Following my earlier blog on 5 September 2011 entitled “Kah Yong’s plea for maggot-infested dog”, there has been an outcome. The perpetrator of this terrible act of animal cruelty got off with only a fine of $5,000! According to Kah Yong below, neither he nor other eye-witnesses were invited to present their accounts and evidence at the court hearing.
Do you think justice has been meted out? You be the judge!
On 7 February 2012, the Singapore Straits Times reported the following:
“A vegetable farmer was fined $5,000 on Monday for failing to take a maggot-infested wounded dog to a veterinarian for treatment.
Yong Chin Hon, 37, admitted to causing unnecessary suffering to a male cross-breed brown coloured dog at his farm at Lim Chu Kang Lane 1 on Aug 17 last year.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Kumaresan Gohulabalan said following a tip-off, officers from the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) went to the farm that day and saw the dog with an extensive wound running along its spine.
Yong claimed that the stray dog came to his farm three or four months earlier and he decided to keep it.”
Kah Yong’s Reaction
Kah Yong, the brave young man who reported the case, is disillusioned with the whole process. There is a groundswell of support for his views.
Here is what Kah Yong has to say, in his own words:
“I am the person who came across the maggot-infested dog in the farm at Lim Chu Kang and informed AVA and SPCA. I would like to express my utmost disappointment with the outcome – a $5000 fine. How can a person be let off so lightly when an animal suffered so much, and for such an extended period of time? And with a maggot-infested wound on the head for months?
There were eye-witnesses that were always ready and wanted to testify in court. We also had lots of evidence. However we were not even informed of the court trial! With such a light penalty as a fine, how could we deter anyone from performing similar cruel acts on an animal in the future?
What was reported in the papers was not right either. Who else can speak the facts except us, the eye-witnesses? Yet, we were not even informed about the court trial. The same dog was chained there for at least 3 years, not months or weeks. And the maggot wound was as huge as a palm size, definitely not something on the animal for just 2 weeks as mentioned in the Chinese newspapers. From the extent of the injury, the wound was there for months.
At my last meeting with AVA personnel and the legal officers, an eye-witness also testified that pesticide was sprayed on the maggot wound of the animal. What kind of excruciating pain would the animal have suffered? Was that mentioned in the court? No – because no eye-witness or the public was invited to speak the truth by presenting the evidence. Why?
I hope more animal activists would be able to attend the upcoming Singapore Animal Welfare Symposium and Public Forum on Animal Welfare Policies. When there’s a greater voice, more can be heard and seen.”
By: Daisy Chee