The courtroom was silent as Ashley Warren recounted the frantic phone call – a child’s voice, choked with sobs, delivering the horrifying news: the dogs had attacked Esther Martin. He broke down, tears streaming as jurors watched a video of the puppies, a stark contrast to the tragedy that unfolded.
Warren had asked 68-year-old Ms. Martin, a neighbor, to watch his two XL bully dogs while he pursued a fleeting ambition – a music video shoot in London. He described a simple request: letting the dogs into the front garden a few times to relieve themselves. He never anticipated the catastrophic outcome.
His journey to London, he explained, was about more than just the video; it was about “meeting up with my lady friend.” But the carefree pursuit of personal connection was shattered by the call from the house, a desperate plea for help amidst unimaginable violence. Panic seized him, and he urged the child on the phone to escape, to find safety.
Racing back to Clacton, Warren desperately sought someone, “a strong man,” to intervene, to potentially save Ms. Martin. He felt helpless, consumed by a growing dread as he realized the gravity of the situation. The image of the attack haunted his every thought.
The recent ban on XL bully dogs weighed heavily on his testimony. He believed neutering and muzzling were prerequisites for walking them, a requirement he hadn’t fulfilled. He confessed to keeping the dogs confined, fearing they would be euthanized, a fear that paralyzed him into inaction.
Under questioning, Warren revealed a stark financial reality. He was reliant on benefits and simply couldn’t afford the necessary equipment – a muzzle costing around £20 – despite acknowledging its affordability. This contrasted sharply with the £40 he’d spent on a train ticket to London.
He faces charges of owning dogs dangerously out of control, resulting in Ms. Martin’s death. He also denies possessing a bladed article, claiming the knife was solely for use during the music video shoot. The prosecution pressed him on his lack of compliance with the new legislation, pointing out he held no exemption certificates for the banned dogs.
Warren admitted the dogs were banned as of February 1, 2024, and that he hadn’t even applied for the required certificates. His defense centers on a combination of financial hardship and a desperate attempt to navigate a rapidly changing legal landscape, while the prosecution seeks to establish a pattern of negligence and disregard for public safety.
The trial continues, leaving unanswered questions about responsibility and the tragic consequences of a fateful decision. The courtroom remains a space of intense scrutiny, as the jury weighs the evidence and seeks to understand the events that led to Esther Martin’s death.
