For anyone who read the appalling story on p9 of The Sun

I missed the Sun item, but blimey what a shocking story :( How awful for her family to have (presumably) thought that her dog was responsible for her death, and then found out that the truth was not much better... This is probably really sappy, but I also feel really sad for the GSD who presumably understood what the pup was doing to his owner :(
 
So sad for the family and I don't suppose the Suns sensationlism helped. :(
Broodle as I read it the GSD was not even in the same room, and the mastiff x was probably not being aggressive, just trying to get a response from its owner.
 
The injuries occurred post mortem. She died and the pup was probably trying to get a reaction as MM suggests. Dogs don't have hands with which to tap us around the face or shake us awake.

Maybe the family thought they couldn't cope with the young dog.
Maybe they made a snap decision when it was suggested the dog was responsible.
Maybe they couldn't cope with knowing that the pup may have damaged their mum's body.

All horribly sad and I am sure the original story was very upsetting for the family :(
 
Anyone who has ever played with their dogs by lying on the floor and pretending to be dead (please say its not just me:o), will know that the dogs will go mad, pawing and licking at you till you react, I suspect this is what happened hear. :( As CC says I would think maybe the family couldn't handle what the pup had possibly done to their mum's body, even if no malice involved. So terribly sad for them.
 
There is a huge research paper on dogs "attacked/eating" owners. They looked at thousands of cases across the USA and found that in 99% of the cases the owner's death has occurred first and then parts of the jaw and throat had been eaten by dogs possibly as an overzealous attempt to revive the owner. In some cases entire arms and legs had been consumed by the dogs, even though dog food was available and accessible in the house of the deceased, again possibly due to some instinctive "tidying up" behaviour after the body starts to decompose, etc.

Not pleasant reading but really fascinating and revisiting post-mortems of many people thought to have been killed by their dogs, esp elderly people.
 
The dog behaviour exhibited by the mastif x is more likely due to the scavanging / opportunistic feeding behaviour inherent in dogs. If something is dead (even may I add a dogs owner) some dogs may revert to underlying canine behaviours where opportunity arises. Take roadkill or a deadbird for instance - how many dogs would not take the opportunity to help themselves to a taste?
Dogs are not stupid, but just because it is a human that is dead doesnt somehow make that human sacred and therefore untouchable to them. I would also suggest that a mastif X staffie cross (and a young dog at that) would not be the most docile creature in the world of dog breeding (sic)...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top