Man jailed for Wilbur animal cruelty case

A man who denied veterinary care to his dog, that was found starving and emaciated last year, has been sentenced to five months in prison for what has been described by a magistrate as one of the worst cases of animal neglect she has encountered.

The defendant, Warlito Damasco Samelo Jr., of the Philippines, was jailed on Wednesday, 29 May, after previously being convicted of one count of cruelty to an animal in his absence in relation to his dog Brun-Brun, who was renamed Wilbur by rescuers.

“This, in my judgement, is one of the most serious cases of animal neglect that I have seen, on the evidence presented,” said Magistrate Philippa McFarlane, while making note of the limitations of the Animals Act.

That legislation states that an owner convicted of causing “unnecessary suffering” to an animal is liable to a fine of $4,000 and imprisonment for one year.

When calling for a custodial sentence, prosecutor Tetrina Rivers told McFarlane that Wilbur’s prolonged suffering and eventual death merited the top end of the sentencing range despite the lack of sentencing guidelines.

“The UK does have sentencing guidelines which might be of some use; however, the law prescribes a maximum sentence of five years in prison,” said Rivers.

When handing down her sentence, McFarlane started with six months in prison but reduced it to five months to reflect Samelo’s previous good behaviour.

Christer Brady, who represented Samelo, asked for the court to consider imposing a suspended sentence, while adding that his client would be willing to do community service.

“He is prepared to complete such an order at the Humane Society, where he can put his skills, or lack thereof, to work and development.”

McFarlane said she believed a suspended sentence, whether partial or whole, would be entirely inappropriate.

“These courts must send a clear message, that of deterrence,” McFarlane said. “When you are considering owning an animal, you must be ready to take on the responsibility that comes with it, or face the consequence.”

The magistrate noted that, although the law prescribes for a financial penalty as well, it would not be appropriate due to Samelo’s lack of financial means.

‘Betrayed’ by owner

Wilbur was rescued in October of last year by animal charity One Dog at a Time, after being found by a neighbour in Prospect, not far from Samelo’s home.

He was taken to veterinarians who attempted to restore his health, but he was too far gone.

His case led to the widespread calls for animal cruelty laws to be better enforced and a campaign called Justice for Wilbur was launched.

“The very fat from around the animal’s eyes and other parts of its head were gone,” said McFarlane. “The animal’s eyes were infected. It had heartworm and hookworm. There were worms in its faecal matter.”

News of the Samelo’s sentence was met with mixed emotions by Caroline Johnston, One Dog at a Time’s organiser.

“We are happy that this case progressed all the way through the courts because it is a step in the right direction,” Johnston told the Cayman Compass, but added that she had hoped for a harsher sentence.

“When we found Wilbur, you could see in his eyes that he had lost all hope and just wanted to die,” she said. “And to think that he was betrayed by his owner in such a cruel manner, it’s just not right.”

According to a social inquiry report, Samelo accepts that he denied the animal veterinary care, because he was unable to afford the medical expenses and had sought to import medicine from the Philippines.

“In a jurisdiction like the Cayman Islands, where even if you found yourself in circumstances where you would have struggled to pay for treatment, no veterinarian would have turned you away,” said McFarlane, who also noted Samelo’s lack of remorse.

No question as to the real ‘victim’

The social inquiry report also revealed that Samelo views himself as the victim, and is being unfairly punished despite his good intentions and history of good deeds.

“The report reveals that his attitude towards the offending suggests that he believes he is the victim,” noted McFarlane. “It states that he feels that all the love and care that he provided to the dog before it became ill has not been taken into account, and that now he is being punished for not providing the dog with medicine although he could not afford it.”

When rejecting his claims of remorse, McFarlane stated that she believes Samelo was sorry that he was appearing before the court, and not for the act.

“The report reveals that he believes his only mistake was not going to look for the dog before it was found and rescued, after it disappeared from his home,” the magistrate said, as she quoted from the report.

Despite his protestations, McFarlane made clear that she did not believe Samelo to be a victim, rather “the only victim here was Brun-Brun”.