CONVICTED (2016) | serial wildlife persecutors Sam Louis Boylett, born 20 September 1982, of 127 Burtondale, Brookside, Telford TF3 1PP and Mark James Paddock, born c. 1970, of no fixed abode – failed to treat their dogs’ bite wounds. Animal fighting charges thrown out.
Boylett and Paddock were found guilty of causing unnecessary suffering in relation to several dogs seized in a joint raid by police and RSPCA.
Boylett was found guilty of five charges of cruelty to dogs Tess, Jack, Pinto, Arnie and another unknown dog.
Paddock was found guilty of one charge relating to a single dog.
The court had heard how the dogs kept at the home of Samuel Boylett and his father Charles Boylett, born 23 October 1945, of Cardington House, Arleston Manor Mews, Telford TF1 2HS, were encouraged to fight with wild animals, including badgers, but charges related to animal fighting were ultimately thrown out by the court.
All charges against Charlie Boylett, who was originally prosecuted alongside his son and hunting associate, were also thrown out.
During an earlier hearing RSPCA prosecutor Paul Taylor told the court that the seized dogs were found with injuries consistent with them “fighting mammals”.
A mobile phone belonging to Boylett and a laptop were also seized and revealed evidence of earlier involvement with animal fighting.
Mr Taylor said that the phone was used to send and receive text messages about dogs and to set up animal fights. Photos were found that proved the dog fights happened and that the defendants had been present. He said that, in one of the images, Samuel Boylett was holding a dog which had an injury to its mouth.
Mr Taylor said that text messages also showed he had tried to avoid taking an injured dog to the vets. He said the evidence suggested Boylett had been responsible for putting a dog down a hole to fight a wild mammal, such as a badger, underground. He said Boylett and Paddock had communicated with each other to set up dog fights.
Giving evidence, Constable Gerry Plant said he had found nine terrier and lurcher-type dogs – some injured – when he went to Boylett’s home on March 28, 2014 following intelligence received from the RSPCA, and the animals were seized.
The trial was shown pictures of the accused out hunting with their dogs.
These showed Paddock, with Boylett holding a firearm, and other men, digging with an animal tracker nearby, a small terrier dog covered in mud wearing a tracker and another dog being sent down a hole. It was not clear from the images when the firearm was discharged.
Video footage taken at Boylett’s address showed a number of dogs, some with injuries, and a treadmill with a dog lead attached and a tool box containing veterinary equipment.
Veterinary surgeon William Walker, who examined a number of the dogs, told the court he found a catalogue of injuries – and that he thought they had been suffering for “one week or more”.
William Walker was called in to examine the dogs at the home of Samuel Boylett and his father Charles Boylett in Burtondale, Brookside, Telford.
He told Telford magistrates he found a number of injuries to the mouth, face and feet of the dogs that were so serious the animals had to be sedated before he could treat them.
Mr Taylor asked Mr Walker about one dog specifically: “Was the animal suffering?”
“Yes,” the vet replied.
Mr Taylor said: “For approximately how long was that animal suffering?”
Mr Walker replied: “It was caused to suffer for a period of one week or more.”
The prosecutor asked him: “How could that suffering have been alleviated?”
“It would have been obvious to a reasonable owner that the animal required a vet,” the vet replied.
Another vet, Deborah Wragg, told the court how she carried out surgery on a dog after it had been seized by the RSPCA following animal welfare concerns. She said that some of the injuries around the dog’s face were fresh with additional injuries to its nose and lip.
Ms Sara-Lise Howe, for Boylett, suggested the animal had been attacked while in the RSPCA’s care.
Despite the weight of evidence that the dogs had been forced to fight wild mammals, animal fighting charges were thrown out in January 2016 by District Judge Nigel Cadbury. He said it had not been proven that an animal had been placed with another animal for the purposes of fighting. He ruled there was “no case to answer” for the charges relating to animal fighting.
Sentencing the pair on the unnecessary suffering charges, District Judge Cadbury said: “You did not take these dogs to the vet because you were worried and concerned about the vet discovering how they had been caused and that would have led to reports to the police and or the RSPCA.”
Sentencing |
Boylett was sentenced to 24 weeks in jail and was told he could not have anything to do with dogs for 10 years (expires February 2026).
Paddock was sentenced to 12 weeks in jail, suspended for two years, and was ordered not to have anything to do with dogs for five years (expired 2021).
Previous trial reports:
Shropshire Star 10 January 2015
Shropshire Star 19 January 2016
Shropshire Star 22 January 2016
Shropshire Star 23 January 2016
Shropshire Star 26 January 2016
Shropshire Star 29 January 2016
Shropshire Star 1 February 2016
Bit Of Work The Scum Wants.
They wouldn’t have the energy to go out Digging or Hunting or what ever else they have been up to before they were caught.
What sad lives these people live.
They are Mentally Disturbed Scum