Making his closing speech, Andrew Downey, prosecuting, said he was no longer sure what Hillin’s case was.
He said: “The defendant’s evidence in my respectful submission was as bad as I’ve heard in any court.
“I don’t really know what his case is. Certainly the forensic evidence indicates the use of an axe.
“That just so happens to be the weapon he picked up amongst all his broomsticks – a medieval-looking axe.
“The idea the sharp end of that medieval-looking axe wasn’t used or the injuries were caused by neighbours who themselves called the police is utterly preposterous.”Tough call for the defence! But...he didn't really even try, did he?
Keith Webster, defending, said Hillin had kept dogs for some 30 years and questioned why he would want to hurt them.
He said: “They are his beloved dogs, whom he has had since they were puppies.” Mr Webster said Hillin risking his safety to separate the pets was the action of “somebody who loves his dogs”.
He said “when that didn’t work” his client “went inside and got the first thing he could and hit the dogs”.Swing and a miss, Keith!
The presiding magistrate told Hillin: “You are unable to account for where or how these injuries occurred.
“We also find your evidence to be inconsistent, providing various explanations of how the injuries occurred.”
Hillin burst into tears as he was found guilty of the offence, crumpling in a heap in the dock. The court heard he has previous convictions for dishonesty, the last of which was in 2001.I know, I was shocked too...
Magistrates requested a pre-sentence report and adjourned sentencing until May 21 – before remanding Hillin on unconditional bail.Ah, the 'pre-sentence report'. What will it show, I wonder?