case Law

Jurisdiction: British Columbia

Topics: beyond a reasonable doubtCriminal Codedestroyguiltyhockey stickhumanekickkillunnecessary painunnecessary suffering

Report a Broken Link