R v Seidel, 2014 BCPC 230 (CanLII)

This is the sentencing for Mr. Seidel on a single count of causing unnecessary pain and suffering to his cat, Oreo, contrary to s. 445.1(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Seidel strangled and killed Oreo, and was convicted of this charge after trial.

The Crown, focusing on denunciation and deterrence, sought a jail sentence of six months, a two year probation order and a 10 year prohibition order pursuant to s. 449.1(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. Whereas the Defence submitted that a conditional discharge or a non-custodial sentence was appropriate in the circumstances. Alternatively, if a jail sentence was necessary, it should be a conditional sentence order.

Balancing the accepted animal cruelty sentencing principles, the aggravating factors, and the legislation, with the mitigating factors and Mr. Siedel’s reduced moral blameworthiness, the Court that it would be disproportionate to impose a jail sentence.

The Court imposed a nine month Conditional Sentence Order, on the expiration of the Order, a one year Probation  Order, and a prohibition from owning, having the custody or control of or from residing in the same premises as an animal for a period of five years.

Source: Case Law

Jurisdiction: British Columbia

Topics: catcriminalCriminal CodeguiltykillprohibitionsentenceStrangle

Report a Broken Link