Farmer Richard Goode shot two German Shepherd dogs in Malvern and then attempted to cover his tracks by staging a false shooting scene in a nearby field. After killing the dogs, he moved their bodies to make it appear as though the shooting had been lawful and justified.
The offences took place in April 2025.
Goodelater admitted causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal and criminal damage. At a further hearing, he also pleaded guilty to committing an act with intent to pervert the course of justice.
Goode appeared at Worcester Crown Court on October 8, 2026, where the judge heard how he had deliberately manipulated the scene to mislead investigators. His actions were described as a calculated attempt to justify the shooting after the fact.
West Mercia Police confirmed they were unable to provide a custody photo of Goode.
Read turned up to court in a Canada Goose jacket — a brand notorious for using real fur — which feels grimly appropriate for someone who treats animals as disposable.
On 31 July 2024, Axel Shane Read, 24, broke into the back garden of neighbour Laice Cleough in Upperby, Carlisle, and stole her two rescue ferrets, Pumpkin and Latte, from their enclosure.
Rescue ferrets Pumpkin and Latte were stolen from their enclosure and later found dead after being used as bait for dogs.
CCTV captured Read and another man at around 6:30pm shining a light into the cage before Read opened the door, reached inside, and removed both animals. The ferrets were among 25 kept by Cleough, who also cared for other rescued animals.
Both ferrets were later found dead — one dumped in a black bin, the other under a hedge. They had bite marks, body trauma, and head injuries, consistent with being used as bait for dogs.
A video shown in court depicted Read holding one of the ferrets and “trying to get one of his dogs to have a go at it”.
Judge Fanning described the act as “an act of execution and an act of sadism”, noting that the animals would have expressed a stress odour and “died in fear”.
Further footage showed Read disposing of one of the dead ferrets while saying it “stinks”, and celebrating the dogs’ involvement by telling one it was a “good boy”.
The judge said Read’s dogs were trained to kill by applying pressure to the neck. He rejected suspending the sentence, stating that doing so might lead “other young lads” to think such behaviour was acceptable.
Read denied involvement, telling the owner: “I don’t have your stinky ferrets. If I had taken your ferrets, I would have skinned them and left them outside your front door.” He also threatened to destroy her car and home. Cleough said the incident left her paranoid, scared to live in her own home, and fearful of seeing Read, whom she described as unpredictable.
Read was unanimously convicted by a jury of five on multiple counts of causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal, including causing a ferret to be destroyed by a dog and causing a ferret to be taken from its protected enclosure, resulting in its death.
Sentence
Court: Carlisle Crown Court Date: 6 October 2026 Penalty: 15 months’ imprisonment Ban: None reported Restraining Order: 3 years — no contact with victim; barred from entering a residential Carlisle road Mitigation: None reported
At a Glance
Offender: Axel Read
Born: circa 2002
Age at Conviction: 24
Address: Marks Avenue, Belle Vue, Carlisle CA2
Occupation: Roofer
Previous Convictions: Not reported
Additional Information: Read is known locally as a wildlife persecutor; his social media accounts contain numerous images of dead animals and birds, including hunting with dogs and with a firearm
Animal Victims: Pumpkin & Latte (ferrets)
Victim Fate: Both found dead with bite wounds, body trauma, and head injuries
Evidence: CCTV of theft; CCTV of baiting; physical injuries; owner statement
Case Type: Theft; fatal animal abuse; baiting; dog‑related cruelty
The killing of Pumpkin and Latte was not a moment of panic or a reckless mistake — it was a deliberate, sustained act of cruelty. The CCTV footage and witness accounts show a man who did not simply disregard animal suffering, but actively sought it out, encouraged it, and took pleasure in it. Judge Fanning’s description of the incident as “an act of execution and an act of sadism” is not rhetorical flourish; it is an accurate reflection of the behaviour captured on video.
Read didn’t just steal the ferrets. He handled them in ways clearly intended to maximise fear and distress. He encouraged his dogs to attack them, praised the dogs afterwards, and even mocked the dead animals while disposing of their bodies. This is cruelty carried out with intention, enjoyment, and a complete absence of empathy.
What makes this case even more disturbing is what the court did not do. Despite the sadism, despite the baiting, despite the fatal injuries, despite the clear evidence of deliberate violence, Read was not banned from keeping animals. This means that the man who fed two terrified ferrets to his dogs can legally continue owning dogs — and, crucially, can continue hunting with dogs, something he already does extensively.
His social media accounts, filled with images of dead wildlife, hunting trophies, and animals killed with dogs and firearms, show a long-standing pattern of behaviour. The ferrets were not an isolated incident; they were simply the victims caught on camera. The absence of a ban means that nothing prevents him from continuing the same activities that preceded this offence.
For the owner, the impact has been profound. Her statement describes paranoia, sickness, fear, and a loss of safety in her own home. She was left terrified of seeing Read again — and given his behaviour, her fear is entirely justified. The restraining order offers some protection, but it does not address the core issue: a man who has demonstrated sadistic violence towards animals still has legal access to animals.
This case exposes a serious gap in the system. When an offender demonstrates sadism, enjoyment of suffering, and a pattern of violent behaviour towards animals, a ban should be automatic. The fact that Read can walk out of prison and immediately resume hunting with dogs is not just a failure — it is a risk.
Pumpkin and Latte deserved better. Their deaths should have resulted in a lifetime ban. Instead, the man who killed them retains the legal right to continue the very activities that led to their suffering.
A sheep trapped in brambles at Groes Farm, rescued by officers during the inspection.
Case Summary
Luke Morgan, of Groes Farm, Southerndown, Bridgend, was convicted of serious animal‑welfare offences following an investigation by Shared Regulatory Services (SRS) and the Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA). Officers attended the farm in October 2025 after concerns were raised about the condition of sheep on the grazing land.
During the inspection, officers found multiple welfare breaches.
A sheep with a severe eye injury was discovered unable to stand, lying in a field where 15 carcasses were also present in varying stages of decomposition.
Another sheep was found trapped in dense brambles and required immediate rescue.
Several animals showed signs of poor condition, including wool loss, scratching and evidence of ill health.
Investigators also identified widespread animal by‑product issues, with carcasses, bones and body parts scattered across the grazing land.
Morgan was unable to produce medicine records and admitted he had not checked the flock for approximately a week.
Formal notices were issued under animal‑welfare and animal‑by‑product legislation, requiring urgent action.
Follow‑up visits throughout November 2025 recorded improvements, including veterinary involvement, treatment for a significant worm burden, updated medicine records and relocation of the flock for closer monitoring.
Despite this, SRS determined that enforcement action was necessary due to the seriousness of the original findings.
Morgan was interviewed under caution and the case was referred for prosecution. At court, magistrates described the situation as “the worst case of animal neglect” they had encountered, stating that Morgan “should be ashamed” of the conditions found.
Sentence
Morgan received a 24‑week custodial sentence, suspended for 12 months. He was ordered to pay £5,000 towards prosecution costs and a £154 victim surcharge.
Left: Offie Price, who kicked the dog. Right: Jesse Price, who kicked a woman in the stomach.
Case Summary
Travellers Jesse Price and Offie Price assaulted a man, a woman, and a dog during an aggressive incident outside the Milano kebab shop in Great Yarmouth on 13 August 2026. The attack involved kicking, punching, and damaging property. The dog, although kicked hard in the ribs, did not sustain lasting injuries.
Both offenders pleaded guilty to multiple charges and were sentenced to unpaid work and compensation orders.
Offender Overview
Jesse Price
Name: Jesse Price
Born: 10 September 1998
Age at Conviction: 28
Last Known Address: Cambridge
Occupation: Gardener
Previous Convictions: Not reported
Additional Information: Found in possession of cannabis at the time of the incident.
Offie Price
Name: Offie Price
Born: 25 July 2002
Age at Conviction: 24
Last Known Address: Cambridge
Occupation: Gardener
Previous Convictions: Not reported
Additional Information: Expressed remorse in court, stating he was “utterly appalled” at kicking the dog and describing himself as “an animal lover”.
Incident Details
On 13 August 2026, outside the Milano kebab shop in Great Yarmouth, Ellie Rouse and her friend Jack Lovick witnessed a male ripping a wing mirror off a car. Ms Rouse approached Jesse Price to check on him, at which point he attempted to take her phone and delivered a hard kick to her stomach.
Offie Price confronted Mr Lovick, calling him a “snitch” before punching him in the face, knocking his glasses into the road. As Mr Lewis (a witness) picked up the glasses, Offie Price kicked his dog in the ribs, causing the dog to yelp. The dog was fortunate not to suffer lasting injury.
Both men were intoxicated during the incident.
Sentence
Court
Great Yarmouth Magistrates’ Court
Date
September 2026
Penalty
Jesse Price:
120 hours of unpaid work
£150 compensation
Convicted of assault by beating and possession of cannabis
Offie Price:
120 hours of unpaid work
£229 compensation
Convicted of assault by beating, criminal damage, and causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal
Mitigation
Both defendants claimed the behaviour was out of character and attributed their actions to intoxication. Offie Price expressed particular remorse for kicking the dog, stating he was “deeply sorry” and “can’t believe he behaved that way.”
Owen Rayner laughed as he chased, hit and stamped on defenceless ducks at Cawthorne Woods, South Yorkshire.
Case Summary
Owen Rayner, 20, of Greenside Avenue, Staincross, Barnsley, received a suspended prison sentence after disturbing footage showed him chasing, striking and repeatedly stamping on ducks at Cawthorne Woods, a South Yorkshire beauty spot. The footage was originally posted on Snapchat and later passed to police and the RSPCA.
Offender Overview
Name: Owen Rayner Born: 2 February 2006 Age at Conviction: 20 Last Known Address: Greenside Avenue, Staincross, Barnsley Occupation: Unknown Previous Convictions: None known Additional Information: His surname was misspelt as “Raynor” in early press coverage. Footage shows multiple older teenage males laughing during the attack. They have not as yet been identified.
Incident Details
Rayner was filmed chasing a flock of Mallard ducks at a lakeside area in Cawthorne Woods. He struck three ducks with large branches and then returned to stamp repeatedly on them. It is not known whether the ducks survived.
Stills from the Snapchat video show Rayner chasing, hitting and stamping on terrified ducks during the filmed attack.
He pleaded guilty to one offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981: intentionally killing or causing injury to three ducks/ducklings.
Animal Victims
Three Mallard ducks (survival unknown).
Sentence
Court: Barnsley Magistrates’ Court Date: 7 September 2026
Penalty:
18‑week prison sentence suspended for two years; 150 hours of unpaid work; £400 costs; £154 victim surcharge
Mitigation:
His age at the time of the offence and the impact on future employment prospects were cited.
Magistrates’ Remarks: “As a bench we have never seen anything this bad. This was appalling behaviour which was seriously aggravated by the fact it was posted on social media. One of my colleagues felt physically sick as he watched that video footage and heard the case outlined to us.”
RSPCA Statement
Inspector Keith Hogben said: “I viewed the three video clips in which I viewed three older teenage men abuse several Mallard ducks at a lakeside by chasing, hitting with a stick, stamping on at least three ducks. It’s unclear whether these ducks were killed.”
He added: “This is one of the worst deliberate acts of cruelty on innocent, defenceless animals I have seen in 27 years of working for the RSPCA. The fact those involved were laughing as they carried out this cowardly act shows how little respect they have for animals.
“Animals feel pain, fear and distress, just like we do, and always deserve to be shown kindness, compassion and respect.”
Some cases stay with you because of the violence. Others stay with you because of the intent. This one stays with you because of both.
What happened at Cawthorne Woods wasn’t a moment of stupidity or a lapse in judgement. It was cruelty carried out for entertainment — filmed, laughed at, and posted online as if the suffering of terrified ducks was something to brag about. That’s what makes this case so deeply unsettling. It wasn’t hidden. It wasn’t impulsive. It was performed.
The ducks in that video were defenceless. They were simply existing in their own habitat when a group of teenagers decided they were props for a joke. You can see the fear in the way they scatter. You can see the intent in the way Rayner chases them down. You can see the violence in the way he swings branches and stamps on their bodies. And you can hear the laughter — the part that tells you everything you need to know about the mindset behind this attack.
Magistrates said they had “never seen anything this bad.” The RSPCA inspector said it was one of the worst deliberate acts of cruelty he’d seen in 27 years. They’re right.
This wasn’t just an attack on animals. It was an attack on empathy itself. A deliberate choice to cause pain, record it, and share it.
UKACF exists because of cases like this — cases where animals suffer at the hands of people who treat cruelty as entertainment. Cases where the justice system can only go so far. Cases where the victims cannot speak for themselves.
The ducks mattered. Their fear mattered. Their pain mattered. And what happened to them deserves to be documented, remembered, and condemned without hesitation.
On Christmas Day 2025, Matthew Cumming used a bow and arrow to shoot a grey squirrel in his garden — in full view of a child.
The animal was pinned against a wall but somehow survived.
A shocked neighbour reported the incident to the Scottish SPCA, leading to Cumming’s prosecution under the Wildlife and Countryside Act.
Offender Overview
Name: Matthew Cumming
Born: circa 1990
Age at Conviction: 36
Last Known Address: Coatbridge, North Lanarkshire
Occupation: Support Worker (Adult Mental Health)
Previous Convictions: None reported
Additional Information: Claimed ignorance of the law; described by defence as believing his actions were “acceptable.”
Incident Details
On 25 December2025, Cumming spotted a squirrel on a bin in his garden. He retrieved a large bow and arrows, took aim, and shot the animal in the head.
The squirrel was struck, ran, and became pinned against a wall.
A neighbour witnessed the attack and contacted the SSPCA, who attended the scene. Officers found the squirrel injured but still alive. The projectile fell as they attempted to dislodge it, allowing the animal to escape.
When questioned by police, Cumming replied: “I’m innocent.”
Animal Victim
Grey Squirrel
Shot in the head with an arrow
Pinned against a wall
Sustained cheek injury
Survived and reportedly continues to visit the property
Sentence
Court: Airdrie Sheriff Court (August 20, 2026)
Penalty:
£185 fine (£175 + £10 victim surcharge)
Forfeiture of bow and arrows
Mitigation: Claimed ignorance of wildlife protection laws
SSPCA Statement
The SSPCA confirmed the squirrel survived but condemned the act as cruel, reckless, and entirely unjustifiable. Shooting wildlife with a bow and arrow is illegal under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.
Cumming’s profession — support worker — makes this case particularly disturbing. A man trusted to care for vulnerable adults chose to inflict suffering on a defenceless animal for sport, in front of a child, on Christmas Day.
He didn’t act out of ignorance; he acted out of malice and thrill-seeking cruelty.
The question remains: why keep a bow and arrow at all? And how many other animals — squirrels, birds, or even pets — have suffered unseen?
Left: Conlon; Right: Brown — convicted for stealing two puppies in Leeds, during an incident that resulted in the mother dog’s death.
Summary
Two men stole two Staffy puppies from a woman’s home in Armley, Leeds. During the theft, the puppies’ mother chased the offenders into the street and was fatally struck by an arriving police car. Jordan Brown and Aaron Conlon were later jailed for the violent theft.
Offender Overview
Jordan Brown, born circa 1995
Aaron Conlon, born circa 1997
Addresses: Brown – Upper Commercial Street, Batley; Conlon – No fixed address
Previous Convictions Brown has 47 previous convictions; Conlon has 38, including violence, theft, and drug issues.
Summary of Offence
Date: 29 January 2026 Location: Armley, Leeds
Brown and Conlon visited a woman they knew, asking to use her phone. After becoming concerned about Brown’s behaviour, she asked them to leave. Brown then grabbed one of the five‑month‑old puppies and shoved her to the ground before fleeing. The mother dog immediately chased him.
Conlon took the second puppy and assaulted the woman outside as she tried to stop him. Brown got into a waiting car, with the mother dog still pursuing. She was struck and killed by an arriving police vehicle.
Fate of the Dogs
Mother dog: Killed after being hit by a police car
Puppy 1: Recovered the next morning
Puppy 2: Found sold online for £200 (despite being worth around £3,500) and later retrieved
Names / vet findings: Not reported
Sentence
Court: Leeds Crown Court, July 2026 Charges: Theft (both), assault (Conlon) Jordan Brown: 35 months’ imprisonment Aaron Conlon: 40 months’ imprisonment Ban: Not applicable — this was a theft/assault case
Recorder Simon Jackson KC said the incident was a planned group activity involving force against a vulnerable woman. Although neither man directly caused the dog’s death, it was a clear consequence of their actions.
Notes
No RSPCA involvement reported.
Press did not provide the dogs’ names or veterinary details.
CONVICTED (2026) | Dylan James Campbell, born October 1998, of Lewis Court, Beersbridge, East Belfast BT6 9TG – for animal cruelty and domestic abuse.
Campbell pleaded guilty to the following offences:
Domestic violence: Two counts of non-fatal strangulation or asphyxiation, two counts of common assault, and using threatening or abusive behaviour against his ex-partner.
Animal cruelty: Causing unnecessary suffering to his ex-partner’s chihuahua puppy.
Drug offences: Possession of Class A and Class C drugs.
Property damage: Causing criminal damage to police property.
The incidents began on 22 March 2025, after an argument escalated in Belfast city centre. Campbell became aggressive after monitoring his partner’s Facebook account and questioning individuals who interacted with her posts.
The confrontation escalated into violent physical assaults at the victim’s home later that evening.
The victim told police the accused grabbed her around the throat and started to squeeze it with his hands which she described as “terrifying”, adding: “I was unable to breathe”.
She recalled a previous incident on January 25, 2025 when she was at home and the defendant was also present. The woman said she was “frightened” as the defendant became argumentative. He told her he wanted to buy more drugs but she said she didn’t have enough money in her bank account.
She said she went into her son’s bedroom and sat on the bed and was followed by Campbell who sat down next to her and started “shouting and ranting”.
“My puppy was sitting on me and the defendant was shouting and he said the dog was ‘yapping’ before throwing the puppy across the floor. This behaviour scared me.”
During police interviews, Campbell accepted possession of the drugs but made no comment to all further questions relating to the domestic assaults.
The court heard Campbell has 25 previous convictions on his criminal record with four entries for common assault, one for a threat to kill and eight for drug offences.
In May 2017, he was convicted of striking an ex-partner in the head and threatening to kill her. In 2021 he was further convicted of striking another partner to the head and pushing her to the ground, before striking her to the face and arms.
Sentencing | 28 months in custody, followed by an additional 28 months on supervised licence upon his release. Five-year restraining order.It has not been reported whether an animal disqualification order was issued.
CONVICTED (2026) | Brooke Thornley, born c. 2008, previously of Fleetwood, Lancashire, and now Hunter Road, Crosshouse, Kilmarnock KA2 – kicked her family dog around the house and attacked her parents and sister when they tried to intervene.
Thornley was celebrating her 18th birthday with her family at a local pub in Fleetwood before returning home. Under the heavy influence of alcohol, she became enraged when the family dog refused to dance with her.
She kicked the dog, who ran into the kitchen, but Thornley chased him to kick him again. Her sister tried to intervene but Thornley turned on her, kicking her and stamping on her head.
The girls’ mum then stepped in to protect her daughter but Thornley kicked at her and hit her all over her body. She then picked up a knife and lunged at her mother, who was fortunately able to knock the knife out of her hand.
Thornley proceeded to smash up the kitchen before leaving the house with the dog. When she returned she started banging on her sister’s door and making threats to kill her.
This woke their father up and he came out of his bedroom and told their mother to call the police. Thornley ran at him, causing him to fall and hurt his wrist.
When the police arrived Thornley became aggressive with them and had to be handcuffed before being arrested. She gave “no comment” answers to all questions in an interview at the police station.
Thornley’s sister suffered bruising to her leg, chest and shoulder, and their mum had swelling and bruising to her face and cheek.
The court heard that the victims were no longer supportive of the prosecution and had declined to give impact statements to the court.
Thornley pleaded guilty to ABH, criminal damage and animal cruelty.
The court heard she has since moved to Kilmarnock, Scotland to live with her aunt and uncle and has started working.
Recorder Michelle Brown, sentencing, said the case was so serious she would ordinarily have no hesitation in handing down a prison sentence. However she recognised that Thornley was just 18 when she committed the offences and it was set against a difficult background at home.
She said: “It is clear from their statements that your sister and mum were very frightened and distressed by your actions. You have found a new life with support from extended family and have found work.”
She told Thornley: “Your behaviour and the vicious nature of the assault on your family members and the dog were very serious. I very much hope you will work with the Probation Service to deal with this. You now have support and every opportunity to make your future a better one – I very much hope you take it.”
Sentencing | three year community order with a 12 month mental health treatment requirement, 20 days of rehabilitation activity requirements and 80 hours of unpaid work. No ban on keeping animals.
CONVICTED (2026) | wildlife persecutorJames Kempster, born c. 1986, of the Bury Brickfield Park travellers site, Marchwood Road, Eling, Totton, Southampton SO40 4JW – for possession of two dead birds of prey dumped along with the bodies of 50 deceased hares outside a shop.
Kempster, a traveller, was sentenced for possessing two protected birds which were stuffed under the door handles of a village shop alongside the 50 dead hares.
The father of three was convicted following a trial of two counts of possessing a dead bird under the Wildlife and Countryside Act.
Prosecutor Adam Cooper said Kempster had been convicted of possessing the birds at some point but found not guilty of a charge of criminal damage, meaning he was cleared of involvement in the shop incident.
The trial heard DNA found on the birds, which were dumped in the early hours of 15 March 2024, was linked to the defendant.
Cooper told the magistrates: “There was no expert evidence on the manner or time of death. Your worships are entitled to draw conclusions that the birds were recently killed rather than rotting specimens or for taxidermy.
“That therefore places the defendant’s handling of the birds closer to them being discovered outside the shop.”
The court heard Kempster, who left school at the age of 12, had previous convictions for dishonesty as well as wildlife crimes including trespassing for game including for hares.
The trial was told CCTV footage showed three men arriving in a car with two men getting out and dumping the hares.
One of the men, who were both wearing balaclavas, is then seen to “tear” the body of a hare and smear blood on the shop front before stuffing a dead kestrel and a barn owl under the door handles in what Cooper described as a “horror movie scene”.
The car was found burnt out in a country lane after the incident.
Sentencing Kempster, chairman of the magistrate panel Gary Chant told him: “There is some aggravation, you have previous convictions, you continue to deny the offence and there was minimal co-operation.”
Sentencing | 15-month community order including 30 days of rehabilitation activity; six-month tagging order; fined £120 and ordered to pay costs of £650 with a £114 court surcharge.
