Matthew Thomas Wellington and Theresa Louise Delaney in court over treatment of Great Dane cross Munster in North Mackay animal negligence case
The harrowing image speaks 1000 words. A magistrate has shamed the Mackay couple responsible for this dog’s ‘miserable’ condition.
Police & Courts
Don't miss out on the headlines from Police & Courts. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Harrowing images capture the “appalling” condition of a family pet prompting a magistrate to hand the Mackay couple responsible the maximum ban for owning any animal.
The Great Dane cross – named Munster – was so skinny when the RSPCA seized him that his spine and ribs were visibly poking through his skin.
Magistrate James Morton said the North Mackay pair – Matthew Thomas Wellington and Theresa Louise Delaney – had failed “dismally” in their care.
Mackay Magistrates Court heard Wellington was Munster’s owner, but his fiancee Delaney was also responsible for the dog.
Wellington said he got Munster for free when he was six weeks old from a place at North Mackay in August 2019 that he said, “wasn’t very healthy”.
“And you cast another miserable environment on him,” Mr Morton said, as he told the 25 year old he should be ashamed of himself and made the couple look at the “appalling” images of Munster.
“(He’s) skinny as a rake … (you can) just about see every bone on him.”
RSPCA inspectors received a report on March 3, 2020 that Munster was so skinny his ribs and hip bones were showing.
He was chained up without access to shelter and there was a bowl, which did not appear to contain any water.
More stories:
Uncle’s vile sexual assault on drunk niece
Bomb threat culprit could face up to 10 years jail
The court heard Munster had a body condition score of two, where one is emaciated and nine is obese. The dog was positive for hookworm.
Wellington told the RSPCA inspector Munster had begun losing weight three months earlier so he increased the dog’s meal size, but he failed to gain weight.
The court heard he did not take Munster to the vet because he had been unemployed at the time, was supporting his partner’s children and “had more important things to attend to”.
The court heard Wellington was a traffic controller and currently earned between $1200 and $1500 per week, while mother of three Delaney brought in about $1100 per fortnight “on the government payroll”.
When Wellington told the court he did everything he could, Mr Morton interrupted with, “you did not, otherwise the animal wouldn’t have ended up like this”.
“Why have you got these animals you can’t care for?” Mr Morton asked Delaney.
“I mean this about the animal, that’s like putting one of your kids out in the yard and not feeding it.
“This is going to be a costly exercise for you for not looking after poor old Munster as a party to this offence.”
Both pleaded guilty breaching duty of care in that they failed to get appropriate treatment for Munster.
The court heard Delaney also had another dog – a staffy cross named T-Bone – that she wanted to have put down because she believed he was going blind following a phone consultation with a vet.
Mr Morton told the couple “I don’t want you to have any animals … because you can’t look after them”.
He fined each of them $2000 and ordered them each to also pay $110.85 in vet costs and $853.60 in professional costs.
Wellington and Delaney were banned from owning any animal for five years. Convictions were not recorded.
More stories: