This Coward Should Have Been Banned From Owning Dogs For Life...

At Crewe magistrates, Forster admitted having dangerous dogs out of control and was sentenced to a 20-week 7pm to 7am curfew. He was also ordered to pay £1,220 in compensation to Riley's owner, plus £1,910.61 in costs and a victim surcharge.

Some compensation for watching your beloved pet killed by these two monster animals. And having to sit through a court case and listen to this load of old bollocks from the defence: 

In mitigation Tom Worsfold, counsel for Forster said: 'He trains security dogs but also other types of dogs, such as sniffer dogs. This was an incident which happened very quickly which got out of the control of the defendant. It was a momentary lapse of control or attention which had devastating consequences.'

Lie:

The court heard in February 2021, another dog was attacked by Forster's hounds and suffered puncture wounds to the back. The matter did not end up in the courts after he agreed to pay the £95 vet bill. Later that same month at Runcorn Town Park, a six-month old Doberman received two 1.5cm wounds on one shoulder and a 2cm wound on its other shoulder. The Doberman's owner later made a civil claim against Forster. A third incident involved Demon attacking a dog called Buddy which was dragged around in its mouth. There were wounds of approximately 8 cm and 4 cm and multiple other puncture wounds and Buddy had surgery under general anaesthetic at a cost of £500 which was paid by Forster.

So, not a momentary lapse at all. These things had attacked three times before. Why don't the magistrates challenge such obvious lies?

'This is a man who knows about dogs. He has made a mistake and is clear that this is a warning shot to him. It is an experience that he has learnt from and continues to learn from.'

Not a lie:

'After the incident, Ms Snape recalls the defendant saying that 'Your dog should be on a f***ing lead.' Ms Snape left the scene to find an officer, when she returned, she noticed Riley's body had been turned to face the other way and the lead had been removed. A 15-year-old witness saw the defendant take the lead off.

He's learned, all right. He's learned to do all he can to dodge the consequences, paltry as they are. 

So why is he still allowed to have anything to do with dogs, when he's proven to be incapable of handling them? Why no lifetime ban?