DOG ATTACKS MEN

Hokitika Guardian, 11 July 1931, Page 2

DOG ATTACKS MEN

OWNER OF ALSATIAN FfNED. PALMERSTON NORTH, July 6. On the grounds that defendant had permitted a dog, known to be dangerous and to have bitten a person, to go at large without being muzzled in the proper manner, proceedings were taken in the Palmerston North Police Court to-day before Mr J. L. Stout, S.M., 'agadnst John Edward Flavell, bookseller, of Palmerston North, on me information o. 1 John Louisson. Defendant was further charged with being the owner of a dog which attacked John Louisson and Arthur ParKtm.

Defendant’s dog is an Alsatian, and evidence concerned throe episodes, including two attacks on children. J. Louisson, of Wood Street, stated that on June 19 he was returning home when the dog rushed out of cieiendant’s place and dashed round a woman, but did not attack her, eonhnmg its attentions instead to witness. The dog grabbed at witness’s hip twice, but its fangs did not penetrate the flesh. Later it attacked a cyclist. Flavell saw the episode and took no action whatever. There was no doubt about the savageness of the dog’ s attack, stated the witness. It came at him like a lion and was so big that it did not even have to spring.

Arthur Parker said that oil Julie 19 the dog came at him dangerously. It was by no means playful and growled viciously,

De endant stated that on the occasion of the incident complained of by Louisson he saw the whole opisodo. The dog ran after Mrs Flint for whom it had an affection, and played round. It did 'not- attack Louisson, but just bumped into him accidentally. Defendant did not see Parker at all. Had defendant thought tho dog was attacking anybody lie would have checked it. A fine of £2 and costs on the second charge was imposed, the first charge being dismissed.