Leyland buried puppy trial: 'You can safely infer who is the perpetrator' says prosecutor

Evidence against a woman accused of burying an injured seven week old puppy alive is being summed up to magistrates as her trial draws to a close.

Wednesday, 4th August 2021, 10:09 am

Seven week old Pomeranian, Spencer, was found in a shallow hole close to Worden Park on April 27, 2019, but had suffered two severely broken legs and vets later decided it was kinder to put him to sleep.

Inga Ozola, who was breeding and selling the puppies for between £400 and £550 each, denies causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal between April 24 and 27, 2019 and is on trial at Preston Magistrates' Court,

The 43-year-old, of Seven Stars Road, Leyland, and her partner of 15 years, Arunas Venslovas, 50, deny failing to ensure Spencer received appropriate veterinary care for his injuries.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

Spencer the puppy

The court previously heard they had sought treatment for a fractured leg and been told it would cost £2,000 for surgery, which they could not obtain credit for, and it was costing them money for appointments, medication and X-rays.

The couple claim they 'gave' the dog to a Lithuanian man, whose full name they don't know, who was going to take the puppy to Latvia for surgery because it was cheaper there.

Prosecutors for the RSPCA say that is a lie as Ozola was seen on CCTV leaving her house with a rucksack and returning a short time later, a few hours before Spencer was found.

Carmel Wilde said: "The level of suffering is undisputed, it's been confirmed by experts.

"The puppy was caused to suffer by being buried alive.

"Clearly Spencer would have been petrified.

Read More

Read More
Leyland woman denies 'burying puppy alive' in field near Worden Park

"But Dr Nash gave the example it was a blunt force trauma due to being dropped from a height, trodden on or rough play.

"It's clearly not unusual in that household injuries would occur with many dogs being present.

"Although she had sought treatment for the hind leg, if you remember she was asked to return in 48 hours to decide how she was going to find that money.

"But they didn't return to the vets - they didn't even have courtesy to contact Dr Nash. In fact he had to phone her to say what are you doing because this dog needs treatment.

"So suffering, the prosecution say, was caused by the fact neither defendant returned Spencer to the surgery for treatment for a serious injury.

Miss Wilde suggested it could have been an act of desperation or panic, but that "this behaviour cannot be tolerated."

She said: " Perhaps there was no love lost between Spencer and these defendants because he wasn't a family dog. It was a cog in the chain of breeding wasn't it?

"It was all getting too much, the cost, wasn't it?

"How on earth would you be able to sell a dog that couldn't walk?

"The prosecution say Miss Ozola's way was far cheaper, wasn't it?

"The defence may say you can't be sure because you can't see who buried the dog - but we don't often see murders happen do we?

"You can safely infer from the circumstances who is the perpetrator.


The Lancashire Post is more reliant than ever on you taking out a digital subscription to support our journalism. For unlimited access to Lancashire news and information online, you can subscribe here.