Sutton granted first Dog Control Order (From Sutton Guardian)
Contact us: Got a photo? Text SLPICS to 80360, click to upload your story or call
020 8722 6355
Sutton granted first Dog Control Order
4:00pm Saturday 1st September 2012 in News By Alexandra Rucki
Sutton granted first Dog Control Order
The borough has been granted its first Dog Control Order after a 75-year-old woman was bit by a boxer dog.
A 13-year-old girl was walking the dog in Buckhurst Avenue, Carshalton, on June 25 at about 5pm when the dog struck.
The victim was walking home from her volunteer job and moved to the edge of the pavement to avoid the boxer-type dog.
But the dog, which is called Blade, suddenly leapt up and bit her, causing her arm to bleed.
She was treated in St Helier Hospital and went on to call the police the following day.
A dog liaison officer assessed the dog and it was decided it could stay with the family, while Sutton Police appeared in court to arrange a Dog Control Order.
On July 27 the 39-year-old owner appeared in Croydon Magistrates Court and was charged with having a dog dangerously out of control in a public place.
A Dog Control Order was granted, which means the dog has to be kept under control following a number of regulations, such as it must wear a muzzle and be neutered.
The dog must also only be walked by someone aged 18 and over, and be on a lead in a public place.
If the conditions are not followed the dog could be seized by the police and put down.
PC Heath Keogh, of Sutton Police station, said: "Our aim at Sutton is for all dog owners to enjoy their pets, and for residents of Sutton to feel safe in the knowledge that action will be taken where circumstances allow us.
"We are here to educate, work with and help dog owners, of all breeds of dogs, to be aware of their responsibilities to other residents, local communities and especially to their pets."
Comments(8)
dave.artist
says...
3:25pm Sun 2 Sep 12
I'm afraid!
Krissi
says...
6:43pm Sun 2 Sep 12
Michael Pantlin
says...
8:01pm Sun 2 Sep 12
Michael Pantlin
says...
9:03am Mon 3 Sep 12
imalaydee
says...
2:23pm Mon 3 Sep 12
ChristopherB
says...
10:18pm Mon 3 Sep 12
Whilst I appreciate the right of a newspaper is to report stories of interest to the public, the information they provide should be a true representation of the story, not a one sided view.
You have failed to report exactly how the 'victim' reacted when she first came across the dog and 13 year old in question. You also failed to mentioned how the 13 year old was honest enough to provide personal information to the 'victim'. Through the honesty the 13 year old already had shown, surely that person would have called an ambulance (if required) if the victim's injury was that severe.
Granted there are many stories in the press recently of very dangerous dogs, and rightly so justice should be served accordingly.
In this case the court must have proven beyond all reasonable doubt the dog was no way dangerous as he was given back to the family.
This is clearly the first time the court has found a dog innocent otherwise they would have had to grant an order for the dog to be put down.
It does feel that the court was not ready for a not guilty verdict against the dog (hence the first dog control order). For a subject currently in the public eye it seems this article is more hear say than people being interviewed from both sides to provide the facts.
TheEverardedbutt
says...
6:11pm Thu 6 Sep 12
Krissi wrote:As it was a 75 yr old lady that was bitten, I'm sure you made her day calling her a girl!
but we haven't been told anything about the situation in which the girl was bitten - dogs usually don't bite randomly- and before I get gone on at- my son has been bitten himself- he startled a dog who was sleeping,before my husband, who was with him could prevent it - and I don't and didn't think she should have been put down
The dog was walked by a 13 yr old, who should NOT have been walking a dog fullstop.
Hightime it was made illegal for anyone under the age of 21 to walk a dog!!
AlKnowsBest says...
6:58pm Sat 1 Sep 12