Edward Andrews admitted to punching, kicking and dragging the Kito/husky cross puppy as he walked home on October 21.And the five-year-old boy, who must have been terrified to see the defenceless pet treated like this?
The 46-year-old, who was with his five-year-old boy, was spotted by a member of public as he walked the dog at about 7.30pm.
The witness saw Andrews, of Warbank Crescent, New Addington, dragging the dog by its lead and on several occasions yanking it forwards.
The court heard how the dog appeared motionless on the floor.
But then Andrews picked the dog up and dropped it back onto the concrete from a height of about five feet several times.
The witness told police she saw the five-year-old boy “laughing at the defendant’s behaviour”.*speechless*
The single father then punched the dog five or six times and also kicked the dog, with the witness worried the dog had died.But not the child? WTF?
She followed Andrews to his home address and called the police, who then arrested Andrews and confiscated the dog.
Naturally, there’s ‘mitigation’ – of a sort:
The court heard how Andrews had drunk half a bottle of vodka and some beer prior to the incident and could not remember what he had done.Which is no doubt what his defence told him to say, and no excuse whatsoever, so I’m sure swift punishment was…
He admitted the offence and said he “felt ashamed and disgusted” by his actions.
Oh, FFS!
He will be sentenced on November 2 following pre-sentence reports.*sigh*
Andrews was released on bail but cannot buy, acquire, keep or be responsible for an animal.And, as the commenters point out, no mention is made of the child…
The abused dog has been taken from his care and is now with the RSPCA.
Hove Ex-Pat says...It would be nice to think so, wouldn’t it?
Surely he should have also been banned from being in charge of a child on his own, at any time, unless the child is being taken into care, I hope.
G_Whiz says...I couldn’t agree more.
He cannot own a dog but can bring up a child! - no wonder England's future is glum......
15 comments:
The RSPCA was founded in 1824 , the NSPCC not until 1889
Says it all really
Great comments on the Croydon Guardian website regarding this hillbilly.
Jaded
I don't mean to sound like a bit of a misanthrope but if scum beget scum, well, that's just the way it goes but to treat perfectly respectable puppies harshly is bang out of order.
Never heard of a "Kito", I suspect they mean "Akito".
The ones I've come across are nasty and morons. They were bred to be working dogs (they're not pets) and don't mix well with others.
I have a Staffie, but wouldn't let an Akito anywhere near kids. They need harsh treatment to make them do, shouting "Woofie please stop savaging that small child" won't quite do it. 3 or 4 smacks over the head with a length of re-bar usually gets their attention.
Reports of "Cruelty" from bystanders is meaningless. The world is full of do gooding tossers who are experts in the field of dog rearing and child care. Never had any of their own, but experts all the same.
How many times do we hear of reports of someone giving a child a smack on the backside for throwing a tantrum in the supermarket and some do gooder reacts as though it was being bludgeoned to death?
I make my dog do as it's told, I don't beat it but I assert my roll as the Alpha male. I've had stupid women calling me cruel, but the difference is I can control my dog and it comes to me when I call it. Unlike the things these women have who disappear over the horizon when called and off they go chasing it.
NEW ADDINGTON ...... again! At least we all know where they are! Not at all surprised that this sub species of homo sapiens underclassius emerged from the swamp there.
"Great comments on the Croydon Guardian website..."
Oh, they usually are pretty good!
"I don't mean to sound like a bit of a misanthrope but if scum beget scum, well, that's just the way it goes..."
Well, yes, but they tend to grow up and become a nuisance or a danger to the rest of us. You can'r have them put down, as you can the dogs..
"Never heard of a "Kito", I suspect they mean "Akito". "
Or even 'Akita...? ;)
I've known a few, and they've been quite well-behaved, but then, as with everything, it's the owner that's the crucial factor.
Although you can always get the odd error of breeding, it's mostly true that the owner's treatment determines the general temperament of the dog.
"NEW ADDINGTON ...... again! "
I say we nuke it from orbit. Only way to be sure...
Never mind Julia - Gadget's girlfriend (Hom. Sec.) is going to sort out 120,000 problem families with some one fell swoop solution - i.e.for the birds.
More barking was the exclusion of obviously relevant evidence in the Tabak trial. We can use clown US forensics (as in Bento) but not trust a jury with evidence of watching women strangled by a person who ... you know the rest,
XX The court heard how Andrews had drunk half a bottle of vodka and some beer prior to the incident and could not remember what he had done. XX
"Drunk in charge of a child" I PRESUME is still an offence?
Why was he not done for that as well?
Or do the police not learn things like....you know LAW in Training colleges these days?
Penalty for being drunk while in charge of child.E+W
(1)If any person is found drunk in any highway or other public place, whether a building or not, or on any licensed premises, while having the charge of a child apparently under the age of seven years, he may be apprehended, and shall, if the child is under that age, be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding [F1level 2 on the standard scale], or to imprisonment, . . . F2 for any period not exceeding one month.
(2)If the child appears to the court to be under the age of seven, the child shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be under that age unless the contrary is proved.
(3)The offence under this section shall be included in the list of offences mentioned in the First Schedule to the M1Inebriates Act 1898, . . .
NOT superceeded as far as I can find. Therefore still an offence.
Posting pics of virtual dead animals makes you an "animal lover" does it? This moron has a combination of poor upbringing & alcohol to blame for his actions...what's your excuse?
Anyway, as the compassionate Budvar says, Akita's are "nasty & moronic" & "need harsh treatment"...so presumably a nasty, moronic person who dishes out harsh treatment is the perfect Akita owner. If anything the owner was one of the meddling "do gooding tossers" Budvar mentions...no smacks over the dog's head with a steel bar? Of course the dog wasn't savaging a child & we all know that attacks on children by that peaceful breed, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier are virtually unknown, don't we?
""Drunk in charge of a child" I PRESUME is still an offence?"
Oh, yes, quite a few have made the papers after being done for it recently.
"Posting pics of virtual dead animals makes you an "animal lover" does it?"
Well, actually, it makes me a video game player...
Drunk in charge of a child is still an offence? That all depends on your yardstick for defining drunk doesn't it?
Ask 10 different people their definition of what they constitute drunk as and you'll likely as not get 10 different answers, Ranging from passed out in the gutter to just one small sherry. The general consensus I would think would be somewhere in between, and more towards the face in the gutter end of the scale.
The thing with using arbitrary limits such as with drink driving, is that sobriety plays little part in it. I being over the drink drive limit, by all other yardsticks I'd be considered sober. The wife OTOH would be well below the limit, but has her head down the pan throwing up and falling about the place.
Be careful what you wish for, as this takes hold, and it won't be long before police and social workers turn up at every wedding, wake and christening taking kids into care.
Anon 02:34, Your point is? I take it the concept of exaggeration to elaborate a point is anathema to you?
The fact the child was laughing at the animal abuse unfortunately means it is probably too late for him. History shows he will more than likely end up a danger to others and a drain on Society just like his dad.
Logic should surely dictate that morons like this should not be allowed to keep an animal of a higher intelligence than themselves as a pet.
It may seem harsh but I say neuter them both, add a little Chlorine to the gene pool....
XX Logic should surely dictate that morons like this should not be allowed to keep an animal of a higher intelligence than themselves as a pet. XX
But then, "animal". Animals with lower intelligence than this bastard do not exist.
I would think even THEY would eventually get bored walking the ameoba.
Post a Comment