Friday 8 October 2010

Not Really Such A Shocker, Is It?

Nearly everyone who has been attacked by dogs in Colchester does not press charges.
And this is a surprise? As one commenter points out:
da managment, says...

"Why do the victims of dog attacks refuse to press any charges?"

Because there usually thugs with staffs and your name and address is read out in court ,Work it out for yourself LOL at our dumb law.

Yet that’s far too simple an answer, and might stir awkward questions.

So the obvious answer must be that those that are savaged (or their pets savaged or killed) are far too soft-hearted:
In the past six months, 20 attacks by dogs on people have been reported to Colchester Council, but only one has reached the courts.

Animal control manager Colin Rand says this is often down to the simple fear an animal may be destroyed as a result.
Hmmm, don’t know about that. Disappointment that the feral animal on the wrong end of the leash is in line for a lethal injection, more likely…
He said: “That would be down to the courts to decide, but there are more ways than just putting a dog to sleep to deal with such situations.

“They might be asked to put a muzzle on or always keep them on leads.

“But in 99 per cent of cases those people who have been bitten do not want to press charges.”
Perhaps because they know full well that there’s little point? As another commenter points out?
5665, Colchester says...

My colleague and friend was bitten in Stanway some years ago The Dog and owner where guilty of 12 previous attacks...he is permanently scarred on his elbow with the teeth marks....The case took 6 months to get to a families court where the dog got off. It attacked again this time action was taken after 14 attacks...The owner was registered disabled with an impediment and got nothing...
Rhetorical papering over the cracks...then white-washing over the top...coupled with the lumps under the local government rugs...Id say job well done as usual then???


Sue said...

I'm not sure what the reason is. Possibly something to do with the fact that we have lost all faith in our legal system?

I DO however think that all dogs (or perhaps just certain breeds) should be insured. If an incident then arose, the owner would be forced to give insurance details for necessary compensation (loss of work etc....).

Dogs are not responsible, owners are.

Clarissa said...

Unfortunately Sue individual responsibility seems to be a concept that has died out in certain sections of society.

JuliaM said...

"Dogs are not responsible, owners are."

As Clarisaa points out, in some circumstances, it seems people are on a par with animals when it comes to responsibility!