[Closed] Dog held on death row with no exercise

Beginning to wonder if cruelty is the real drive behind humanity...

Waste of money and not fair on the dog. Bullet in the old noggin would have been the humane thing to do, one for the owner too. These dogs have no place in 2016.

Utter PoS - shared and posted to Twitter both personally and business.
I'll remember this next time A&S ask us for something with work - arseholes.

Edit - jimjam - sod off with your comment about the dog - no place for it.
The dog is a baby, done nothing wrong and shown nothing but love to anyone who has been near her.
Perhaps people like you are the ones due a visit with the bolt gun.

I'll remember this next time A&S ask us for something with work - arseholes.

What a ridiculous thing to say. Calm down and have a bit of a think about that. I hope I'm never in Avon and Somerset and need the police to help and you end up obstructing them.

hammyuk

Edit - jimjam - sod off with your comment about the dog - no place for it.
The dog is a baby, done nothing wrong and shown nothing but love to anyone who has been near her.

Lol. Sorry, the dog is not a baby. It's a dog. There's a fundamental difference and if you can't understand that then your moral compass is broken. But hey, for sure tweet about it. Tweet about it twice, it'll make you feel better.

Perhaps people like you are the ones due a visit with the bolt gun.

Yes, I should be murdered for suggesting it's more humane to quickly kill an animal than prolong its suffering before it's destroyed. Get a ****ing grip.

I have thought about it molgrips or I wouldn't have said it.
FYI - it wouldn't be obstruction but then you have no idea what we do in conjunction with them so put your slippers back on and pick up your rug - you've got yourself in a tizz.

Jimjam - its a "baby" in the sense of a youngster/pup/etc. Its not an adult, trained by some chavster to fight.
Saying that "dogs like this have no place in 2016" is ridiculous. Do you know the real history of this kind of dog? I bet you don't
Maybe search "Nanny Dogs" for a little insight before making a comment associated with how you portray them now. There is no such thing as a bad dog - only bad owners.
Even after 2yrs locked in a cage its still young and the professionally qualified carers and the RSPCA have all stated its cruel, she's not a threat and never has shown any threatening behaviour so I stand by my comments about A&S.
Considering that even A&S cannot come up with any reason as to why they have chosen to treat this animal like this that speaks volumes for their blanket mentality. Simply trotting out "any dangerous dog is to be locked up" is total bollocks and they and everyone else knows it.

Then you'd better explain that comment or you'll continue to look like as big of a dick as whoever's responsible for the decision re this dog.

Yes it is just a dog but JimJam your trolling is awful

Pigface

Yes it is just a dog but JimJam your trolling is awful

Awful in terms of quality, or in terms of taste?

Dont flatter yourself 😆

Considering the article references Devon & Cornwall Police, penalising A&S seems a little harsh!!

That'll be my fat fingers dan - still stands though.
Do a little digging around and their own dog teams have criticised their treatment of animals held by them both internally and openly.
Says a lot.

Oh do keep up, Avon and Somerset Police. Everyone knows all the cool cops are sorting dogs out with 70mph squad cars nowadays.

I think the saddest part of the story is they have treated the dog like this for 2 years only to decide to kill it.
If you have a dangerous dogs law and this dog breed isnt allowed then it doesnt take 2 years to make a decision. Makes me sick that we can treat animals like that

If the case has been to court 11 times and the order is still to destroy the dog, you'd have to suspect that there has been some sort of evidence presented that suggests that the dog is potentially dangerous.

hammyuk

Jimjam - its a "baby" in the sense of a youngster/pup/etc.

Then the word is pup (hardly). It's not a hairy quadrupedal growling baby, but baby is just so much more emotive.

Saying that "dogs like this have no place in 2016" is ridiculous. Do you know the real history of this kind of dog? I bet you don't
Maybe search "Nanny Dogs" for a little insight before making a comment associated with how you portray them now.

Stupid names used by stupid people in housing estates to justify owning a dogs which were historically bred for bloodpsorts. It also lulls idiots into a false sense security around animals. It's a dog. It's not a nanny. If you leave a baby alone with ANY dog you deserve what's coming.

There is no such thing as a bad dog - only bad owners.

Another meaningless cliche people cling to. Yes, you can train and engender good habits in a dog, but you can't totally remove certain genetic predispositions such as aggression towards other dogs or animals and there is no accounting for random factors that can make an animal flip.

Wow. This escalated quickly. 🙂

Woman chopped a baby's head off in Moscow today, don't exercise any women for 2 years then destroy them 🙄

the dog certainly had a bit of a ruff deal...

Pleaderwilliams i think the only evidence was the breed type and not any behaviour that particular dog has shown. Unfortunately people have bred certain breeds to be aggressive and then exploited those traits or dogs have caused serious incidents. Any dog can bite you, but id rather be bitten by a yorkshire terrier than a pitbull. I can see why the dangerous dog breed law is in place but i cant see why this dogs had to suffer like this for this long.

I suggest you go and do that search then - they were bred to care for and protect children in large homes.
Hence the term "Nanny Dogs" - they would stay with that child for life as it grew up.
Bloodsports as you put it came later with the idiots that chose to partake in it.
Do your research before you look any more of a prat than you already do.

"Meaningless cliche" - are you really that big of a ****wit that you believe any large dog is inherently dangerous?
If you are then I hope you are never allowed any animal - if not then you are yet another meaningless troll of which they are plenty floating around.
At least you will not be short of company in your old age.

BigYom - the dog team that were called in to "remove" the dog originally stood in court and stated as to the dogs nature. They walked it out of the house after she let them put a lead on her without complaint.
The issue is the treatment - if an individual had treated the dog like this they would be in court having had the dog removed and placed into care.
The fact its a police force doing this is apparently acceptable.
Then the fact that they have a blanket "destroy" policy on any animal even remotely resembling a "pitbull" type is bullshit.
Other forces have found themselves successfully sued over this in the past yet its still going on with relative impunity.

Personally, I'd rather see Pigface confined without exercise or access to the internet for [b][i]at least[/i][/b] two years.

Maybe after locking the poor dog up for 2 years its now more likely to be dangerous given its recent experience with humans.

Presumably because 11 court cases take a fair bit of time.

There is no such thing as a bad dog - only bad owners.

That simply isn't true, although thankfully naturally bad dogs are rare.

Isn't Stella a Pitbull?

The phrase "nanny dog" traditionally refers to Staffordshire Bull Terriers. Different breed.

"Pitbull type" Andy - a blanket term forces like to use to save them actually having to confirm the breeding.

The Nanny Dog term is referenced to a number of these types of dog not just Staffies.
The point being they are of a size and strength to stop anything that might wander into a plantation owners/farmers house and attack a sleeping infant.
The American Kennel Club doesn't recommend them as guard dogs because they "are too friendly with strangers" - thats for Pitbulls let alone Staffies!

Up yours you P**dy midget x x x

I'm sure that when you guys look back at this thread in a year or so, you'll be ever so proud of your handiwork.

Nothing like a dog or tattoos thread to bring out an argument. But some good points made.

Some bad ones too

hammyuk
Hence the term "Nanny Dogs" - they would stay with that child for life as it grew up.
Bloodsports as you put it came later with the idiots that chose to partake in it.

You're ignoring the fact that bloodsport and selective breeding of certain traits is in their DNA, regardless of the timeline. You're also ignoring my point that the term "nanny dog" regardless of it's original context is now used by people to promote the supposedly benign temperament of these dogs, with potentially dire consequences.

"Meaningless cliche" - are you really that big of a **** that you believe any large dog is inherently dangerous?
If you are then I hope you are never allowed any animal

So, let's get this straight, you presume that I think "any large dog is inherently dangerous" [i](not what I said but anyway)[/i] and as such I should never have be allowed to have any animal?

The logic (or lack of any) here is pretty staggering, ignoring the fact that you suggested I should be murdered for being of the opinion the dog should have been put down quickly.

More details can be found here, better info than the BBC link.

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/feb/29/dog-called-stella-kept-kennels-two-years-without-exercise-devon-police ]The Guardian A dog-called-stella-kept-kennels-two-years-without-exercise-devon-police[/url]

So the bit about nothing but love to others doesn't stack up, unless you happen to be the biased owner.

Won't someone please think of the furry children.

Better outcome than the poor dog in North Wales. It doesn't stike me it should be the police's responsibility to look after the dog.

Better article thanks dragon. Even if the dog chewed the popes face off in front of a primary school i dont see why its been shut in a cage for 2 years. If its an illegal breed or has attacked somebody then make a decision and do what the law says.

Jambalaya if the police dont look after the dog then whats the alternative suggestion ?

[url= http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/Policemen-called-investigate-dangerous-pit-bull/story-24838583-detail/story.html ]The owner sounds like a real charmer.[/url]

If its an illegal breed or has attacked somebody then make a decision and do what the law says.

The guardian article suggests that there were a number of adjournments, not requested by the police. That would suggest that the defendant was drawing things out for whatever reason.

Sounds like the owner should have been put down

Anthony James Francis HASTIE, C/o Princes Road, Torquay. Age: 32. On 06/05/2014 at Torquay had in your possession or custody a dog to which section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 applied, namely Pit Bull. Plea: Guilty. Discharged conditionally for 24 months. Victim surcharge of £15. Costs of £200. Order that the Pitbull dog be destroyed unless an appeal is lodged within the next 21 days. Reason: dog found to be a real danger to the public.

None of this changes that fact that, whilst in the care of the police, the dog was subjected to animal cruelty. If a person had been found to kept a dog in a small kennel for 2 years, they would be banned from keeping animals and quite rightly so.

Total contradiction in the reports - In every single report they state that they seized the dog after attending the house on a different matter - yet jimjam finds the ONLY link that states they arrested him for cannabis after attending the house about reports of his dog?
What a crock of shit.

Several common points in all this - the police have refused to say why they kept the dog in this manner despite breaking every rule they have.
Every expert has stated the dog has been fine - only the police have stated it showed aggression.
The staff and owners of the private kennel the police use have stated the dog showed no aggression.
A vet of 30yrs and behavioural specialist has..
The police dog unit stated...
See where this is going?
They've chosen a hard line and are sticking to it regardless of the fact they have broken rules.
Anything else and the whole of STW would be up in arms - odd considering how many dog owners there are on here - however in light of recent threads and posters comments surrounding dogs on trails, etc not so much anymore.

None of this changes that fact that, whilst in the care of the police, the dog was subjected to animal cruelty. If a person had been found to kept a dog in a small kennel for 2 years, they would be banned from keeping animals and quite rightly so.

This. I am not surprised though having had a run in with Devon Police over their handling of dogs in the past when we caught an escaped husky killing a pregnant Ewe (ewe was dead by the time we got back to it with the gun). They were woefully ill-equipped to handle a dog and took it away on the back seat of a normal police car with a trainee female officer holding via a rescue rope tied to it's collar and sat right behind the other officer driving. There was no way she was going to stop that dog if it decided it fancied a bit of the officer in the front.

They then gave it back to the owners.

I have two Staffys, both rescues, both found stray at about 2 years old. One of them shows clear psychological signs of having been mistreated (scared of the dark, anxiety etc.), the other less so. Both have such a beautiful, caring spirit (as 99% of dogs do). I'm not about to say I would leave either of them alone with children, as I wouldn't leave any dog alone with children. I also keep them under close control in public, as they can be quite nervous of people approaching them, but they are great pets.
If coppers came round and tried to take them away I would not be at all surprised if they put up a bit of a fight. If they were then caged alone without exercise for a very long time, I'm fairly sure they might get a bit aggressive during any "assessment".
None of this makes them dangerous dogs, yet on the wrong day, with the wrong copper, that's exactly what they could be called...
scary.

Jimjam - put down the keyboard and get back to your DailyMail

etmetalktomark

Jimjam - put down the keyboard and get back to your DailyMail

Oh feisty, I like that in a woman. Is it Dailymailesque (yes it's a word I just made up) to wonder at the motivations of someone who has 46 criminal convictions, 17 for drugs, for having such a dog? Could it be that these dogs have characteristics (other than being fabulous baby sitters) which might make them attractive to drug dealers and scum bags?

hammyuk

Total contradiction in the reports - In every single report they state that they seized the dog after attending the house on a different matter - yet jimjam finds the ONLY link that states they arrested him for cannabis after attending the house about reports of his dog?
What a crock of shit.

Are you suggesting I fabricated that website? 😆

I like that in a woman

Swoon .....

[img] [/img]

I'm not into Daily Mail readers though.

Next.

Just 2 years ?
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/19/albert-woodfox-released-louisiana-jail-43-years-solitary-confinement

Fwiw both the dog and the human were mistreated

Total contradiction in the reports - In every single report they state that they seized the dog after attending the house on a different matter - yet jimjam finds the ONLY link that states they arrested him for cannabis after attending the house about reports of his dog?

Not necessarily a contradiction.

e.g. Known drug dealer/scally/ne'er-do-well, but insufficient evidence for a search warrant -

"He's got a "pit bull type" dog"

"That'll do! In the van, lads."

Looks much more like a staffie to me, anyway. Long legged staffie, bit still.

"He's got a "pit bull type" dog"

"That'll do! In the van, lads."

Looks much more like a staffie to me, anyway. Long legged staffie, bit still.

Thing is though, even if seizing the dog was the right thing to do, which it sounds like it was, and even if putting it down is the right thing to do, which it might well be, and even if the process was drawn out unavoidably which it seems is the case... It's no way to keep a dog. Even if you disregard everything else, that's a constant, the poor bugger should have been looked after.

The whole "pit bull type dog" thing is a terrible piece of lawmaking.

From [i]hammyuk[/i]:

Every expert has stated the dog has been fine - only the police have stated it showed aggression.
The staff and owners of the private kennel the police use have stated the dog showed no aggression.

From [i]The Guardian[/i]:

The force insisted that the assessment remained under constant review and further examinations had been made by independent experts, including the RSPCA and the managers of the kennel where Stella was kept, who agreed with the decision.

The dog also attempted to bite a court-appointed independent expert during its assessment.

In the end, the problem the police have is that if they told the kennel staff that they had to exercise these dogs, and then one of the staff got attacked, they'd be in trouble for that too. I'd much rather that they protect the right of the staff not to be attacked, than the right of the dog to be exercised.

Maybe we could build a specialist dangerous dogs kennel that could take all the confiscated dogs from around the UK and that would have a system of cages allowing some sort of 'run' so that dogs can be exercised without human contact, but with current cutbacks I can't see who would be likely to pay for it.

Why didn't they get the owner to come and exercise it?

Well they're paying for a [b][i]PRIVATE[/i][/b] kennel to house the dogs they confiscate now so the funding is there!

Strange the owners and staff have stated in reports that they saw no aggression from the dog.
The worker who broke the story on her Facebook stated that.
The Vet of 30yrs who is also the behavioural specialist stated she wasn't aggressive and their treatment went against every rule and guideline.
The only aggression that was apparently shown was to "two PCSO's" - it doesn't state when, where or why.
In fact there's no other mention of it in any other report anywhere.

Are you surprised that the force "insisted that the assessment remained under constant review and further examinations had been made by independent experts, including the RSPCA and the managers of the kennel where Stella was kept, who agreed with the decision."

I'm not - they're hardly likely to come out and go "we didn't like the look of him and we'd tried to have him over on a few occasions so we took his dog... it got a little pissed off we us as we didn't let it out so we locked it back up"

"The dog also attempted to bite a court-appointed independent expert during its assessment."
I'm fairly sure a sodding Yorkie would be fairly pissed off being locked up for 2yrs and not be very happy to see said assessor.
In fact - take any dog from any owner off here, cage it for 2yrs without it so much as having a chance to walk and see how "angry" it gets.
Nature/Nurture - reacting to her environment.

In the end, the problem the police have is that if they told the kennel staff that they had to exercise these dogs, and then one of the staff got attacked, they'd be in trouble for that too.

I'm fairly sure a sodding Yorkie would be fairly pissed off being locked up for 2yrs ...
In fact - take any dog from any owner off here, cage it for 2yrs without it so much as having a chance to walk and see how "angry" it gets.

Angry dog, probably best not to let it out of a cage then.

As far as I can tell it was only the kennel assistant who said the dog wasn't aggressive. Can you point me towards a statement from the kennel owners? I haven't seen one anywhere, apart from the police statement that the kennel owners agreed with the policy of not interacting with dangerous dogs. Equally, I haven't seen anything suggesting that the "vet of 30yrs" has ever met the dog, she appears to be commenting abstractly on the report?

And as for funding, yes there may be the money to put dogs into private boarding kennels, but that doesn't mean that there is necessarily the right funding or organisation to develop a properly equipped kennel designed for dangerous dogs and staffed by professional animal handlers. Police policy is to return dogs to owners wherever it is possible without increased risk to public safety because it is such a drain on resources to keep them.

Pleader - she is one of the Vets who that force(and many others) use for assessments involving The Dogs Act 1871, and Sections 1 and 3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 as well as the Animal Welfare Act 2006.
Also instructed as an Expert Witness in cases under said acts.
She's spoken out against someone who pays her wages so I doubt she did that lightly - same as the kennels owners.

Yes, but did she actually assess that particular dog? I can't see any evidence of that? Equally, still can't find anything from the kennel owners stating that it wasn't aggressive? All we seem to have on that front is kennel assistant vs. police report (which cites RSPCA & kennel owners as agreeing with policy of isolating dangerous dogs, and 'independent experts' as agreeing dog was aggressive/potentially dangerous).

I agree that conditions that the dog was kept in were far from ideal, but it's difficult to see what alternatives there are without building some sort of specialised facility. I don't know if anywhere exists that is set up to handle dogs like these?

Personally I just think this is an odd outlier case, where normally sensible rules just haven't worked for various reasons. Would you walk a potentially dangerous dog? But likewise the courts shouldn't have taken so long to come to this conclusion.

Probably Would have been far better for everyone if it just had been put down from the word go, clearly the owner wasn't fit to own a dog, and it's hardly like the UK is short of these dogs sitting in rescue homes.

This one and numerous others over the years apparently - hence her speaking out about it and potentially knackering her work prospects 😯
Would you open your mouth about it to the press if there was no basis to it?
I know I wouldn't jeopardise paying my mortgage if I couldn't back it up.

There are some right bell ends on this forum!

This one and numerous others over the years apparently - hence her speaking out about it and potentially knackering her work prospects
Would you open your mouth about it to the press if there was no basis to it?
I know I wouldn't jeopardise paying my mortgage if I couldn't back it up.

I still haven't found anything that she has said about the behaviour of this dog at all? All I can find is one quote in the BBC report that appears to be about the kennelling system in general?

hammyuk - Member

Pleader - she is one of the Vets who that force(and many others) use for assessments ....
Also instructed as an Expert Witness in cases under said acts.
She's spoken out against someone who pays her wages so I doubt she did that lightly - same as the kennels owners.

Is there a reference for that, all the reports I've seen say she was an assistant, part time and in one or two it was in the past tense implying she was not still employed there

The thing is, there are no records of this dog ever having bitten anyone (before being ceased)

I don't think it's been ceased yet, that's what all the court hearings are about.

I think you'll find it has been both seized & ceased, its the lack of exercise between the two that people are getting all hot under the collar about

big yim - Member

Jambalaya if the police dont look after the dog then whats the alternative suggestion ?

Give it to the Vietnamese or mainland Chinese? 😮

Disgusting abominable behaviour by the police force in question, there was no need to act so black/white with such a case.

My mate had an American Pit-Bull and it was the sweetest most amiable dog you could ever hope to meet which was astonishing considering the background as to how he came to own it. It belonged to a group of Irish pikeys/so called travellers who ran an underground dog fighting scene in County Amagh - the police knew about it but they did nothing/weren't interested in dealing with them, he found the dog dumped on a back road nr to his farm and it was barely alive but still whimpering, the front bite of his lower jaw and most of his tongue was missing and his ears were just rags, there was a huge chunk missing from his rear end and he was covered in lacerations so he laid him on a sack and took it to his vets where he spent the best part of two months getting treatment which involved removing the damaged parts of his lower jaw, the ears were trimmed right back to the skull and his rear quarter was dealt with as best as possible but he eventually lost a rear leg. It cost my mate thousands in vets bills yet he persevered against advice from everyone at the time but he was determined to at least try.

Just as well he did as "franki" (yeah….that was his name aka frankenstein 😀 ) turned out to be the most loving and happy dog you could ever hope to meet despite having a permananlty goofy overbite grin and only 3 legs, when the farm cat disappeared franki looked after the kittens and would carry them in his gummy mouth and they absolutely adored him yet kittens being kittens would gang up and bully him into submission on his back, same with the new born lambs as the ewes were so used to franki that they let him nuzzle and play in the pens with them - he absolutely loved my mate and anyone who he met and would lie on the windowsill all day waiting on him coming home. He still had the massive muscly chest and build of a Pit-Bull so he could look pretty fierce when he hopped up to you with teeth showing but you quickly realised it was a smile because of his missing jaw.

He unfortunately had quite a severe stroke back in 2008 so had to be put down but it proves that not all dogs are beyond help or redemption from such a vicious upbringing.

Do you not see any hypocrisy in accusing a police force of "disgusting abominable behaviour" in the face of fairly limited information, before accusing them of being too black and white in their thinking? I wouldn't say that your statement allows for many shades of grey either.