Minto Heights’ Daniel Brighton fronts court for sentencing on animal cruelty charges

A man who used a pitchfork to stab a dog before hanging it in a tree and beating it with a sledgehammer has been sentenced. Find out what the magistrate decided. Warning: Graphic content.

A petting zoo owner has been jailed for what a magistrate has described as a “barbaric and brutal” attack on a dog that assaulted a camel he owned.

Daniel Brighton, 33, was convicted in 2019 of animal cruelty offences but was cleared when he took the matter to the Supreme Court in 2020.

However, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals went to the Court of Appeal where it was ruled the entire matter needed to be redone and it was reverted back to the local court.

A hearing was held in Campbelltown last year, and in February Brighton was found guilty of torturing, beating and causing the death of an animal and torturing, beating and seriously injuring an animal.

The Minto Heights man is the director of Get Wild and Farm Fields Mobile Farmyard, and a statement of facts showed that on January 14, 2016 one of the company’s camels had been attacked by two dogs.

The documents said Brighton caught one of the dogs, a Staffordshire Terrier, and tied it to a tree then stabbed it with a pitchfork about six times.

Brighton then left the pitchfork stuck in the dog and left it to go to the vet to get painkillers for his camel.

Court documents said when Brighton returned he took the dog to a tree, strung it up on a branch then beat the animal with a sledgehammer until it was semiconscious.

Brighton then wrapped the dog’s body in towels, and told one of his employees to bury it. More than a year later, on August 31, 2017, police and RSPCA inspectors attended the property and found the animal remains.

In sentencing on Monday, Magistrate David Degnan said there was evidence before him that Brighton had said “it just won’t die” and “I’ll make sure it’s dead”.

He said Brighton’s intention on both occasions was to kill the dog and to inflict severe pain.

“Let me state right now, I find the actions of the offender were gratuitous to the extent that they were completely unnecessary,” Magistrate Degnan said.

Daniel Brighton.

“The choice of the means and the manner I found against him highlight the fact they were unnecessary.”

Magistrate Degnan read the “highlights” of Brighton’s CV which had been tendered to the court, pointing out his extensive history of work with animals and also adding that Brighton had the means and experience to humanely euthanise the dog.

“It was a particularly brutal and barbaric attack upon not necessarily an innocent animal but by the time the attacks occurred there was no need for the offending and he was acting in retribution or vengeance,” he said.

“He is a person that has failed to show any remorse or contrition for the offences.

“There was compelling evidence the dog was no longer a threat, the dog was submissive … he [Brighton] maintains that he was somehow justified in this type of barbaric behaviour.”

Magistrate Degnan sentenced Brighton to an aggregate term of 38 months imprisonment, adding an intensive corrections order was not appropriate.

Brighton will be eligible for release on July 10, 2024 after a non-parole period of two years due to a finding of special circumstances.

After the sentencing, Brighton’s legal team filed an appeal over the matter with the District Court.

‘GAPS IN LEGISLATION’

Ms Emma Hurst, MLC for the Animal Justice Party. Picture: Annie Lewis

Emma Hurst, MLC for the Animal Justice Party, attended the sentencing at Campbelltown Courthouse after following the Brighton case for a number of years.

“It’s a relief to see this sentence again contained jail time for this absolutely horrific act of animal cruelty,” she said.

“We need to make sure that acts of cruelty that are this extreme are taken very seriously in the courts and that’s what happened today.”

Ms Hurst said that the community are more aware of the seriousness of animal cruelty offences, but there are still “massive gaps” in the legislation.

She said anyone charged with such offences should face a provisional ban to ensure that no vulnerable animals are placed in potentially dangerous situations.

“I think there needs to be provision for strong interim animal bans for very serious cases,” Ms Hurst said.

“It puts animals in a very vulnerable position when you’re looking at a court case that has been in front of the courts for many years because of appeals.”