Dad and son slapped with animal ban after supergluing dog's wounds from fox hunt

Robert Mills and his son Jack Mills have been banned from owning animals after they patched up their dog's wounds using superglue following an illegal fox hunt

A father and son have been banned from owning animals after supergluing their dog's lip back together following an illegal fox hunt.

Robert Mills and his son Jack Mills used the strong commercial adhesive in a botched DIY effort to patch up their Terrier's 'horrific' wounds. The pair were also handed a suspended prison sentence and told to rehome all their other animals and give up their five dogs to the RSPCA.

Patterdale terrier Fudge had got the injuries following an illegal fox hunt, though they had tried to argue they came after attacks from a badger or a rabbit. After an RSPCA investigation, police raided their home and found lurcher with extensive scars across its face, a large part of its tongue missing and a weeping nailbed on one of its paws.

Following examinations of their mobile phones, disturbing photos were found - such as a smiling Jack posing with a dead fox. Brickklayers from Kent, the duo admitted to two counts of causing unnecessary suffering to an animal, and have now been banned from owning animals for five years.

Folkestone Magistrates' Court heard police raided their home in January as part of an RSPCA investigation known as Operation Aurora. Officers found five dogs in an outbuilding kept in individual kennels with inadequate bedding and two of them - a lurcher called Rose and Patterdale terrier Fudge - were immediately seized.

Recounting the notes of an expert veterinarian who examined the animals, prosecutor Janet Patel told magistrates: “There was damage to the skin of Rose’s lower jaw with the site of a deep tear or cut visible on the lower jaw and a loss of the lip margin contiguity.

"A significant amount of the tongue had been lost in a surgical or traumatic incident. The lesions are consistent with those that could be received in a fight between this dog and a large mammal such as a dog, fox, or badger.”

The vet added that a nail was missing on Rose’s left paw that was oozing fluid and clearly causing pain to the dog. Fudge was found to have suffered significant damage to his face and head and was missing several front teeth.

The prosecutor added: “The person caring for Fudge cut off some tissue, used commercial superglue to try and repair degloved tissue on her face and did not administer any pain medication."

Messages shared between Robert and Jack described the dogs being used to hunt foxes, with records from their phones indicating that Fudge was harmed in November 2021. The vet added: “The entries, dated 16.11.2021, lead me to believe that Fudge was involved in a fight with a mammal such as a fox, large dog, or badger. The use of the word ‘hanging’ implies the lower jaw has been degloved to some extent, leaving the tissue literally hanging."

A message discovered by officers read “had any joy with the fox?" with a photo of a dead fox also shared with the words: “Went out this morning, Fudge killed it.”

Though still legal in Northern Ireland, fox hunting was banned in England, Scotland and Wales in 2004. When questioned by police, Robert Mills said the dogs’ facial injuries had occurred when Rose and Fudge encountered a badger in the garden and that both dogs had been attacked by a rabbit.

But his son contradicted that claim in an interview - saying that neither dog had ever come across a badger. Defending the Mills, Sam Harkness told the court the pair were remorseful, saying: “Mr [Robert] Mills says he has owned dogs all his life.

"He deeply regrets his actions and Mr Mills Junior says this is a steep learning curve. They are both devastated that they have been involved in these proceedings, but they have cooperated."

The two charges both Robert and Jack Mills admitted related to Fudge’s facial injury and the wound to Rose’s foot, which was established to have been sustained in the days before the police visit in January this year. During a discussion about the prospect of both defendants being banned from keeping animals, the pair were seen intensely shaking their heads.

However, after lengthy deliberations, chairwoman of the bench Patricia Light handed down punishments including a ban on owning animals for five years. She also handed the pair a suspended prison sentence and fined them more than £1,300.

She said: “For these offences we have come to the decision that they have broken the custody threshold because there is more than one dog with deliberate suffering. The fact that you have access to a vet and financial means to pay for treatment and yet still did not seek treatment shows deliberate disregard for the welfare of the animals."

“For each of you we are imposing 23 weeks custody, suspended for two years. You will also each complete 150 hours of unpaid work and we are ordering that you both pay £500 in costs and a £154 surcharge each."

“We are also granting a deprivation order for Fudge and Rose and the RSPCA will seize your other dogs. We are also granting a disqualification order for both of you in relation to owning, keeping, or participating in controlling or transporting any animals for five years, [and] no application may be made to appeal this for two years.”

Rose and Fudge, who have remained with the RSPCA since January, are to be rehomed. The defendants’ three other dogs will be seized within 14 days, with magistrates also giving them two weeks to rehome a number of chickens and ferrets.