Suffolk Man Convicted After Dogs Attacked by Badgers

A Suffolk man watched on and filmed as his dogs were mauled by badgers and foxes.

Sam Staniland, 37, of Kennels House, Hadleigh, previously admitted three offences contrary to the Animal Welfare Act 2006, as described below:

• Between 21st March 2021 and 21st April 2023, failed to ensure the welfare needs of three Patterdale terriers by failing to prevent them from fighting with badgers.
• On 17th October 2022, caused unnecessary suffering to a fox hound by failing to prevent it from fighting with a fox.
• On 17th October 2022, failed to ensure the welfare needs of two lurcher dogs by failing to prevent them from fighting with a badger.

At the time of each of these offences the maximum sentence on summary conviction was 26 weeks' custody.

Staniland was sentenced at Norwich Magistrates' Court on Thursday, 10th April 2025.

Magistrates heard that the 37-year-old ex-huntsman's mobile phone was seized in relation to other matters in February 2023.

On 20th April 2023, having retrieved evidence of fox and badger persecution from Staniland's phone, officers returned to his Hadleigh home, searched the premises and arrested him.

On the same occasion the three Patterdale terriers, which had injuries consistent with badger fighting, were seized and taken into the care of a veterinary surgeon.

Footage retrieved from the phone showed a fox hound fighting with a fox down a storm drain. The fox was seen to bite the hounds head.

A second video clip showed the defendant shining a torch at the two lurchers as they attacked a badger.

A still image showed five men posing in a freshly-dug hole in the ground, holding up the body of a dead fox.

Magistrates were of the view that Staniland's offences were so serious that only a custodial sentence was appropriate. However, for reasons that have gone unreported they have elected to suspend the custodial term.

Staniland was sentenced to 26 weeks' custody suspended for 18 months, with the requirement that he completes 150 hours' unpaid work and up to 20 days' rehabilitation activity.

He was also disqualified from keeping dogs for 5 years and ordered to pay £1,200 towards the RSPCA's prosecution costs and £128 surcharge.

Sergeant Brian Calver, of Suffolk Police, said: "This case has highlighted the benefits of partnership working.

"I'm incredibly grateful for the expertise of the RSPCA's Special Operations Unit, and the diligence they’ve shown in bringing this matter to court.

"This investigation uncovered some very unpleasant animal cruelty to both wildlife and the dogs used by Staniland, whilst he was employed as a professional huntsman.

"I hope today's result acts as a deterrent to others that may consider carrying out such acts."

Such barbarity. It would be interesting to see how well Staniland faired if he was set upon by an irate badger fighting for its life (clue: very not well).

Brazen Leeds Upskirter Jailed for Targeting Young Girls

A brazen Leeds upskirter has been jailed for targeting two young girls.

Joel Humberstone, 27, of Woodville Square, Leeds, previously admitted two offences of upskirting.

He was sentenced at York Magistrates' Court on Friday, 11th April 2025.

Upskirting, which involves taking images beneath the clothing of an unsuspecting victim for the purposes of obtaining sexual gratification, is an offence under section 67A of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

It has a maximum sentence of 12 months' custody and/or an unlimited fine on summary conviction; 2 years' custody on conviction on indictment.

Magistrates heard that Humberstone's first offence took place on the morning of Friday, 7th June 2024, when the 27-year-old approached an 11-year-old girl making her way to school in Ripon.

Humberstone brushed against the girl, who felt his phone rub against her leg. She initially thought it was accidental contact, but Humberstone followed her down the street, lifted up her skirt and took a photograph.

Two builders witnessed the crime. One of them stopped with the distraught girl to offer reassurance, the other pursued Humberstone as he fled through the streets of Ripon. Humberstone managed to escape the builder, but was later identified from CCTV.

The second offence took place on Thursday, 27th February 2025, when Humberstone was actually on his way to Harrogate Magistrates' Court to be sentenced for the first offence.

He approached a 17-year-old girl who was walking on Victoria Avenue, which is the same street where the court is located.

Again he walked straight up to the girl, lifted her skirt and took a photograph.

The girl pushed Humberstone away and started to record him on her own phone.

He never made it to court on that occasion, instead being arrested by the police and charged with the second offence.

Magistrates were of the view that Humberstone's offences were so serious that only a custodial sentence was appropriate.

He was sentenced to 9 months' immediate custody and ordered to pay £187 surcharge.

He was also made subject to the notification requirements of the sex offenders register for a period of 10 years.

Detective Constable Karen Everitt of North Yorkshire Police's Harrogate Safeguarding Investigation team said: "These were terrifying and traumatic experiences for both young girls, understandably impacting their sense of safety and security.

"The first victim showed immense bravery and maturity by providing a detailed account of the incident and positively identifying the suspect in a photo identification procedure.

"The second victim bravely confronted Humberstone and captured him on her mobile phone, securing vital evidence that helped to build the case against him. Their courage ensured that Humberstone was held accountable.

"I would like to extend my gratitude to the two builders who acted swiftly in the first incident to protect and support the girl and pursue the suspect. I also want to thank members of the public who came forward with information following our appeal.

"Humberstone is a dangerous individual, and I welcome today's sentence, which ensures he faces justice for his appalling actions."

Not Laughing Now: "Joke" Backfires on Puerile Social Media Prankster

A "joke" has spectacularly backfired on a puerile social media prankster, who humiliated a shop worker in front of customers.

Ricki Hughes, 41, of Runcorn, admitted an offence of intentionally causing harassment, alarm or distress when he recently appeared at Warrington Magistrates' Court.

This is an offence under section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986. It has a maximum sentence on summary conviction of 26 weeks' custody and/or an unlimited fine.

Magistrates' heard that Hughes attended the Go Outdoors store on Wilson Patten Street, Warrington, on the afternoon of Saturday, 4th January 2025.

He had with him a box, which contained a pair of shoes he claimed he wished to return. However, concealed alongside the shoes was a large flesh-toned dildo.

The complainant was called across the store to assist with Hughes' return. She initially thought he had "pranked" another customer, but then noticed that a second man was filming the interaction on his mobile phone.

It was then she realised that she had been the target of the joke. Hughes removed the dildo from the box and invited the distraught complainant to hold it, telling her "it's just a joke". He then took the dildo, held it up to his nose and started sniffing it.

By this stage the complainant was distraught. She was escorted from the shop floor in tears.

Hughes was later identified on CCTV and invited for a voluntary interview, in which police told him the stunt was "not big, not clever".

He was subsequently charged with the section 4A offence.

Magistrates' were of the view that Hughes' conduct was so disgraceful that only a custodial sentence was appropriate.

He was sentenced to 18 weeks' immediate custody and ordered to pay £154 surcharge and £85 towards prosecution costs.

PC Graham Davies, of Cheshire Police, said: "While Hughes may have seen this as just a prank, the store worker was not amused and was left traumatised by his actions.

"He attended the store intent on humiliating the victim to get some hits on a social media video.

"Thankfully, as a result of the statements provided by the victim and the work of the team here at Warrington, Hughes is now behind bars where he can reflect on his actions that day."

Again I doff my cap to Warrington colleagues. They don't take any nonsense there.

It must be the season for irritating content creators having their arses handed to them.

Social Media Auditor Clobbered with £32k Costs Order After Failed False Imprisonment Claim

Oh dear, how sad, never mind.

Kevin Brown, 35, of Blackburn, goes by the name of Auditing Lancashire on YouTube.

Feeling really sorry for himself, Brown recently uploaded full details of his court failure to his YouTube channel. The upload, which has now been deleted, included full footage of the incident as well as various stills of court documents.

Fortunately another YouTube channel, Street Video Reviewer, managed to grab a copy of Brown's video before he deleted it. Street Video Reviewer has given a commentary on Brown's case.

There is nothing I will be mentioning here that has not been publicly shared by Brown himself.

If anyone has not come across the crass phenomenon of auditing before, then aren't you the lucky one?! Please see my earlier whistle stop guide to auditing for background information.

In the simplest of terms, it involves "an auditor" filming in such a manner as to provoke a reaction, which they hope will result in a popular - therefore lucrative - upload on social media later on.

The auditor will often claim they are exercising their rights to film in a public place, but that is very much a secondary consideration to generating controversial, click generating content.

I reiterate one of my previous comments, which is of relevance in this particular case. Some auditors have realised that if they provoke a reaction from police officers, they might well be in a position to make a civil claim later on. They are actively staging and pursuing these vexatious claims as an alternative revenue stream. They are deliberately setting up police officers in the hope of making a few extra quid.

Brown, shown in the custody mugshot above (which you can read more about here), was filming at the rear of Greenbank Police Station, Blackburn, at 0330 hrs on Thursday, 29th September 2022.

Sergeant Kerr, who was in the yard of the police station, noticed Brown filming through the gate.

It being pitch black and the dead of night, Sergeant Kerr considered Brown's activity unusual enough to approach the gate and ask what he was doing.

It should also be noted that Brown was dressed in camouflage clothing and was wearing a face covering. The terrorism threat level at the time was "substantial", which indicated an attack was likely.

"Are you taking pictures of people's private vehicles?" asked Sergeant Kerr from the other side of the gate.

"Pardon" replied Brown.

"Are you taking pictures of people's private vehicles?" Sergeant Kerr repeated.

"I don't understand" replied Brown, trying to feign a foreign accent.

"I'm sure you do" replied Sergeant Kerr.

"I don't speaking English" replied Brown, in his native Lancastrian twang.

"You're speaking it" noted Sergeant Kerr.

"Why are you filming me? It's not a good idea to film people's private vehicles" Sergeant Kerr continued.

Brown stood silently with his camera trained on Sergeant Kerr, who then took the 30 second stroll around to the public side of the gate.

On arriving at Brown, Sergeant Kerr asked: "What's your name?"

"Why?" replied Brown.

"Because you're acting suspiciously" replied Sergeant Kerr.

I'm not going to transcribe the whole video, because I think I've illustrated the point already - Brown's behaviour was certainly very unusual and Sergeant Kerr was right to be suspicious about it. Not many legitimate photographers and videographers head out in the dead of night. Those that do, generally don't pretend to be foreign when they clearly aren't.

It's at that stage that Sergeant Kerr took hold of Brown, who no doubt saw the pound signs flickering before his eyes.

After a few minutes of Brown accusing Sergeant Kerr of abusing his powers, a second police officer approached. Brown then acknowledged for the first time that he was filming the police station. The second officer, Chief Inspector Black, told Sergeant Kerr to let Brown go, which he did.

Brown sued Lancashire Constabulary for false imprisonment and trespass to his person. 

HHJ Jacqueline Beech, presiding over the trial at Preston County Court, described Brown's behaviour outside the police station as "utterly unacceptable" and said that in her view it was designed to provoke Sergeant Kerr. The Judge noted that Sergeant Kerr's use of force was necessary and reasonable.

Brown has been ordered to pay costs of £30,575 to Lancashire Constabulary. HNK Solicitors, the firm of choice for litigious auditors, are also asking for costs of £1,175 for taking the matter to trial.

It is unlikely Brown will have sufficient assets to pay those costs, but at least they will be hanging over his head for a while.

It would be nice if this was the beginning of the police defending these most meritless of actions commenced by auditors. For far too long the default setting of the police has been to roll over and settle.