The business owner’s Tibetan mastiff Kong sunk his teeth into the unsuspecting customer’s leg as he waited to collect his car
Alan Gilmartin outside Liverpool Crown Court(Image: Liverpool Echo)
A professional strongman was left bloodied and with a phobia of dogs after an ill-fated visit to a garage. Mechanic Alan Gilmartin’s Tibetan mastiff Kong sunk its teeth into the unsuspecting customer’s leg as he waited to collect his car, leaving him with “nasty injuries”.
It came after the “powerful and muscular” canine, who had previously landed his owner with a police caution after biting another man in a field, broke free from the skip where he had been tied up outside the premises. But the “decent lad” has been spared a prison sentence and allowed to keep his dog.
Liverpool Crown Court heard yesterday afternoon, Wednesday, that John Crossland attended Vehicle Technician UK in Knowsley, of which Gilmartin was the proprietor, on November 11 2023 in order to pick up his vehicle after repairs. The 31-year-old defendant, of Shelley Close in Huyton, had left his “powerful, muscular and athletic” dog chained to a skip outside for 50 minutes before Kong began pulling on this restraint and barking.
Ben Berkson, prosecuting, described how CCTV footage then showed Gilmartin’s pet breaking the “inadequate” chain and running into the premises, where Mr Crossland was using his mobile phone while waiting for an invoice for the work on his car. He was thereafter bitten on the back of his right leg after being approached from behind by the escaped dog, who went on to bite the victim’s hand as he attempted to fend off a further attack.
The incident only came to an end when an employer was able to take hold of Kong and bundle him into a van. Mr Crossland was meanwhile “rushed to hospital” while “bleeding and in shock”.
Kong’s attack unfolded in front of the complainant’s mum, who had taken him to the garage in order to collect his car. He was said to have been left with a “phobia around dogs” and off work for three weeks, with the competitive strongman’s training programme also having been interrupted as a result of his injuries.
Alan Gilmartin outside Liverpool Crown Court(Image: Liverpool Echo)
Gilmartin previously received a conditional police caution in September 2023 in relation to an incident in July of the same year, when Kong bit another man to the knee while off the lead in a field. The terms of this caution required him to keep the dog muzzled in public and attend training classes.
Jonathan Rogers, defending, told the court that his client was a father-to-be, with his partner expected to give birth later this year. He added: “Mr Gilmartin accepts culpability and wishes that it did not happen. He has made a success of his life and presents with a good work ethic. He comes across as a decent lad.”
Gilmartin admitted being the owner of a dangerously out of control dog which caused injury. He was handed a 12-month community order with 120 hours of unpaid work and a contingent destruction order, which means Kong will not be euthanised subject to conditions including neutering and being muzzled in a public place.
Alan Gilmartin outside Liverpool Crown Court(Image: Liverpool Echo)
Sentencing, Judge Neil Flewitt KC said: “The dog, Kong, a Tibetan mastiff, was a family dog that, on the 23rd of November 2023, was with you at your work premises in Knowsley. It was initially chained, but managed to break free.
“The reason for that is probably twofold. Firstly, the chain was inadequate to hold a dog of that size and, secondly, the dog had clearly become agitated. While it was loose, Mr Crossland, who was attending at your premises to pay the bill for repairs you had done to his car, was attacked by the dog. He suffered nasty injuries. This appears to have had a considerable and lasting effect on him.
“It is, however, important to note that this is not an incident in which you actually did something to create that dangerous situation. This was an offence of omission. You failed to keep the dog muzzled.
“You should have known better, because there had previously been an incident and you were subject to a conditional caution requiring you to keep the dog muzzled in public. I accept that there may have been a misunderstanding over whether your place of work was considered a public place, but there should be no misunderstanding going forward.
“You failed to supervise the dog properly so that you could take action when it broke free and kept it in a place where the public had access when it was not properly secured. I accept that you are, generally speaking, a responsible dog owner and that this is a case of you educating yourself so that it does not happen again.
“I have a degree of confidence that you will do that. If you do not, not only will you be at risk of imprisonment, there is every chance that the dog will be destroyed.”