A BELFAST dog owner has lost a court attempt to overturn the death sentence imposed on her pet in a case that has attracted a major online campaign for clemency.
Caroline Barnes was appealing a ruling that her pit bull terrier-type dog called Lennox should be destroyed because it was too dangerous.
County Court Judge Derek Rodgers yesterday upheld the original decision after declaring public safety must come first.
He said he could not be satisfied that Lennox did not pose a threat, based on attacks on a dog warden and former Metropolitan Police dog handler who examined him.
Setting out the reasons behind the relevant legislation, he said: “That purpose is to allow the public and particularly vulnerable members of the public, such as children, to walk the streets, play in parks, visit friends and even be in their own homes without fear of attack by a dog, particularly a large strong dog of a type bred for fighting. Accordingly, I cannot be satisfied that this dog is not a danger to the public, and I dismiss the appeal.”
Ms Barnes (35), of Disraeli Court in the city, was said to be too upset by the verdict to comment.
Her six-year-old pet was seized by Belfast City Council dog wardens in May last year. Since then a major campaign, which included an online petition signed by more than 100,000 people, has been mounted on Lennox’s behalf.
Expert witness evidence was given on both sides in the case, including that of former Metropolitan Police dog handler Peter Tallack, who claimed the dog represented a danger due to his unpredictability.
Ms Barnes insisted Lennox only has anxiety issues caused by two incidents in public, and has formed a close bond with her daughter. She rejected suggestions by a city council lawyer the dog was “waiting to go off”.
Judge Rodgers’s decision comes just months after the Dangerous Dogs (Amendment) Act 1997 in England and Wales was extended to Northern Ireland. The legislation introduced a discretionary element to automatic destruction for pit bull-type dogs, based on whether the animal is deemed a danger to the public.
Following the verdict, the council acknowledged the upset Ms Barnes was suffering but said it was the right decision. In a statement, it said: “If we had failed in this regard, and in the event of Lennox being involved in attacking or injuring a person, the council would be found to be at fault.”
The council said the ruling vindicated the actions of its staff who, it alleged, “had to endure a relentless, and still ongoing, campaign of intimidation and abuse throughout these legal proceedings”.
There is no suggestion Ms Barnes was involved in the alleged campaign.
The statement added: “Threatening letters, including one drenched in petrol, were put through the letterboxes of two female officers and another member of staff had her car tyres slashed outside her home.”