Brothers guilty of letting dog get fat - is that a crime?

Question

Two brothers have been found guilty of animal cruelty for allowing their pet dog's weight to exceed more than 11 stone. Derek and David Benton were convicted of causing unnecessary suffering to their dog Rusty by overfeeding. The pair, aged 62 and 53 respectively, from Fordham, Cambridgeshire, allowed the dog's weight to rise from eight to more than 11-and-a-half-stone in two years. RSPCA inspectors say the Bentons failed to give Rusty an appropriate diet and allowed the dog to become "hugely and grossly" overweight. The brothers said the dog is overweight because it has arthritis and cannot exercise easily.

Their lawyer, Ann-Marie Gregory, told magistrates in Ely, Cambridgeshire: "They are not specialist dog trainers. They are not specialist Labrador trainers. They are common or garden dog owners." The RSPCA had spent more than £3,000 trying to reduce the dog's weight in recent months. She added: "How many people have £3,000 in their pocket to spend on their pet dog?". Miss Gregory said there was no evidence that the dog had been "stuffed" with treats or overfed. She said the Bentons fed him a small bowl of dog food in the mornings and the evenings and gave him a bone as a treat on a Saturday.

Prosecutor Stephen Climie refuted her suggestions that the prosecution was a "test case". "This is not a test case," he said. "This is a case peculiar to its facts." The brothers denied any offence. RSPCA inspectors took the dog from the brothers in March and since then it has lost three-and-a-half stones under the guidance of vets.

-------------

That's pretty good they can do this for a dog - next step, parents who feed their kids so much that they become grossly overweight. Imagine a dog having better protection against this type of abuse than children?

Answer 1

I'm glad they're doing this with these 2. Even though some think they're doing their pet a favour by giving them treats or feeding them human food, they're slowly killing the them as they'd have the same health problems as a human would being over weight.

Answer 2

When I first seen the reporr on the internet I was furious that the RSPCA had wasted time and effort persuing this case, when there are dogs being abused and starved out there. Then I seen the poor dog on television and realised that the RSPCA were quite right to take it to court. Who in there right mind could feed a dog to get it into that condition, the poor dog had no quality of life. A dogs life is going for walks and smelling different scents, the poor thing could hardly get up. As for the defence saying it only got a small meal, it's ridiculous t suggest that, Dogs are just like people they are consuming more calories that they need, with exception to a tiny percent of the population who have a health problem. This dog did not have an illness that made him overweight. So good on the RSPCA. Sounds to me like the men were trying to beat a crazy record.

Answer 3

I seen that poor dog on TV and I think charging them was the right thing to do dogs do not have a voice so someone has to speak up for them they are a couple of idiots they lied when they said they where only feeding the dog small helpings of food and blamed it's arthritis if that was the case how did the rspca get the weight off the dog??? it more than likely got arthritis from being overweight they don't deserve to own a animal.Well is someone wants to charge the parents over stuffing their children with food and take them to court by all means do it and take the kids off the parents and charge them with child abuse but if you look at most of the parents they would be stuffing their faces with food also so they see no wrong in it.

Answer 4

If taken to court by someone presenting a case to a prosecutor the parents who overfeed causing gross ovrweight in their child(ren) am sure will be fined after found guilty and would be court ordered to follow pediatric advice to reduce weight and provide healthy nutrition.More than likey counseling would also have to be done by the parents to fine by overfeeding and even the child would (depending on age) undergo some kind of counseling.But before this happens charges have to be made, a case presented, someone has to be willing to advocate for the child.I just do not like having animal protection claims better than those for children for not the case-to beat a child is against the law while one can beat,chain a dog for all its life and unless there is grievious injury the person doing will not even be fined. How many animals suffer unheard in many many backyards all around this land-chain a child and guaranteed there'll be outrage expressed,arrest and lockup will follow. Child protection laws have been in place for many years but its just recently that the plight of animals is being heard and grave injury/suffering caused finally is now a felony but how many actually make it to court and the suffering continues.Better laws being ENFORCED for children and Dogs/Animals

Answer 5

I'd disagree with this prosecution flat out, but I suspect that we don't know the half of the case. I'd willing to bet all the money I have (luckily for me, that's all of 27 bucks) that there is something more, or something underlying to the situation. Perhaps they had been visited, given advice, warned? Perhaps these brothers have prior, more serious instances of cruelty? Cruelty officers don't have the authority to go and take your dog unless it is in immediate danger.

And having read of this case after seeing your question - its not as if the owners are going to jail. They have the dog back, and are simply required to keep it at 100 instead of 150 pounds.

See the before picture of the dog: http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=64802007
Does it look healthy to you?

Nonetheless, I do think this is silly.

Answer 6

If there is no medical reason - and I mean like a thyroid problem, then yes it is criminal - a dog, and a child cannot say no I will get fat if I eat more, and being that fat causes so many health problems that it is cruel. As to how much money is spent, just feeding a dog an appropriate diet would prevent the wieght gain.

Answer 7

That is animal cruelty, that's is just wrong. Most all animals need exercise and to have a dog weigh about 150 lb, when they should weight only around 60-70 pounds, no wander he has arthritis, that dog has been eating from the table AND his bowl.

Answer 8

Yeah I think its a crime & a shame...the poor dog could hardly walk. it is a form of neglect, imagine being in the poor dogs 'shoes' how would you feel...they are really killing it with kindness by over feeding.Its obviously not getting the proper care it should have and i dont think they should have a pet if they are not going to look after it correctly. Its not a walking 'dustbin' its a dog .the poor dog cant play or run around it must be mserable. Find it a new home

Answer 9

I don't agree with this.

As for the kids that are grossly overweight, I waitressed at this snazzy restaurant. The owners were very overweight, and they had a 5 yr old girl that weighed over 100 lb and a one yr old that weighed 60 lb. I watched the mother stuff food into that baby's mouth. She would feed it more than I would eat, she just kept stuffing it. It was child abuse in my eyes.

Answer 10

Isn't that RIDICULOUS! There was a young disabled boy in my state who had his service dog taken from him because the dog was overweight, and he wasn't obese, just overweight.

Next...
Dog removed from home because he didn't have enough toys (actually part of an ordinance in Albuquerque)

Dog removed from home because he wasn't allowed food 24/7 (ALREADY happens all over the US, and then when he gets too fat they will remove him for being too fat!)

Dog removed because he wasn't given lepto vaccine (unnecessary in some parts of the country) or a bordatella vaccine (TOTALLY unnecessary vaccine)

Dog removed because he is too thin (forget the fact it is a ***** that just had pups, it happens) or (the dog is 15 years old and the owner does whatever they can to keep weight on)

Dog removed because the owners don't feed high $$$ super premium food

Dog removed because the owner had a litter of pups (happens)

Dog removed because owner yelled at dog and gave it a correction.

etc etc etc

If you don't think this is the direction things are heading, you are being naive.



Maguire - "Cruelty officers don't have the authority to go and take your dog unless it is in immediate danger."

That is not at all true. In some places in this country they can (and do) seize dogs for any number of inane reasons.

I must agree the dog is disgustingly obese though.