The owner of three ornamental croaking frogs has been fined after a court found him guilty of annoying his neighbours.

Householders living next to Andrew Cromar's battery-operated plastic garden figures were so incensed by the non-stop ribbeting that they took him to court.

On Monday, the Glasgow resident's frogs were branded a nuisance and he was fined £150 by Glasgow District Court.

The plastic ornaments, which had been taken to the court hearing, were fitted with a sensor to detect movement and croaked non-stop.

Mr Cromar had denied causing annoyance and he refused to tone down the frogs, which cost £ each, when told to do so by police.

Neighbour Catherine Watt, 65, had earlier told the court it was the final straw for her in February last year when she began suffering a sleeping disorder, had high blood pressure and was on medication.

She said: "Frogs were croaking each and every time I entered my own garden for some considerable time."

Mrs Watt had identified the frogs in court when one was activated.

'Invasion of privacy'

She complained to police and said: "I felt it was an invasion of my privacy.

"I thought if they don't keep quiet I'm going to go off my head."

Her husband James, 66, told the court the frogs had first appeared a couple of years ago, had then gone quiet but last year had been joined by two more.

He said: "The frogs were activated through wind or movement or whatever. They were on 24 hours a day.

Non-stop croaking

"When you are in the garden what's more annoying than three frogs croaking away all the time non-stop?"

PC Alan Jackson told the court police had warned Mr Cromar to switch off the frogs but he failed to do so.

Three days later PC Jackson seized the offensive amphibians "in the interests of justice".

He said that when he visited the Watts they were upset and Mrs Watt was in tears.

"As I took their statements I could hear the frogs myself," he said.

'Miscarriage of justice'

Mr Cromar had placed the frogs on top of an old cooker in his garden and PC Jackson said he and his colleague had taken them back to the police station after speaking with the Watts.

Outside the court, Mr Cromar said he intended to appeal against the verdict which he described as "a miscarriage of justice".

Later, Mr Watt said he was glad the case was over. "We are satisfied with the verdict," he said. "He has done what he did and he has paid the price."

And he said there was no chance of a reconciliation with Mr Cromar. "I am having nothing to do with him. He is not the kind of man you speak to."