JEFFREY GREER FROM PORTGLENONE, COUNTY ANTRIM WALKS FREE AFTER STARVING HIS DOG TO DEATH
| Red Rose Database
Portglenone, County Antrim Animal Abuser
Jeffrey James Alexander Greer, born on May 12, 1970, and residing on Hiltonstown Road in Portglenone, County Antrim, has become the focus of widespread outrage following his recent court appearance. Greer was convicted in 2016 for a heinous act of animal cruelty involving his pet dog, Bailey, an eight-year-old Rottweiler cross. Despite the severity of his actions, Greer was allowed to walk free from court with minimal punishment, sparking fury among animal rights advocates and concerned members of the community alike.
Greer pleaded guilty to failing to ensure the welfare of Bailey, a dog that suffered a slow and agonizing death due to neglect. The court sentenced him to an 18-month conditional discharge and ordered him to pay £274 in costs. Notably, an interim ban on Greer owning animals, which had been previously imposed, was revoked during the court proceedings, effectively removing any disqualification from owning pets. This decision has been met with widespread criticism, as many believe it fails to serve justice for the suffering endured by Bailey.
Animal rights campaigners reacted with outrage to the court's leniency. Daniel Barclay, representing the group Northern Ireland Says No To Animal Cruelty (NISNTAC), expressed his disgust at the outcome. He described Bailey’s suffering as “torturous and agonising,” noting that the dog was subjected to prolonged periods of starvation before being given a single large meal that the dog’s body could not tolerate, ultimately leading to its death. Barclay emphasized the moral responsibility of pet owners, stating, “If you take on the commitment of an animal, you have a responsibility to ensure you have the correct knowledge and means to properly care for the animal.”
He further condemned the case, saying, “Another precious life has been ended through a conscious and deliberate choice, made every single day, not to adequately care for this dog.” Barclay called for tougher sentencing in cases of animal cruelty, questioning the grounds on which the charge of causing unnecessary suffering was dismissed. He highlighted the disturbing image of Bailey’s suffering as a stark reminder of neglect and cruelty.
In addition to the court’s decision, the local authorities expressed their disappointment. A spokeswoman for Mid and East Antrim Borough Council stated, “We are disappointed with the outcome of this case,” underscoring their concern over the leniency shown to Greer.
This case has ignited debate over the adequacy of current animal cruelty laws and the penalties imposed on offenders. Many believe that the revocation of Greer’s disqualification from owning animals sends a troubling message about the seriousness with which such crimes are treated in County Antrim and beyond.
Greer pleaded guilty to failing to ensure the welfare of Bailey, a dog that suffered a slow and agonizing death due to neglect. The court sentenced him to an 18-month conditional discharge and ordered him to pay £274 in costs. Notably, an interim ban on Greer owning animals, which had been previously imposed, was revoked during the court proceedings, effectively removing any disqualification from owning pets. This decision has been met with widespread criticism, as many believe it fails to serve justice for the suffering endured by Bailey.
Animal rights campaigners reacted with outrage to the court's leniency. Daniel Barclay, representing the group Northern Ireland Says No To Animal Cruelty (NISNTAC), expressed his disgust at the outcome. He described Bailey’s suffering as “torturous and agonising,” noting that the dog was subjected to prolonged periods of starvation before being given a single large meal that the dog’s body could not tolerate, ultimately leading to its death. Barclay emphasized the moral responsibility of pet owners, stating, “If you take on the commitment of an animal, you have a responsibility to ensure you have the correct knowledge and means to properly care for the animal.”
He further condemned the case, saying, “Another precious life has been ended through a conscious and deliberate choice, made every single day, not to adequately care for this dog.” Barclay called for tougher sentencing in cases of animal cruelty, questioning the grounds on which the charge of causing unnecessary suffering was dismissed. He highlighted the disturbing image of Bailey’s suffering as a stark reminder of neglect and cruelty.
In addition to the court’s decision, the local authorities expressed their disappointment. A spokeswoman for Mid and East Antrim Borough Council stated, “We are disappointed with the outcome of this case,” underscoring their concern over the leniency shown to Greer.
This case has ignited debate over the adequacy of current animal cruelty laws and the penalties imposed on offenders. Many believe that the revocation of Greer’s disqualification from owning animals sends a troubling message about the seriousness with which such crimes are treated in County Antrim and beyond.