Further to yesterday’s news that Scottish gamekeeper Russell Mason, 49, had pleaded guilty to battering a trapped Goshawk to death on a shooting estate in Perthshire (see here), the Daily Record has published more detail about this case, which is quite disturbing.
The article is reproduced below in case this URL is broken/removed at a later date.
Russell Mason, 49, lured the protected goshawk into a baited trap before battering it several times with a cosh to cause its agonising death.
He was also found to have left nearly 200 rounds of live ammunition lying around in his bedroom and unsecured within his Polaris Ranger vehicle.
Fiscal depute Karon Rollo told Perth Sheriff Court: “Goshawks are rare birds of prey. They hunt birds and small animals. They have a wingspan of up to four feet and weigh between two and three pounds.
“They were persecuted to extinction in Scotland in the last century, but have been reintroduced, with now around 100 breeding pairs in existence.
“A crow cage trap was visited by RSPB staff on 9 January 2024. At the time this trap was set, it had a meat bait, and the door was chained and padlocked shut.
“It had a sign on the trap stating that the Scottish Government pays the estate to catch carrion crows from 1 March to 30 June to increase the chick survival rates for conservation-listed bird species.
“To continue observations and continue with this research, it was decided to install a continuous recording static camera covering this crow cage trap“.
She said RSPB staff visited the camera several times to review the captured footage and became aware of a male visiting the trap on 12 February 2024.
“At this time there was a goshawk and a crow in the trap,” Ms Rollo said. “The male opened and entered the trap. After entering he used a hand-held net to capture the goshawk and put it to the ground.
“He then struck the bird six times with a cosh. He placed the bird into a carrier bag, rolled it up and put the package under his arm.
“He left the trap, placed the net in the back of the vehicle and the bag in the cab. He locked the trap and drove off“.
The prosecutor said: “The male was identified from the footage by police officers, who knew him as being gamekeeper Russell Mason. The crow cage trap number related to the accused.
“Footage on other dates, including him putting a decoy bird in the trap, confirmed his identity. An avian vet specialising in raptors was shown the footage.
“He opined that the goshawk looked healthy and was exhibiting the normal behaviour of a captured raptor. Goshawks, in his experience, as ‘particularly flighty and stressy birds’ and this one was no exception.
“He describes it as showing a man beating a goshawk to death with a cudgel with the bird having been first netted within a crow cage trap.
“He states there were six blows to the body, which may have caused broken wings or rib fractures during the trauma, and that it was quite obviously not killed outright with one blow.
“He is of the view that it is extremely unlikely that it would have been lying passively in the net and therefore there is a high possibility that it would have sustained painful fractures and injuries before dying“.
A search of Mason’s cottage found unsecured ammunition, along with clothes matching those seen on the CCTV footage. A bag and cosh were found in his vehicle.
The bag was analysed and found to have goshawk DNA on it. The search team recovered 195 illegally stored rounds of ammunition.
Mason admitted intentionally or recklessly killing a goshawk on 12 February 2024 by seizing it with a net before repeatedly striking it with a cosh on Cochrage Moor, Bridge of Cally, Perthshire.
He also admitted breaching the terms of his firearms certificate by failing to store ammunition securely.
Sentence on Mason was deferred for the preparation of social work reports until next month by Sheriff Alison McKay and he was granted bail.
Mason was previously placed on the sex offenders register after being spotted carrying out a solo sex act in his car by a resident of a sheltered housing complex.
He was spotted by an elderly woman with his trousers down as he sat in the car beside a path used by children to walk to and from school.
When officers told Mason they were at the scene to investigate reports of someone masturbating in a car, he said: “That was me.”
Mason admitted carrying out an act of public indecency outside the sheltered housing complex in Harriet Court, Blairgowrie, and was placed on the register for a year.
ENDS
A reminder – sentencing for Mason’s latest convictions (wildlife crime & firearms offences) has been deferred until 24 April 2026 for background reports.
UPDATE 23 March 2026: Game-shooting industry’s response to the recent conviction of Perthshire gamekeeper Russell Mason (here)
Raptor Persecution UK 
The Record article makes it clear that the camera was installed by the estate not the RSPB. Thus the ludicrous change in the law enacted without parliamentary approval by the Crown Office Procurator Fiscal Service has not been overturned. Scotland is still in the position that a camera set up by anyone on land not belonging to them may not be used in court to convict these organised criminals. The exception that a camera may be installed if the estate has given permission is as unlikely as ever to be available to the RSPB or members of the public. We may freely take photographs etc but not set thrm up or use them to prove criminality.
The COPFS law still apploes in Scotland, making the will of Parliament less powerful then the need for criminals to escape justice, when backed by senior figures in the judiciary.
Your comment doesn’t make any sense, Alex.
The camera was installed by the RSPB, not by the estate.
What ‘ludicrous change in the law enacted without parliamentary approval by the Crown Office Procurator Fiscal Service‘ are you referring to?
What do you mean by the ‘COPFS law‘?
The Daily Record article says: “To continue observations and continue with this research, it was decided to install a continuous recording static camera covering this crow cage trap“. I interpreted this to mean that the estate had installed the camera. This makes sense to me because if the RSPB had installed the camera then it could not have been used in a Scottish court, which was the point of my post.
The COPFS said in a letter to the convener of the Environment, Climate change and Land Reform Colmmittee in May 2017: “Crown Counsel concluded that the placing of covert cameras was, in those cases, for the purpose of detecting crime and, as that activity was not authorised, the subsequent video evidence was obtained irregularly. The irregularity was not capable of being excused, for the purposes of the common law of admissibility, and it followed, on the application of the common law principles to which I have referred, that the evidence was inadmissible. In light of that conclusion it was appropriate that the proceedings were brought to an end.”
The effect of this letter was that a crime for which a gamekeeper had already been imprisoned would not have been imprisoned had this “Law Change” been enacted at the time, and several cases already in process were similarly abandoned.
I trust that this is sufficiently clear to explain my post.
I have much history in this matter, and would be happy to explain further my (and many others) view on this post.
Ok, I see how you came to think that the camera was installed by the estate. But it wasn’t, the RSPB installed it. The Daily Record article has omitted some context to the discussion that was heard in court – namely, that the RSPB is conducting long term research on the use/abuse of Crow cage traps, hence the line….”To continue observations and continue with this research, it was decided to install a continuous recording static camera covering this crow cage trap“.
Re: your commentary on COPFS – I’m afraid you’re misinterpreting what COPFS does and how it does it. COPFS doesn’t make laws, or change them. Its job is to interpret the law, in light of the available evidence relating to a particular case.
Thank you for the clarification regarding the placing of the camera. I’m pleased that the RSPB has been able to place a camera for “research”. I hope that they conduct a great deal more “research”.
I appreciate your view that COPFS has not changed the Law. I hope that you can agree that the effect of their review has been to change the Law as it was at that time understood and makes it difficult, if not impossible, to have wildlife crimes prosecuted in Scotland assisted by video evidence.
I also hope that the Crown Office do not feel the need to review the legislation again if it begins to disturb the “Glorious 12th.” They will be under pressure from now to do so, in my opinion.
I’m assuming that the sign on the trap (saying that the “Scottish Government pays the estate to catch carrion crows from 1 March to 30 June to increase the chick survival rates for conservation-listed bird species”) was mere bullshit to impress / reassure a casual rambler that might come across the trap?
Unless this estate actually had at some point ever received grants or payments for conservation projects that they could twist the meaning of?
My bet is that this is one for the archive of the many signs put up by keepers and estates that are simply lies to influence and / or control the general public.
“I’m assuming that the sign on the trap (saying that the “Scottish Government pays the estate to catch carrion crows from 1 March to 30 June to increase the chick survival rates for conservation-listed bird species”) was mere bullshit to impress / reassure a casual rambler that might come across the trap?”
Sadly not. Through the Scottish Government’s Agri-Environment Climate Scheme (AECS) NatureScot funds applicants who “include effort proportionate to the needs of the site, within the eligible funding period of 1 March – 30 June (the bird nesting season). You must demonstrate in a predator control plan how your activities will help specific bird populations”
https://www.ruralpayments.org/topics/all-schemes/agri-environment-climate-scheme/management-options-and-capital-items/predator-control/guidance-for-predator-control/#:~:text=You%20must%20include%20effort%20proportionate,early%20in%20the%20application%20window.
Hmmm, a couple of known gateway offences there.
Exhibitionism is a known precursor to further sexual offending.
Violence against animals is a known precursor to violence against humans.
This is a potentially dangerous person.
I hope this is reflected in the pre-sentence reports.
NB, if I as a retired MH nurse know this then those preparing the reports most certainly should.
Some sweeping statements here Murmur. I have been a hunter all my life, which you might construe as violence towards animals, yet I have never in my 78 years ever considered violence towards humans. It may be true in some but absolutely not in all.
Murmur’s statements are not that sweeping, NIck Kester – and s/he said “This is a potentially dangerous person.”
Of course not every killer of animals graduates to killing humans.
And I do think killing animals is an act of violence.
Statements founded in research and observation of offenders and their histories.
If beating a hawk to death with a cosh isn’t violence against animals, I don’t know what is.
Hunting is an interesting topic and not one that, AFAIK, was included in such research.
Dear Murmur (whoever you are)
what is AFAIK?
I have no doubt that for some – weak minded – individuals one abuse can lead to another, all I ask is that you do not include me and other hunters in your mindset. Just a polite request which I am sure you will acknowledge is fair.
I didn’t include hunting: you brought that one up.
If you have any issues with the copious research out there, please take that up with the relevant journals, forensic psychiatrists and psychologists, criminologists and the like.
Couple of references from the many available:
https://www.ncdv.org.uk/the-correlation-between-animal-abuse-and-domestic-abuse/
https://medcraveonline.com/FRCIJ/animal-cruelty-pet-abuse-amp-violence-the-missed-dangerous-connection.html
There is a deal of such research out there.
So Russell Mason, David Campbell and Racster Dingwall were all licenced to wander round with a shotgun. Have these licenses been revoked by the police. If not why not?? Not sure why all three were deemed suitable to hold a licence in the first place based on what is known now, following their convictions.