Banned dog mauled Uber Eats driver delivering McDonald’s in savage attack

19 comments

1. The dog was not destroyed and given back to this idiot who let it rip into a man’s face.

   If I was the victim I would feel that this society does not give two shits about what happens to me. Dogs that attack people in this way should be destroyed.

   When this dog attacks again, the people who enabled it to be returned should face repercussions as they share the responsibility. If it attacked a child rather than a man it would probably kill them.

2. >At [Tameside](https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/all-about/tameside) Magistrates’ Court today (Monday), Ward was told she could be reunited with the animal after a dog expert concluded it was not a danger to the public.

   That’s an absolute failure of logic. The dog bit somebody’s face yet it’s no danger to the public.

   >Chair of the bench, Janet Entwistle, told Ward that the court had deemed her to be a “fit and proper” person to be allowed to keep a dog.

   And another failure.

3. >She said the dog could be returned to her under a contingent destruction order, which stipulates that it must be kept on a lead and muzzled in public. Ward was also told to keep the pet inside a crate when answering the door in future.

   Tbh I think that’s fair enough. Heavy restrictions and the sword of Damocles.

4. Who even gets McDonald’s delivered? It can’t possibly travel well.

5. She doesn’t look the type to have an out of control banned breed.

6. On the face of it the decision is hard to understand. However, reports from a court are generally 2 or 3 sentences out of what will have been several hours of evidence. 

   This unfortunately leaves us wondering how a decision has been made, without really any way of working out if this was correct or not.

   Courts really should publish written decisions as standard.

7. “At [Tameside](https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/all-about/tameside) Magistrates’ Court today (Monday), Ward was told she could be reunited with the animal after a dog expert concluded it was not a danger to the public.”

   “Gemma Louise Ward’s Pit Bull Terrier mauled the man as he delivered a McDonald’s order to her home”

   “The dog was seized by police following the attack and has been in kennels ever since. The court heard that although it was a banned breed, an expert had assessed the pet and concluded it was not a danger and could be put on the register of exempt dogs managed by the Department for Food and Rural Affairs.”

   Sounds like someone, somewhere got sucked off.

8. Distroy them all. Prison for anyone caught with one.

9. She should face 5 to 10, fined enough to compensate him his permanent damage and the dog should be put down. What the hell is happening with out legal system that this is falling through the gaps.

10. What kind of moron of a dog expert concludes the dog isn’t a danger after it’s already tried to rip someone’s face off? Absolute clown.

11. What an incredible waste of time if they are going to destroy the dog or punish the owner.

12. That’s what he gets for delivering McDonald’s in savage attack! The nerve!

13. Emotional responses aside.

    You have a dog who has such a strong defence reaction that it pushed past its owner and attacked a member of the public who was doing what the owner paid them to do.

    How is that not a danger to the public? Genuinely baffled.

    The owner needs gates to control the animal. They do not have control.

14. >The court heard that although it was a banned breed, an expert had assessed the pet and concluded it was not a danger

    I’d like to know how they reached that conclusion.. it has already attempted to rip a man’s face off once. Did they ask the dog to sign some sort of declaration admitting that it was at fault and wouldn’t do it again?

15. The dog owner looks exactly how expected them to look

16. The problem is that some people, usually not the brightest, insist on owning animals which can pose a danger to anyone unfortunate enough to come into contact with it. Then, unsurprisingly, at some point the animal gets free and mauls a bystander or turns on the owner.

    I’m sick of seeing “lost dog” type posts locally, with some powerful, overbred beast shown to be loose once again on the streets. These folk are happy to take the risk with other people’s safety for their status/amusement/whatever. But there’s so many enabling, dog worshipping loons out there who always seem to make light of it as well.

17. The owner should be treated as if they committed the injuries themselves.

18. Sadly you can’t trust so called „dog experts” so many are pit bull activists it is shocking. Even the RSPCA refuses to acknowledge those dogs are simply dangerous 

19. Why do benefits people love agressive dogs so much?