R v Marshall, [2013] OJ No 702 (ON Ct J)

The accused, Steven Marshall was charged with eight counts of animal cruelty. It was alleged that Mr. Marshall caused unnecessary pain or suffering to two domestic cats contrary to section 445.1(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. Two further offences are alleged with respect to both animals, to wit: failing to provide adequate care contrary to section 446(1)(b) and killing the cats contrary to section 445(1)(a).

Two additional charges, under sections 445.1(a) and 445(1)(a) of the Code, are outstanding with reference to an allegation the Mr. Marshall physically abused and injured a grey tabby cat, known as Shana, owned by Randall Thompson.

The court stated that it was absolutely clear that the accused inflicted harm on the cats, and caused their deaths when they were in his room. On the basis of the circumstantial evidence there was no other reasonable inference that could be drawn other than that Steven Marshall brutalized and killed the two cats. Furthermore, the evidence satisfied that the only reasonable inference that could be drawn was that the injuries to Shana, the third cat, were caused by Mr. Marshall.

The court found that the Crown had proven all of the charges beyond a reasonable doubt and found the accused guilty on all counts.

Source: Case Law

Jurisdiction: Ontario

Topics: animalbeyond a reasonable doubtcarecatcriminalcrueltyinjurekillMemoryproofTrauma

Report a Broken Link