Havelock to revisit rules on vicious animals

Published: Wednesday, July 9, 2014 at 04:59 PM.

“This family has gone through hell because of what has happened to the dog,” Allard said of the dog’s owners. “The dog is alive and well, but it cost them $1,000 that they didn’t have and the dog has gone out of the city limits and will soon go to Pennsylvania. It’s not right. If you have no bite marks, no torn clothes, no blood drawn, where is the evidence that a person was bit by the dog? It’s not right. I think the ordinance needs to be changed.”

Allard said the dog was living with a family that has three children ages 7, 8 and 10 and that there have frequently been other children in the home. She said that Sadie had never shown any aggression toward the family or other children.

Donna Scheck, who identified herself as Sadie’s owner in a statement to commissioners, said that birds in the city have more protection than pets.

“The same ordinance that took the dog away from my children allows the woodpecker to destroy my home,” she said.

Patricia Murray told commissioners Sadie’s plight affected her.

“It doesn’t matter what degree that aggressiveness is, the outcome is that the animal is put down or has to move out of the Havelock community,” she said. “I would like to petition the board to let the animal’s punishment fit the crime. There is a big difference between somebody getting a scratch from a dog than having their arm or their skin torn off. When you have people validating the gentleness of the animal and you have one person, no witnesses, no nothing claiming the animal bit them, to go on that claim, the investigation should be in detail. There are animal haters out there.”

Murray said that there are some people who are vindictive against families that have animals.

1 2 3 4

Reader comments posted to this article may be published in our print edition. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.

▲ Return to Top