Okay so let me get this straight an 70 yr old grandma is going to attack a pitbull without provocation -- trust me, she more than likely would have ran away - can't imagine her going after the pitbull at all actually..unless it still had her dog.
"Owner Jacquelyn Kay English, 51, said she agreed to have her dog Vicious killed because she would otherwise be charged more than $500 in boarding fees to get him back from an animal hospital, which she could not afford.
'I'm never having another dog the rest of my life,' said English, who relies on a wheelchair and is recovering from a series of strokes. 'We lost the only dog we loved.'
English, of Inver Grove Heights, faces three misdemeanors in the March 26 attack, which caused serious injury to 70-year-old Margaret Johnston and ended with the death of Johnston's miniature schnauzer, Schultz.
The charges are maintaining an unlicensed dog, having a dog at large and harm caused by a dog.
If convicted, English faces up to $750 in fines and 90 days in jail.
Her first court appearance has been scheduled for April 16 at the Dakota County Courthouse in Hastings ...
.... She could not stand by her son's statements to the media that Johnston might have attacked first ... "
Actually even if she just gets away with the fine ... she isn't going to be done with court yet. There will still be the civil side of it all. This woman can expect to have to pay for the medical bills and any vet bills incurred by the victims.
Worse part for me? Her grandson is a member of my son's scout troop -- he found out about the attack while on a campout. His father came up to the campsite with the bad news and assured his son that grandma would be fine, they even brought up the newspaper article about it.
This kid bore it well. He was upset that his grandmother lost her dog though ... apparently he had been a long-time companion, and a comfort to the woman. He said he didn't know if she would be getting another dog or not as of yet (no one asked, he just said it ... kids) but he hoped she would after a while.
I can see where this may have been a case of inadvertant fleeing of the dog, but then the dog had been known to bite/attack before so they should have taken better care of keeping the dog confined.
And if it was the son's dog then why would the city go after her? they would be going after the son .... while she may have purchased the dog for her son, by putting her name on the license and vet bills she took responsibility for the dog and its actions.
I have to feel bad for both sides of this issue -- accept possibly the son who tried to blame the old lady .... grow up!!