A Bradford woman accused of neglecting and causing unnecessary suffering to animals is to face more charges after the RSPCA took more creatures from her home.
Colman, who did not come into the courtroom, had pleaded not guilty at an earlier hearing to three charges of causing unnecessary suffering to a protected animal and 12 of failing to ensure the welfare of an animal.
All the charges were brought under the Animal Welfare Act of 2006.
The animals concerned range from dogs and cats to chickens, rabbits, hamsters and a ferret.
The charges of causing unnecessary suffering allege that Colman failed to get veterinary care for a dog with conjunctivitis, a hamster with neurological problems and another hamster with dermatitis and inflamed skin.
The other 12 charges allege that Colman did not take reasonable steps to ensure the needs of an animal.
One charge alleged she failed to provide a suitable environment for 15 cats, two dogs and three chickens.
Others alleged she failed to protect cats from flea infestation.
Other charges claimed Colman failed to protect cats from an untreated skin condition; another alleged a dog had overgrown nails; a chicken was said not to have been given an appropriate diet; rabbits did not have an appropriate diet; a hamster had an untreated nose lesion; and three rabbits and a ferret were alleged to have inadequate drinking water and were housed together as predator and prey.
All the offences were alleged to have taken place last year.
Nigel Monaghan, prosecuting for the RSPCA, said that a further 20 animals had been removed from Colman’s home and the trial would probably involve more than 30 charges.
Mr Monaghan said the defendant refused to believe she had done anything wrong.
The case was adjourned until April 16. Colman was granted unconditional bail.