The owners of an historic castle are facing a legal battle to save their dog from a "death sentence" after it bruised the nose of a waiter at a posh wedding.Bruised his nose? Was it a boxer?
Sarah and Robert Hay, who own 11th century Bickleigh Castle in Devon, have received a court summons saying their labrador Doubleé could be "dangerous".
It follows an incident at the venue in May last year when the dog "excitedly jumped up and hit" a 15-year-old waiter, who later needed a rabies jab as a precaution.Eh? There’s rabies in Devon…?
The teenager did not complain but Devon and Cornwall Police issued legal proceedings after the teenager sought hospital treatment.Really? How interesting. You usually can’t get Devon and Cornwall Police off their lazy backsides with genuinely dangerous dogs, so one wonders why the excess of zeal in this case?
Envy? Did a senior police officer get served a disappointing vol-au-vent at a wedding?
Or is it so they can point to this and say ‘We don’t just target chavs, look, we go after toffs too!’ if questions are asked?
A hearing is due at Exeter Magistrates Court on January 27 to consider the summons, which calls for the dog to be "put under control or destroyed" under section 2 of the Dogs Act 1871.One hopes the magistrates will show some common sense, no matter how uncommon that might be.
Devon and Cornwall Police have declined to comment on the matter.I wonder what they'll say when the magistrates have ruled?
'Mrs Hay said that the ordeal was more stressful as Doubleé was also blamed for the death of rams in the village, but she says this was a case of mistaken identity'. This is at the end of the report in the Telegraph.
An update on the story - any comments now? It seems the incident was not a one off and the owner was trying to play the 'lovable labrador' card. There were three incidents in total that were reported to the police. The case was put before the magistrates and they made their decision based on the evidence put to them. If I was hiring an 'upmarket venue' I would be less than pleased if the proprietors habitually let what appears to be a badly trained dog loose where food was being served.
"...Doubleé was also blamed for the death of rams in the village, but she says this was a case of mistaken identity'."
In other words, there was no proof. Aren't dogs supposed to get the benefit of this too?
"It seems the incident was not a one off and the owner was trying to play the 'lovable labrador' card."
I notice those 'other incidents' were similar bumps and bruises. We aren't talking razor-toothed killing machine here, are we?
" If I was hiring an 'upmarket venue' I would be less than pleased if the proprietors habitually let what appears to be a badly trained dog loose where food was being served. "
Maybe. But one could see it as a Muslim customer deterrent..? ;)
...Doubleé was also blamed for the death of rams in the village, but she says this was a case of mistaken identity'."
Well she would, wouldn't she? Sorry but looking at the stories it seems she has allowed an untrained dog to run about and the locals have got fed up with it. We may not be talking about a killing machine but a labrador is still a large dog capable of inflicting damage on livestock/humans, I would place a lot of blame not on the dog but the owners for not training it. Looking at the local paper I would think that the owners may have tried to get their story in place by playing the lovable labrador card knowing that some of the more credulous members of the public would take it at face value. BTW the 'rabies jab' was probably a tetanus jab. A rabies jab would in all likelihood not be administered unless there was a risk rabies was present, if there was a risk of rabies do you really think the dog would be alive today? It would have been destroyed at the first opportunity and a lot of other people would have had treatment.
Post a Comment