But the dog's owner appealed and won.
It turned out the dog, a pit bull named Honey, didn't inflict enough damage to qualify as a dangerous animal, a city hearing examiner ruled. One victim suffered a gash needing sutures, and another got a 2-inch laceration treated with butterfly strips, but neither wound was enough to invoke Seattle's narrowly written dangerous animal law, the examiner found.
 |
| Honey, the pit bull, attacked three people in the span of one hour, yet officials refuse to put her down |
Honey's death sentence was lifted in February.
The ruling highlighted a small trend among owners choosing to preserve violent dogs, either by getting a lawyer, or choosing banishment over death, an option allowed by the Seattle Animal Shelter.
In the past, dogs considered dangerous were usually euthanized, said shelter spokeswoman Kara Main-Hester. But in recent years, she said more owners have opted for canine exile, usually at a rural, locked-down, out-of-town shelter that specializes in troubled dogs.
Of the seven dogs declared dangerous last year, only two were destroyed.
Honey's ruling also set the stage for another contested case, in which a pit bull in Magnolia severed a man's lip and was banished from the city. The owner has appealed.
"This animal has caused severe harm to a human being," Main-Hester said. "Is this an animal I would want to continue to own? I don't have the answer, but it's an interesting question."
'Goofy dog terrified of cat'
For owner Jason Jarrett, the answer is that he wants his dog, Bambu, back.
"Outside of my girlfriend... he is my best friend, and I am so sad to not have him in our home," Jarrett, 35, wrote officials after the attack. He said the dog, whom he described as gentle and playful, had no history of aggression.
 |
| Bambu, a pit bull that bit off a man's lip, was banished from Seattle. The owner has appealed the order (photo courtesy city of Seattle) |
"I know Bambu to be a goofy dog who is intrigued by his own shadow and terrified of our cat... It is very difficult for me to comprehend what happened that night and why," he wrote.
Like Honey's ruling, Bambu's case calls attention to Seattle's animal law, which Adam Karp, the attorney in both cases, has deconstructed for an appeal.
Seattle defines a dangerous animal as one that kills or inflicts a severe injury on a person or domestic animal when unprovoked. "Severe injury" is defined as "broken bones or disfiguring lacerations requiring multiple sutures or cosmetic surgery."
In her ruling on Honey, Seattle hearing examiner Sue Tanner called the city's severe-injury definition "surprisingly restrictive."
But she found that none of the victims had more than one disfiguring laceration needing sutures or surgery. Honey was allowed to live with her owner, who listed a West Seattle address in city records last year.
"You don't get to declare an animal is dangerous by creating a meta person," Karp said.
'Shreds of (victim's) face on the ground'
In Bambu's case, the owner was out of town when a friend took him for a walk in Magnolia on Jan. 1 at around 11:30 p.m.
According to an animal shelter report, a man leaving a convenience store saw Bambu, whom witnesses said had been jumping and wagging its tail. The man thought the dog was friendly and reached down to pet him without asking for permission. The dog then lunged into the air and ripped off the man's lower lip.
"Shreds of (the victim's) face were on the ground and part of his lip was hanging down," a witness told an animal control officer.
Bambu was declared dangerous in March and sent to live in a dog sanctuary in the rural town of Snohomish. City law requires that banished dogs live in a "secure" facility away from the public for the rest of their natural lives.
Bambu's owner then appealed.
Did victim provoke dog?
Attorney Karp noted the law requires an animal to be "unprovoked" and questioned if the victim spooked Bambu. He also said the victim told an officer that he had had two beers prior to the attack.
"You've got a provocation issue," Karp said. "Who goes up to a dog at midnight, an animal you've never met before, after you've had some beers?"
He also questioned whether the man's injury, though severe, qualifies as more than one disfiguring laceration, as required by law.
The victim's attorney, Matt Menzer, said the dog should not be freed, and that his client remains seriously disfigured, despite two surgeries. He also said the victim didn't provoke the dog, and that his drinking had nothing to do with the assault.
"My understanding is that this was a vicious and unprovoked attack," Menzer said, who said the dog attacked with "no warning."
"I don't think the dog is safe is to be out on the street, among people where he may bite or attack somebody else," he said.
Menzer also questioned the owner's priorities in spending money to fight the city and board his dog. "He has not offered a penny to help defray the medical cost and losses to the victim," he said.
In his letter to the city, dog owner Jarrett offered his sympathies.
"I extend my heartfelt and sincere condolences to the man bitten by Bambu," he wrote.
"As I do not know his identity, I cannot let him directly know that while I cannot change what happened that night, I truly wish I could."
 |
| A laceration to a woman's leg inflicted in 2010 by Honey, the pit bull |
(Seattle PI - June 2, 2011)
