Lennox has been destroyed. Thank you to all who tried to help

krlyr

But the BSL doesn't even go by breed in terms of Pitbull-type, it goes by measurements. This could mean a Labrador cross without an ounce of bull breed in it could be deemed a "dangerous" Pitbull-type if it had certain measurements.
Also it is worth noting that these breeds were not initially bred for human-aggression. The term bull breed is because they were initially bred bull baiting - but a good temperament towards humans was essential due to the aggressive nature of the dogs, the owners needed to be able to handle them safely.
American Pitbulls were initially bred from these kinds of breeds, as hog hunting dogs, for driving livestock, and family companions.
Yes, they have become one of the favoured breeds for those who choose to engage in dog-fighting, and as a status dog, but equally many breeds are just as strong and quick to aggress with the "training" techniques used. Do we ban all large and/or strong dogs as potentially dangerous breeds? It would be like banning the sale of kitchen knives, fullstop, because some individuals used them as weapons.

I can completely understand why the judge has made the decision they made - technicalities and emotions aside, the law states Lennox to be of-type but I definately think that the council & courts have gone through the process very wrongly and that it was handled very badly. If they weren't prepared to go by proper behaviourists' assessments of Lennox's character, why go by any (including the ex dog handler's), why not just state that the measurements made him of-type and that was that? If the claims of Lennox's health and living conditions are true, I think this also needs to be investigated and dealt with officially - Lennox's 'type' does not excuse the accused cruelty to be continued for years.
Like I said, I don't think that the whole thing is solely about Lennox as an individual any more but he has become a symbol of a flawed system.

vax2002

Devon and Corwall police warned Holiday makers that they will seize pitbull type dogs that may be tolerated at home, the advice, if in doubt, leave it at home.

demystified

You seem to be missing the point though..........he's not a pitbull

Says who? You?

I notice you or someone else is posting this across a number of forums. Apparently the dog warden and others have been threatened with violence which doesn't exactly help their case much.

So lets see.. family with aggressive/violent tendencies, owning a pitbull-type dog... you can see where the authorities are coming from on this one.

Elle7

walwin wrote: »

You seem to be missing the point though..........he's not a pitbull

The legal evidence shows that his owners agreed that he was of type, and signed a document saying that they had broken the relevant law by keeping a pit bull.

This is why the requests for DNA and his siblings have been ignored by the court - his owners have admitted he is a pit bull, and an aggressive one at that.

I did want to attach the relevant documents but they are behind an access point at work, so I'd have to post the log-in details and I don't think they'd be too happy if I did that!

Unfortunately, there is a lot more to this than meets the eye.

Fire_Fox

walwin wrote: »

You seem to be missing the point though..........he's not a pitbull

Actually I stated in my earlier post (IF he is one). As far as I can tell this dog's heritage has not been conclusively established either way. Have the owners supplied details of the b1tch and stud and the breeder given evidence that there is no pitbull in him? The authorities claim he is a pitbull cross, you claim he is not, what you added to the OP uses a good deal of emotive language and clouds the main issue (pitbull or not) with information designed to tug at the heart strings (daughter, kennelling). Currently the authorities are being asked to ship what they believe to be a dangerous breed to the US, it's not logical or moral. Shipping the dog to the US is not resolving the legislative issue: if he is a pitbull he needs to be PTS, if not he needs to be returned to his owner. All the while he absolutely should be treated with a high standard of care.

krlyr

Elle7 wrote: »

This is why the requests for DNA and his siblings have been ignored by the court - his owners have admitted he is a pit bull, and an aggressive one at that.

Personally, I would refuse DNA testing too - it is not all that accurate in dogs and I have heard of some ridiculous results from owners who've had their dogs tested. The author of the magazine Dogs Today had her purebred Bearded Collie tested to see how flawed the system is and I believe the results came back without even mentioning Bearded Collie as even a fraction of its makeup. And someone who's teeny little Chihuahua-sized, brindle "Pom x Sheltie" (as the rescue deemed it) came back as over 1/3 Pyrenean Mountain Dog :eek:

HeatherintheHills

Elle7 wrote: »

The legal evidence shows that his owners agreed that he was of type, and signed a document saying that they had broken the relevant law by keeping a pit bull.

This is why the requests for DNA and his siblings have been ignored by the court - his owners have admitted he is a pit bull, and an aggressive one at that.

I did want to attach the relevant documents but they are behind an access point at work, so I'd have to post the log-in details and I don't think they'd be too happy if I did that!

Unfortunately, there is a lot more to this than meets the eye.

Sorry Ellie, but saying that the evidence is there but cannot be shared is not acceptable. Anyone can do that with anything.

According to some sources Lennox has been DNA tested ans isn't a pit bull. (There, see how easy it is?)

Where and when did his owners admit he was a pit bull? And if aggressive, why was he companion to their disabled daughter?

Most telling of all, why won't Belfast City Council admit that their dog warden lied (now proven) and show openly the conditions Lennox is being kept in?

Lennox's family have been displayed to the public, warts and all, over this issue whereas BCC keep hiding behind a wall of red tape.

I know who I believe.

Fire_Fox

krlyr wrote: »

Personally, I would refuse DNA testing too - it is not all that accurate in dogs and I have heard of some ridiculous results from owners who've had their dogs tested. The author of the magazine Dogs Today had her purebred Bearded Collie tested to see how flawed the system is and I believe the results came back without even mentioning Bearded Collie as even a fraction of its makeup. And someone who's teeny little Chihuahua-sized, brindle "Pom x Sheltie" (as the rescue deemed it) came back as over 1/3 Pyrenean Mountain Dog :eek:

At the point your dog is on death row I don't really see what you have to lose. The DNA testing was not intended to be used alone but as clarification/ confirmation. The authorities have taken measurements and have (hopefully) asked for details of parentage. If the dog fails all three tests then IMO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test

krlyr

And if the results came back indicating he was a Pitbull then it would be the final nail in the coffin - the fact that it cannot be confirmed for definate has left the possible option of the judge changing their minds I suppose. I wouldn't want to trust the accuracy of a DNA test to make that final call.
Though I vaguely recall the question being asked on why DNA testing couldn't be used to prove/disprove dogs being "of type" in the past, I have just looked it up on the dog forum I'm on and apparently the main issue is that fact that the law deems "Any Dog known as a Pitbull type" illegal, rather than specifically "Pitbull Terriers and Pitbull Terrier crosses". There is no breed called "Pitbull type" so how do you use DNA to prove a "type"?

Elle7

HeatherintheHills wrote: »

Sorry Ellie, but saying that the evidence is there but cannot be shared is not acceptable. Anyone can do that with anything.

According to some sources Lennox has been DNA tested ans isn't a pit bull. (There, see how easy it is?)

Where and when did his owners admit he was a pit bull? And if aggressive, why was he companion to their disabled daughter?

Most telling of all, why won't Belfast City Council admit that their dog warden lied (now proven) and show openly the conditions Lennox is being kept in?

Lennox's family have been displayed to the public, warts and all, over this issue whereas BCC keep hiding behind a wall of red tape.

I know who I believe.

You may well do. I don't know if the information is available online too, but I won't risk losing my job to prove it to you. It is true, I have seen it with my own eyes.

He has not been DNA tested. The court refused. He was not a companion to their daughter - even the statement from EGAR yesterday shows that he was originally kept in the back yard, and was never a registered therapist dog. This was given to them as a possible defence by their first solicitor. He did say this on Twitter, but the comments were later deleted.

I haven't met the family. I have got access to the court records, and we have weekly updates on cases like this that affect our work. There is a great deal of information that suggests that Lennox' family have changed their story routinely, and I struggle to understand why they didn't send him bedding or treats when they were able to do so.

As for the council - it's a disgusting world when a judge can sit over his own appeals, and the court refuses to explain itself or respond to comments. Even the march seemed to go unnoticed. I can only hope that they now allow Lennox to be rehomed with Victoria.

Cesar Milan was previously an option too, until he was insulted and abused on the families facebook page. It's still there - maybe it was hacked, but if so, why not delete the comments and apologise the Cesar?

And why were the multiple petitions never taken to court?

Make up what you like. There is a huge amount of this story that has stayed behind the scenes, and will never been seen by people who can't access the paperwork or talk to the legal team involved. Both on Lennox' families part and on the councils part. In my opinion, they've both made mistakes and acted terribly. The council continue to do so, by not letting him be released to a third party.

It's quite common that court papers cannot be made public. I was adding to the discussion - research it yourself, or consider it and see if it fits the story better. It doesn't matter to me if you believe it or not. It's quite condescending to respond in such a way when you can't prove what you are saying either.

I don't think the decision is due today any more, so hopefully there is more time for him to be saved somehow. The poor boy has suffered enough.

I'll refrain from commenting further, this isn't the mature discussion I thought it was.