THE only prosecution of an organised hunt has collapsed after the judge questioned links between a key witness and the lobby which brought the case.
Six members of the Lamerton Hunt in Devon were accused of illegally hunting and killing a fox on Dartmoor in a private prosecution by the League Against Cruel Sports.
Bristol University professor Stephen Harris - one of the world's leading experts on foxes - gave evidence for the prosecution on the second day two of the ten-day trial.
But a day later district judge Kevin Gray questioned Professor Harris' alleged friendship with the League's West Somerset-based head of operations, Paul Tillsley.
He also sought confirmation on an allegation the League's acting chief executive Rachel Newman had advised Prof Harris not to mention this relationship in court.
The anti-hunt lobby withdrew its evidence and the case collapsed on Thursday.
The Countryside Alliance has accused Prof Harris of "embellishing" his evidence and the Lamerton Hunt slammed the League for mounting the prosecution in the first place.
David Lewis, huntsman of the Lamerton Hunt, said: "We were confident from the start that we had done nothing wrong and that all our hunting was legal, but our names and the allegations that LACS were making were all over the local papers.
"The whole thing seemed to go on forever and whilst we are happy it is now all over it was not a pleasant experience."
Six members of the Lamerton Hunt were accused of breaking the 2004 Hunting Act near Lydford, Devon, on March 26 this year.
The accused were one of the hunt's masters, George Moyse, huntsman David Lewis, whipper-in Steve Craddock and three terriermen - Gilmore Lewis, Stephen Mitchell and Wayne Bartlett.
The League said it tried to take its evidence to Devon and Cornwall Police, but was "ignored" and pursued a private prosecution.
They claimed members had filmed an incident where the hunt encouraged the hounds to find and follow a fox, which led them to an earth containing at least two fox cubs.
The hearing at Newton Abbot Magistrates' Court - said to have cost around £100,000 - heard evidence from Professor Stephen Harris.
But after giving his evidence he was questioned about whether the League's acting chief executive Rachel Newman had advised him not to tell the court of his friendship with Mr Tillsley.
Last month, the League also commissioned and published a report by Prof Harris into the differences between hunting law in England and Scotland.
The group withdrew the case on Thursday.
Countryside Alliance chief executive Tim Bonner said: "Professor Harris had also been accused of embellishing his experience of hunting whilst giving evidence.
"Rather than answer these very serious questions LACS has now withdrawn all charges.
"This appalling case raises a series of fundamental questions about the abuse of the criminal justice system by vindictive private prosecutors.
"LACS spent more than a £100,000 of charitable funds on a case that the police had correctly judged simply did not stand up.
"In desperation it has then sought to present as independent an expert witness who was clearly deeply prejudiced against the defendants.
"LACS sought to corrupt the criminal justice system and use it to harass six innocent people over an 18-month period.
"Questions need to be asked about this abuse at the highest levels."
But the League maintained the riders were hunting illegally and accused the defence team of "haranguing and hounding" the expert.
A spokesman for the League Against Cruel Sports added: "We still strongly believe that the Lamerton Hunt were hunting illegally, and strongly encourage people to look at the video footage and decide for themselves what they are seeing.
"We're also saddened by the way Professor Harris had his character assassinated by the defence lawyer.
"He was cross-examined, harangued and hounded for two and a half hours, all in an ultimately successful attempt to make it look as though he was in some way connected inappropriately with the League, which we vigorously deny.
"Professor Harris is an internationally respected fox expert so to see him pursued and savaged in court was shameful, but unfortunately this is typical of the way fox hunts are defended in a desperate attempt to deflect away from the real details of the case.
"We stand by our decision to take this private prosecution.
"We cannot let hunts get away with what we still believe is a bang to rights case of illegal hunting.
"We wanted the judicial process to make a decision on this case, and we want the world to know that the League Against Cruel Sports will not stand by and let hunts flout the law.
"We may have had to withdraw, but anyone with common sense can see what this hunt were doing."
↧