Castanet

The other expert (Eklund) testified that Diesel is likely to bite or attack in certain circumstances. She sounds more realistic. It appears Diesel needs to go to a home with a person experienced in behaviour that Diesel is exhibiting.

Fancy wrote:The other expert (Eklund) testified that Diesel is likely to bite or attack in certain circumstances. She sounds more realistic. It appears Diesel needs to go to a home with a person experienced in behaviour that Diesel is exhibiting.

Elklund also testified that another dog "conned" her with it's behaviour.

That may be but the bottom line is the dog has bitten and Smith doesn't control it. He knew Diesel should be leashed yet wouldn't. What he wants now is too little too late.

Fancy wrote:That may be but the bottom line is the dog has bitten and Smith doesn't control it. He knew Diesel should be leashed yet wouldn't. What he wants now is too little too late.

Who did Diesel bite? I was under the impression he was in a fight with another dog.

A lady had a bruise on her hand. It's in the decision.

Missed that. I'll go take a look. Either way, the dog is not dangerous. He's not a threat to people. With the proper training he can be an excellent dog. Is that with Dave? Probably not. I said it once and I'll say it again. RDCO is not playing fair. They're actions are less than stellar.

Triple 6 wrote:Right you are. I'm sure other dogs we're released with "rules" so I'd like to know what the difference is. Between them & Diesel?

Dave Smith has proven himself an unfit owner over the years with numerous chances to change.
Did a judge in Shadows' case rule that he was not to be returned to them?
Or was he to be returned with conditions (to which his owners complied)?

There needs to be a foo foo dog law. If some fuzzy little piece of dog comes charging out at your large dog and the charging dog gets injured the person who owns the small dog should be the one charged. I am sick and tired of small aggressive dogs charging my dog. My dog does not react aggressively but why should he be at fault if he grabs the small dog by he scruff of the neck and shakes it? Why is it always the large dog who is at fault in these cases? I have 3 small dogs who charge out at my dog day after day. Why am I the one who should have to change where he walks as at least one person suggested here? Small dog owners in general are the worst owners around. They seem to feel that as their dog is small it is ok if he barks and charges other dogs and strains at his leash. Maybe we large dog owners need to report these aggressive dogs the way small dog owners report others.

LordEd wrote:What reason does a person have to make up a 'completely fabricated' story. Why would a totally unaffected person take the time and effort out of their day to make a complaint?

Personal vendetta or they hate dogs would be my guess. It happens

And the dog is still in jail .22months and counting.

Did I hear right on the news tonight? Taxpayers have already spent $54,000 on lawyers over this damn dog?

ifwisheswerehorses wrote:Or was he to be returned with conditions (to which his owners complied)?

He was returned with conditions. RDCO dropped the court proceedings w/Shadow.

Anyway I'm pulling for Dave. If he can fence his dog, leash at all times, he deserves a fifth chance. The dog does anyway.

crookedmember wrote:Did I hear right on the news tonight? Taxpayers have already spent $54,000 on lawyers over this damn dog?

They have. Rumor is close to $96,000 on Diesel, Shadow and another lady named Mary who's dog we're taken. People don't realize that the RDCO is spending your tax dollars foolishly.

Diesel & Shadow:
Both were at large, off leash
No proper enclosures
Owners not remedying the solution before a problem cropped up

Mary (too many dogs?)
Know the bylaws,
With a little research could have worked around that

Oh that's right all these solutions cost time and money so let's ignore them until we absolutely have to do something and then whine about those who are making us do so.
Unless your Mr Smith who is trying to hide his selfishness behind a dog

^^^^Owners like these are why so much money is being spent.

crookedmember wrote:Did I hear right on the news tonight? Taxpayers have already spent $54,000 on lawyers over this damn dog?

$900. a month for upkeep for him. Almost twice what keeping him in a kennel costs. All over a pishing match with someone