Wiltshire man guilty of animal cruelty after dog suffers critical injuries

A Wiltshire man has been found guilty of animal cruelty after a dog suffered critical injuries consistent with blunt-force trauma.

Dean Parkes, 27, was charged with causing a four-year-old miniature dachshund named Mable significant chest injuries and failing to protect her from pain, suffering and injury.

He denied the allegations against him and this week (starting on Monday 22 May), District Judge Joanna Dickens chaired a four-day-long trial at Swindon Magistrates’ Court.

On 24 December 2021, Mable’s owner Fae Prangle – who had recently started a relationship with Parkes – called a vet concerned about her breathing and presentation, stating she had been fine that morning.

The vet found signs of a high heart rate and abdominal pain but sent Mable home, telling Prangle to monitor her closely. Later that evening, Mable was returned to the vet as she remained concerned about her health.

Further testing – as Mable remained critically unwell – was carried out and on 27 December, a different vet Luca Bresciani found fractures to three ribs and numerous pelvic fractures.

He described Mable’s injuries as “something that would be caused by a road traffic collision or something big like that”.

In the absence of an explanation for her injuries, Elizabeth Sharples, who was the principal vet at VetsNow and treated Mable on Christmas Day, decided to report the matter to the RSPCA.

Ms Sharples told the court that she “has never been in a situation where an animal has suffered significant trauma injuries where the owners have no knowledge of how they came about”.

She consulted VetsNow’s non-accidental injury department and explained that there was no trauma history and Mable had been in the care of Prangle’s new partner at the time.

The RSPCA attended Prangle’s home in Easton Square, Sherston, near Malmesbury, on 6 January 2022 and seized Mable, her 18-month-old puppy Matilda and Duke, a red labrador belonging to Parkes.

Matilda, also a miniature dachshund, was examined by vets – and was found to have sustained numerous pelvic fractures, similar to those of Mable’s.

It transpired that Prangle had sought treatment for Matilda on 3 December, eight days after she had jumped off an embankment during a walk and started limping. But her limp and lameness were intermittent and the pet didn’t show any signs of pain or serious injury.

Even the vet found no concerning signs of serious injuries, releasing her back to Prangle with seven days’ worth of anti-inflammatory medication and orders to take only short walks on a lead.

Alongside Parkes, Prangle faced charges of causing unnecessary suffering to her dogs by failing to seek prompt vet care and failing to protect them from pain, suffering and injury.

In relation to the incident on 24 December, both defendants provided very similar accounts to the court.

They said that they had been shopping in Chippenham for about three hours, later meeting at Halfords so Parkes could collect a bicycle for Prangle’s nephew and take it home in his van.

Prangle said she provided Parkes with a key to her house and allowed him to go on ahead. Parkes said he placed the bicycle in a shelter at Prangle’s house before entering and letting the dogs out into the back garden. Prangle arrived home a short time later but went upstairs for 15-20 minutes before seeing the dogs, leaving Parkes alone with them.

But Prangle’s sister Heather, who was present at the end of the shopping trip and signed paperwork pertaining to her son’s new bicycle, provided the court with a completely different version of events.

She said that Parkes had loaded the bicycle into his van and taken it to her house in Hullavington – after they travelled there in convoy. She said they had then travelled to Prangle’s home, suggesting that Parkes arrived there just minutes before her and that Prangle was already back at home.

Heather also stated that Mable was definitely “jumping up as normal” when she arrived, despite Prangle having been so concerned about Mable’s presentation, she phoned an emergency vet.

After hearing expert evidence, District Judge Joanna Dickens ruled out numerous potential causes of Mable and Matilda’s injuries put forward by the defence – including brittle bone disease.

She found Parkes not guilty of inflicting the injuries on Mable, stating: “He clearly had the opportunity to do it. I didn’t find his explanation very convincing.

“Whilst he could have done it, and certainly on the balance of probabilities did do it, I am not sure, and therefore I find you not guilty.”

However, he was found him guilty of failing to protect Mable from pain, suffering and injury – an offence under Section 9 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

She added: “Mr Parkes was responsible for that animal when that injury happened. Something happened to Mable, I don’t know what happened, but I’m sure Mr Parkes knows.

“Whether he did it or someone else did it, either way, he didn’t take reasonable steps to prevent this happening.”

27-year-old community care worker Prangle was found not guilty on both charges. Judge Dickens said that she “obviously loves the dogs” and took them to the vet when she had concerns about them.

Parkes will be sentenced next month and faces a ban from owning animals. Mable and Matilda were released from Bath Cats and Dogs Home back to Prangle – who remains in a relationship with Parkes and now resides with him.