Mother-daughter dog-breeding duo deny RSPCA animal mistreatment allegations

Shocking new details about the alleged abuse of several dogs at the hands of a mother-daughter breeding duo have been revealed in court during their trial.

An RSPCA veterinarian who examined a number of dogs after they were allegedly rescued from mistreatment at the hands of two women has revealed the shocking extent of their injuries.

The fourth day of a trial for two Lockyer Valley breeders accused of a string of offences – including cutting a lump “bigger than a golf ball” out of a dog and letting “at least weeks’” worth of faeces build up in enclosures – saw RSPCA’s Dr Anne Chester cross-examined in Ipswich Magistrates Court.

Elizabeth Alice Verhagen, 61, and her daughter Tiana Daniels, 22, both pleaded ‘not guilty’ on August 11, 2022 to charges related to their alleged mistreatment of several dogs.

On Tuesday, August 16, RSPCA prosecutor Nathan Boyd asked Dr Chester about the state she observed three dogs – Nala, a female Great Dane; Cody, a male golden retriever; and Pablo, a male Chihuahua – to be in after they were removed from Verhagen and Daniels’ care on June 3, 2020.

Dr Chester told the court Nala was thin, had dental disease, and was covered in fleas, while Cody was mildly anaemic, had bad breath, and was covered in fleas and dirt.

She said Cody also suffered muscle wastage in both his hind limbs, which likely meant they were not being used.

Pablo was also thin, had fleas, and suffered dental disease with missing and mobile teeth, bad breath, and tartar build-up. Dr Chester said such issues would have affected him for at least six months.

The court heard the “obvious” fleas on each of the dogs were indicative of an unclean environment where larvae previously lay dormant.

Mr Boyd also asked Dr Chester about the procedure Vergahen allegedly carried out on one of the golden retrievers in her care, which involved her spreading numbing cream on the dog’s skin before using a scalpel to cut a large lump from beneath it.

“I would say that that was not adequate pain relief,” Dr Chester said.

“Because the nature of that numbing cream is not designed for surgical procedures.”

She said there would be no circumstances in which Vergahen’s alleged “way to deal with that type of medical issue” was reasonable.

Elizabeth Alice Verhagen, on trial for animal mistreatment allegations in Ipswich Court.

Vergahen, who appeared in court self-represented, put to the court that there were “hundreds” of “discrepancies” in Dr Chester’s reports and that the veterinarian’s determinations did not align with that which she found through her own research.

After some hours of back and forth between Vergahen and Dr Chester, the accused told the court “I’m not going to be able to collect my thoughts because my head’s thumping”.

Dr Chester was excused and court adjourned until the following day, Wednesday, August 17, when two more witnesses are to be cross-examined by the prosecution and defence.

It comes after Vergahen cross-examined Summer Heath-Crilley, an RSPCA inspector who previously recounted her observations of “excessive amounts” of faeces and prickles in one of the dog pens, on Monday, August 15.

The court also heard from Melissa Anne Berard, an investigator inspector at RSPCA at the time of the alleged offending, who said there were “at least weeks’” worth of faeces in one of the pens, as well as prickles that eventually became embedded in the dogs‘ coats and feet.

Body-worn camera footage played in court revealed a conversation between Verhagen and Ms Berard at the scene, during which the former inspector asked the accused about lumps on one of the golden retriever‘s bodies.

Vergahen was heard explaining she removed two lumps herself, stating she cut one lump the size of a “10 cent piece” off the dog’s head and another that was “bigger than a golf ball, but smaller than a tennis ball” from his body.

She further explained in the footage she had put numbing cream on the dog first and reapplied it throughout the procedure.

Ms Berard asked if the lumps were tested for cancer, to which Verhagen said ‘no’. She said she knew they were not cancerous “according to [her] research”.

Verhagen further explained to Ms Berard that she was going to be a veterinarian and had “spent a lot of time with a vet” volunteering in the past.

“I’ve seen it all, I’ve helped with it all, I just don’t have a degree obviously,” she said.

Mr Boyd asked Ms Berard about her reasons for seizing Verhagen’s dogs and she said “there was issues with living conditions, there was issues with lack of bedding, there was multiple veterinary issues … There was a history with Ms Verhagen, an extensive history -”

The court heard Ms Berard had performed several welfare checks at Verhagen’s property in the past.

Tiana Daniels, on trial for animal mistreatment allegations in Ipswich Court.

EARLIER

Previously, the trial commenced on Thursday, August 11, when the court heard Ms Daniels was charged with two counts of failing to provide appropriate food and water, and failing to comply with a compulsory code requirement (code of practice of breeding dogs).

Ms Verhagen was charged with six counts of failing to provide appropriate accommodation or living conditions, nine counts of failing to provide appropriate treatment for injury, six counts of failing to provide appropriate food or water, one count of being cruel to an animal by causing it unnecessary or unreasonable pain, one count of failing to take reasonable steps to provide for the animals needs for displaying normal patterns of behaviour in a way that is appropriate, one count of failing to comply with an animal welfare direction, and two counts of failing to comply with a compulsory code requirement (code of practice of breeding dogs).

The court heard the charge of being cruel to an animal related to Ms Verhagen cutting two lumps off a golden retriever’s body with a scalpel on an unknown date in 2019.

The other charges related to keeping dogs in enclosures that were too small, not giving them access to appropriate bedding and clean water, and failing to treat them for a range of conditions including fleas, hookworm, osteoarthritis, dental conditions, and an ear infection.

The court heard the RSPCA issued a warrant on June 3, 2022, and seized a number of dogs that Ms Verhagen had kept in pens outside her house in Lockyer Waters.

RSPCA regional inspector Yorick Wahlberg-Schmitt said he observed at least seven pens on the property during the seizure – including one pen with two chihuahuas inside, one with five golden retrievers inside, one with two Great Danes and another with two golden retrievers.

He said many of the dogs were flea-burdened, dirty, timid and had dental issues, and that many pens were littered with faeces, lacked bedding, and that the water provided was limited and dirty, while one yard allegedly had prickles in it.

Mr Wahlberg-Schmitt further recalled that one of the Great Danes, Jigsaw, was “somewhat lean”, had a dry spot and swelling on his ear, and that one of the golden retrievers, Honey, had “what looked like a wound” on her head, and “severe grinding of the teeth”.

Ms Verhagen also said she had been woken up when Ms Berard arrived at the property, and hadn’t yet had an opportunity to clean the dogs’ pens that day.

She put it to him that “it is impossible to control the flea ground burden or eradicate it because of the large size of the property”, but he said “it would still be inappropriate to keep the animal there”.

“If you make a choice to keep an animal on that property, knowing that there’s a heavy flea burden, I would suggest finding a different solution or not keeping the animal there at all,” he said.

“Where else would I keep the animals? These are animals that I love and don’t want to part with,” Ms Verhagen responded.

She also said the larger dogs would tear apart any bedding she gave them, that one of the dogs was underweight and had poor teeth because of his age, and said the area was very dusty and the golden retrievers liked to play in the water, so she only gave them the water they needed because she knew it would likely get dirty and be wasted.

Originally published as Mother-daughter dog-breeding duo deny RSPCA animal mistreatment allegations