On Friday (31st March 2023), gamekeeper Rory Parker, 24, of Drumbain Cottage, Tomatin, pleaded guilty to shooting and killing a sparrowhawk on 16th September 2021 whilst employed on Moy Estate (see here).
Parker was filmed by an RSPB Investigator as the (at the time 22-year-old) gamekeeper hid in a bush on the grouse moor, a few feet away from a large plastic owl that had been placed on a fencepost. It’s well-known that raptors will be drawn to an owl decoy and will try to mob / attack it. If someone sits quietly nearby with a gun they’ll have a good chance at shooting and killing the raptor whilst it’s distracted by the owl.
Weāve seen this technique deployed on grouse moors many times before, sometimes with plastic decoys, sometimes with live eagle owls (e.g. see here, here, here, here, here, here).
It looks like that’s what happened that September day in 2021. Here’s a screen grab from the RSPB’s video showing the position of Parker and the decoy owl:
If you haven’t yet seen the full video, there’s a copy of it embedded in this tweet below. I’d encourage you to watch it, and take note of Parker’s body language when he goes over to the sparrowhawk he’s just shot, as it’s flapping around, wounded, on the ground. He’s calm and proficient as he stamps his foot/knee on the bird to crush it, before casually picking it up and retuning to his hiding place in the bush. It appears to be quite routine and he does not look at all disturbed at having just committed a serious wildlife crime.
In court, Parker was defended by Mark Moir KC. The KC stands for King’s Counsel and denotes an experienced, high-ranking lawyer considered to be of exceptional ability. I wonder who paid for his services? In mitigation for Parker’s offending, Mr Moir KC reportedly told Sheriff Sara Matheson that his client had been in his job since he left school.
āHe is deeply shameful of what he has done. He has brought the estate into disrepute and has now resigned.
āHis firearms certificate is likely to be revoked as a result of this conviction. He should have been shooting pigeons and crows that day. Feral pigeons are a problem on the estate.
āHowever, the sparrowhawk flew over and there was a rush of blood. He says it was a stupid thing to do.ā
After watching the video, it didn’t look like ‘a rush of blood‘ to me. It looked entirely premeditated.
Apparently the RSPB video wasn’t shown in open court but I’m not sure whether Sheriff Matheson had an opportunity to see it behind closed doors. I suspect she didn’t, given the sentence she handed down to Parker – a pathetic Ā£1,575 fine and three months in which to pay it.
This should have been a test case of the new Animals & Wildlife (Penalties, Protections & Powers) (Scotland) Act 2020; legislation that was introduced to increase the penalties available for certain wildlife crimes, including those under Section 1(1)(a) of the Wildlife & Countryside Act – ‘Intentionally, or recklessly, killing, injuring, or taking a wild bird‘. Parker committed his offence after the enactment of this new legislation.
Prior to the new legislation, the maximum penalty available for the type of offence Parker committed was up to six months imprisonment and/or a fine of up to Ā£5,000.
The new legislation increased the maximum penalty available (on summary conviction, as in Parker’s case) to a maximum of 12 months imprisonment and/or a fine of up to Ā£40,000.
So why was Rory Parker only given a Ā£1,575 fine??*
The penalty increases in the new Act were introduced by the Scottish Government because the previous penalties were not considered sufficient to recognise the seriousness of wildlife crime(s) [and animal cruelty offences].
This view was supported by an independent review by Professor Poustie, published in 2015, which concluded that the then maximum penalties available to the courts may not have been serving as a sufficient deterrent to would-be offenders, nor reflecting the seriousness of the crime(s).
The Poustie Review was first commissioned in 2013 by then Environment Minister Paul Wheelhouse, and as part of a series of measures aimed at tackling the continued persecution of birds of prey (see here). It was his response to growing levels of public concern and a lack of confidence in the judiciary to deal with raptor-killing criminals. Criticisms of the system had often centred around perceived corruption, vested-interests and biased Sheriffs, and we had come to expect unduly lenient and inconsistent sentencing in most cases (e.g. see here).
The new legislation was supposed to address those concerns with a significant increase in the severity of penalties available for courts to hand down to offenders.
I don’t see any evidence of that in the sentencing of raptor-killing gamekeeper Rory Parker.
*UPDATE: Someone who was in court on Friday has just been in touch to provide further insight into sentencing. They told me:
‘When the defence KC was summing up he repeatedly suggested to the sheriff what penalty might be most appropriate, i.e. a fine and maybe a community payback order. He also told her Mr Parker had savings of Ā£2,000. It was therefore no surprise at all she then issued a Ā£1,800 fine (discounted to Ā£1,500 because he wasn’t considered an adult when he committed the crime. Since when is a 22 year old not an adult?!!!) In my opinion, therefore, the Sheriff was basically spoon-fed the sentence by the KC‘.
Raptor Persecution UK 
Pointless increasing the maximum fine without having a sensible minimum fine. This individual was obviously guilty and found to be, such an insignificant penalty should not have been available to the Sheriff. Any other losses (gun licence, employment, etc, are entirely down to the offender, and should play no part in determining the level of fine.
We need minimum sentencing for these offences, in addition to maximum. We need to take away the ability of the judiciary to hand out pathetic punishments that act as no deterrent whatsoever. It happens with fox hunting in England and that’s is why these people continue with impunity. What difference does his savings make? It would be the same offence if he had millions in the bank!! And it’s hard to believe that nonsensical reduction for not being considered an adult, despite legally being one. They need to start prosecuting the landowners who employ these degenerates and dishing out some prison sentences. Once you send one of the landowners to prison these crimes will disappear overnight.
[Ed: worth remembering that the landowner isn’t necessarily the one employing the gamekeepers. As in this case, there is a sporting tenant on the estate. Having said that, you’d think that the landowner might have a contract in place with a provision to terminate the lease if there’s evidence of wildlife crime]
Same old stuff, the system is rotten to the core.
Grouse shooting is a rich persons sick hobby and they will include corrupt xxxxx and corrupt xxxxx The rich don’t give a feck what the other half says or cares.
And you don’t care what they think or say, so that’s interesting isn’t it?
The question really is why he did it? The fact he is young means he wonāt have decades of ingrained bias against raptors. So someone told him this was expected of him.
In general terms (not commenting on the back story of this person or this estate, as I don’t know them) an Agent will look to bring in youngsters who are known quantities. They will have a shortlist at recruitment stage and will ask themselves “what will be this candidates attitude be to doing whatever is needed to produce grouse, is he the of the right sort?”. They will answer this by researching /asking on the grapevine – if they don’t already know – to see if he is related (a family name/son/brother) of an established keeper with the right reputation, or which keepers or clique he spent his time with as a kid helping out or beating, or who he did his YT (or similar college scheme, if he did one) training with. It is a key part of the very successful business model of the Agents to know where to go to pick a youngster who “will do the business” as they want it doing, and to know how to bring them on “through the ranks”.
Well said, Spagnum. That’s the process down to a “T”
He didnāt start there until July 2021. Moved up from Ayrshire 2021
Did he go to college and do a game keeping or land management course? There’s a number of higher education establishments that offer these types of courses along with a number of young gamekeepers who have been convicted/investigated for serious wildlife crime. Maybe it’s time someone investigated who’s teaching these courses. Are they retired gamekeepers who are passing on outdated opinions on wildlife management and failing to properly teach a syllabus that properly stresses current laws and legal responsibilities?
I would fully expect the training courses to be perfectly by the book and the teachers to be the same, no doubt the world they describe is the type that the Game Conservancy think exists. But from what I have seen over the years, the real schooling of young wannabe keepers is done helping in the field at the side of an “old hand” or during serving time as a YT (or similar) with them. And it is the reputational standing of said “old hand” that largely determines the currency and desirability of the youngster in the job market. The college certificate is just window dressing.
But this talk of this 20-odd year old being a child, or suggesting he was maybe a just a bit green is just ridiculous. He will likely have picked up the essentials of his trade between ages 14 and 18 and be well honed by 20. Also, one or two keepers with a solid reputations have been known to get big headkeeper jobs in their early twenties. So in that world if you’re good enough, you’re old enough, etc. The Sheriff was conned, in my opinion, into going too easy with the sentence.
Saw a red kite over the house today first one (in my area) (outskirts of Northumberland) Thrilling! Though not that many miles from XXXXXXX where there are about at least 30 birds after a re-introduction several years ago. The gamekeepers and any other culprits of shooting these birds should automatically have their firearms licences revoked, maybe a call for a petition on the matter of this or however else it may work.
I saw a Red Kite when out for a walk in my town in West Wales, in 2021, but not seen one again. There used to be a kept buzzard (falconer) across the valley too, but I don’t see it now, unfortunately. Having moved from Hampshire, where you could see both any day, it was a link with my previous address. I would have thought there would be more in Wales.
Has there been any re-introductions of red kites in Wales?
No Tim.
Thanks Paul.
Err…perhaps not reintroductions but a huge effort to repopulate! You should visit Nant Yr Arian. Its like a gamekeepers nightmare. There are hundreds of red kites at feeding time.
There is a farm in mid-Wales, where they feed red kites daily, it can be quite the tourist attraction, Hundreds of them!
Just to quickly add to that having their firearms licence revoked would probably act as a half decent deterrent not just as a punishment (as the sickos will probably enjoy shooting other animals as well) petition for it?
Yes! Go for it!
His firearms licence probably will be revoked. However other estates may still choose to employ him and allow him to use an unlicensed firearm. After all he’s got a proven track record of doing whatever it takes to maximize grouse numbers and it’s highly unlikely that other estates or employees of an estate he was working on would report the fact that he was in employment as a keeper and no member of the public is going to recognise him should they happen to see him walking around with a shotgun.
Thanks Matt, is it often the case that they have their firearms licences revoked? I didn’t realise that was the case.
I bet if a 22 year old raped a woman or killed his grandma he wouldn’t be considered a child.
Shockingly, Martin, new sentencing guidelines in Scotland for sentencing under-25s means that custodial sentences are not encouraged, even when it involves an offender raping a 13yr old child.
See: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-65173054
Unfortunately that isn’t true. A 17 year old raped a 13 year old and although found guilty he walked away from court with only a community service order.
The post suggests a belief that the KC defended him well. If the KC had been involved before he pleaded guilty he would have been ae to claim that the RSPB were acting illegally in being present to video the offence. I wonder if it is possible that the RSPB were able to call the police at the time of the offence could have made a difference, or whether the COPFS wildlife unit have set new parameters for NGOs. Had this case been ready to go to court in the past 5 years it would have been dropped, as some were. The grouse shooting industry, as well as those interested in obtaining prosecutions must be wondering what has changed.
Why would the RSPB have been acting illegally?
My understanding is that it is not illegal to film someone if you believe that a crime is about to take place, and setting a decoy up on a fence post next to a grouse moor then hiding with a gun should be compelling evidence of this. I suspect what you say is right that it was sufficiently borderline that they couldn’t or didn’t present the video in court.
What is definitely illegal is setting up surveillance cameras without due notice and registration with the Information Commissioner’s Office.
Rubbish how there is no recourse for crap sentencing by the Sherrif. She should have to account for this nonsense sentencing. We could also do with a public Hall of Shame for solicitors who choose to defend these raptor killing bastards!
So accused people aren’t entitled to a good defence because it is your pet cause? Grow up!
Justice isn’t best served by such nonsense.
Itās not that they arenāt entitled to a good defence, the question is, who is paying for it, since the Landowners, SGA, BASC etc all claim zero tolerance for this type of crime so why would they stump up a considerable sum of money to defend this crime
So you think a 21 year old gamekeeper could afford a supposed top barrister? Have you seen what the Tories have done to legal aid? Left to his own resources he would have been lucky to have had a local solicitor, so the question is, who paid for a KC and why?
If the landowner, who didn’t sack him but let him “resign”, then I think a vicarious liability charge should certainly be investigated. If the SGO, it will just underline what we all think about their supposed zero tolerance towards wildlife crime.
[Ed: the landowner wasn’t necessarily involved. There’s a sporting tenant on this estate. Agree though, that vicarious liability should be a consideration. Perhaps it will be?]
Rubbish how there is no recourse for crap sentencing by the Sherrif. She should have to account for this nonsense sentencing. We could also do with a public Hall of Shame for solicitors who choose to defend these raptor killing bastards!
Why was there no evaluation of the mitigation plea (of a rush of blood to the head) against the background of the use of a plastic decoy owl to attract raptors? These lawyers and judges are supposed to be intelligent people. Only explanation can be is that they are complicit in down valuing these crimes. Another depressing outcome.
It is the same with all wildlife crime: magistrates and judges always find some reason for not imposing the maximum available penalties, if they don’t find a technicality to throw out the charges. Look at the Allen Lambert case, the then worst raptor persecution crime in East Anglia, who was let off with a smack on the wrist because he lost his job and his tied cottage. It would have been a kindness, under those circumstances, to give him a jail cell: clearly the judge didn’t think it through.
As for the estate: initially the Rural Payments Agency made a swingeing cut to their grants and then, ever so quietly, reinstated them. The whole system is corrupt, despite the good intentions of some wildlife crimes officers and even one or two senior officers.
In “A rush of blood” He produced an owl decoy!
Does anyone know why the video wasn’t shown in court?
It is really difficult to understand how this well evidenced premeditated crime has not been adequately punished.
Interesting that Mark Moir KC was also mentioned as the defense for a falconer accused of mistreating raptors. Does he have some particular interest in these wildlife crime cases? Or perhaps he’s on the shooting industry/fieldsports speed-dial for damage limitation now? Maybe his defense comes as part of a membership package??…
https://raptorpersecutionuk.org/2023/03/14/prominent-falconer-cleared-of-welfare-allegations-relating-to-ten-eagles-but-faces-charges-for-another-90-eagles/
Can’t the Scottish prosecutors apply for a review of the sentence because they feel it’s too lenient? I hope the RSPB video was shown on Scottish TV news so the public could see just how callous he was. Public pressure is going to be the only way sentences are increased to a level more in keeping with the offence
Definitely agree with you
“Canāt the Scottish prosecutors apply for a review of the sentence because they feel itās too lenient?”
My understanding is that yes, they can. But the public cannot (in Scotland).
However, the sentence is only considered unduly lenient if it falls outside of the “normal range of sentences the judge could have considered”. So, if the precedent of lenient sentencing has already been set…
“The prosecution can’t challenge a sentence just because they think it’s not severe enough.”
See https://www.mygov.scot/after-the-verdict/the-appeals-process
Scottish Law needs to change. Lobby your MSP…
I might consider lobbying my MSP if he wasn’t Fergus Ewing,who has previously attended a game fair on the Moy estate and seems to be highly supportive of the shooting industry.
You have my sympathy.
What I do with a hostile local representative is copy my letter to the local press and/or the Government Minister responsible for the subject at hand.
That way opens up a route for pointing out to the local press, later, that the local representative has failed to respond or is actively opposed to what I am proposing. You may find that supporters of local opposition parties may then join in…
Is there any way of appealing this sentence? The Sheriff originally specialised in child and family law work. Would she be biased towards the ‘young’ defendant, though surely should be able to treat him as adult!?
If he was old enough to have a gun licence (which I hope is no longer so) then he was mature enough to behave sensibly. Does anyone know T & Cs of licence application? Does it, for instance, need signing by an employer, certifying good and steady character?
Which leads me to think that there might be value in a rational set of changes to gun licences. Let then repay to the Police the cost of managing them, for a start. Have an automatic if temporary wildrawal if the licencee is charged to appeal in Court, any Court, any charge. Let it be a symbol of correctness of behaviour.
Perhaps others can suggest more.
License has to be signed by your doctor or a judge, an MP, a lawyer etc; supposed to be someone of good standing but if it is refused join the BASC and they will fight your case to get you a licence. I knew an under cover police man that goes shooting and now a game keeper close to Edinburgh that bragged to me about catching a fox on a fishing line with a big hook and chicked bait. They are all big men with a gun that can do no wrong. Just like Dunblane Primary School.
Good article Ruth, picking apart the deceit that underlies these public displays of faux penance. i still have a problem understanding why some who claim green/ecological credentials choose to work with DGM’s in any shape or form. As usual estates continue to deny all wrongdoing and this appears to be routinely ignored by them. There has been no positive change in the response of any of the above. If anything any change has been negative as they have employed PR companies to facilitate their defence which relies on incomplete information and a faulty context.
Just been reading the Strathdearn & Speyside Moorland Group Facebook page. Both the Moy grouse shooting estate & the Lochindorb grouse shooting estate are members. The most recent post is an advertisement for beat keeper at Lochindorb, where you can find details of the estate & qualifications for the job. It would seem a criminal record would xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
This blog reports that the KC said that the defendant should have been shooting pigeons and crows and then referenced feral pigeons as a particular problem on the estate.
If this is the case and the task was to deplete the population of feral pigeons then this fence post with the pigeon decoy would have been chosen for its position at or near a centre of their feral pigeon population.
I am wondering what the data would show if as an experiment another plastic owl was put on the same fence post and all the birds attracted were recorded (but not shot obviously).
Any ideas out there as to what this trial/experiment might reveal?
[Ed: Interesting comment. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen or heard of feral pigeons being attracted to a decoy owl to mob/attack it, in the same way that raptors would be attracted to it. If killing large amounts of feral pigeons was the intention, there are far more effective, and less time-consuming, methods!]
I was wondering if there was a search done for a [Ed: Thanks spaghnum morose but I don’t think it’s a good idea to publish this!]
As nearly always he got away lightly, with the KC trying at least to lead the sheriff in sentencing, he may even have succeeded which frankly is appalling. This crime was no rush of blood, it was a carefully set trap for any raptor that mobbed or was attracted by the decoy owl, he was there to shoot raptors, corvids, of which most he could have legally shot are too canny to come to a plastic owl they need the real thing. That should have been made clear to the sheriff, with the video evidence if necessary ( Which it was IMO) He should have got jail time, that he didn’t is an addition to all the other sentencing travesties in Scotland and England.
‘(discounted to Ā£1,500 because he wasnāt considered an adult when he committed the crime. Since when is a 22 year old not an adult?!!!)’
###
Since 26th January 2022 the Scottish Sentencing Guidelines stipulate that those under 25 are to be treated differently to older people. So a custodial sentence was never going to be imposed, and the fine was probably reduced for the same reason.
Thanks for this, Dave. I’ve been reading up on these new guidelines – for anyone interested here are the details:
Click to access sentencing-young-people-guideline-for-publication.pdf
I cannot help but think that the Scottish Government (SNP and Greens) have left the public behind.
From the Guidelines: “8. The best interests of the young person should be considered in every case, and must be a *primary* consideration when the young person is under the age of 18, in accordance with the provisions of the UNCRC.
So much for the victim:-(
The UNCRC (United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child) define a “child and young person” as being under 17. Not under 18. It is not new: it came into force on 15th January 1992.
I think the Scottish “Guidelines” published 26th January 2022 go well beyond the UNCRC.
I wasn’t present but I suspect the reduction in the fine would have been attributed to the guilty plea rather than the age of the offender.
You guys just hate people richer than you mostly. It’s sad.
Desperate straw-clutching. Some folk here might be millionaires for all you know. Rich or poor, criminal scum are criminal scum.
He killed a bird. He shouldn’t have.
The level of vitriol suggests that isn’t really the issue for a lot of folks. You object to the Grouse moors and rich people shooting on them and having more than you.
Hi Philip
I’m not sure I would describe the comments as vitriolic but there is a very strong reaction to the suffering and killing of Raptors.
The majority of people on this blog get very upset and yes, probably angry at the persecution of wildlife.
That is the issue that drives us to a) read Ruth’s blog and b) to comment.
It has nothing to do with wealth. You have no idea what assets we have.
I wonder why you take this position when the most important factor is the health and safety of Raptors. And by the way (for me) the hundreds and thousands of innocent sentient beings which are snared and trapped and the damage to precious eco systems, just so that people can shoot birds. It’s a cycle of destruction.
Sentient? Do me a favour, raptors are killing machines.
I am all for people hiding from reality of it keeps them sleep but Grouse moors are as much as Ecosystem as anything else.
Quite a few humans kill (and not for food) but they are still sentient.
Raptors have to eat. Is your position that you want to eradicated Raptors because they kill to eat?
Your reaction to the death of a bird but your inaction in the game of 1 Million people in concentration camps in China is telling. I about and want to preserve all sorts off things but I don’t hate anyone or wish them imprisoned and denied council as one poster suggested.
This is a blog about Raptors. If we start introducing other topics it would be inappropriate. It doesn’t mean we don’t take action on other injustices. Surely you can work that out for yourself?
Pathetic whataboutery. You’re making a fool of yourself now.
“raptors are killing machines”
So are Swallows. Bet you don’t hate them.
The irony of the well trodden & discredited (in fact abandoned, by the mainstream of the shooting industry) argument that Philip is repeating is not lost on me or no doubt anyone that knows some history of a few grouse moors. It is petty jealousy & envy along with personal insecurity that has driven a lot of ramping up of persecution on many Estates. On many occasions an Owner has been content for years with his bag averages and with his keeper team who maybe have a comparitively “soft” approach to birds of prey. Then a nearby moor or two intensify their management and start outperforming his moor and making his empire look, well…a bit shit in comparison. He can’t stand looking inferior – he is jealous and needs to be among the top-dogs so he has to match them! So usually, with a willing Agent or Consultant at his side, he will sack or force out his old keepers and bring in a new team who have a zero tolerance to predators of all kinds. A few years later, hey ho his bag numbers are up on a par with his peers and he feels good about himself again. The place maybe devoid of raptors but who cares? Just the “antis” resentful only about wealth…what bollocks.
I object to…
the wanton damage to ecosystems, simply to maintain a diseased-ridden unnatural density of a single species, in order for them to be killed for the empty-headed amusement of individuals who lack the intellect to find something positive to do with their time…
I object to…
the sickening cruelty, and total contempt for living beings involved…
I object to…
the exacerbation of the effects of flooding in local communities, which damages the local economy, and causes high levels of anguish for those trying to make an honest living…
I object to…
the release of thousands of tonnes of Co2 into our atmosphere by the morons who burn the uplands each year…
I object to…
the continual lies and obfuscation from those involved, who engage in the fraudulent pretence of being representative of rural communities,and who laughably style themselves as “guardians” of our countryside, while wilfully desecrating it to suit their own ends…
I object to…
being told by one who has never met me, what I object to.
Is that clear enough for you?
Hardly, it said that Mr.Parker only had Ā£2000 savings. Even still a lot to some.