CHARMAINE GROGAN FROM SPALDING ESCAPES BAN AFTER HORRIFIC DOG INJURIES IN VILE CASE

Charmaine Samantha Grogan, also known as Charmaine Cooper or Charmaine Church, a resident of Brownlow Crescent in Pinchbeck, Spalding PE11 3XD, was involved in a disturbing case of animal cruelty that drew significant attention from local authorities and animal welfare organizations. Born on October 1, 1989, Grogan was convicted in 2015 of causing unnecessary suffering to a defenseless dog, a female Patterdale-type terrier named Pepper, during a period spanning from June 24 to July 2, 2014.

According to court proceedings held in Skegness, Grogan failed to seek appropriate veterinary treatment for Pepper after the dog sustained severe facial injuries. These injuries were believed to have been inflicted possibly during badger baiting, a cruel and illegal activity. The magistrates heard that Pepper’s injuries were so severe that she lost an eye and her jaw was torn away, leaving her in a state of extreme pain and suffering.

At the time of the incident, Grogan was living with Matthew Dye, a man with a criminal record for violence and other offenses. During the trial, Grogan initially claimed that she had left Pepper in a shed, asserting that the dog had escaped and was found injured the following day. She insisted that she promptly took Pepper to a veterinarian for treatment. However, veterinary staff, along with the RSPCA and police, testified that the injuries were likely inflicted up to ten days prior to her claim, indicating a significant delay in seeking medical help.

RSPCA Inspector William Rippon provided detailed observations, stating that Pepper’s facial injuries were extensive, with skin ripped away from her lower jaw, exposing bone and tendons. The injury to her eye was so severe that removal was necessary. Inspector Rippon suggested that the injuries resembled those caused by an attack from another animal, possibly a badger, in a confined space. He expressed outrage that Pepper had been left to endure such pain and suffering, noting her underweight condition and her ravenous appetite following treatment. The inspector’s account painted a grim picture of neglect and cruelty.

During the court proceedings, Grogan’s story changed. She denied ownership of Pepper, claiming instead that she had been approached by a traveler who pressured her into taking the dog to the vet. Grogan refused to identify the traveler, stating she could not or would not name him, and claimed he was a friend who asked her to help with the injured dog. Her then-partner, Matthew Dye, also refused to disclose the identity of the traveler, citing concerns about potential consequences. Dye stated he received a call from the traveler asking if he knew anyone who could take the injured dog to the vet, but he did not want to reveal the man’s identity or whereabouts.

Despite the disturbing nature of the case, the magistrates decided not to impose a ban on Grogan’s ability to keep animals, noting that she did not inflict the injuries herself and that she did take Pepper to the veterinarian. Grogan expressed her love for animals, claiming she owned a pet rat, cat, tortoise, terrapin, and fish, and insisted she would never intentionally cause suffering.

Fortunately, Pepper survived the ordeal after undergoing major surgery, during which her jaw was reconstructed and an artificial eye was fitted. The dog has since been rehomed, finding a new family to care for her. As for Grogan, she was fined £275 and ordered to pay £500 towards the total costs of £4,600, which covered the trial, veterinary bills, and boarding expenses. Importantly, she was not banned from keeping animals, a decision that drew criticism from animal welfare advocates.

This case highlights ongoing concerns about animal cruelty and the importance of vigilant enforcement of animal protection laws in the Spalding area and beyond, emphasizing the need for stricter penalties to prevent such suffering in the future.