'His wife told him the postman was coming to the dog enclosure and the postman opened it despite there being a very clear no entry sign.
'Dogs are, like people, very territorial. If someone came and sat in the magistrates' lounge you would raise an eyebrow.'
Undoubtedly. Probably wouldn't savage them, though. Since most magistrates are toothless, unlike the Parkinson pack...
'That enclosure is the dogs' area and that is why there is a no entry sign there.
'The bulldog who bit the victim was put down that day and the dog who bit another postman last year was also put down on the day of that incident.'
So this isn't the only incident of him owning vicious, out of control animals?
He said Mr Humphries was now pursuing a civil claim and urged magistrates not to 'double' punish his client.
Interestingly, the very claim you're relying on for leniency under criminal law - the fact of the 'Beware of the Dog' sign - is likely to prove the opposite under that civil claim. It's a clear sign acknowledging the dogs were vicious.
'This whole affair has been a very traumatic episode for him. The fact of his appearances at court have given him and his wife sleepless nights and have caused him to be nauseous and unable to eat.'
Yes, despite showing absolutely no care for the man injured by his pack of beasts, he's the real victim here...
Good luck with a civil claim, it makes no difference what the court awards you if the offender can't or more likely won't pay.
We are not in alignment here.
Is that not trespassing?
If someone has put up a sign warning about something and someone else ignores that warning then they should get no compensation for ignoring that warning nor should the owner be prosecuted for that either.
If I get eaten in a zoo do the warning signs there get me compensation for being a moron? After all they know the animals are dangerous.
I've worked for royal mail so know how it goes.
Why did he not put p739 card through the letter box
Why did he have to spend 4 days getting 2 stitches
And he's obviously milked the sick pay and came back to work before a stage 2 warning
"...it makes no difference what the court awards you if the offender can't or more likely won't pay."
True! But then, there's little chance of 'can't pay' getting used here, since his brief has pointed out how 'respectable' he is...
"Is that not trespassing?"
No. I take Dave's point about the other options open to him, but the signs are pointless. What if he'd been unable to read (don't laugh, it IS the Royal Mail!)?
"And he's obviously milked the sick pay and came back to work before a stage 2 warning"
Post a Comment