High court sets new hearing for hunting ban case

Trusted article source icon
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Profile image for This is Bristol

This is Bristol

The ban on hunting with dogs took another twist last night

after a High Court judge said the case of the first man to be

prosecuted for hunting foxes should be returned to court.

But the saga of the case of Tony Wright, the Exmoor

Foxhounds huntsman, is no nearer being finished – and until

then almost all the other major prosecutions of West hunts

cannot proceed.

In a highly technical hearing at the High Court in London,

the Crown Prosecution Service appealed against a decision by a

judge in Exeter last year. The Exeter judge had acquitted Mr

Wright on appeal, overturning an earlier guilty verdict by

magistrates.

The CPS won a partial victory yesterday – if the High Court

had thrown out their case it would have effectively spelled the

end for that and other prosecutions, and thrown into doubt any

effective use of the hunt ban in the future.

Anti-hunt campaigners emerged declaring they were “very

pleased” with the outcome, but Countryside Alliance campaigners

also emerged pleased, saying moves to effectively order a

re-trial of Tony Wright were also dismissed.

The High Court decided the judge in the original appeal did

not fully explain his reasons for quashing the conviction and

so ordered a new hearing in the autumn which will look into two

specific points of law surrounding the Wright case. One will

decide whether searching for foxes constitutes illegal hunting.

The other, more crucial one, will decide where the burden of

proof lies when a hunt claims it is arguing it was hunting

using one of the ban's exemptions: is it down to the

prosecution to prove the hunt wasn't, or is it down to the hunt

to prove it was?

That is also a key question in the prosecution of the Devon

and Somerset Staghounds, the most controversial so far in the

years since the 2005 ban, and that case – plus others pending –

has been on hold awaiting a verdict in the Wright case. What it

means is that the hunt ban will have its first 'showdown' court

case in the autumn, and although damaged by the Wright appeal

victory, the ban is not finished yet.

“We are very pleased with today's outcome,” said a spokesman

for the League Against Cruel Sports, which brought the original

case against Mr Wright. “The High Court can now determine what

the Hunting Act means and could overturn the last appeal

decision.

The Countryside Alliance's Tim Bonner was upbeat too. “All

the points the league and International Fund for Animal Welfare

wanted to have argued were thrown out by the judge who said

they should play no role in this – all it boils down to is

points of law and it is extremely unlikely Tony Wright will

face a re-trial,” he said.

On Monday, the next chapter in the hunt ban will take place

at Witney, when a huntsman from the Gloucestershire-based

Heythrop Hunt faces his first charge of hunting illegally.

21
Tweet this article
Report

21 Comments

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by giles bradshaw, rose ash

    Monday, September 08 2008, 10:25AM

    “I'd like to quote something written by Gary Hills about the precise point of law on which the Tony Wright case hinged, the requirement of the Hunting Act that animals can only be flushed oif they are then shot.


    Mr Hills writes:

    "On the night of the vote, hundreds of stupid amendments were put down by the Lords in an attempt to run it out of time.

    They failed but one or two did get through and one of them being flushing."

    and furthermore he states:

    "I do not like the shooting part".”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by Gary Hills, Campaign Director, Stevenage

    Wednesday, August 27 2008, 10:36PM

    “The law will be upheld and once again we will see that not only was the Government right to bring in the hunting ban, but equally it will show that the ban can be enforced. It is time those who think they are above society and law, stopped their obsession with killing and seeking to inflict cruelty for fun. The argument is no longer about why there should be a ban. It is now about why shouldn't hunters accept that the ban is in place and here to stay. The game playing and false claims of being victims of society are nonsense and do nothing for their cause. For once it would be good to see some respect for democracy which has been totally lacking from the Countryside Alliance and David Cameron with his commitment to ignore the public's overwhelming support for the ban to stay. They may think David Cameron will come to their aid, yet the election is not won yet and much can and will happen before it. We as a nation can finally hold our heads up with pride knowing this shameful disease of hunting is no longer legal in the UK. Nobody is above the law. A fine principle many hunters should take note of. Gary Hills, Campaign Director, Support the Hunting Act (Ban) UK”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by BRENT, lees summit mo

    Friday, July 25 2008, 1:42PM

    “jessica,jessica,jessica if it were up to people like you to shed your will on other people we wouldn't be eating,hunting, or fishing.thank the good lord jesus we have a thang called states rights and a whole lot of checks and ballances or we would lose our rights one by one. get off your high-brow duff and learn something about wildlife conservation or maybe the real world. brent th redneck american in missouri.”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by jessica jones, bath

    Friday, July 25 2008, 12:34PM

    “I own horses and i cant stand hunting with dogs no need to chase animals for miles and miles just for the fun of it.”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by brent, lees summit mo

    Friday, July 25 2008, 1:42AM

    “nick why would you single my comment out? if you were truely a hunter and outdoorsman/conservationist would'nt your comments be better directed to the anti's”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by brent, lees summit mo.

    Friday, July 25 2008, 1:35AM

    “nick, i understand all about their culture, just don't want any part of it. i actually have some limey friends, just like to give them hell. by the way nick bears make good rugs.”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by Nick Atkinson, Anchorage, Alaska

    Thursday, July 24 2008, 9:00PM

    “To: brent, lees summit' mo.
    No, I watch bears, hunt moose, caribou and Dahl sheep.
    My comment was about your lack of knowledge and understanding of other peoples' culture and history.”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by Charles Henry, Somerset

    Thursday, July 24 2008, 7:16PM

    “But seriously Ken; have you ever actually seen a fox taking a lamb. . They are cunning devils. .They will even drag a half born lamb from the ewe. . Or have you ever heard a rabbit screaming in the night as it gets devoured alive by a badger. . That' a really chilling sound. . 'Til you have; don't presume you can lecture me and moralise. . I don't hunt and I never have, but I applaud those who do, and will defend their right to do so to my grave.”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by Charles Henry, Somerset

    Thursday, July 24 2008, 6:50PM

    “We've been hay making today Ken. . When the Sun is shining, time waits for no man. . We have to bring the Harvest home. . . You are right of course; the poor woman will despair if the hay is not sweet enough, and her horse turns up its nose. . A Mare of course, I should say her. . But I don't fight it! . . By golly she can't half cook!”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by Ken, Bristol

    Thursday, July 24 2008, 3:42PM

    “Well Charles Henry it doesnt surprise me that you are being offered divorce, the poor woman must want someone vaguely 'normal'. Perhaps someone who can converse in a meaningful way. Pity you chose to be so flippant about such an important issue but that is about typical for the people of this country.”

        Your comments awaiting moderation

        Add your comments

        max 4000 characters