Where animals are concerned we are a nation of contradictions.

On the one hand we are content to see them slaughtered for food. On the other we will react with outrage to any example of cruelty towards them.

That distinction is even more marked when it comes to pets.

And especially to dogs.

More than any other pet, dogs show loyalty to their owners and families.

And so it would have been in the case of Sheba the Jack Russell.

There was and never could be an excuse for Paul Honeyfield to kick him, let alone as hard as he did.

This was a vile act of thuggery upon a defenceless animal that would have trusted him implicitly.

The fact that Honeyfield's own father was the one who contacted the police says a lot about the outrage he must have felt.

The sad thing is that little dog died a miserable and painful death for no other reason than Honeyfield's outburst of uncontrolled temper.

It was preventable, avoidable and unforgivable.

Rightly the court has banned Honeyfield from keeping animals for the rest of his life.

But his suspended jail sentence means he has effectively got away unpunished unless, of course, he commits a further offence before it ends.

Effectively he has been told "Only if you end up before the courts again in the next two years will you be sentenced for killing this dog."

Does that really send the right message out to other people who are cruel to animals?

It sounds more like the go ahead for them to do what they like – at least once.