THE Pretoria Regional Court had not been presented with any evidence on which Riccardo Ghiazza and Wayne Stockigt could be convicted of abusing elephants from the Tuli block in Botswana, their attorney argued on Wednesday.
Applying for their discharge on four counts of contravening the Animal Protection Act, attorney Alan Trusler submitted that they were implicated in only ”a few, petty incidents” of those brought before the court.
In those instances, their actions had, under the circumstances, not been unnecessarily cruel, nor had they caused unnecessary suffering, he argued.
The court had heard evidence of the necessity to restrain the animals, and that the chains, hobbles, sticks, ankuses and ear-loops used on them were all tools normally associated with elephant training.
Although elephants not obeying or co-operating were hit and suffered pain, it could not be said that this amounted to their being cruelly beaten. It was part of their handling and training, Trusler submitted.
Ghiazza and Stockigt have pleaded not guilty to the charges of maltreatment. Ghiazza has also pleaded not guilty to not having a licence to train the elephants.
A co-accused, Craig Saunders, was acquitted earlier this week of contravening the Animal Protection Act, after an application was brought for his discharge on the grounds there was no evidence he owned the elephants or was in possession of them at the time of the alleged abuse.
While admitting there was little real evidence that the animals had been underfed or starved, State prosecutor Johann Kok submitted there was indeed evidence on which Ghiazza and Stockigt could be convicted on other counts, and argued they were not entitled to a discharge.
Not only had Ghiazza known what training was taking place, when an NSPCA monitor had suggested less cruel methods, his reply was that the training method chosen was the fastest.
International elephant trainer Randall Moore had previously testified that on one occasion the beating of an elephant was unnecessary, senseless and stupid and could have severely injured the animal.
”Even if he (Ghiazza) was not present, he foresaw the possibility of these acts, amounting to cruelty during training. He reconciled himself with that,? Kok told the court.
The court will make a ruling on Friday on the application for discharge. – Sapa