By staff reporter

Last updated at 08:36, Friday, 18 September 2009

A district judge has thrown out a case against a huntsman accused of two counts of hunting foxes with dogs because of insufficient evidence.

John Harrison

Defence barrister Robert Woodcock appealed to district judge Gerald Chalk, sitting in Penrith Magistrates’ Court to stop the trial against John Harrison, 48, of Grassthwaite Howe in Glenridding, because he said there was insufficient prosecution evidence.

And Mr Chalk agreed, ruling that there was no case to answer as there was no solid proof that any fox had been involved in either of the two counts.

Several witnesses spoke of having seen what they ‘believed to be’ or ‘thought was’ a fox.

But Mr Chalk said: “If somebody sees a cat, they say ‘I saw a cat’, not ‘I believe I saw a cat’.

“I have no evidence a mammal was identified or hunted.”

Several witnesses had spoken on Wednesday about seeing terrier men – other participants in the hunt – digging out foxes from two holes using terrier dogs and tracking devices, while Mr Harrison stood by with the pack of hounds he takes charge of while in his role as huntsman.

However, despite producing videos and testaments from six hunt monitors who had secretly watched the hunt, on November 19 last year, there was no clear proof that a fox was ever involved in the hunt.

Speaking after the verdict, Mr Harrison, who always denied the allegations, expressed his delight and relief that the trial was over, adding that he did not know what the terrier men were doing digging their holes.

“It is a huge relief that it’s all over after months with it hanging over me,” he said.

“I always understood that I had done nothing wrong.

“It’s one of many cases that have gone to court on nothing more than a whim, and it shows the hunting act to be inconsistent, unworkable and unenforceable, making life very difficult for everybody concerned.”

Tim Bonner, from the Countryside Alliance, added: “We are very pleased for John. He has been under a huge amount of pressure and it is not something we would wish on anyone.

“The real shame here is that we have two days in magistrates’ court, and the police have spent hundreds of hours investigating this.

“ We look forward to a repeal of the Hunting Act next year.

“This was the only outstanding Hunting Act case against a hunt, and it could be the last time a huntsman ever stands before a court.”

First published at 05:21, Friday, 18 September 2009
Published by http://www.cumberlandnews.co.uk