Postwoman who suffered horrific injuries in savage dog attack "devastated" after court rules animal will NOT be destroyed

[LouBarlow]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/po ... s-11254711" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A postwoman has been left with potentially life-changing injuries after being attacked by a dog as she tried to deliver mail to a rural house outside Boston, a court has heard. Boston Magistrates Court was told that 47 year old mother of two Sharon Singer was attacked by the female black Doberman as she delivered mail to the home of Julian Palfreyman at Goldfen Bank, Wrangle on the morning of July 4.

Prosecuting, Jim Clare said Mrs Singer had been a postwoman for 19 years and went to the detached house where she had been many times before, to deliver the morning mail. He said she let herself in through a gate to put a letter into the letter box when she heard barking and then saw a Doberman she had never seen before, barking at her. He said that as she was afraid it might attack her, she put her hands up in front of her and backed slowly away but without any warning, a second Doberman ‘came from nowhere’ and attacked her.

Mr Clare said Mrs Stringer was bitten severely on the left forearm and she screamed out in pain and for help, but was then bitten on the arms, legs and hands. He said that in a ‘few seconds’ the owner, Mr Palfreyman, came into view and shouted at the dogs. He said he grabbed the dog, called Mezzie, that was attacking Mrs Singer but it broke free and again attacked her, biting her on the lower back and bottom, until she finally got out of the gate and into her van. He said she was bleeding and in a lot of pain and Palfreyman then took her to the Accident and Emergency Department at Boston Pilgrim Hospital, where she spent four days. Mr Clare said Mrs Singer had large open wounds to her left forearm, cuts to her hand and fingers and an open wound on her right arm. He said she had a total of 19 wounds which needed 45 stitches and that five weeks later she still had difficulty sleeping, was still in pain and was suffering from muscle wasting.

He said she was that day undergoing an operation in London to try and repair the damage to the nerves in her hand and there was no timescale for a return to work, as she had no feeling in her hand and was unable to drive. Mr Clare asked the magistrates to order the immediate destruction of the dog which Palfreyman accepted was dangerously out of control although he told police it had never shown any aggression previously. In mitigation, Andrew Wheldon said Palfreyman did not minimise the seriousness of what had happened but the incident ‘could not have been foreseen’.

He said he had only moved into the house the day before and it was securely fenced. Palfreyman had let the dogs out while he made a cup of tea and ran outside when he heard the screaming. Mr Wheldon said the police had seized both dogs but had released back to Palfreyman the one that was not involved in the attack. He said there was now increased security at the house with double gates, and anyone visiting had to ring a bell to obtain access through an electric gate that could only be opened from the inside. The postbox was now outside the property, he told the magistrates and asked the not to order the immediate destruction of the dog. He said Palfreyman had had dogs all his adult life and had owned Mezzie since it was a pup. The incident had changed his life, he told the court, because of worry for Mrs Singer and the incident had triggered his split from his wife. The magistrates told Palfreyman it was a ‘very serious matter’ and that Mrs Singer had suffered ‘horrendous injuries’ for which they gave their sympathies.

However, they said that because of the steps he had taken at his house, they would not order immediate destruction of the dog but would issue a contingent destruction order which effectively acts as a kind of ‘suspended sentence’ on the dog. They ordered Palfreymen to carry out 200 hours of unpaid work for the community and to pay £1,000 compensation to Mrs Singer and court costs of £85.

Those photos. A disgraceful ruling. This is why you don't take any chances out there on delivery folks.

[Janet Brum]

To be fair, that dog was defending its territory, it`s entirely the owner`s fault for not locking the gate or putting a warning in place.
It`s easy to kill an animal, what if it was a human trespasser?
I don`t agree that all dogs should be put down, not all of them are ville.

[banner]

Unbelievable! Any animal that savagely attacks a human should be destroyed without question.
The judge will have blood on his hands should it ever attack someone else.

[k979aaa]

I believe that the owner should be put down for not making sure the dog was not a threat to anybody a dog is a lethal weapon it's the same as a gun or knife or booby trap device or a car any of these things can kill or maim people in the wrong hands.

[vastus35]

Unbelievable! Any animal that savagely attacks a human should be destroyed without question.
The judge will have blood on his hands should it ever attack someone else.

So its ok for another human being to attack other humans & mistreat & starve innocent animals ?

[Janet Brum]

I believe that the owner should be put down for not making sure the dog was not a threat to anybody a dog is a lethal weapon it's the same as a gun or knife or booby trap device or a car any of these things can kill or maim people in the wrong hands.

Exactly what I said, the owners are 100% guilty of not making sure their animals are not causing any harm.

[wannabeek]

Unbelievable! Any animal that savagely attacks a human should be destroyed without question.
The judge will have blood on his hands should it ever attack someone else.

So its ok for another human being to attack other humans & mistreat & starve innocent animals ?

Huh? That is in no way related to what banner said.

If any creature considers it acceptable to attack a human then that is a dangerous creature, no matter how many gates and locks and promises there are.

That animal should not be a pet. That's mad, no matter how many years someone has owned it, I reckon.

[POSTMAN]

Just an off topic quicky to all, this is in the H&S forum already, Teebs doesn't miss a trick. My point is there are many nasty dog stories in there as well as important H&s ltbs'.
If it's red pop in there and have a shuftie.

[fishtank]

If any creature considers it acceptable to attack a human then that is a dangerous creature

Animals don't consider things acceptable, that's a human construct. My dog would attack anyone who attacked me, that's because he's a pack animal and I'm the alpha. He's also instinctively territorial but I've trained him to bark not bite when his territory is threatened. The dog in question has not been properly trained but depending on age and its ability to accept a new alpha there's no reason why its behaviour couldn't be changed. Very few dogs are beyond redemption, sadly I can't say the same for humans.

[wannabeek]

Sorry I disagree. A dangerous animal is a dangerous animal in my opinion. A dog that won't bite a human won't bite a human, no matter what provocation in my experience. If you're advocating the right to keep a dog which would attack a human just in case it needs to one day to protect you?.. well why not be done with it and just allow us firearms to defend ourselves like in the US?

[banner]

Unbelievable! Any animal that savagely attacks a human should be destroyed without question.
The judge will have blood on his hands should it ever attack someone else.

So its ok for another human being to attack other humans & mistreat & starve innocent animals ?

It is generally understood that we don't extend the same morality we have regarding humans to animals. A dog that has dangerously attack someone has proven it is a danger to humans and it's life is not worth the risk it poses to people. It is obviously not the dogs fault, a dog isn't responsible for its actions but you think it's okay to leave such a dangerous dog with someone who didn't control it properly in this instance?
We can stop proven dangerous dogs being in anyone's hands by destroying them. We have to put up with humans who are dangerous, it is part of living in a society. The sanctity of human life is what allows us to be protected from each other and possible injustices.

[fishtank]

Sorry I disagree. A dangerous animal is a dangerous animal in my opinion.

All dogs are dangerous given the right ( or wrong ) circumstances.
As a postman you should always remember that.

A dog that won't bite a human.....

Doesn't exist.

If you're advocating the right to keep a dog which would attack a human just in case it needs to one day to protect you?..

Of course I'm not, my dog won't defend me because I want him to, he'll defend me because that's his instinct as a pack animal.

[edwardo]

Just looking at pics there I own a dog and an animal lover but dog should be destroyed terrible injuries . Hope she makes a full recovery

[Dorset Plodder]

I hope the Postwomen manages to recover fully. God knows how she's going to feel getting back out on Delivery and having to face the prospect of meeting another dog. I'm sure most of us have been bitten by dogs at sometime in our career, and even after a minor bite I've found myself getting a bit "Edgy" when you hear a dog barking nearby!

I wish her well but it wouldn't surprise me if she feels unable to return to work. It's unfortunate that it always seems to be slightly built Posties, invariably women, who suffer the worst from these kind of attacks. I have a Golden Rule that I will NEVER enter a garden if a dog is loose, or I even suspect it. I know that is the H&S guideline but so many Posties seem to ignore it (admittedly sometimes they're unaware, or the Dog is hidden).

If the Postie is unaware of a "New" Dog (as appears to be the case here) surely the defense of "He was only defending his territory" is invalid, surely then the onus should be on the owner to put a sign up, or lock his gate?

[Dorset Plodder]

Just an off topic quicky to all, this is in the H&S forum already, Teebs doesn't miss a trick. My point is there are many nasty dog stories in there as well as important H&s ltbs'.
If it's red pop in there and have a shuftie.

I've had a look at the H&S Forum. The Policy for Dealing with Dogs doesn't appear that clearly. A link would be appreciated. Although 29 pages of various Dog Attacks on Posties is truly shocking!

I'm willing to take responsibility for my own safety ..... but I wonder how many of these owners were willing to take responsibility for their dogs? And I realise it is the owners who should be responsible. I've got a customer who trains, and regularly walks 5 dogs at a time around the streets on leads. They're very well behaved and I've full confidence in the owner. Yet again there's several Older customers who have the typical "Snappy little Terrier/Poodle/Jack Russel".... (other breeds are available) ..... and I have No Confidence that they even know what there doing.