Yesterday, I had the honor of remotely collaborating with a small but dedicated group of people in Australia to live-tweet the sentencing of Adam Robert Corden Britton. Britton is a disgraced zoologist who pled guilty of 56 offenses related to the torture, sexual abuse, and murder of Animals. He was sentenced to ten years imprisonment, with a minimum of six served and is prohibited from purchasing, acquiring or taking possession of a mammal for the rest of his natural life. I have mixed feelings about his sentence. While I am happy to see that he will indeed be serving prison time for his offense, I feel it falls exceedingly short of justice. I do not feel it practical to list the various obvious reasons that I am disappointed that he’ll still have access to certain types of animals when he is released, or that his sentence wasn’t longer – I do not have any influence over the Australian justice system and there is no way to change that. I will instead focus on things we can do to move towards lasting change.
Firstly, this isn’t a bestiality or zoophilia case – it’s a zoosadism case
Britton is a zoosadist. A zoosadist is distinct from a zoophile or somebody who has commited bestiality. A zoophile is somebody with sexual attraction to animals. A bestialist is somebody who has performed sex acts with animals. Bestiality is illegal, as it should be. However, zoosadism is in a category of its own and highlights the severity of this particular crime in a much more effective way.
Zoosadists do not see animals as attractive. They do not see the animals they abuse their partners, nor are they “one off” committers of bestiality. A zoosadist derives sexual pleasure from literally torturing animals. They often commit horrific forms of cruelty and mutilation upon their victims. The more pain their victim suffers, the more excited they become.
By lumping this case in with other bestiality cases, news publications are inadvertently withholding information regarding the severity of Britton’s actions. It is absolutely imperative that he be appropriately labeled as a zoosadist, and the world be allowed to come to grips with the uncomfortable reality of his crimes. This is a small but important step in ensuring legislation is passed to impose more appropriate penalties for the worst kinds of offenders. Unfortunately, despite this being one of the first major cases in Australia, zoosadism is more widespread than any of us would like to admit. I, for one, would like the legal system to be able to develop more effective tools for dealing with such offenders.
Stop threatening his barrister & uninvolved parties
Everyone, and unfortunately I mean everyone, is entitled to a fair defense under the law. The legal system would not work if people were unable to find defense attorneys. If barristers as a class had the option to universally refuse to provide services to Britton, a system would exist where people accused of certain crimes would not have a legal defense which is not a system anybody would want to be a part of. Anger at Britton’s attorney, Chief Justice Grant, or former friends and colleagues of Britton is misplaced. The anger should be towards the offender and directed in such a way to petition the legislature to give the courts more tools to deal with Britton and similar offenders.
Closing thoughts
I am not judge, jury, nor executioner. If I had the sole authority to define Adam Britton’s sentence, he would never see outside the walls of a prison again. Thankfully, I am not in the position where I have to make such decisions – I collect the evidence that I can, package it, and forward it to the appropriate law enforcement agencies and all decisions from there are made without my involvement beyond the occasional consulting. With that said, it is my personal opinion that offenders like this are a danger to society and should be dealt with accordingly. A person who has the ability to harm and torture innocents is not somebody I, nor anybody else in a civilized world, ever want as a neighbor walking among us.