We recently reported on the prosecution at Leicester Magistrates Court of huntsman John Oliver Finnegan, 36, and whipper-in Rhys Matcham 30. They were accused of breaching the 2004 Hunting Act in Leicestershire on February 4 last year by encouraging hounds to look for a fox after a trail hunt was set up as a charade. Both men denied any wrongdoing.

The prosecution was abandoned by the Crown when their first witness, Roger Swaine of The League Against Cruel Sports acknowledged that he could not see where Matcham was looking when a fox was seen to emerge from a covert. Defence lawyer Stephen Welford then asked Mr Swaine: “It’s perfectly reasonable to suggest that hounds were in that bit of covert, they had found an artificial trail… and a fox popped out. That is one possibility, is it not?” Mr Swaine answered: “Yes.”

Mark Fielding of the Crown Prosecution Service said: “The Crown Prosecution Service have a duty to review the prospects of success of a matter at all times, up to and including the end of the case.

“Suffice to say, having listened to Mr Swaine giving clearly honest and truthful evidence in cross-examination, for which he is to be commended, my impression, which I communicated to the reviewing lawyer, was that this case no longer had a reasonable prospect of success.

“Bearing in mind what the Crown are asking the court to do is interpret actions of the hunt as we saw on the film, the concessions made by Mr Swaine… reduce the prospects of success such that there are no longer any reasonable prospects of success.”

Following Mr Fielding’s comments, the chairman of the three-strong magistrates’ bench entered not guilty verdicts on both defendants.

As we said wghen first reporting this case a number of others are in the pipeline. It is to be hoped that the Crown Prosecution Service has assessed their evidence in these cases carefully. Enthusiasm, however welcome, is no substitute for careful preparation.