Nature lover complains over ‘wrongful arrest’ after freeing animals caught in snares
Activist says he acted reasonably and his prosecution was ‘bizarre’
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A nature lover who freed a young deer and a hare that were frantically struggling while caught in snares has complained to police that he was wrongfully arrested.
In a case that inspired public anger, Doug Maw faced nine charges – six of criminal damage and three of theft – for allegedly tampering with or taking traps and snares designed to target wildlife.
Police had arrested the activist nearly a year ago after he posted footage he took of the devices and animals caught in them on land in Sussex.
He says he filmed for several seconds before freeing the fawn and the hare, which both ran away. Animal lovers hailed him a hero for the rescues.
But Mr Maw says the charges police brought were false because they were based on other clips that he had posted on social media. In some, he says he was “clearly” not in the videos or even in Sussex where the footage was shot.
At Lewes Crown Court on Wednesday, the judge officially declared him not guilty after prosecutors offered no evidence – although he could still face a non-conviction restraining order in a hearing next month.
He said his arrest and prosecution had been bizarre.
“It’s crazy – the use of snares is barbaric,” he told The Independent. “It’s reasonable for someone who wants to release a wild animal from a trap or snare that causes them harm.
“I’m a thorn in the side of estates so police looked through my social media and backdated charges to dates when I uploaded things. “In some clips it’s clearly not me – I don’t wear nail polish and have long hair.”
Mr Maw, 54, a veteran hunt saboteur, admits he and others sometimes trespass on land to prevent the crime of foxhunting.
Professor Stephen Harris, a former Bristol University academic, gave evidence to the Welsh government that led to a ban on snares there, he said, and the same evidence has led to a coming ban in Scotland later this year.
Under the Protection of Wild Mammals Act, freeing wildlife that’s suffering supersedes the damage to a snare causing harm to animals, according to Mr Maw, and gamekeepers should release “non-target” species – those caught by accident.
After Wednesday’s hearing, he wrote to Sussex Police demanding they return the possessions of his that they took when he was arrested.
He said on the day he appeared in court, people linked to the countryside tried to intimidate him by leaving dog mess on his doorstep.
“I’ve put up cameras now but it’s all been very stressful,” he said.
Sussex Police said: “We have a duty to investigate all reports of crime in line with relevant legislation and take proportionate action where necessary.
“A thorough investigation was launched in July, 2023, into reports of criminal damage and theft with a value of around £1,700.”
They added: “We work closely with the Criminal Prosecution Service and, following developments in the case, the CPS confirmed there was not enough evidence for a realistic chance of securing conviction.
“A number of relevant items were seized as evidence during the investigation and these will be returned following formal declaration from the Crown Prosecution Service that the trial has been discontinued.”
A Crown Prosecution Service spokesperson said: “We can only prosecute cases where there is enough evidence for us to have a realistic chance of securing a conviction – following changes to the evidence available in this case, this test was no longer met.”
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments