Abstract
Animal welfare legislation in South Australia underwent amendments in 2008, where all the maximum penalties for animal welfare offences were doubled. This commitment to increased penalties arguably provides evidence of the legislature’s intent with respect to penalties. Studies have speculated that the legislative intent behind the increased penalties is not being reflected in the courts. This interdisciplinary research sought to gain evidence to confirm or disprove these speculations, by quantifying the average custodial sentence and monetary fine handed down in court before and after the 2008 amendments. Furthermore, trends relating to the species of animal affected and the demographics of the offender were identified. A total of 314 RSPCA (SA) closed case files from 2006 to 2018 were converted into an electronic form. Since the amendments, the average penalties have doubled in magnitude; fines have increased from $700 to $1535, while prison sentences have increased from 37 days to 77 days. Cases of companion animal abuse were most common (75% of all cases) and the location of the offence was found to influence offending. These findings suggest that the 2008 amendments have caused the average penalties to increase. However, it is debatable whether these increases are enough to effectively punish animal abusers.
Subject
General Veterinary,Animal Science and Zoology
Reference57 articles.
1. Lock ‘em up and throw away the key? Community opinions regarding current animal abuse penalties;Taylor;Aust. Anim. Prot. Law J.,2009
2. Predictors of Views about Punishing Animal Abuse
3. Don't Be Cruel: Assessing Beliefs About Punishments for Crimes Against Animals
4. Human-to-Animal Similarity and Participant Mood Influence Punishment Recommendations for Animal Abusers
5. Making sausages & law: The failure of animal welfare laws to protect both animals and fundamental tenets of Australia’s legal system;Ellis;Aust. Anim. Prot. Law J.,2010
Cited by
15 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献