Intimidation, violence and illegal hunting: a story of the ‘Criminal’ and Horsham

From ban defiance to a legacy of crime

The true face of the Crawley and Horsham.

On the 10th March 2021, two cases against William Bishop, huntsman of the Crawley & Horsham Hunt (CHH), were dropped during court despite the judge stating that a “fox was unlawfully hunted”.  Simon Wild, who supplied the video evidence, was shocked by the “unprofessional failing” of Sussex Police and the CPS (Crime Prosecution Service) to provide the evidence to the defence. 

Though Bishop avoided prosecution on this occasion, the hunt has a history of criminal behaviour, which makes its intentions clear. The Citro spoke to Margaret Hackney of West Sussex Hunt Saboteurs (WSHS) about the CHH.  

Wildlife crimes

According to Hackney, the CHH received some of the earliest convictions under the Hunting Act 2004. In 2012, a total of £9,900 in fines and costs were imposed on hunt staff Andrew Phillis, Neill Millard and Rachel Holdsworth after they were convicted of five offences under the Act.

The following year, huntsman Nick Bycroft of the CHH was also convicted. Even though he pleaded guilty to one account of hunting a wild mammal with a dog, Tim Bonner of the Countryside Alliance defended the hunt by stating that the “hounds found a fox in cover while trail hunting”. Hackney comments on the court case:

When the huntsman came up for sentencing by the chairman of the bench we recognised her; we had filmed her a couple of years before watching the same hunt hounds closely chasing a fox over her land and saying “Oh look, wonderful“ 

It is claimed that saboteurs had to put in extra effort before their claims of illegal hunting were taken seriously:

We initially found the police telling us to pass evidence to the RSPCA, and they would not do anything. So, we staged a number of sit down protests at police stations in Crawley and Horsham, nearly getting arrested. This rumpus had the desired effect, and suddenly police took us seriously and were looking at our evidence.

It is believed that these prosecutions weren’t due to isolated incidents:

They have hunted foxes every time they have been out; the hounds are trained on a fox scent and their country is wooded, so they would have trouble not to [pursue a fox]

It was reported by Horse & Hound that the CHH took its pack of hounds to hunt in Northern Ireland, where fox hunting remains legal. The magazine described this event as “a first for an English pack of foxhounds”. Hackney reaffirms:

“Only a fool would believe these same hounds would then hunt to a trail.” 

Recurring events

On the day the Hunting Act came into effect, saboteurs were taunted with a dead fox that was thrown to hounds in front of them. Hackney said the hunt was the CHH and was filmed as part of an ITV News special.

The hunting and killing of foxes continued.

In a damning video from 2012, a member of the hunt can be seen collecting the bodies of foxes that appear to have been killed by the hounds. It is stated in the video that both of these kills happened in the same week.

During a joint meet with the Cottesmore Hunt on 16th February 2019, saboteurs retrieved the body of a dead fox after they were chased and killed by hounds. Earlier in the season, another fox was also recovered by saboteurs after they’d had suffered the same fate.

The persecution of wildlife isn’t just confined to the fox. 

During a joint meet with the Old Surrey Burstow and West Kent Hunt, a badger sett was dug out after the hunt had allegedly marked a fox to ground. No one involved was prosecuted.

In a similar incident, a terrier was forced into a badger sett while other entrances were blocked with nets. Despite the evidence as being described as “excellent”, the case was dismissed due “errors” made by the CPS.

Unsavoury behaviour

In a recent press release by the Hunt Saboteurs Association (HSA), the CHH are described as “one of the most violent” hunts in the UK. Hackney comments on this history:

In the 80s and 90s the hunt used violence to keep sabs away, vehicles would be ambushed, and you could not sab them unless in considerable numbers.

Since the introduction of the hunting ban, the hunts behaviour appears to have changed little.

While other hunts may attempt to keep up appearances, the CHH seem to know no bounds. With insults like “peasant” and “coon”, it shows the hunt truly is stuck in the past.

Insults are usually accompanied by threats, as can be seen in a video that shows a hunt supporter stating to a saboteur he would “go to prison to fuck [them] over” and that he was their “worst fucking nightmare”.

Hackney recollects her experiences:

I have been involved with the C&H hunt for over twenty five years…they have always been hostile.

One threat that caused trouble was from then huntsman Kim Richardson. He stated that he would shove a hunting horn “straight down” a saboteurs throat. Richardson was initially convicted but this was overturned in an appeal.

Hackney recalls another incident involving the huntsman at the time:

Just as the Hunting Act came in, the hunt master, Kim Richardson told sabs: “You are all fair game now, I’ve fucking told everyone”. Soon after that edict, a hunt sab had his nose broken.

An injury that resulted in prosecution took place a month before the hunting ban came into effect. In January 2005, hunt supporter John Hawkins broke the arm of a saboteur in an “unprovoked attack” and was later convicted of GBH. 

Another supporter was convicted for their actions during a similar period of time. John Wesley pleaded guilty to driving without due care and attention, having no insurance and failing to report an accident.

More convictions were given to hunt supporters in the years that followed. In 2011, Andrew Leaver was convicted after he made multiple attempts to punch through the window of a saboteur vehicle. Another four convictions were added to the CHH’s list in 2012 for driving offences, collecting money illegally and making sexual comments toward a female saboteur.

Not satisfied with his conviction for an offence under the Hunting Act, then-huntsman Nick Bycroft pleaded guilty to causing criminal damage on a saboteur vehicle in 2012.

As an alternative to damaging saboteurs’ vehicles, attempts were also made to block them from getting to the hunt.

“Every trick in the book”

Aside from the use of violence and threatening behaviour, the CHH has used other tactics in dealing with saboteurs and monitors.

The hunt claimed it was being stalked. 

In 2008, the CHH along with 80 landowners, and backed by the CA, began what was to become a landmark case for in the UK. If the allegations under the Harassment Act were successful then it would, according to Hackney, would make gathering evidence on a hunt, or sabotaging them, “impossible”.

A defence under the Act, however, was for trying to detect or prevent crime, as the accused saboteur, Hackney, explains:

We had also gathered much evidence of illegal hunting including using an undercover rider with a hidden camera that had never gone to the police. This boosted the harassment defence and the trespass and nuisance claims were rejected after two aborted trails as fundamentally flawed.

The following year, the hunt subsequently withdrew from the action and were to pay £120,000 in defence costs. This however was not the end of claims of harassment: 

In July 2017 I had a call from an officer of Crawley Police, he advised me they were investigating complaints of harassment made me by [the] Crawley & Horsham hunt kennel staff. I could attend voluntarily to answer questions under caution, which I did. I heard no more until January 2018, when, by phone, I was informed the CPS had decided to charge me.

Hackney was a childminder registered with The Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (OFSTED). Police informed OFSTED of the case and subsequently lost her main source of income.

She pleaded not guilty. After a five-day case at Crown Court, Hackney was given a unanimous verdict of not guilty. Following the jury’s short deliberation of 30 minutes, the decision was made due to a lack of evidence backing up the allegations made. The prosecution requested a post-trial restraining order, which was denied.

Though Hackney was relieved by the verdict, she suffered considerably during and after the case:

The years in between being interviewed in July 2017 and going to trial in February 2019 were horrendous. I lost income, my business suffered, and my health deteriorated. I suffered depression and anxiety which led eventually to having treatment for post-traumatic stress.

The allegations against her were fabricated with seemingly no evidence. What the prosecution hoped to be a landmark case against saboteurs and monitors, backfired against them:

If I had been found guilty it would have affected every sab and monitor group, essentially preventing them following a hunt. This was to be another costly failure for hunting, a double edge sword. I was found not guilty, therefore giving sabs and monitors reasonable defence for [kennel watching] and following hounds.

“Our work has paid off”

In February 2021, the HSA published a press release announcing that the CHH was downscaling and moving the few remaining hounds to the South Down and Eridge Hunt kennels. Though this was celebrated amongst those who oppose bloodsports, the CA attempted to spin the news as a “positive future” for the hunt. Commenting on the announcement, Hackney told The Citro that she wasn’t surprised: 

We have known for about three years [that] the hunt was meeting neighbouring hunts to consider amalgamation, and bemoaning their finances.

Saboteurs and monitors saw the opportunity to put pressure on the hunt:

There has been a reduction in the last few years on land the hunt has gone, and a big blow was losing access to a large part of the Knepp estate due to rewilding. However, up until recently [the] Knepp [estate] has always said they welcome the hunt. To pressurise them we did much lobbying; meeting the estate manager and sending damning videos to press them not to allow the hunt. Our work has paid off.

Issues within the hunt may be deeper than surface level as it would seem that finances were not the driving force for the hunt to move out of the kennels. Hackney continues:

Recently three directors have resigned, and it is unclear why the owners Penelope Greenwod and Mark Burrell have sold the kennels. They are both very wealthy people, and Mark Burrell is still presently a director of the hunt…[the] hounds have been housed at the kennels in West Grinstead since 1877.

The CHH has a long history of violence, intimidation and criminal behaviour. And with additional factors including lack of support and investment as well as less land to hunt on, the hunt’s situation has gone from bad to worse. Hackney reaffirms:

We think there will be limited cub hunting in our area…they will hunt in the traditional areas, but much less often. In due course the Crawley and Horsham hunt name may even disappear. But for now, and until the law is strengthened, we still have much work to do.

She concludes that the hunt “have always been a fox hunt” and that is it “unlikely they could be anything else”.

The only positive future for this hunt would be not just to downscale but to disband entirely. This wouldn’t be a relief just for local wildlife, but also for the hunt monitors and saboteurs subjected to its violence.

-

Want to support The Citro? Click here to contribute.

-

Headline image via West Sussex Hunt Sabs