Image source, Herts Police

A 16-year-old boy has been convicted of stabbing a police dog - leaving him fighting for his life - and injuring his handler. But how did it happen and how has it affected the pair?

"Only three beings know what went on in that garden that night," PC Dave Wardell said, ahead of the teenager's trial.

He has had to keep the details of the attack under wraps, dealing with his own emotions as he nursed his dog back to health.

Read Finn's story here.

Image source, GUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND

Should the bill go further on Finn's :aw with higher sentencing for attacks on service animals, asks SNP MSP Angus Macdonald.

Howard Bridges from Edinburgh Cat and Dog Home says he fully supports Finn's Law and suggests assistance dogs and guide dogs should be included.

Runa Hanaghan from Dogs Trust agrees it is really important to consider guide dogs, given the huge impact an attack on assistance dog can have on its owner.

Any animal that is made to suffer by humans deserves equal access to justice and therefore the bill will remove that anomaly regarding service animals, says Libby Anderson.

She backs the view it should be extended to other assistance dog.

Penny Middleton from NFUS calls for clear plans to be in place for when farm animals are seized.

She adds that the mental health of farmers is often a key element of animal welfare problems on farms, and therefore it is necessary to give farmers the opportunity to engage with the outcome.

Ms Martin highlights the high cost caring for farm animals which would fall to local authorities.

Ms Middleton agrees there is a huge cost of caring for farm animals, but a clearer pathway for handling these animals would be helpful.

Image source, bbc

Gillian Martin again returns to the provision of re-homing without a court order in the bill.

Runa Hanaghan says the Dogs Trust rehomes animals and she thinks the three week time frame is appropriate although it would be better if it was shorter.

Ms Martin asks what impact being in limbo has on animals.

Howard Bridges from Edinburgh Cat and Dog Home cites the cost and welfare of animals being put at real risk by leaving them in limbo.

We'd like to re-home animals as quickly as possible, adds Mr Bridges, who backs the three week period but agrees with Ms Hanaghan that it would be better if it was shorter.

Image source, Getty Images

Mr Carson asks about the scope of the bill in terms of which animals it covers.

Libby Anderson says the Animal Welfare Act 2006 does cover fish, but OneKind has called for it to be extended to cover crustaceans, decapods and ostracods.

She says the 2006 Act came before sentience of these animals was established, but they do need protections, particularly since they are involve in the food sector.

In a BBC News article published earlier last year, Prof Robert Elwood, from Queen's University Belfast, said numerous experiments showed "rapid avoidance learning, and [crustaceans] giving up highly valuable resources to avoid certain noxious stimuli" - consistent with the idea of pain.

Green MSP Mark Ruskell wonders if there is a need for sentencing guidelines and whether there is an issue around funding bodies like the SSPCA, external.

Ms Anderson backs powers being extended to the SSPCA to investigate wildlife crimes and Runa Hanaghan agrees.

Runa Hanaghan backs calls for disqualification orders to be considered more.

Libby Anderson suggests there should be a register of disqualification orders, as it is currently difficult for agencies to keep track of where they exist.

Automatic consideration for such orders and explanation for when one is not given would be useful, she adds.

Image source, bbc

Runa Hanaghan from Dogs Trust says we need to able to reach for support for people who are struggling, adding that could be improving education and understanding.

Ms Hanaghan pivots to organised crime and cites the effects of puppy farming, saying the suffering it causes and the seriousness of what these animals are enduring is appalling.

She agrees with increasing the maximum sentence to echo the seriousness of the crime.

Libby Anderson from OneKind welcomes wildlife offences will be treated in line with offences around domestic animals.

We also wanted preventions and protections for animals, she adds.

Community Payback Orders are commonly used in these offences, but the measures attached to these are also important she adds.

She suggests retraining and education about animal welfare could be included in penalties.

Image source, bbc

The convener says the next session will focus on animal welfare.

Gillian Martin welcomes:

• Libby Anderson from OneKind, external
• Runa Hanaghan from Dogs Trust, external
• Howard Bridges from Edinburgh Cat and Dog Home, external
• Robbie Marsland of the League Against Cruel Sports, external
• Penny Middleton from NFUS, external

Mark Ruskell asks if there is a mismatch between the powers over crimes against domestic animals and that of wildlife crime.

The SSPCA should be given more powers and should be treated as a public body, replies Mr Radford.

The first evidence session draws to a close.

Moving to wildlife crime, Ms Beamish asks about the implications of changes to the investigation of crime.

Scott Blair says is seems anomalous that persons who employ other persons are not vicariously liable when it comes to rural estate management.

When there is much money to be made there must be vicarious responsibility places on those who manage sites, he adds.

SNP MSP Angus Macdonald pivots to Finn's Law, which has come into force in England and makes it harder for those who harm service animals to claim they were acting in self-defence.

Mr Blair says he was struck by the level of violence against service animals, including horses.

He argues someone saying they were defending themselves from a service animal is an anomaly that needs to be addressed in Scotland.

Image source, PA

Mr Blair backs an independent penalty that makes it clear that animals have rights or at least we have duty towards them.

He says there is a clear body of support for Finn's Law and this legislation reflects this.

The nature of some attacks can lead to dogs not being able to carry on in their service role and these instances are very serious, Mike Radford adds.

Gillian Martin pivots to rehoming without a court order.

Mr Radford points out these cases involve a living, feeling creature and if an owner does not voluntarily give up ownership the animal has to be held by the SSPCA, external.

Ms Martin asks if this is particularly the case with puppy farming.

Scott Blair says yes, adding it is very important that a puppy is handled appropriately otherwise you will end up with a dog that is aggressive towards humans.

He warns against the situation where puppies have to sit in limbo for months, adding there is nothing better than a new home for these puppies.

"There's a wider benefit to society there."

Gillian Mawdsley says raising awareness and education is important, suggesting sentencing guidelines would be useful.

There is no point in increasing penalties unless people are aware they will be applied, she adds.

Scott Blair agrees education is important, pointing to cultural issues which Disneyfy animals.

Children need to understand animals are sentient, can suffer and can feel pain he argues.

Some of more concerning acts of cruelty may simply not take place if we educate people, Mr Blair adds.

Labour MSP Claudia Beamish asks why the word "unintentional" has come into the legislation.

Mr Radford explains in criminal law there are strict liability offences like parking and speeding where the person's state of mind is irrelevant.

He says for more serious offences it divides into:

• objective mental element - which is the reasonable person test
• subjective element - where its the intention of the person (i.e the difference between manslaughter and murder)

Image source, bbc

The vast number of prosecutions for unnecessary suffering occur when someone is not looking after an animal or themselves and are not intentional he explains.

"The beauty of the welfare offence allows for intervention before the animal has reached the point of suffering."

Scott Blair suggests introducing an automatic ban on animal ownership would reflect the fact that certain treatment of animals is "simply beyond the pale".

He suggests such measures would be broadly supported by the public, drawing parallels with children being removed from parents in the most serious child protection cases.

A disqualification order is a penalty but not a punishment, adds Mr Radford.

He expresses disappointment there is nothing in the bill about disqualification orders, arguing it would be appropriate.

Image source, Getty Images

In addition to Finn's Law, the bill also:

• increases maximum available penalties for causing unnecessary suffering and animal fighting offences
• amends maximum penalties for 58 wildlife crime offences
• creates new ministerial powers to make regulations on fixed penalty notices relating to animal health and welfare offences
• introduces a new procedure to allow enforcement agencies to transfer, treat or destroy animals taken into their possession for welfare reasons without the need to obtain a court order

Read more about the bill in this SPICe briefing., external

Tory MSP Finlay Carson asks how effective community payback orders (CPOs) and automatic banning orders are.

Gillian Mawdsley says CPOs are particularly important with the presumption against short sentences.

The Law Society of Scotland representative says they would be effective and in line with what the government is proposing.

She says automatic bans as part of a sentencing regime could be effective, as long as there was an appeal system.

Effectively taking away someone's livelihood on some occasions certainly would be appropriate, Ms Mawdsley adds.

Green MSP Mark Ruskell asks about updating the definition of animal sentience.

Mike Radford suggests this would require separate legislation to the bill being examined today.

Animal welfare legislation has so far focused on those directly responsible for animals but proposals from Defra would have made governments responsible for it too, he says.

This would have been materially different from existing law Mr Radford explains.