Law question

M

mtj

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 December 2002
Messages
1,321
Visit site
Before coming on here today, I read the H+H newspage with the dreadful report of the shetland fatally attacked by a pair of staffordshire bull terriers.

It states that the police do not intend to pursue a prosecution. Are the police genuinely out of options or is this poor justice? It just seems odd when you hear of relatives being prosecuted when dogs attack children.
 
I think it says the matter is being resolved between the owner of the dogs and the owner of the pony. Unless the owner of the dogs have agreed to put them to sleep I can't see how this could be resolved?
The only way I could see myself agreeing to this would be if I knew the dogs and knew they had acted totally out of character and I had witnessed the owners of the dogs doing their absolute utmost to get them off the pony and if they'd been horrified and desperately sorry for the damage done, I might think about the possibility of not prosecuting them, but that would be a tough decision.
I adore my dogs, they are like my children and my best friends rolled into one, and the thought of them doing anything like this doesn't bear thinking about, but if they did they would have to be put down. I couldn't risk it happening again. Bad enough that this time was that poor poor pony, what if it was a child next time?
 
To be honest, I'm baffled why no action has been taken for the dogs being out of control.

Surely, animal cruelty charges could be applicable?

Whilst i adore my dogs, i agree I would have mine pts if they behaved in this manner. I would never trust such a dog not to attack anything/anyone again. I'm guessing most of the dog owners in these cases have a different understanding of responsiblity to others.
 
Poor, poor pony.

I'm guessing that the police aren't pursuing it because the only legislation they could use is the Dangerous Dogs Act and the offence of having dogs dangerously out of control. The CPS don't tend to prosecute unless a person is badly injured and even then will often drop the case if the dog is PTS.

I would imagine that the dog owner has agreed to pay any vet bills etc but that would be a civil matter anyway.
 
To me it just reads like the owner of the dogs has bought them off financially. Why else would you not prosecute dogs that killed your childs pony.
 
LHS said:
To me it just reads like the owner of the dogs has bought them off financially. Why else would you not prosecute dogs that killed your childs pony.
Click to expand...

Unless you bring a private prosecution at huge expense it's not up to the victim to make the decision about prosecution. Ultimately, it's the Crown Prosecution Service who decides based on the public interest ie is it likely to happen again and the prospect of a successful prosecution.

Rightly or wrongly animal on animal attacks are not treated as seriously as an animal on human attack and so usually come down to a civil complaint about costs incurred ie vet bills.
 
Not good.

A got attacked by an old neighbours dog once. Thankfully no hard was done as we were able to get away and the neighbour ended up using a tree as leverage to stop his dog following as it was too strong on the lead.

Two years later the same dog attacked its owner, Owner was left with half a face and damage to her arms. Dog was PTS shortly after.

We tried to warn them but they wouldn't listen. The dog was lovely but had a screw loose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top