Incompetence or Collusion?

Posted: March 16, 2021 in Comment

My last blog entry was an explanation as to why the evidence supplied in a Hunting Act case didn’t pass the threshold for the CPS to consider it in the public interest and proceed with the case. Now I’m going to write something on why Thames Valley Police and the CPS have fundamentally failed and got things either ridiculously wrong or perhaps that there are more sinister reasons.

I’m referring to the incident where the Kimblewick Hunt killed a fox on private property last December and the whole incident was captured on CCTV.

The video, produced by Grafton Hunt Watch can be seen below.

Now as far as I’m concerned, and as the video explains, clear intent is shown by the huntsman Andrew Sallis. He doubles the horn which is universally accepted as an encouragement call and gives voice calls of “Get after im” several times. Sallis is also perfectly aware he’s hunting live quarry as it runs right past him and he makes no attempt to stop the hounds, no shouting for the them to “leave it” and certainly no cracking of his whip which will usually stop the hounds in very quick order. Finally the whipper in feed the rest of the dead fox to the hounds when he thinks he’s out of view, this is a reward for the hounds, hounds that are trained to hunt and kill live quarry. It’s also important to note that the hunt are trespassing on private property, there is absolutely no reason for them to be there.

All things considered from an evidential point of view IT DOESN’T GET ANY CLEARER THAN THAT and all the relevant criteria to achieve a successful prosecution have been met.

There isn’t even the hunts usual excuse in that the death of the fox was the result of sabs turning it into the hounds. No sabs or monitors were present. As far as the hunt were concerned they thought they were good to go and no-one was watching, except of course for the multiple CCTV security cameras which caught all their actions and the mobile phone footage of a single person who just happened to be at the location going about their own business.

Now Thames Valley Police offered the following as a justification for dropping the case.

“We decided due to the public interest in cases such as this to consult a rural crime specialist prosecutor at the Crown Prosecution Service. That prosecutor has reviewed all of the evidence and has decided that there is not a realistic prospect of a conviction in this case and that therefore no further action will be taken against Mr Sallis in this case. This is because the Mr Sallis has provided a ‘clear and cogent’ account of what occurred on the day. Case law in relation to hunting offences says that we have to have evidence of the suspect having set out intending to hunt a fox that day, which even despite the CCTV evidence we do not have”.

Fundamentally wrong

What I’d like is for TVP or their so-called expert at the CPS to point out the actual case law or the relevant paragraph in the Hunting Act where it states that you have to prove that the suspect set out with the intention to hunt a wild mammal that day.

Just think about that for a moment.

If it is a defence for a suspect to claim they didn’t set out to do something but then on the spur of the moment changed their mind does that make them innocent of the charges? Would you expect to be cleared of assault if you thumped someone down the pub during an argument over crisp flavours just because you didn’t get out of bed in the morning and think “i’m going to punch someone today”?

There are of course exemptions within the Hunting Act but as Sallis and the Hunt were on private property and didn’t have permission to be there non of those exemptions can possibly apply.

Andrew Sallis MFH

Clear and Cogent?

So what was the explanation that Sallis gave that was so convincing?

The account he gave explained that killing the fox has occurred by accident as the hunt were moving between fields belonging to Aston Mullins Farm using the bridleway which goes across the front of your property. They had just concluded following a laid trail in the fields adjacent when some of the hounds became disorientated and the fox appeared from the wooded area. Before he could gain control of all the hounds again, the fox had unfortunately been killed. He went behind the building to remove himself from the situation as soon as possible”.

That’s a pretty standard response and we’ve heard it all before, it was an accident. Except of course the claims made by Sallis clearly don’t match up to what we see in the video. The lies are there for all to see. A quote from Sallis in Horse and Hound referring to the day in qestion:

“I got 99 problems but… my hounds… ain’t one,” rapped Jay Z (sort of). After keeping a fit pack of hounds on ice for a month, last week’s release into the hunting field was glorious. On crisp mornings hounds had bounced down the road but despite their confusion at being “off games”, had kept themselves together beautifully”.

Kept together beautifully . . . kinda puts paid to his claim that the hounds became “disorientated” doesn’t it. It’s anything but clear and cogent.

Given what I’ve explained above what other options are there?

Police Collusion?

Well I’ve never been one for conspiracy theories but when you’re left with no other options you have to consider its just plain old collusion. The Kimblewick are a powerful hunt. The locals are regularly threatened and are scared to speak out against them. Sallis writes for H&H and is one of the best known huntsmen in the country, Polly Portwin (lives a short walk from the kennels) is a member and also head of hunting at the so-called Countryside Alliance. Most importantly Lord Gardiner of Kimble is a member and Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Minister for Rural Affairs and Biosecurity). I think it’s safe to say a few quiet words in the halls of power can make any annoying little investigation go away.

I think its time Thames Valley Police explained themselves. Drop them a line and see what they have to say.

John Gardiner – UK Parliament official portraits 2017

  1. salza11 says:

    Absolutely disgusting. How much more evidence do they need. Obviously corrupt.

    • Liz Flett says:

      Barbaric in this day and age. Who are you to set out with your horses and hounds purposely to hunt down and kill an innocent animal? They are God’s creatures and should be treated better!

  2. Philip Kilpatrick says:

    I have lodged a complaint with TVP.

    The Kimblewick hounds chased a fox through an industrial estate that they had no permission to be in, encouraged on by the huntsman Andrew Sallis. Filmed on multiple cameras it shows elements of the chase and after the kill a member of hunt staff can be seen feeding the dead fox to the hounds. This action is contrary to the Hunting Act 2004. It is not a defence to claim that there is no evidence of the suspect having set out intending to hunt a fox

    There is a provision for defence included within the act:-

    Hunting: defence

    It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under section 1 in respect of hunting to show that he reasonably believed that the hunting was exempt.

    Why have Thames Valley Police decided not to proceed with this case, when the reason they have given is not valid?

    How can members of the public have confidence in the police when they themselves appear to be refusing to uphold the law?

    I await your response.

    Philip Kilpatrick

  3. S. says:

    Eleisha Sallis is as scummy as Andrew, getting paid by CA to snoop sab sites for contact info to add to their illegal database. They deserve each other.

  4. robert whybrow says:

    I agree with your list of suspects from the Kimblewick side, would the CPS rural crime specialist prosecutor at the Crown Prosecution Service possibly be Stephen Davies (from the fox cubs, south Hereford case) as he has form on trying to interfere . or have they got a new pro hunting & shooting prosecutor?

  5. robert whybrow says:

    It also seems they were happy to throw the terrier men under the bus (for the bagged fox) as they could say they are not working for the hunt, But the police will not be allowed to prosecute the hunt master as is shows what their (CA) prestigious Kimblewick hunt are really doing

  6. heclasu says:

    How about taking out a private prosecution? I am sure you could crowdfund it.

  7. G Greenland says:

    This injustice has made me so angry, but I’d have thought the owners of the property would have to take out a private prosecution. But I don’t know how these things work. I’d contribute to a crown fund though.

Leave a Reply to heclasu Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s