Guilty, the father and son who held illicit foxhunt
Pair fined in landmark case
TWO huntsmen have been convicted of breaching fox hunting legislation in a landmark ruling.
Father and son John Clive Richardson, 67, and Johnny Riley, 24, are the first members of a mounted hunt to be prosecuted since the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act was introduced 15 years ago.
Both are members of the Jedforest Hunt in the Borders and were secretly filmed by investigators from the League Against Cruel Sports.
The pair denied breaking the law, but following eight days of evidence, Sheriff Peter Paterson ruled that in two incidents Richardson and Riley were in breach of the legislation and found them guilty of deliberately hunting a fox with dogs.
Riley, who was in charge of the hunt, was fined £400 at Selkirk Sheriff Court and Richardson, who was described as having a lesser role, was fined £250.
Lawyers for both men indicated afterwards they would be appealing against the conviction. Last night, Robbie Marsland, director of the League Against Cruel Sports Scotland, said: ‘While we are delighted with the outcome, and our role in this, we remain of the view that the law needs strengthened.
‘The Scottish Government has committed to consult on the hunt ban following a review by Lord
‘Sends a clear message to hunts’
Bonomy, who clearly stated there was evidence of lawbreaking by Scottish hunts.
‘In finding Johnny Riley and Clive Richardson guilty, Sheriff Paterson has confirmed this to be the case.
‘We look forward to working with the Scottish Government to strengthen the law and hope today sends a clear message to hunts that flouting the law will not be tolerated and those who continue to hunt illegally in Scotland will be brought to justice.’
Most of the evidence during the trial focused on the video which showed 34 hounds from the Jedforest Hunt chasing a fox into a hole on farm land at Town foot hill near Jedburgh, Roxburghshire, on February 16 last year.
After an individual described in court as a ‘terrier man’ spent 40 minutes digging at the hole, the fox bolted. The law states a fox should then be killed by a pistol or shotgun.
However, the animal was again pursued by the dogs before disappearing out of sight of the footage into a gully.
The defence claimed a waiting gunman shot and injured the fox after it had been flushed from cover by the hounds which is permitted in law.
Witnesses for the Crown said they saw no gunman and heard no shots when the fox was being pursued.
Sheriff Paterson accepted the evidence of the defence that there were two gunmen in place.
However, he ruled that in two incidents the huntsmen were still guilty of illegal hunting.
The sheriff said: ‘As is well known there are strongly held views on the issue of hunting and the correct interpretation of the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002 and indeed there has been a view of the working of the Act by Lord Bonomy.
‘However, to be clear, this trial is not about any form of traditional fox hunting. What it is about is whether the hunt carried out pest control within the meaning of the Act.’
Richardson and Riley of Bonchester Bridge, Roxburghshire, declined to comment afterwards.