http://news.stv.tv/scotland/tayside/278378-pet-owner-totally-gutted-after-losing-appeal-against-order-to-put-down-dog-for-cat-attack/

I'm hoping there's more to this story than has been reported, the cat survived the attack,it seems very draconian not to have a so called " doggy asbo" put on the dog for this one incident, makes me wonder if the outcome would be the same if it was a different breed.

I thought animal attacks on animals werent dealt with in the same way as animal on human ?
It does seem somewhat extreme if the dog had previously been fine and the cat survived although aterrible thing to have happened.

I guess the main part here is that the dog entered somebody else's garden. Otherwise under the DDA a Bullterrier some years ago was cleared of killing a cat as the judge ruled it did what dogs do naturally -and it was in its own garden.

Lord Bonomy is obviously not a dog lover!

Although it is terrible that this happened I didnt think cats had much protection in law and were regarded as "wild"

This took place in Scotland, and last year (2010), Scotland adopted an Amendment to the Dangerous Dogs Act, to include attacks on other animals, and any incidents on private property.

In doing so, this repealed the 1871 Dogs Act in Scotland, which was a civil prosecution rather than criminal, but did cover all non-human dog attacks. It is still in force in England; unfortunately most police seem unaware of it and it's rare that any prosecutions under this act come about.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2010/9/section/1

The DDA amendment has not yet gone through English parliament but it is planned. We can then expect a lot more cases of a similar nature.... On one hand it will go a long way to helping those whose dogs are killed by other dogs, but for dog on cat attacks, it may well go too far.

You never get the full in depth story but, it seems this dog is being made an example of due to the owner allowing the dog loose one other time, two strikes and your out with this judge.

It's a tragedy for the dog if it is otherwise a nice animal, how can anyone look at that picture and not feel so very sorry for the poor thing, it doesn't know it did anything wrong and it didn't, there are not many dogs which would not try to get at a cat outdoors, (and I say that as a longtime cat owner) there have been other cases of cats and dogs being attacked and sometimes killed by loose dogs, I guess this judge has got passed trying to punish the owner and perhaps getting nowhere and is going straight for the dog now if it has been reported previously for being loose.

I'm usually one of those voices shouting for something to be done about some owners allowing or not caring that their dogs just kill and attack other dogs and cats, but I do feel terribly sorry for this dog especially if the dog did get out by accident and is otherwise sound.

But, I guess I don't really know that for sure.................

Posted before seeing your post MsTemeraire, well that makes sense why the judge passed the sentence then. I hope that judges will use their common sense your right it could be a dangerous country for many dogs afterwards.

my friends dog was killed by a staffie while my friends dog was in its own garden. the killer dog didnt even get an asbo or anything.  my friends dog was 13yr old. this was in scotland.

It does seem pretty hit or miss as to whether anything will be done or not,it would also depend on when your friends dog was killed as the new legislation only came into force at the end of last year.

This judgement is very worrying, my dogs live quite happily with a cat and hens, but I couldn't say for sure what would happen if they chased a cat outside, any of us could be in this owners position.

It also seems very unfair that cats can kill wildlife willy-nilly and not a dicky is ever done about it. Couldn't the same be said about dogs mauling cats as can be said about cats mauling wildlife...it's in their nature.

It doesn't even say the cat wass killed, it just says the cat was injured.

I don't get it. A cat can KILL other peoples pets and the law doesn't have anything to say, a dog HURTS a cat and the dog gets killed by the law (I do have a cat, I am not a cat hater! I also have had a cat ripped up badly by dogs, amazingly against the vets advice we didn't have her PTS and she survived)
Seems as if a dog hurts another dog, under the legislation MsT linked to, the dog can be killed.

It's strange how humans can KILL dogs for hurting other animals . Dogs are acting on instinct, humans are meant to be the smart ones...........

I don't see the point in killing dogs for this sort of thing, I really don't. If a dog is a danger to humans I can understand, but not becasue it has attacked a cat. Something does need to be done about irresponsible onwers, but are the problem owners really going to be bothered by having thier out-of-control dogs killed? - no, they will just go & get another one. It's irresponsible OWNERS that need sorting out......GRRRRR.

Also nobody knows if the cat actually attacked the dog & the dog was defending itself, apparently it was found with the cat in it;s mouth - no talk of anybody witnessing the event. Cats can & do attack dogs, is it unreasonable for a dog to defend itself against such an attack?
A neighbour recently had to come & grab her cat that had sarted to stalk Buster (90kg English mastiff being stalked by a 3kg cat!!! )as we walked past her house.
Years ago my cat saw a neighbours kitten being chased by a GSD, so my cat attacked the dog. that same cat also attacked a lab that had wandered into our garden.

Seems as if the judge took the anonymous report of the dog being previously loose (and not found by police) as the 1st 'offence' and will not allow a 2nd offence.
All the people that walk thier dogs off-lead and let them toddle along behind them 30ft away really should clip thier dogs on a lead in Scotland - you never know when somebody will notice your loose dog, not see you so report your dog as being loose & subsequently it is 'out of control', then if your dog even gets in any bother it's allready had a previous offence

> It also seems very unfair that cats can kill wildlife willy-nilly and not a dicky is ever done about it

Yes and my pondfish!

I don't get it. A cat can KILL other peoples pets and the law doesn't have anything to say, a dog HURTS a cat and the dog gets killed by the law confused

Because in law, cats are wild animals that cannot be trained, dogs are the opposite. It's six of one and half a dozen of another. Cats shouldn't be let out unless the owner has a fully secure garden which it cannot get out of, but dogs should absolutely NOT be able to get into other people's gardens either.

> Also nobody knows if the cat actually attacked the dog & the dog was defending itself, apparently it was found with the cat in it;s mouth

Walking in the dark early one morning last week My old dog came up to me with a rabbit in his mouth.  I was gobsmacked to think that he had actually caught a rabbit as he rarely gets out of a slooow trot these days. But when I took it off him it was stone cold. He had obviously found a dead one and brought it to me. If no one saw the attack maybe the dog didn't even catch teh cat.

If you check the comments at the bottom of this article there seems to be a bit more to this case than meets the eye (suppose there normally is)....

http://www.thecourier.co.uk/News/Dundee/article/16311/charity-joins-efforts-to-save-condemned-dundee-dog-c-jay.html?setNum=3&sortBy=latest#comments

It does seem pretty hit or miss as to whether anything will be done or not,it would also depend on when your friends dog was killed as the new legislation only came into force at the end of last year.

It was this year my friends dog was killed.

Ahhhhhhhhhhh................ I see Penfold,

Posted by Bobby, Dundee, Scotland

DC Thompson at their best, are not telling the full story here! This dog has attacked 2 children, 2 adults, & 3 dogs (one of which had to be put down), as well as the cat that the story seems to be focused on! The owner is incapable of owning such an animal, and admitted so in court, hence verdict

Makes perfect sense why the dog is being destroyed, papers eh, never tell the whole truth do they? Tut, tut.

and of course the dog pays the price of the owners ineffective/irresponsible ownership.

How typical -dog being PTS for hurting a cat makes a much more sensational story than the far more common dog being PTS for biting people...

Tadog that's outrageous! did the police attend at all ?.

Well, I'm a bit relieved tbh, at least there was more to the story. This story was also on the STV news and nothing was said about the dog having " previous " just that it was being pts for mauling the cat.

Celli, yes they did.

> Makes perfect sense why the dog is being destroyed, papers eh, never tell the whole truth do they? Tut, tut.

Oh my gosh! Yes it does make perfect sense now.
I got my self all worked up into a right tizz about the 'injustice' and it was all just sensastionalist journalism!

very very sad for all concerned and to make it worse the press dine out on it.

> I got my self all worked up into a right tizz about the 'injustice' and it was all just sensastionalist journalism!

Which begs the question.... what prompted the journalistic slant in the dog's favour, when given its 'previous' the press could have really gone to town on "ASBO Dog" and made it into a warning to others? I am normally on the dog's side... especially when I find out later its owners should be PTS instead.

I am sure many dog owners in Scotland are completely unaware of the Amendment passed last year. This could have been a golden opportunity to make others aware of the consequences of the new laws, but instead it has been wrongly reported as being a prosecution under the 1871 Dogs Act (repealed last year) and journalists have made a real hash of it by failing to disclose the past history.

DC Thomson's have been on the side of the dog since the beginning and this story has been extensively covered in the evening version of the local paper.  There has been pages and pages of letters with dog lovers vs dog haters passing comment but the link provided on this thread is the first time any of the alleged truth from neighbours etc has come out.  What was mentioned is that on another occassion a staffy was loose in the area but there was no confirmation that it was the woman's pet.  The owner of the cat had previously said to the paper that he didn't want the dog put down or anything like that but just wanted compensation and the owner warned.

I really feel for them and find the punishment unjust in comparison to other similar cases.  This could happen to any one of us if our dogs got out e.g. if the house was broken into and the dogs were let out. 

RIP C-Jay.

It would seem that the owners lawyer has started another appeal.

I just don't know, there doesn't appear to be any other corroboration on the claims that the dog had attacked people, other than the e mails sent into the Courier. Just have to wait and see I suppose.

Hard to say isn't it.....don't suppose we'll ever know the full story, it could be full blown neighbourhood backstabbing.

That's what I wondered too.

yeah, it is amazing about how things that get mentioned online become 'fact'.  I have seen on other forums people stating as fact that the dog was dangerous and had previous.  I don't know the family and have never met CJ but something just doesn't seem right, there is obviously a lot more to this than has been released in the papers.