[PyrNet-L] CHAT, Rescue: Vicious dog

[MagEBroD@aol.com]

   People keep wanting to know where I (Janice Vocke - MagEBroD@aol.com) am
getting my ideas about this situation.  I am going to snip and paste a number
of passages from various e-mails to answer these questions, with a few
comments by me on them in bold italics.

Here are some parts of the original post by Jeannine De Palma that many people
seem to have not read or at least many did not understand: 

<<We have a l.g.d in a shelter on Death row.
For a first bite offence. MAY be KILLED by this Friday.
We are in the process of comfirmning which breed it is.
Could be Polish Tatra or great pys?/ <snip>
He prefers Man over woman..<snip>
And since Carol has NO people in Nebraska .WE need a MAN to help TRANSPORT
dog.<snip>
Without getting into legalities of case.
Stange Visitor( Woman) was bit in house after she was asked not to touch dog.
Dog has never bitten ANYONE before this.
Owner realizes his mistake by not putting dog away. Will do anything to see
the dog saved . >>

Jeaninie De Palma who wrote original post wrote again of her knowledge of the
case:
<<The dog was in house. <snip>
THe woman was asked to leave the dog alone.
The woman admitted in court she tried to pet the dog after the warning.
Because he looked so CUTE<snip>
He left the dog alone in a room
with a not so comman sence woman(stranger) who did not listen to warning
He went to get her coffee to make her feel better.
In that blink of a eye the dog bit her bad.
A ambulance was immediatly called.snip>
 The bite was a severe one. which resulted in many stitchs to face & arm.
So severe the woman went back to work 2 days later & only spent a couple
of hours in the hospital.>>
Jeannine DePalma
& 100% Loveable PET Central Asian Ovcharka Tasha/still not for everyone

On Thu, 17 Dec 1998 14:11:00 -0500, Judith Diamond wrote:

>The case has been pending since May of
>this year and went to trial on October 26th. This dog is not a pyrenees,
>but, rather an Austrian Oucher, a different type of guard dog. His name
>is Bosci.  It is this man's opinion who has known Bosci throughout most
>of this time at The Humane Society, that Bosci is a viscous dog, who
>probably  has bitten before. He felt that if there were a chance for
>Bosci's rehabilitation, it is gone now, due to his confinement in his
>cage since May of '98. It is true that the bite Bosci gave was a serious
>and severe one.

Cindy Henke wrote:
<<A dog bite is different than a mauling.  If this woman touched this dog
after being warned, did he give her in what amounts to dog language " a
corrective bite"?<snip> you assume that this dog was unable to determine
a threat.  I am not sure that we can assume that without more
information? It would seem that no one gives the dog the benefit of the doubt,
and we
do not question the woman at all? <snip> I would want to know body posture of
the dog on this bite, what really occurred prior to the bite and afterwards.
Did the dog warn and back
off, or did he aggressively pursue. <snip>Humans abuse other creatures too
easily. This poor animal probably has no idea that what it did was
inappropriate, it may have felt
very justified, and we kill without question?>>


[I, Janice Vocke,  wonder why they waited 7 months to try to identify the
breed or to plead for help and to post to this list. By waiting until 48 hrs.
before dog is to be killed and pleading for help it created a panic on lists
because mnany felt so much time pressure that they did not feel or want to be
bothered to read clearly or find out the whole story. By pleading for help
like this yet refusing to give all the legalities or the victim's side of the
story I feel we were presented with an unfair situation. Either do nothing or
have our reactions based on only part of the story.  Not a good situation.
Especially when this happened 7 months ago and the dog has been in this
shelter since then.  I notice that the shelter worker who has been around this
dog probably the most the past 7 months and also has access to to more
information than we do , including the legalities of the case and the victim's
report, thinks this is a vicious dog that he believes has probably bitten
before. What was it about this dog that made the owner have to warn an elderly
woman not to touch it and makes it impossible for a woman to transport this
dog?  Owner admits he made a mistake leaving her alone with the dog. Also the
mix-up with the breed may have had to do with the way Jeannine De Palma signs
off her posts to LGD newsletter!]

Judith Diamond also wrote:
<<Firstly, yard's are private property! No one has a right or any
business in my yard uninvited. If they come in anyway, that is called
trespassing and is illegal. If, they come uninvited when a dog is there
growling or friendly really, they 'almost' deserve what they get because
they have asked for it and it and was a dumb move to begin with. The
fenced off acre for the pyrs on my land has NO Trespassing signs on it
every 20' with my signature on each one. Thank God in the state of
Maine, when an intruder of any sort enters  despite these warnings, not
only do I have a right to protect my house and property with a gun if
necessary, my pys have a right to do their job of guardians that they
were bred for Jonah & Lexi were bred for. This, of course, means a bite
only for any life threatening situation and only as a last resort. After
all is said and done isn't that one of the reasons I own The Great
Pyrenees dog. Biting dogs are a liability.  So are hoodlum children>>

In reply I (Janice Vocke) asked:
   <What about the mailman or UPS deliveryman?  What about the floral delivery
 person?  What about the electric company meter reader?  I have also had
 solicitors/salesmen come onto my property, despite No Trespassing signs.
What
 about Jehovah's witnesses?  I have them come by too. Neighbour kids. Kids
 selling candy and magazine subscriptions for school, band, etc. Kids
 collecting food and clothing for the needy. Teens who ran out of gas or whose
 car broke down and need to use phone. People answering ads for items you want
 to sell. Do all these people deserve to be bit and scarred or maybe maimed or
 killed as a result?? I think not. >
 
clhenke@juno.com wrote: 
<<I for one really do want to
>know what caused the bite in the first place.  <snip> Sounded to me, like the
woman
>didn't listen to instructions provided for her own safety, not that the
>dog ran out to attack her without provocation.

The Judith Diamond wrote:
<< All in all, that's not too bad of a reason for a dog to bite now is
it? The stranger, apparently was an intruder, as the police would say.>>

Then Judith Diamond added regarding the statement "a truly sound guarding dog
should be able to determine if a person is a threat to its people or property,
or just a welcomed guest or friendly visitor...":
 <<   I mentioned that  also as did another.>><snip>
<>

The Judith Diamond complained : 
<<What is it about my post's that some people do not read thoroughly? >>

The again Judith posted:
<< Although she was probably too frenetic to tell me specific's, I
believe she means us to quickly and in an urgent manner, post
immediately our opinions, so that it will reach the judge before he
decides to execute the dog.
    Perhaps those of you that 'are' for saving this dog until he is
proven innocent or guilty may want to forward this cry for help to your
e-mail buddies.<snip>This however, is happening much to fast all in 48
hours, to determine that sentence.>>
I 
BCavins wrote: 
<>


 I, Janice Vocke, think  we should ALL read the posts we are writing about.
The dog attacked an elderly woman because she reached out to pet him while a
guest in owner's house while he was in other room making her some coffee. I do
not call that provocation or being a threat to people or property! Again IN
HIS HOUSE! That's what we are talking about! Or should be! The facts of the
case! And this has been going on for 7 months, NOT 48 hours! And he does not
sound at all INNOCENT to me!!  His own owner admits he bit someone who tried
to pet him and bit hetr severely. And why with all the time spent posting
asking for help, is Jeannine too "frenetic" to tell us the specifics??  We
needed the FACTS BEFORE considering making any phone calls, writing e-mails,
etc. 

In a message dated 12/17/98 8:31:51 AM Pacific Standard Time, clhenke@juno.com
wrote:
  <<  I never said that all children were bad, or
  no parent does his job.  But if they were, then their kid wouldn't be inthe
bottom of someones else's pool, on property that was not their own!!! >>
  
And later she wrote:
   <<If your children find food or clothing or anything else for that matter
in someones swimming pool, more power to them.  There is a distinct
difference in walking up to someones front door, or trespassing the rest
of their property, and evidently a lot of you fail to distinguish the
difference.<snip> This applies to the dogs as well  Now unless you know of
someone with a
moat around the front of their property, that a person would fall into
while walking up to your front door, I consider anything else trespass.I don't
think anyone DESERVES to fall in a pool, or be bit by a dog.Both are events
that happen.  I frankly am amazed at how irate everyone has become in defense
of rude or unmanageable children>>
 
Judith Diamond posted:
<<We have been discussing mostly, 'fenced off property', not casual
entrance for a stranger's innocently walking to the front door or
electric meter person or the like and for a reason or not just suddenly
get bitten. Have we not? I have.>>


  I, Janice Vocke write: Now we're getting ridiculous!  We are not talking
about a dog biting someone in a pool or a moat!  Someone made an analogy is
all. We were talking about trespassing  on other peoples' property, because
different people remarked that they thought people were asking for trouble or
almost deserved a dog attack or maybe even were risking being shot.  We were
NOT talking about people wandering all over the rest of their property!  This
case was about a visitor in someone's home, however. It is you that failed to
distinguish the difference, not me. I have understood that the attack took
place in a home of dog owner and because an elderly woman visitor tried to pet
the dog. Being a guest in someone's home or going on their property for some
good reason, such as in the course of your job, whether a paid job, or doing
volunteer work for your community, I do not consider criminal trespassing!
And also I do not remember anyone ever coming to the defense of rude or
unmanageable children!!!!  On the contrary!!  The people that posted,
including  myself, wrote defending decent children!  I posted about the number
of wonderful, nice, polite, hard-working, selfless, community-minded children
that are trying to help feed the hungry, clothe the poor, do repairs and
cleanup for elderly or handicapped, etc, and may have decent reasons for being
on someone else's property in the course of helping others less fortunate. 

Jeanine DePalma, the original poster, wrote:
   <<So please who ever said to Judith She should only consider Rescueing Her
own breed. Should take a long look at herself.>>

I, Janice Vocke, do not recall anyone posting anything like this.  If anyone
was upset that the dog in question was not a Pyr, it is probably more because
we wasted a lot of time talking about what the character traits of a Great
Pyrenees should be. And comparing our Pyrs to this dog and how he attacked
this woman. It is a bit unfair to expect us to write educated letters in
defense of this dog and breed if we do not know very much about this breed. I
personally have been very interested in this Tatra breed, but that is just my
natural curiosity.  How ever personally I would not want a vicious dog or to
help rescue a vicious dog NO MATTER WHAT BREED IT IS!!  I have gone to the bat
for dogs that were victims of abuse at puppy mills and even been willing to
adopt up to 2 of them at a time, even though they were not a breed I had ever
had before. I do get bugged a lot at:
-- how little people pay attention to posts they are replying to;
-- how the truth can get so twisted;
-- how reactionary people can get at arguing things when they often don't have
a clue;
-- and how little they seem to care about getting their facts right;
-- and how far from the truth these arguments can get.
--and how few people read the original posts before posting an opinion about
them.
Hoping this helps to clarify things a bit.

Janice Vocke
MagEBroD@aol.com
Shelton, WA.