Post by RealPitBull on Feb 27, 2008 8:32:44 GMT -5
Pitbull Type Dog “No Danger to Public”
www.dogmagazine.net/archives/373/pitbull-type-dog-no-danger-to-public/
Posted By Alison Green Date: 27/02 Posted Under: Breed Specific Legislation, Dangerous Dogs
Another case heard in a Liverpool court (Feb 26, 2008) has resulted in a much-loved family pet being allowed the chance of life after being deemed of no risk to the public. Fifty was seized after her owner called the police regarding a stolen mobile phone. Police attended the address only to seize Fifty as being “pit bull type” under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.
The court heard that scarring and a damaged canine tooth where visible on fifty and his owner was asked to explain these injuries. Owner Marcelle Stranach stated that prior to being seized Fifty had no scarring save for a few scratches gained by the family cat. Ms Stranach produced a picture which she had brought along to show her dog alongside another dog, which also backed up this claim. The judge accepted that fifty had been in kennels for a whole month prior to being examined by a breed identification expert and that as no mention of any scarring had been made by the arresting officers at the time disregarded this evidence. It has been previously reported of other dogs being returned home with scaring or other physically problems as a result of the kennel environment.
The court heard that Fifty had never been subject to a complaint and had never been allowed to stray. When walked Fifty’s owner had previously kept him on lead and muzzled meaning he would easily accept living with the restrictions of a “pit bull type”. Marcelle went on to explain that Fifty lived with a cat and a Yorkshire terrier at their home which had a secure garden that he could not stray from.
After considering the evidence a delighted owner was told Fifty would be ordered to be entered onto the register of exempted dogs and would soon be returned home. The restrictions mean Fifty must be :
Neutered
Chipped
Tattooed
Kept on lead and muzzled at all times in a public place
His owner must also obtain third party liability insurance for him and register him with the index within a set period. Failure to follow the restrictions could result in Fifty being destroyed.
Melanie Rushmore of the Bull breed advisory service represented Marcelle in court. Ms Rushmore says “ Fifty has never given any reason to suggest he is a dangerous dog and we welcome the judge’s acceptance of this fact”. No court or kennelling costs were awarded adding to an already expensive bill for Merseyside police.
During the hearing Marcelle was asked why she had brought a pit bull type and answered that she had brought an Irish Stafford from the Liverpool Echo newspaper and had no idea he could be deemed to be “pit bull type”. Interestingly the Liverpool Echo have been running a campaign since July 2006 that they claim is “a fightback against yobs blighting our communities with dangerous dogs.” Yet it wasn’t until November of the same year that the Echo stopped taking the adverts themselves.
Author Details
Alison is a long time dog owner and dangerous dog legislation observer who lives with her family and four Bull Breed dogs in Sussex. - See this author's webpage
www.dogmagazine.net/archives/373/pitbull-type-dog-no-danger-to-public/
Posted By Alison Green Date: 27/02 Posted Under: Breed Specific Legislation, Dangerous Dogs
Another case heard in a Liverpool court (Feb 26, 2008) has resulted in a much-loved family pet being allowed the chance of life after being deemed of no risk to the public. Fifty was seized after her owner called the police regarding a stolen mobile phone. Police attended the address only to seize Fifty as being “pit bull type” under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.
The court heard that scarring and a damaged canine tooth where visible on fifty and his owner was asked to explain these injuries. Owner Marcelle Stranach stated that prior to being seized Fifty had no scarring save for a few scratches gained by the family cat. Ms Stranach produced a picture which she had brought along to show her dog alongside another dog, which also backed up this claim. The judge accepted that fifty had been in kennels for a whole month prior to being examined by a breed identification expert and that as no mention of any scarring had been made by the arresting officers at the time disregarded this evidence. It has been previously reported of other dogs being returned home with scaring or other physically problems as a result of the kennel environment.
The court heard that Fifty had never been subject to a complaint and had never been allowed to stray. When walked Fifty’s owner had previously kept him on lead and muzzled meaning he would easily accept living with the restrictions of a “pit bull type”. Marcelle went on to explain that Fifty lived with a cat and a Yorkshire terrier at their home which had a secure garden that he could not stray from.
After considering the evidence a delighted owner was told Fifty would be ordered to be entered onto the register of exempted dogs and would soon be returned home. The restrictions mean Fifty must be :
Neutered
Chipped
Tattooed
Kept on lead and muzzled at all times in a public place
His owner must also obtain third party liability insurance for him and register him with the index within a set period. Failure to follow the restrictions could result in Fifty being destroyed.
Melanie Rushmore of the Bull breed advisory service represented Marcelle in court. Ms Rushmore says “ Fifty has never given any reason to suggest he is a dangerous dog and we welcome the judge’s acceptance of this fact”. No court or kennelling costs were awarded adding to an already expensive bill for Merseyside police.
During the hearing Marcelle was asked why she had brought a pit bull type and answered that she had brought an Irish Stafford from the Liverpool Echo newspaper and had no idea he could be deemed to be “pit bull type”. Interestingly the Liverpool Echo have been running a campaign since July 2006 that they claim is “a fightback against yobs blighting our communities with dangerous dogs.” Yet it wasn’t until November of the same year that the Echo stopped taking the adverts themselves.
Author Details
Alison is a long time dog owner and dangerous dog legislation observer who lives with her family and four Bull Breed dogs in Sussex. - See this author's webpage
I look forward to learning much here