A NEWCASTLE Emlyn pensioner was aiming at a squirrel when he shot his neighbour’s cat by mistake, leaving it paralysed and needing to be put down, magistrates have heard.

John Charles Quinney, 71, shot the cat called Fluff while trying to fire at a squirrel in his back garden.

He then took the cat to a vet where it had to be put down because of its injuries.

Quinney pleaded guilty to a charge of causing unnecessary suffering to the cat by shooting at it on 27 March.

RSPCA prosecutor John Tarrant told magistrates that Quinney, of Tanyrallt, had gone to his neighbour’s home to tell them that he had accidentally shot their cat and had taken it to a vet.

An RSPCA inspector visited the vet practice with notes showing that Quinney said he had shot the cat accidentally while trying to shoot a squirrel that was scaring birds on his bird table.

A second vet’s report found that the shot had left the cat paralysed in its back legs and had led to it being put down, with the report saying that the cat would have suffered both physically and mentally.

In an interview, Quinney said he hadn’t realised he had shot the cat as he was shooting at a squirrel, but that when he realised that he had shot the cat he took the animal to a vet straight away.

Mr Tarrant said that Quinney’s basis of plea was that he had been “reckless” as there was a risk of hitting the cat with the pellet, and that he accepted the cat had suffered.

Defence solicitor Katy Hanson said Quinney was very remorseful about what had happened and was adamant he had not deliberately tried to shoot the cat.

Ms Hanson said after the incident he had told his neighbours what had happened and rushed the cat to a vet as soon as he could.

She said: “Once this had happened he did everything he could to do the right thing by the cat and the owners.

“This is an unfortunate incident, one which he deeply, deeply regrets. If he could change it, he would, but he cannot.”

While magistrates had to consider imposing a ban on Quinney keeping animals, Ms Hanson said that would not be appropriate as it was not a deliberate attempt to cause suffering to the cat.

Quinney was fined £160 and ordered to pay costs of £430.

While magistrates said they considered a ban on Quinney keeping animals, they had decided not to impose a ban.