A court was powerless to impose conditions on the control of a dog which attacked a 65-year-old woman – because its ownership has changed.Wha..?
Mother-of-three Emily Savage, who owned the dog at the time and appeared in court yesterday, was unaware the attack was taking place, believing her pet to be securely locked in a shed.And why would you need to do that..?
Nick Wenden, defending, said: "When she was home the dog was inside the property but when she was out, to stop it from chewing things, it was locked inside a shed. But she concedes it might not have been locked, she can't be 100 per cent certain."Ah.
Chewing things like furniture? Or like neighbours?
However, magistrates were thwarted in their attempts to attach conditions to the ownership of the American bulldog, called Stella, such as having it muzzled in public, after being told they no longer had the power to do so as, following the attack, which happened in March, Savage had returned the dog to its breeder, who lives in nearby Melbourne Avenue.Which is yet another example of the stupidity of the law. Why would this bizarre loophole exist?