BEN BRAHAM AND EMMA HENDY FROM THAME CONVICTED OVER CRUELTY TO SHAR PEI WITH UNTREATED EYE CONDITION

In a recent case that has drawn significant attention from animal welfare advocates, Ben Braham and Emma Louise Hendy, both residents of Thame, faced justice for their neglect of a beloved pet dog. The incident involved a Shar Pei named Flake, who suffered from a painful eye condition known as entropion, which causes the eyelids to roll inward and press against the eyeball, often leading to severe discomfort and potential blindness if left untreated.

The court proceedings revealed that Flake was found as a stray on May 4, 2018, more than six months after Braham had initially taken him to a veterinarian for diagnosis. During that first visit, on October 17, 2017, the vet advised that the dog needed surgery to correct the entropion and instructed Braham to return within a week for the procedure. However, Braham failed to follow through with the recommended treatment, neglecting the dog's worsening condition.

Instead of returning for the necessary surgery, Braham left Flake at Emma Hendy's residence. Over time, the dog's condition deteriorated, and he was left untreated, which posed a serious risk to his eyesight and overall well-being. The court heard that Braham had purchased Flake as a puppy for £400, intending for Hendy and her children to care for him. He also provided a cage, a lead, and arranged vaccinations, demonstrating initial responsibility for the pet. However, Braham's subsequent actions—cutting off contact with the family and neglecting the dog's health—highlighted a failure to fulfill his duty of care.

Emma Hendy, in her own trial, claimed she had repeatedly urged Braham to take Flake to the vet. She also stated that when she eventually took the dog herself, she was told that only the owner could arrange treatment, implying a lack of cooperation from Braham. Despite her efforts, the neglect persisted, leading to the dog's suffering.

In sentencing, Braham was ordered to pay a total of £430, covering fines, costs, and charges. The RSPCA had requested that he be banned from owning dogs in the future, but this request was denied by the court, allowing him to keep another dog at his residence. Emma Hendy received a fine of £640, which included court costs and a victim surcharge, but she was not subject to a ban on owning animals.

This case underscores the importance of responsible pet ownership and the legal consequences of neglecting animal welfare. The authorities hope that such convictions serve as a reminder that neglecting a pet’s health can lead to serious legal repercussions and, most importantly, suffering for the animals involved.