By Steven Bell

A DUNDEE MP is to write to Scottish ministers underlining public disquiet over the behind-closed-doors decision not to pursue charges against children accused of torturing animals at Camperdown Wildlife Centre.

While against any form of “naming and shaming,” Dundee West parliamentarian Jim McGovern said there was room for greater transparency in the children’s hearing system.

Two youngsters accused of being involved in the horrific incident at Camperdown in the summer appeared before children’s hearings in the city last week.

Those hearings were held behind closed doors but it subsequently emerged that a decision had already been taken by the Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration to drop charges relating to animal welfare at the council-run park.

That decision has prompted widespread outcry, with scores of city dwellers signing a petition calling for a review to be carried out by the Scottish Government.

Asked about the case last night, Mr McGovern said, “The interests of the child has to be paramount in the whole system.

“I am certainly against any sort of naming and shaming because of the stigma that can be attached at school and beyond.

“I can understand why people are emotive about this particular case. What happened at the wildlife park was disgraceful, terrible.

“I would agree that the public has a right to know why something is not being pursued. There is room for greater transparency in the system, to know who is making decisions and why.

“I will be writing to the appropriate minister and using this particular case as an example, pointing out that there is public disquiet in my constituency about how this decision was reached.”

A painstaking police investigation, including a fingertip search of enclosures, was launched in the aftermath of the break-in to the wildlife centre in July.

A deer had been slashed with a craft knife, several otters beaten with clubs and a terrapin’s eyes gouged out. A snowy owl was so distressed it killed its chicks.

Three children, all aged under 14, were subsequently arrested. It is understood that one child has been referred to a social worker while two appeared at the children’s hearings.

While a decision had already been taken that the available evidence in relation to the animal welfare charges did not meet the “beyond reasonable doubt” test, there was concern that children were out unsupervised at the park so late in the evening.

The children’s cases were continued for further investigation. The social work department will continue to work with both children.

For legal reasons neither youngster can be identified. It is not clear if, or when, there will be any further hearing in either case. No interim orders were made.

The internet-based petition website was launched after the shock decision to drop the charges was revealed by The Courier last week.

“We the undersigned demand that the decision by the Children’s Panel…be immediately investigated by Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill,” states the petition.

“These toothless and frankly useless Children’s Panels are allowing children to get away scot-free for some of the most heinous of crimes.”

It added, “Every decent citizen has once again been let down by a so-called justice system.”

Many of the signatories at www.justicenow.co.uk described the decision as an “outrage” which sent out the wrong message to society in general and young people in particular.

“What happened to respect for people and animals?” asked Kellie Hanton, one of the more than 160 people who had signed the document by late yesterday.

“Something needs to be done quickly before something like this happens again, and I think the kids responsible should be punished for their actions—they knew exactly what they were doing.”

An anonymous posting added, “Too often I think some kids, because of our ‘society way of thinking,’ don’t take responsibility for the results of their behaviour.

“Too often the blame is put on other things such as ‘their background etc,’ but the end point is—we are all responsible for our actions, no matter our backgrounds.”

Another stated, “I strongly object to the decision which has been reached and feel this should be re-considered.”

A spokesperson for the Scottish Government said yesterday that ministers do not have the authority to review the decision.