LEYTON HARFORD FROM MALVERN SENTENCED FOR CRUELTY TO PUPPY RIDDICK IN WORCESTER

Leyton Charles Harford, born on July 29, 1983, and residing on Elgar Avenue in Malvern, was found guilty of causing unnecessary suffering to a young dog named Riddick. The incident, which took place in November 2013, involved Harford repeatedly striking the puppy over the head with a chew toy and kicking him until he collapsed, actions that resulted in severe swelling and trauma.

Harford was convicted on two counts related to animal cruelty. The case was brought to court after the RSPCA responded to complaints about the treatment of Riddick at Harford’s flat. Inspector Pippa Boyd, who attended the scene, observed that the Staffy was notably subdued and exhibited a significant swelling on his head, roughly the size of a tennis ball. Harford initially claimed that the injury occurred when Riddick went outside to relieve himself and disappeared around a corner, only to yelp shortly after hearing a car drive away. However, this explanation was challenged during the proceedings.

RSPCA prosecutor Rafe Turner pointed out that Harford’s account changed multiple times during questioning, indicating dishonesty. The court was shown photographs of Riddick with the swelling on his forehead, which Harford’s relative had supposedly taken on the night of the injury. A veterinary expert testified that such swelling would not develop to that extent within a few hours, as Harford claimed, and that it was unlikely the injury was caused by a car or a kick alone. The expert emphasized that the injury’s severity suggested deliberate harm.

Harford admitted to causing further unnecessary suffering by neglecting to seek veterinary treatment for Riddick, citing financial concerns and Christmas preparations as reasons for his inaction. During the investigation, he expressed remorse, acknowledging that he had made a mistake but insisted he had been a good owner who invested time and effort into caring for Riddick. Despite this, the court heard that Riddick was so frightened during his temporary foster care that he hid under a table for half an hour after urinating by the back door, a sign of his extreme fear of repercussions.

Harford’s defense lawyer, Sarah Brady, highlighted her client’s poor health, mentioning ongoing investigations into chronic vomiting and the emotional toll the case had taken on him. She also noted that Harford’s family had received threats, adding context to his personal struggles.

Magistrate John Taylor condemned Harford’s actions, stating that he showed a complete disregard for the welfare of the dog. The court found that Harford could not provide a credible explanation for the injuries or the events leading up to them.

Following the conviction, RSPCA inspector Boyd expressed satisfaction with the outcome, emphasizing the seriousness of Harford’s cruelty. She reported that Riddick, who had been extremely subdued, had since recovered and become a lively, playful dog. Riddick was placed in a new home where he was settling well and enjoying his new life.

The sentencing included a curfew, a total of £1,860 in costs and charges, and a lifetime ban on keeping animals, with no possibility of appeal for ten years. The case received coverage in the Worcester News and Malvern Observer, highlighting the importance of animal welfare and the consequences of cruelty.