The ill-treatment of the horses occurred in 2020, while the assaults on the children involved smacking one child twice and pinching, and grabbing the other child’s ear on two occasions and smacking them on the bottom.
Judge Mabey said the Animal Welfare Act charges would have the “potential to decimate” the man’s business and would have flow-on effects on his employees and children.
“His offences are committed over a single day and whilst of low to moderate seriousness the potential consequences are wholly disproportionate,” he ruled.
As for the assaults on his children, Judge Mabey said they were “not particularly serious” but rather “bad-tempered discipline”.
“The evidence I heard described an ill-tempered man taken to outbursts of a selfish lack of control resulting in corporal punishment of his children.
“The impression I had was of a man whose children were an inconvenience and at times not worthy of the parental respect they were due and for which he had a duty to exhibit”.
‘Choked horse for 18 seconds’
The man was at his premises with horse A in December 2020 when he took the reins and “jerked harshly”.
The horse pulled away and reared upwards. As the man used his whole body weight to hold the lead, the horse then fell backwards onto the ground as the man continued to pull and the horse tried to stand up.
With horse B, he kicked it in the abdomen, causing it to jump away.
But it was the ill-treatment of horse C that Judge Mabey deemed the most serious; pulling at the reins so that he put himself in a sitting position before grabbing the horse’s throat.
He then kicked it in the genitals and again in the abdomen.
The man continued to lead the horse and struck it with the lead in the face before kicking it again in the genitals causing the horse to jump and change its body position demonstrating pain.
The man continued to pull and jerk on the reins before grabbing its throat with sufficient force the horse struggled to breathe, resulting in it coughing several times. That went on for about 18 seconds.
As for horse D, he was walking behind it with a whip, as it was being led by someone else and he struck its hind legs causing it to jump.
‘I was under financial and work stress’
The man’s counsel, Shelley Gilbert, said convictions on the charges would “seriously impede” the man’s ability to only travel for work which at times happened at short notice.
It would also likely impact his ability to continue working in the equine industry.
Although four horses were involved, all events happened in one single day and the man had no previous convictions.
He had since undertaken courses for anger management, parenting, and equine management and offered to pay emotional harm to each child.
“Overall says Ms Gilbert the impetus and unjustified treatment of the horses over a single day which demonstrates ill-temper and lack of control are of a low level of seriousness of offences of the type and that the court has had to deal with much worse.”
The man was remorseful and continued to have supervised access to both the children and animals.
“He attributes his behaviour to financial and work stress.
“[The man] is really saying that his actions were out of character, a one-off incident although involving four horses and that publicity will effectively destroy his reputation,” Judge Mabey said in his decision.
‘Police exaggerated the seriousness of the offending’
Police opposed the man’s application and labelled his offending as serious and that the impediments to travel were overstated.
Police said it should be for the racing industry to decide if the man was worthy of a licence and suggested the man be disqualified from owning animals for a period of time.
However, Judge Mabey declined to issue that order and said police “exaggerated” the seriousness of the offending and that it was an “unrealistic suggestion that he should be barred”.
The judge said the offending needed to be measured against “the many years of successful business, building up a reputation and being trusted in the industry”.
The racing industry was aware of the allegations so it couldn’t be said he would be hiding anything.
He also found publication of his name would cause extreme hardship.
“It is no answer to say that if he is discharged without conviction publicity will not be harmful as the public will know he has been discharged - a deemed acquittal.
“That is not how matters transpire in the real world.
“The allegations will be published. The facts will be published.
“The small print might refer to the discharge but the publicity will cause significant reputational damage and the impact will be severe.”
Judge Mabey said if he did convict the man on the child assault charges he would likely impose a sentence of supervision.
Belinda Feek is an Open Justice reporter based in Waikato. She has worked at NZME for nine years and has been a journalist for 20.
