Anita Killeen, an Auckland barrister and former senior prosecutor with the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), has shown that good litigators can use their skills in unexpected places, and to startling effect, when they support a cause. Killeen realised that she could protect the shelter animals she cared for outside work while at the same time preventing acts of animal cruelty becoming serious acts of violence against humans.

Killeen’s campaign, carried out over two years with the SPCA, ended with the doubling of the maximum fine for wilful ill-treatment of an animal to $100,000 for an individual and $500,000 for a body corporate. The maximum sentence of imprisonment was also increased from three to five years thanks to the collective influence of the lawyers Killeen has involved in the ‘Leagle Beagles’ project – a pro bono panel set up to take on SPCA cruelty prosecutions. There is also now a new offence under the Animal Welfare Act - reckless ill-treatment of animals. Killeen worked to achieve all this on a pro bono basis, so the SPCA could use valuable donations for looking after animals instead of legal fees.

Legal Beagles started after Killeen observed that so many of the cruelty cases she witnessed when visiting her local animal shelter went un-prosecuted and the animals were euthanised. “Before the law was changed people weren’t going to prison, but both the public and eventually the judges responded to the need to treat the offending party seriously,” said Killeen. She joined the board of the SPCA and began approaching prominent New Zealand lawyers to take cruelty cases for free. As she already worked in the SFO Killeen knew the right prosecutors to approach: “I spoke to the three or four key people first and it snowballed really quickly. One weekend I gathered everyone together (21 barristers, QCs and partners) and framed the situation in the easiest possible way to make sure they all said yes.”

From that weekend, Legal Beagles was born and the calibre of lawyers willing to donate eight hours per year to the cause had the desired impact on the judges hearing the cases. By February 2010 the legislation had been amended.