Golden retrievers killed each other in fights and were left without fresh water at popular attraction where tourists paid to play with the dogs
The Golden Retriever Experience had received international news coverage for its popularity, but today its business owner was banned from keeping dogs for ten years and handed an 18-week sentence, suspended for 12 months.
Members of the public had the opportunity to spend time surrounded by dogs out in the fields but behind the scenes the animals were living in poor conditions, with two dying after getting into fights and another having his genitals severed during a fight.
Nicolas Eugene Grant St James, 62 from Minehead, pleaded guilty to failing to provide accommodation of a sufficient size for the number of dogs, failing to keep the accommodation clean, failing to provide a comfortable place for the dogs to rest, and failing to provide continuously available fresh, clean drinking water for the animals.
The RSPCA first investigated after it received reports of dogs being injured and dying due to fights breaking out in overcrowded conditions as part of the commercial operation.
After failing to meet the RSPCA's requested improvements, the police removed all the dogs from the property.
The vet who examined the dogs said they were 'not protected from pain, injury, suffering, and disease'. They added that 'none of the dogs' needs under Section 9 of the Animal Welfare Act were met.
'The environment was inadequate in size and comfort; there was a lack of constant access to clean drinking water; dogs were not protected from pain, injury, suffering, and disease; and they were unable to exhibit normal behaviour or be separated when needed.'
The dog centre opened ten years ago by St-James, who wanted to invite people to 'join our incredible pack of goldies for some much-needed doggy cuddles.'
The website adds that the dogs are 'impeccably trained and endlessly affectionate,' perfect for dog lovers who don't own their own pets.
A basic two-hour long session set adults back £60, seniors £50, and children £30, but is free for children under two.
The business blew up after a TikTok user recommended people visit the centre after going there with her partner to mark their anniversary.
Her video, showing dozens of retrievers frolicking in the grass, went viral, reaching more than 4 million views on the platform.
A behaviourist, whose report was used as evidence, said that their access to water was restricted: 'The dogs were kept in crowded conditions within a dirty home when not at the 'experience'.
'Bedding was not provided and drinking water was restricted to prevent indoor urination. The group included unspayed females and unneutered males living in close contact.
'The dogs in this case were not provided with adequate resting or sleeping places, ideally all dogs should be provided with options for resting places that provide appropriate comfort. In such a large group of dogs a number and variety of types of bed is preferable. Bedding can be considered a valuable resource by dogs.
'Dogs with higher levels of impulsivity and fear are more likely to display resource guarding aggression.
'Resource guarding aggression represents behaviours such as growling, freezing, snapping and biting.
'This behaviour can be shown by some domestic dogs that are possessive of valued resources, for example, food, toys or sleeping sites.'
She continued: 'DEFRA's code of practice for the welfare of dogs states fresh clean drinking water should be available at all times. The restriction may increase the value of water to this group of dogs which may cause conflict over the resource when it is available to them.'
St James was handed an 18- week sentence, suspended for 12 months. He is also banned from keeping dogs for ten years, must carry out 200 hours of community service, ten Rehabilitation Activity Requirement (RAR) days and pay £5,000 costs and a £150 victim surcharge.
During sentencing District Judge Brereton told St James he repeatedly ignored advice and warnings, that the provision for his dogs was 'woefully inadequate', and that this led to deaths and serious injuries.
She also said he showed 'no remorse' and focused on his personal 'financial loss' rather than the impact on the dogs welfare.
RSPCA Inspector Jo Daniel said after the hearing: 'These dogs were failed when it came to receiving the care they needed.
'Water, comfort and a safe living environment are basic needs that every owner has a duty to fulfil to ensure the needs of their animals are being met.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
18 minutes ago
- The Independent
Woman said she was ‘Jesus sent to eliminate evil' after killing landlord and cat
For free real time breaking news alerts sent straight to your inbox sign up to our breaking news emails Sign up to our free breaking news emails Sign up to our free breaking news emails Email * SIGN UP I would like to be emailed about offers, events and updates from The Independent. Read our Privacy notice A woman said she was 'Jesus' and had been 'sent to eliminate evil from the world' after battering her 72-year-old friend to death and stabbing his pet cat in the neck, a court has heard. Habiba Naveed, 35, previously denied the murder of her landlord Christopher Brown, but pleaded guilty to his manslaughter. She also admitted causing unnecessary suffering to his cat Snow by stabbing him in the neck on or before August 15 last year. At a hearing at the Old Bailey on Thursday, Judge Sarah Munro KC imposed a hospital order under Section 37 of the Mental Health Act and a restriction order under Section 41 – meaning Naveed can be detained indefinitely. At the time of the offence, Naveed, who has been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, was 'psychotic' – while her mental health had 'deteriorated' in the days preceding the attack, the court heard. Prosecutor Kerry Broome told the court Naveed believed she had connections to the royal family and was Diana, Princess of Wales and Dodi Fayed's daughter. After the attack, Naveed told her brother 'she was Jesus and had been sent to eliminate evil from the world', and later said to police 'the devil attacked me last night and I won,' Ms Broome said. The court heard Naveed had also told police she 'slept in coffins', and Jesus had raised her from the dead. The Metropolitan Police launched an investigation after Mr Brown's body was discovered under a dressing gown in the living room of the home he shared with Naveed in Polsted Road, Lewisham, south-east London. The house cat, Snow, was also found dead having been stabbed in the neck. Ms Broome said of a previous account of the attack given by the defendant: 'She believed she had seen the deceased kill his mother and that the deceased was evil.' 'She heard a voice telling her to kill him three times,' she said, adding that Naveed hit Mr Brown with a pan and then strangled him. 'She believed the evil spirit had jumped out of the deceased and into the cat.' 'She got a knife and she cut the cat's neck,' Mr Broome added. The pair had lived together at Polsted Road for several years, during which Mr Brown was persuaded to put the property, which he had inherited from his parents, in both his and Naveed's names, the prosecutor said. The house was refurbished and lodgers were taken in, which Naveed orchestrated, the court heard. In the days leading up to the attack, Naveed's family were concerned at the state of her mental health – leading them to call 111 and call an ambulance, the hearing was told. Sentencing, Judge Munro told the defendant: 'You attacked Chris between around 11pm and 11.50pm on August 14. 'You hit Chris a number of times to the head with a saucepan which broke in the process; you then sat on him breaking his ribs and strangled him. 'You then slit the cat's throat before leaving Chris covered in a dressing gown alone and dead or dying in the living room property where he was found by Mr Rizwan (a lodger) when he returned to the house at 2.15am on 15th. 'You left a bloodied knife with which you had cut the cat's throat nearby.' She added: 'The consultant forensic psychiatrist was of the view that the injuries fitted your account which shows that you were conscious of exactly what you were doing as you killed Chris.' The judge said two psychiatrists agreed on the diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia and that Naveed had 'no insight' into her mental health, diagnosis or symptoms. Naveed repeatedly became aggressive during previous hospital admissions and had been off her proscribed medication for a year at the time of the killing, the court heard. The defendant was a frequent user of cannabis which exacerbates her symptoms but, did not cause her psychosis, according to psychiatrists, the judge said. Mitigating factors beyond Naveed's mental illness included her lack of any serious previous offending, while aggravating factors included her use of strangulation and a weapon, the judge added. A post-mortem examination found that Mr Brown, who was a lawyer, died from blunt force trauma. In a tearful statement, a colleague from Mr Brown's law firm told the hearing that the victim would have helped anyone if he could, adding that Naveed had taken away any 'future memories'. She said: 'He wasn't just a 72-year-old-man tragically killed by his housemate, he was a solicitor, a boss, a partner, a kind man.' In a statement read out by Ms Broome, Mr Brown's cousin described him as a 'kind and caring person' who would go out of his way to help his family and his clients. Naveed attended the hearing via video-link and only spoke to confirm her identity.
The Independent
18 minutes ago
- The Independent
Social media companies not doing enough to protect England players from racism, says FA chief
Your support helps us to tell the story Read more Support Now From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference. Read more Social media companies are still not doing enough to prevent England players from suffering racist abuse online, according to FA chief executive Mark Bullingham. Lionesses defender Jess Carter revealed before England's semi-final against Italy that she had received 'vile' and "abhorrent" racist abuse during Euro 2025. It came four years after Bukayo Saka, Marcus Rashford and Jadon Sancho were sent racist abuse after missing penalties in England's Euro 2020 final defeat to Italy. open image in gallery Jess Carter was sent abuse on social media during Euro 2025 ( Getty ) Bullingham said the FA thought 'things would improve' following the Euro 2020 final, after conversations with social media platforms, but believes there has not been enough progress. The FA are working with the UK police following the abuse received by Carter and Bullingham said they want government regulator Ofcom to use the powers it now has under the Online Safety Act 2023 to 'hold social media companies to account' following the abuse. Under the Online Safety Act, social media platforms have a duty to protect users from harmful content such as racism and Ofcom are responsible for enforcing the legislation if there are breaches. 'We did think things would improve [after 2021] and we lobbied very hard together with Kick It Out and other representatives in football to make sure the online harms act came through,' Bullingham said. 'I think we would have liked it to have been stronger in some cases – if you look at the specific areas like 'legal but harmful'. There's a real risk that if we're not firm in how the act is implemented, it won't be as strong as we hope. 'I think now it's incumbent on Ofcom to make sure they really do bring those responsible for running social media platforms to account and I haven't seen huge progress in the last couple of years. We would like to see it now.' England defender Lotte Wubben-Moy said she would be joining Carter by stepping away from social media, posting that she would 'not continue to feed the very platform that enables abuse with no consequence'. open image in gallery Mark Bullingham and Sir Keir Starmer with England's players before Euro 2025 ( Getty Images ) The FA joined a mass boycott of social media, led by football players, clubs and leagues in 2021, and while Bullingham did not rule out taking such action again in the future, he pointed that it is down to regulators to step in. 'I think we'll look at any tool within our disposal, to make a difference,' said Bullingham, who confirmed he had yet to hear directly from any of the social media platforms following the abuse suffered by Carter during Euro 2025. 'I think what you've got now, that's different to before, is you've got the online safety act and online harms act that I think we're very keen to see how Ofcom start implementing measures to bring personal accountability to those that are running social media companies, 'Within that, so I think there are different tools at our disposal now and we'll definitely be pursuing those.' While the FA are working with UK police following the abuse suffered by Carter, many of the hateful posts are likely to have also come from abroad, with Bullingham underlined the challenges in tackling social media abuse by saying that prosecuting anyone outside the UK can be 'really hard and generally really expensive'. He added: 'There's been a lot of focus on taking down content - and I think they [social media platforms] could be much better at taking down content - but more importantly, I think they could be much better at preventing it as well, and then in aiding the prosecution when it happens. So at all stages they need to be better.'
The Independent
18 minutes ago
- The Independent
Scottish airport fined £144,000 for failures that led to death of employee
The company that runs Glasgow Prestwick Airport has been fined more than £144,000 for failures that led to a member of airport staff falling to his death when a guardrail gave way. Joseph Dempsey, an experienced member of the airport's ground handling team, died in the incident on January 11 2023. The 59-year-old had been preparing to unload cargo from an aircraft using a pallet loader. He had positioned the loader alongside the aircraft and was repositioning a guardrail when it suddenly gave way and he fell to the tarmac some 10 feet (three metres) below. Mr Dempsey's colleagues immediately went to his assistance and paramedics attempted CPR and advanced life support. However, these efforts proved unsuccessful and Mr Dempsey was pronounced dead at the scene. An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that one of the guardrail posts had completely fractured, and that there were visible signs of significant corrosion, discolouration and flaking white paint around the area. At Ayr Sheriff Court on June 25, Glasgow Prestwick Airport Ltd pled guilty to a breach of health and safety legislation, having failed to ensure the pallet loader was maintained and in good repair. At the same court on Thursday, the company was fined £144,050, including a victim surcharge of £10,050. Debbie Carroll leads on health and safety investigations for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS). Speaking after the sentencing, she said: 'Joseph Dempsey lost his life in circumstances which could have been avoided if Prestwick Airport had in place a suitable and adequate maintenance and inspection programme to ensure the equipment he was using was in a good state of repair. 'This prosecution should remind duty holders that a failure to fulfil their obligations can have fatal consequences and they will be held accountable for this failure.' Metallurgical examination of the guardrail posts carried out during the investigation found differences in chemical composition, manufacturing, and wall thickness which indicated the posts were manufactured from two different tubing sections. The HSE found these welded sections were not a feature of the manufacture's original design, and appeared to have been modified while the loader was under the ownership of Prestwick Airport. The investigation also found the welds on both the guardrail posts contained defects which would allow moisture in, creating a corrosive environment and speeding up deterioration. It was also found that the maintenance programme in place at the time did not cover the parts of the guardrail where failure or deterioration could lead to health and safety risks. Graeme McMinn, HM principal inspector of health and safety, said: 'Employers have an absolute legal duty to ensure that equipment they use at work is maintained in an efficient state and in good repair and full working order. 'This incident is a tragic reminder of what can result when that does not happen.' Since the incident, Prestwick Airport has undertaken a review of all work at height, and checks of the guardrails on the platform loaders have been made part of the regular service and inspection schedule.
