ACCUSED DOG ABUSER FOUND GUILTY
April 27, 2026: Carly Young Cruelty Abuse Trial – a review of the day – and a VERDICT – BUT is the suggested penalty enough?
With much anticipation we arrived.
We were there to represent Dakota. Just like we always have…to ensure this beautiful young dog was present – never forgotten!!!
Would Carly and Chris Young appear in person as they were ordered to at the last court date? Several times they had been no shows and at the last date Chris said they would not be coming to Welland on April 27th.
Then we saw them enter the courthouse.
They were escorted by a police officer (we assume to ensure the peace was kept). Thanks to the community of animal lovers the killing of Dakota, the investigation, charges and trial were of HIGH public interest. Even the Justice commented on this fact.
The proceedings start…
The Justice explaining to Carly that it was her decision as to whether to testify in her own defence or not. She indicated was going to testify.
As with throughout the entire trial, Carly Young had no defence lawyer. Her husband Christopher was permitted to sit at the defence table and today he was also permitted to stand by the witness box and “support” her as Carly gave her account and the Crown cross examined her.
In her account, Carly said Chris was over at their old apartment as they were moving from there to a new address. Dakota and their other dog were outside and Dakota was wearing a nylon muzzle used by groomers. She said the dogs were only outside for 5 minutes. Carly said the muzzle was used to stop her from barking. For those who might not be familiar, this type of muzzle is only used for a very short time, supervised and for personal safety at …like a veterinary appointment or nail clipping. It was not meant to be worn to stop a dog from barking – ever., in the glaring sun on a 31 degree C July day.
Carly indicated the muzzle was loose – she could get two fingers inside the muzzle when it was closed. Carly also indicated that Dakota had a plastic bag in her mouth. Carly said that someone else must have found Dakota and tightened the muzzle after she ran from the home.
Dakota was tethered to a glass patio table by a red cable.
Carly continued onto to say the Shaw cable guy was there. While using a ladder it made a noise which spooked Dakota and Dakota took off running. Carly said she could not go after her, she flagged down an OPP car and went towards the baseball diamond. She said she called Chris who came to search as well.
Crown starts cross examination…
The Prosecutor starts off addressing the muzzle. She reviews what Carly testified to but then says that when Animal Control (AC) officer Michael Shedden arrived at the scene where Dakota collapsed and died the muzzle was on very tight. So tight in fact that skin bulged out around the sides of the muzzle.
Carly indicated that AC Officer Shedden had previously told her to use a groomers muzzle to stop her from barking. Crown commented that a groomers type muzzle is NEVER meant to be used to stop a dog from barking.
At this point, Chris prompted Carly to say that Dakota could sometimes nip. She then said it was Chris who put the muzzle on Dakota but that she could breath. Chris interjected and prompted Carly to say that Dakota had her tongue protruding while she was wearing the muzzle.
Note: in regard to Chris having put the muzzle on Dakota, earlier Carly testified that Chris was at their old apartment at this time, the dogs had only been outside for 5 minutes. So how was this possible?
OBSERVATION: during the cross examination, in our opinion the Prosecutor failed to follow up on a couple of key inconsistencies such as how Chris could have put the muzzle on the dogs when he was not home.
Final submissions commence…
The Crown Prosecutor goes first.
- The act resulted in death
- Dakota’s death was entirely preventable
- Dakota would have experienced “extreme” distress, pain, suffering
- Death was caused by neglect of care exhibited by Carly Young
- The muzzle was used in an inappropriate and unsafe way that could and did cause grave harm
- It was a 31 degree Celsius July day
- There was no shade or water available on the patio where Carly had put the dogs
- When AC Officer Shedden arrived on the scene where Dakota was deceased.
- The muzzle was on and closed.
- The muzzle was on so tight that her mouth was clamped entirely shut, and that skin protruded and that clear indentation marks were visible on her skin of her snout.
- There was no sign of the owners, just a bystander (who the Crown never called as a witness)
- The Crown spent a good amount of time reviewing Dr. Ian Welch’s findings based on necropsy results of Dakota.
- That there was no sign of any blunt force trauma or of being hit by a car
- That the cause of death was heat stroke and asphyxiation and the method of death was the muzzle
- That without the muzzle being on, Dakota would not have died
- Dr. Welch indicated that Dakota would have experienced “extreme” distress while struggling to breath to survive until the heat stroke caused her organs to fail and she passed
- Blood had accumulated around her lungs and kidneys
- Dakota’s feet and pads were covered in blood from running on the hot pavement and from paddling activity during seizures once she collapsed
Carly Young’s Final Submission…
- White Carly had testified that a plastic bag was in Dakota’s mouth, during final submission Chris prompted Carly to state that someone must have stopped Dakota after running away, tightened the muzzle.
- Carly reports that they spent 2 hours looking for her but to no avail
- Once back at home, she received a call from AC and Dakota’s identify was confirmed
- Carly said she asked to see Dakota and was told no
10am Justice starts deliberations, court to reconvene at 1:30pm and see if verdict is reached…
Court reconvenes at 1:30pm and the Justice begins rendering her findings and verdict….
Justice indicates that the Crown witnesses are consistent and is supported by the medical findings testified to by Dr. Welch. She said she does not accept Carly Young’s account.
The Justice announces CarlyYoung is guilty on all 4 charges.
Justice asks the Crown for sentencing recommendations which are:
- 6 months in jail
- $25,000 fine for Count 1 (Major Offence)
- $2,500 fine for each of Counts 3 & 4 (Minor Offences)
- Sentencing recommendation will move forward on Counts 1, 3 & 4
- Note: Count #2 is stayed as it is very similar to Count #1 (this argument is from a Canadian law principle based on case “R vs Kienapple” where an accused cannot be convicted of multiple offences arising from same act or set of facts).
- Lifetime ban of owning or caring for an animal
- 2 years probation
Crown justified the sentencing recommendations on:
- Result of act was death and severity of distress and suffering by Dakota
- The case had a high level of public interest
- The defendant showed little cooperation with Provincial Animal Welfare Services (AWS) the Crown and the Court
- Contempt for process (multiple no shows in court, not following court directions to appear)
- Case law of recent animal cruelty cases in Ontario (lack of)
Justice asks Defence for sentencing recommendations.
Note: Humane Initiative had to leave just prior to the proceedings ending for the day but we were provided with the Defence’s recommendations:
- No jail time
- A total fine of $6,000 ($2,000 per charge)
- 2 1/2 – 3 yrs probation
- Lifetime ban of owning or caring for animals
Defence justified sentencing recommendation on:
- Both on disability payments only
- First offence
- Chris submitted medical papers regarding Carly’s self admission for psychriatic assessment
- Proof of expenditures must be submitted to the Court
A Pre-sentencing Report will be prepared. Justice will bring down sentencing on 17 July 2026.
