This case is part of the Chilliwack Cattle Sales investigation, which resulted in the BC SPCA recommending 20 criminal charges to the Crown. The initial case can be found here.
The accused were employees at a large dairy farm in British Columbia and were responsible for the care of cattle during night shifts. An undercover investigation using a hidden camera revealed repeated incidents of animal cruelty and neglect occurring between April and June 2014. The video evidence showed both accused directly engaging in violent conduct toward cows, including hitting, kicking, and using objects such as canes and equipment to strike animals. In addition, cattle were observed being subjected to distressing handling practices, including the use of tractors and chains to lift and move downed animals. The footage also showed Mr. Larson failing to intervene when other employees inflicted harm on animals under his supervision.
Both accused pleaded guilty to offences under the British Columbia Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, specifically causing or permitting cattle to be in distress and failing to protect animals from foreseeable harm. The Crown and defence proceeded by way of a joint submission on sentence, which the court accepted in accordance with the principles set out in R. v. Anthony-Cook. The court imposed a sentence of a $4,000 fine and 20 days of intermittent (weekend) jail for Mr. Larson, along with a one-year prohibition on owning or caring for large animals for remuneration. Mr. Blackwell received a $7,000 fine and a three-year prohibition on owning or caring for large animals for remuneration. Both accused also received probationary conditions and victim fine surcharges.
The judge emphasized deterrence at paragraph 11: “The actions of each of the accused…demonstrates what can only be described as gratuitous violence against the cattle. The sentence that is imposed must send out a message that this type of gratuitous violence against animals will not be tolerated in our society”.
The case highlights the court’s strong reliance on deterrence and denunciation in animal cruelty cases. It also demonstrates how courts treat both direct acts of cruelty and passive failure to intervene as equally serious forms of liability under animal welfare legislation, since Mr. Larson contributed both directly and passively to the distress of the cows through his actions/omissions.
https://canlii.ca/t/h569b