Krajnc acquitted of criminal mischief charge in pig transport trial

Despite the defence creating over-the-top, headline-grabbing statements in court and using arguments not based on science, Justice David Harris has acquitted activist Anita Krajnc on the charge of criminal mischief related to interfering with hogs while in transit.

The trial stems from an event on June 22, 2015, whereby Kranjc poured a substance from a water bottle into a pig’s mouth while the pig was on a transport truck, destined for Fearman’s Pork processing facility in Burlington, Ontario.

Justice Harris, addressing the court this morning, said that pigs are property, not persons, and would receive water once they arrived at the processing facility. The animals were still accepted and cleared for human consumption, and so no damage to property occurred.

Farm & Food Care Ontario, Ontario Pork, Ontario Federation of Agriculture, and the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario released a joint statement in response to the dismissal of charges related to interfering with farm animals while in transit, saying they are extremely disappointed with the decision and are concerned that activists will be encouraged to engage in escalating activities that are a growing threat to animal welfare, food security and human safety.

Bruce Kelly, Farm & Food Care Ontario said that “Ontario farmers work hard to ensure high standards of animal welfare and a safe and healthy food supply for Canadians. Actions by Krajnc and activists like her should not be condoned by the courts as they threaten acceptable and legal farming practices and are a threat to food safety.”

“This is frustrating for Ontario pork producers, who adhere to federal regulations and high standards of animal care, and are constantly evolving to further enhance their commitment to healthy animals and communities. Our concern in this instance was specific to the safety of food and people,” says Eric Schwindt, board chair for Ontario Pork.

Related: Burlington Pig Case Shows It’s Worth Planning to Encounter Activists

 

RealAgriculture News Team

A team effort of RealAgriculture’s videographers and editorial staff to make sure that you have the latest in what is happening in agriculture.


Trending

Real Dream Workshops: Making hydro with Otto Bloemen

Are you planning to build a new farm workshop? How will you power and heat it? Do you want a crane? In episode 3 of Real Dream Workshops, Peter Johnson visits his neighbour Otto Bloemen at Lucan, Ontario-based OJB Industries. Bloeman tells Johnson how he set out to build a cost-effective wood-frame building with high insulation…Read more »

Related

2 Comments

Logically Benevolent

You make a bold statement about the defense not using “science”, but provide no information to support that. In fact, the defense called in an animal behavior expert who supported that the pigs were in a bad state due to heat (panting). If the pigs are accepted at the facility, then you cannot make the claim that there is a safety violation when this has been occuring for years. Something tells me the bottled water was more regulated and higher quality than the water at the farm where they came from. Animals are not products to be thrown around and treated like garbage. You are an animal. There is a reason businesses that make a body into a product like prostitution and human trafficking are illegal. You can spew all the word salad you want about improving standards, but the fact remains that as long as you base your profit in the sale of someone elses body, there will always be exploitation and cruelty. If you want to complain about ‘safety’, then maybe don’t line your pockets by using someone elses body. It makes you sound like an angry pimp, who is mad that your “products” have the basic needs of something that is living. Also, if safety of your products is truly concerned, you should probably write ‘This product is deemed to be carcinogenic by the World Health Organization’ on the package. The truth is, you all your other meat industry hippos are mad that your plan backfired and now you are the ones sitting in your own feces.

Reply
Lyndsey Smith

To clarify, this is a news story reporting that the judge made the comment about not using science-based arguments. The judge also stated there was no evidence to support the claim that the animals were suffering. Again, this is stating what was said in court.

Reply

Leave a Reply