Any one agree with this verdict.

Imogen Rose

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 January 2012
Messages
263
Location
South Downs
Absolutely not. They didn't even reprimand her, or insist that the dog be muzzled in public. There is a difference between a dog that runs up to horses and barks, and one that bites... multiple times. The woman clearly dosen't have a clue!
 

cptrayes

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 March 2008
Messages
14,749
No. It's a disgraceful verdict, and I say that as someone who until I resigned last month might have heard just such a case put to me.

The fact that the dog bit the horse at all shows that it was out of control, and that it was dangerous.

The only reason I can think of that they reached that verdict was that they may have been instructed by their Clerk of the Court that the horse was only property, and that the danger was intended to refer to humans. And that they did not realise the danger that humans on a horse attacked by a dog are in.

Trying her best to prevent the situation is not a valid defence. You take that into account in the sentence, not in the verdict.
 
Last edited:

Alec Swan

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 October 2009
Messages
21,082
Location
Norfolk.
Yes, I do agree with the verdict. Certainly, as the owner, she was responsible for her dog, but if the dog had never seen a horse previously, then I fail to see how she could have been expected to predict how the dog would react. Were it my horse, then I'd have been furious, but beyond the responsibility of paying for any Veterinary treatment, I fail to see how she has committed an offence.

I'm very surprised that the CPS brought a prosecution, without clear evidence that the owner was well aware of her dog's likely conduct. Conversely, I think that the dog in question should now be labelled as 'Dangerous', and any further events should bring down the wrath of the Courts, and upon the owner.

Alec.
 

cptrayes

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 March 2008
Messages
14,749
Yes, I do agree with the verdict. Certainly, as the owner, she was responsible for her dog, but if the dog had never seen a horse previously, then I fail to see how she could have been expected to predict how the dog would react. Were it my horse, then I'd have been furious, but beyond the responsibility of paying for any Veterinary treatment, I fail to see how she has committed an offence.

I'm very surprised that the CPS brought a prosecution, without clear evidence that the owner was well aware of her dog's likely conduct. Conversely, I think that the dog in question should now be labelled as 'Dangerous', and any further events should bring down the wrath of the Courts, and upon the owner.

Alec.

Alec I see your point but surely there was a problem with the dog's recall training, which meant it should have been on a lead? Horses aren't exactly uncommon creatures.
 

Dobiegirl

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 February 2011
Messages
6,745
Location
Wildest Somerset
Imagine though if she was walking her dog and encountered sheep which the dog had never seen before and exhibited the same behaviour, a bullet to the brain by a farmer would have been the likely result.
 

Alec Swan

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 October 2009
Messages
21,082
Location
Norfolk.
Imagine though if she was walking her dog and encountered sheep which the dog had never seen before and exhibited the same behaviour, a bullet to the brain by a farmer would have been the likely result.
Agreed, but unless the dog owner is truly dim (and I accept that some are!), we know of the risks which are posed by sheep and strange or unaccustomed dogs. Sheep are likely to run and encourage a dog to chase. These were horses in Central London. Had it been my horse, I would have been apoplectic, but it's a case for a Court to decide, and on balance, I believe that they reached the right verdict.

I suspect that the 'Contemplating suicide' bit, was a DM embellishment. At least I hope it was!

Alec.
 

splashgirl45

Well-Known Member
Joined
6 March 2010
Messages
6,810
Location
suffolk
no definitely not!!!! what message does this send to the general public if they can make the excuse the dog was exited!!! also it bit the horse so how can the so called justice system say its not a dangerous dog..
..we had similar locally with a staffie cross who went for my friends horse who was actually standing still waiting for the owner to get hold of the dog. the horse was really frightened and spun round and galloped off with the dog chasing it and it bit his leg.. my friend was injured quite badly and she reported it to police who just cautioned the dog owner. my friend could have been killed but until this happens these dog attacks will not be treated seriously..
 

Dobiegirl

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 February 2011
Messages
6,745
Location
Wildest Somerset
If this was some local lad though I truly doubt the verdict would have been the same, I just think it sets a very dangerous precedent and will be used by others as a get out of jail card.
 

Alec Swan

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 October 2009
Messages
21,082
Location
Norfolk.
If this was some local lad though I truly doubt the verdict would have been the same, I just think it sets a very dangerous precedent and will be used by others as a get out of jail card.
That I accept. Does being a barrister somehow give one the benefit of doubt, when a dole-wallah may have received a different response?

Alec.
 

Dobiegirl

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 February 2011
Messages
6,745
Location
Wildest Somerset
no definitely not!!!! what message does this send to the general public if they can make the excuse the dog was exited!!! also it bit the horse so how can the so called justice system say its not a dangerous dog..
..we had similar locally with a staffie cross who went for my friends horse who was actually standing still waiting for the owner to get hold of the dog. the horse was really frightened and spun round and galloped off with the dog chasing it and it bit his leg.. my friend was injured quite badly and she reported it to police who just cautioned the dog owner. my friend could have been killed but until this happens these dog attacks will not be treated seriously..
I couldnt agree more, this needs to be taken seriously before someone is killed, the police who were with the horses obviously thought she had a dog seriously out of control and sought to prosecute her, they didn't let her off with a warning did they?.
 

Levrier

Well-Known Member
Joined
9 July 2012
Messages
9,967
What a load of crap - she got away with it because she was a barrister, if she had been Joe Public she would have had the book thrown at her. The dog was clearly out of control - she couldn't get it back on a lead until someone rugby tackled it for her FFS - and the damage to the police horse shows that it is a potentially dangerous animal. It should be rehomed with someone who can actually manage it properly, and it should also be muzzled and on a lead in public.
 

minesadouble

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 June 2005
Messages
2,137
What a load of crap - she got away with it because she was a barrister, if she had been Joe Public she would have had the book thrown at her. The dog was clearly out of control - she couldn't get it back on a lead until someone rugby tackled it for her FFS - and the damage to the police horse shows that it is a potentially dangerous animal. It should be rehomed with someone who can actually manage it properly, and it should also be muzzled and on a lead in public.
Joe Public would have had he book thrown at him because it was a POLICE horse - not because it was a horse. If it was my horse or your horse the case would not even have got to court. Therefore if she 'got off' because she was a barrister then it is 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.
There does not seem to be any mention of the horse needing veterinary treatment so did the dog actually cause any physical harm? Neither are there any independent witness statements quoted. There would have been elements to this case that we are all unaware of therefore it is difficult to state whether one agrees with the verdict it not.
 

Alec Swan

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 October 2009
Messages
21,082
Location
Norfolk.
??..

There does not seem to be any mention of the horse needing veterinary treatment so did the dog actually cause any physical harm? ??.. .
If you look at the DM report and scroll down, you will see that there's a pic of two clear puncture wounds, not on the shoulder, as Dg says, but that's the DMs lack of biological understanding! The injury's where the leg meets the brisket. Are there a couple of stitches? Possibly, but the area's been shaven and sprayed with Oxytet.

Alec.
 

cptrayes

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 March 2008
Messages
14,749
Hmmmm, I've just checked up the law, and it is a valid defence to have taken 'all reasonable steps' to have prevented the incident. I'm just not sure if 'all reasonable steps' would, in my eyes, include having a dog with no recall when excited off the lead in a public place.

I've not had a dog since I was a child. What do you dog owners think?
 

Goldenstar

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 March 2011
Messages
31,148
Funniest shoulder injury I have ever seen and it does not appear a serious injury, why the mounted officers thought spending their time bawling would defuse the situation is beyond me .
Funny isn't it , if a MOP's horse gets bitten the police can do nothing but if it's a police horse they can suddenly prosecute .
The thing the prosecution clearly could not prove the dog had no recall before that incident and it had no ' previous ' .
 

SadKen

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 September 2012
Messages
2,542
Location
North East Wales
I would have thought that insisting that the dog be on a lead and muzzled when in public would have been a sensible precaution. If that was my dog I'd do that anyway... But then I wouldn't have an off lead dog with no recall.

Needed a kick up the bum, that dog.
 

cptrayes

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 March 2008
Messages
14,749
I would have thought that insisting that the dog be on a lead and muzzled when in public would have been a sensible precaution. If that was my dog I'd do that anyway... But then I wouldn't have an off lead dog with no recall.

Needed a kick up the bum, that dog.
The problem is that the owner had to be found guilty, I think, for those conditions to be applied, but I suspect almost everyone will agree with you!
 

SadKen

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 September 2012
Messages
2,542
Location
North East Wales
Hmm. Nobody sings more loudly than me for justice to be applied, but perhaps there should be a kind of asbo parking ticket where there is no criminal record but the owner gets a request from say the dog warden to muzzle the dog and keep it on a lead in public without going through the courts. Then if the dog is subsequently naughty and isn't muzzled the penalty could be more severe.

I have given the morals of this no thought and will probably decide that it is an erosion of justice when I do. Maybe the judge should just kick the dog up the bum and call it quits.
 

MyBoyChe

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 April 2008
Messages
3,901
Location
N. Bucks
A few things the article doesn't make clear. Did the dogs owner know the horses were there before she let the dog off? Would the average young staffie know the difference between a horse and a bullock. The dog I think was behaving in a way that staffies are bred to do, it is a young dog and obviously not fully trained, but neither were the horses (Im sure police horses are not meant to kick out). True, the dogs owner should be making sure the dog is trained and has good recall in all situations, but sometimes a new or unexpected situation will arise when you are not expecting it and are not prepared for it. You could argue (I think) that the police horses were not really ready to be out in public if they could not be trusted not to kick out, would they have reacted the same if a small child had gone rushing up? Lets hope that the dogs owner has learnt from this and makes sure that this young dog learns to do as she tells him, when she tells him.
 
Top