UK & World News
Animal Ban For Cruelty Couple With 69 Pets
A couple with five children who admitted cruelty after cramming 69 pets, including 56 dogs, into their home have been banned from keeping animals for eight years.
The RSPCA found the creatures living in squalid conditions when they raided James and Nicola Wood's four-bedroom semi-detached house in Somerset.
As well as the dogs which included huskies, German shepherds, rottweilers and Staffordshire bull terriers, they also found three cats living in the bathroom, six birds, including love birds in various filthy cages, and four chinchillas.
Inspectors were "swamped by a sea of dogs" in the living room and "too many to count" in the back garden, Taunton magistrates court was told.
They also found the couple's nine-month-old child in a bed that had sheets soiled with bird droppings.
Prosecutor Neil Scott said many of the animals were suffering from complaints affecting their eyes, teeth, ears and skin.
The court was also told that the children in the house were at risk of contracting disease from the animals.
"Every room was full of furniture. In the front room numerous pieces of furniture were piled on top of each other, with dog leads tied to various parts of the furniture," Mr Scott said.
Ian Denley, defending Hood, 40, and his 32-year-old wife, said they thought of the house as an "animal sanctuary".
He said they had taken in animals from friends and from people contacted on the internet which might otherwise have been put down.
The pair, of Queen's Road in Minehead, admitted three charges of causing unnecessary suffering to animals and six of failing to take reasonable steps to ensure the needs of the animals were met, at an earlier hearing.
When they returned to the magistrates court for sentencing, they were each also ordered to pay £250 costs, which will go towards the RSPCA animal charity, and given a two-year conditional discharge.
Hello, regular commenting on Orange News and Sport pages closes on Thursday 30 May 2013. We will continue to provide a commenting facility on major news and sport events on orangeworld.co.uk. Contact us via http://oran.ge/OWfeedback if you have any further questions. Thanks.
what do you think?
Poor creatures, brainless people.
Banned for 8 years?.....They should be banned for life........and sterilised.....poor kids..........
Come on, this is a medical condition! Some people hoard stuff and others hoard animals. Yes the number of animals they have is shocking, as is their condition, and I hope good homes are found for them all. These people should have been assessed medically before any prosecution took place. I hope they were.
My comments seem to be on par with yours; however, we're the minority.
Agree with your opinion ABM, looks to me like a case of well intentioned chaos with no illtreatment intended. Not to be compared with some of the stuff happening these days.
I despair of our justice system. How on earth is an 8 year ban any kind of deterrant to other numbskulls out there? I also doubt anyone will monitor them to make sure they dont just continue with their lunacy. Its just a case of paying lip service without any real punishment . The sign of a decent society is how it protects its old, children,sick and its animals. I fear we are far from a decent society.
wow £250 costs! they should be banned for life,and have to pay every single bill for the animals that need vet attention, absolutely stupid people, if they had a brain they would be dangerous!
So they were rightly banned from keeping animals in squalor but nothing done about keeping kids in the same conditions? What a messed up people we are.
They should be charged for cruelty to children! How on earth could they have ever thought that it was ok for children to live in those conditions??
I understand that they were proberly not best equiped to look after their animals to the highest of standards but, at the end of the day, they looked after those animals with the best of intentions to the animals. I personally feel that the fine was only issued to deter people taking on more than they really can cope with. I don't think they should have been banned from having pets (maybe they could have been educated to understand how to be better managers of pets). Their solicitor got it right that they saw their home as an animal sanctuary. I hope they are not victimised by the publicity.
There are many things these people could have done firstly contacted as many animal shelters as they could and explain their situation and have them take even just 1 dog off them a week or when people enquire about adopting these breeds they could have been informed and rehoused them that way. They could have advertised for homes, put a note in vetinary clinics etc they didn't even have to state how many they had just get people contacting them wanting to rehome animals. God there house must have stank and the noise must have been terrible, i bet the postie hated going round to their door LOL. Im just hopefull that the animals get better, rehomed and don't get put down, and just glad the children are all well and not harmed. Silly people i hope they learn that no matter how big your heart is your house isn't big enough for quater that many animals.
What is wrong with people? Has normality, compassion and common sense gone out of the window? These people should be banned from keeping animals forever and certainly should not be in charge of a child.
How can anybody possibly afford to feed fifty-six dogs??? ... It makes me wonder how they looked after their children. How did they get to become so ... non skinny? They look very well fed. How can they afford to look after all those animals, all their children AND eat??? ... I bought one hamster, it lasted for about two years. I could just about afford one cage for it. Hamsters don't each much, due to their size. We owned one budgie, one guinea pig, three cats and one dog. Not all at the same time. Oh, wait? Three budgies? ... One flew away.
I'm just glad I don't live next door to them!