Dog owner jailed for 6 months after attack
A woman has been sentenced to six months jail after her two dogs attacked an elderly man and left him with permanent nerve damage.
(...)
Mr Kelly arrived at the property, which was fully fenced with warning signs, for a prearranged business meeting but no one answered the front door.
As he went through an unlocked gate that led to the back section the dogs attacked his thighs and arms, tore skin from his hands and bit his wrist through to the bone.
Mackenzie tried to get the dogs off Mr Kelly, then took him to a clinic before returning home and having her pets put down.
(...)
Council service request manager Jackie Wilkinson said that while the attack on Mr Kelly occurred within Mackenzie's property and there were warning signs, the gate to the yard was unlocked.
(...)
"Owners can pay a high price for having an aggressive dog that seriously harms someone and they need to be sure that their dogs are socialised and well trained. Having a fully-fenced property and warning signs is not enough."
Ms Fryer said there were many reasons for members of the public to go on to another person's property and they had the right to expect to be safe.
It was her responsibility to make sure it was locked or the dogs were secured so no one could be injured.
However, Mackenzie's lawyer, Gregor Morison, said Mr Kelly had been given instructions on how to enter the property but ignored them - and five warning signs - by going through the gate.
(...)
While Mackenzie had some support from her elderly father, she was a solo mother in her 50s with a handicapped son to care for and after running a business was now a beneficiary.
Hum... this is a very sad case all around.
The person coming to the door didn't follow her orders in coming to the house and went to the back door. Error number 1.
She didn't have a lock on it. Semi-error number 2. Would you enter a property that had a dog on it without knowing the dog(s)??
He got nabbed by the dogs, and she put the dogs down voluntarily. Doesn't that count for something! He, on the other hand, has lost independence in his life due to his injuries. She, on the other hand, is the main provider for her disabled son and dependent father.
How would you have judged this case?
(...)
Mr Kelly arrived at the property, which was fully fenced with warning signs, for a prearranged business meeting but no one answered the front door.
As he went through an unlocked gate that led to the back section the dogs attacked his thighs and arms, tore skin from his hands and bit his wrist through to the bone.
Mackenzie tried to get the dogs off Mr Kelly, then took him to a clinic before returning home and having her pets put down.
(...)
Council service request manager Jackie Wilkinson said that while the attack on Mr Kelly occurred within Mackenzie's property and there were warning signs, the gate to the yard was unlocked.
(...)
"Owners can pay a high price for having an aggressive dog that seriously harms someone and they need to be sure that their dogs are socialised and well trained. Having a fully-fenced property and warning signs is not enough."
Ms Fryer said there were many reasons for members of the public to go on to another person's property and they had the right to expect to be safe.
It was her responsibility to make sure it was locked or the dogs were secured so no one could be injured.
However, Mackenzie's lawyer, Gregor Morison, said Mr Kelly had been given instructions on how to enter the property but ignored them - and five warning signs - by going through the gate.
(...)
While Mackenzie had some support from her elderly father, she was a solo mother in her 50s with a handicapped son to care for and after running a business was now a beneficiary.
Hum... this is a very sad case all around.
The person coming to the door didn't follow her orders in coming to the house and went to the back door. Error number 1.
She didn't have a lock on it. Semi-error number 2. Would you enter a property that had a dog on it without knowing the dog(s)??
He got nabbed by the dogs, and she put the dogs down voluntarily. Doesn't that count for something! He, on the other hand, has lost independence in his life due to his injuries. She, on the other hand, is the main provider for her disabled son and dependent father.
How would you have judged this case?
1 Comments:
At 3:10 p.m.,
Anonymous said…
looks like the guy was trespassing..
Post a Comment
<< Home