…strangely enough, the answer isn’t to be a Tory Councillor, but to be disabled:
A disabled man defied a court order to let his Alsatian off a lead – allowing it to attack a smaller dog.
Reading the comments, it seems this beast has a pretty bad history with other dogs.
Burchell, of St Mary Street, Stonehouse, was given a Crown Court order forcing him to keep Bart on a lead and muzzled in public at all times.
Burchell admitted breaching the control order by allowing the dog from his lead at Devil's Point on December 12 last year.
Magistrates fined him £100, ordered that he pay £100 towards prosecution costs, compensation of £38 to the owner of the other dog and £15 victim surcharge.
Which will come out of his benefits, of course. So
we’ll be paying that.
Presiding magistrate Michael Thomas said: "This is a serious matter. You let your dog off of its lead on a beach where families go and children play.
"If it happens again your dog could be taken away."
It’s already happened one too many times! And if he’s that physically disabled, how can he hope to control a dog of this size?
Mr Papenfus said six-year-old Bart was Burchell's companion.
He said: "He suffered significant problems as the result of a car accident. He suffered head injuries and had a tracheotomy which damaged his larynx and he has a very difficult day-to-day existence because of that."
Then should he have a dog at all? Contrary to first impressions, I’m not one so heartless as to want to wrench a disabled person’s only friend away, but if he can’t prevent it from attacking other dogs…
Magistrates were told judge Francis Gilbert gave Burchell the control order in November last year after an allegation of a similar incident.
Plymouth Crown Court was told during a trial that Bart had jumped up and bitten a terrier while off its lead.
But the trial was abandoned and Burchell accepted the control order after the judge ruled that jurors were not able to understand his evidence.
That sounds like a get-out-of-jail-free card for any Glaswegian, doesn’t it?
6 comments:
Tracheotomy? Well, that's why he couldn't call the dog off, I suppose.
Ummm. I'm going to hell again, aren't i?
"Plymouth Crown Court was told during a trial that Bart had jumped up and bitten a terrier while off its lead."
Just how big WAS this terrier?
"Then should he have a dog at all?"
I'm no fan of dogs in general, but see no reason why he couldn't have something far less aggressive than a bloody great Alsation...
"Which will come out of his benefits"
And I don't suppose the Alsation survives on one small tin of dog food each day, either...
"I'm going to hell again"
AGAIN?? Did you manage to escape previously?
I reckon I've got about half a dozen tickets for things I've said on the interwebs, and they're all fucking one way.
Hard to know the detail, but head injury patients are often subject to memory loss, forgetfulness and sometimes personality changes. Not an excuse but a possible reason.
"Ummm. I'm going to hell again, aren't i?"
You'll have company!
"Just how big WAS this terrier?"
I took that to mean that it was picked up by it's owner to keep it out of reach.
"Hard to know the detail, but head injury patients are often subject to memory loss, forgetfulness and sometimes personality changes."
Indeed. But as you say, not an excuse.
Post a Comment