Wednesday, 6 February 2013

"...the dogs were just doing their job."

Really? Awfully strange to have dogs whose 'job' it is to savage the pets of your customers.
Karen Creasey said she was “distraught and devastated” about what had happened.
She said she had not heard Teresa knocking on the door and as she had finished appointments for the day had let the dogs out to the toilet.
She said a sign on the gate warned visitors that dogs were running free.
Sobbing, she said: “It’s private property. She shouldn’t have been there.
Ummm...you run a business. Why wouldn't you want customers there?
“I’ve been doing this for six years and have never had a problem because when I have customers the dogs are locked away.
“I’ve debated destroying the dogs but it’s a hard decision – the dogs were just doing their job.
“I was physically kicking them and hitting them and trying to get them off her dog. I laid down on her dog to stop them attacking it, but there was nothing I could do.”
I mean, I'm not experienced in the running of a dog grooming parlour, but even I can see that you won't get many repeat customers that way...

Oh, but wait! Suddenly, in the 'Mail', attitudes have allegedly changed:
Salon owner Mrs Creasey said she was ‘distraught and devastated’ about what had happened, adding that she would have the pets put down.
...
‘I am distraught by what happened. I have closed the business and the dogs are going to be destroyed. I have sent flowers to the lady.’
Flowers? Oh, well, that'll make it all better, won't it?
A spokeswoman for Lincolnshire Police said inquiries into the ‘distressing case’ were ongoing.
At the usual glacial pace, I presume?

Comments in the 'Mail' are illuminating, particularly this one:
My mother was the innocent person who had to endure this ordeal. As far as we are aware the business is still open and operating as usual and there has been no mention of the dogs being destroyed. As far as we are concerned the business is open as usual and the dogs are still there. Yes mrs creasey did try and help but the dogs were completely uncontrollable. The account of what happened that day given by mrs creasey are far from the truth. She knew exactly what her dogs were capable of and many omissions from actual events have occurred such as when mrs creasey declared "your dog is dead" as soon as the mastiffs attacked. If mrs creasey has indeed done what the article suggests which is highly unlikely then at least it will help us with moving on. Nothing will bring our beloved cooper back but it would be the decent thing to do. We miss you coops xx
- Sam walton, Spalding, United Kingdom, 5/2/2013 17:13
Maybe a vicious, slavering specimen of canis lawyerensis would be best sicced on Mrs Creasey, to ensure her business is closed down by virtue of her no longer having a pot to piss in?

And maybe the police would like to do some investigating as to just why a dog grooming business would require such 'security'? Or perhaps HMRC?

I think she'll have a hard time explaining them away as 'emotional comfort dogs'...

3 comments:

  1. Maybe a vicious, slavering specimen of canis lawyerensis...

    I had the same thought. Public liability insurance perhaps? Even if a claim failed, there's zero chance this business would be able to get future cover.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Maybe a vicious, slavering specimen of canis lawyerensis

    Where is the RSPCA and their lush budget when you need them? A dog has been subject to unnecessary and avoidable suffering by the method of a dog owner failing to control other animals.

    If, for example, the salon owner's dogs had savaged one of the salon owner's own small pets i.e. a smaller dog, then they would be in there with the prosecution.

    It makes no difference that the suffering occurred via a dog; the issue was still unnecessary suffering caused in this case by neglect.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "Public liability insurance perhaps? Even if a claim failed, there's zero chance this business would be able to get future cover."

    That's assuming she has any in the first place...

    "Where is the RSPCA and their lush budget when you need them? A dog has been subject to unnecessary and avoidable suffering by the method of a dog owner failing to control other animals."

    Ah, well, that might dredge up unhappy coincidences on the subject of failing owners...

    ReplyDelete