The lawyer for Benjamin Wright had argued that Wright fell within the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act and so treatment rather than punishment was in order.

But magistrate Michael Holmes ruled against removing the threat of prison from him. Now, Wright will be assessed by social and psychiatric experts before sentencing in the New Year.

The slaughter man admitted that he killed his partner’s pets in a fit of “inexplicable acts of cruelty”. He had pleaded guilty to acts of “aggravated cruelty” towards three dogs and a cat. 

On March 22, he killed the four animals with such brutality that, in the case of the cat, its tail became dislodged from its spine.

The court heard previously that he had told the police that he had dispatched the animals humanely because they were ill.

But a vet who examined the carcasses found no ailments, and thought they had died in great pain.

According to the court, his partner said that Wright had been sharpening his knife a week before killing the animals. 

The couple plus his daughter were living in a caravan in the bush and, the court heard, he was under severe financial and emotional pressure. He had been prone to angry outbursts.

Wright’s defence counsel, Chris Leahy, had argued that it was an “inexplicable, sudden burst of cruel activity”. Mr Leahy’s argument was that it was consistent with Wright’s mental condition which was “bipolar”.

But prosecutor Cheryl Hall had told the court that there was “an element of planning”. The animals “weren’t killed humanely. They did suffer horrific and tremendous terror”.

Magistrate Holmes rejected the Mental Health Act argument and will sentence Wright in the New Year.