Drunken animal carer causes dog to suffer

Mansfield Magistrates Court.
Mansfield Magistrates Court.

An animal carer from Mansfield has admitted to causing unneccessary suffering to his dog after allowing it to collide with the back of his bicycle.

Mansfield Magistrates Court heard how Benjamin Wincott, 48, of Portland Street, New Houghton, was reported to the police on Friday 10 July after he was seen on a bicycle “being cruel” to his Jack Russell outside Morrisons in Mansfield Woodhouse.

Mr Wincott was found to be drunk, disorderly and in posession of cannabis at the time of the incident and also used what was described as “colourful language” towards the police officers.

The prosecutor told the court how CCTV footage showed that Mr Wincott had set off on his bike holding onto the dog, but that it had dug it’s heels in.

He then apparently picked the dog up by it’s lead and dragged it along the ground before lifting it up and allowing it to hit the back wheel of his bike.

Wincott shouted over the prosecutor in court saying “that’s not true” and kept saying that he was sad for his dog.

The prosecutor added: “It wasn’t a deliberate act to harm his dog. It happened due to the sheer level of intoxication.”

Mr Wincott, who works with horses, says he does not have contact with any of his family and the rescue-dog is all he has.

His defence Solicitor, Michael Little, said that thought of having an animal related criminal record really upsets him.

He told the court that the dog has never come into harm before.

“It was an isolated incident,” he said. “There’s nothing to be concerned about.”

Mr Wincott then got upset in the courtroom and said that he did not mean any harm and had “only pulled the dog twice”.

“I work with horses and this might exclude me from employment in the future,” he added.

Wincott was ordered to pay £455 in fees to the court and was told to destroy any more cannabis in his posession.

He was also convicted of causing unneccessary suffering to a protected animal, as of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

But the magistrates thought that the criminal record would be punishment enough, so did not enforce any other punishement for this crime.