UNITED KINGDOM -- A pet owner broke down in tears after appeal judges refused to lift a death order imposed on her dog for attacking a cat.
Tracy Jackson said both she and her 15-year-old daughter Emma were "totally gutted" at the decision to put down their Staffordshire bull terrier cross C-Jay.
At a hearing at the Justiciary Appeal Court in Edinburgh on Wednesday, an attempt to turn overturn a court order to put the pet down was rejected by judges.
The three-year-old animal was held in kennels pending an appeal after a Justice of the Peace in Dundee ordered its destruction earlier this year.
Ms Jackson, 35, of Finella Terrace, Dundee, said she helped deliver it as a puppy and that she wanted to see her pet "one last time".
She previously admitted failing to keep C-Jay under control when the dog left her property and entered a garden in her street before attacking a cat which was severely injured on February 11 this year.
Defence counsel Chris Shead argued that as an alternative to ordering the dog be put down an order to keep it under control could be made.
He said: "There is not the slightest suggestion this dog had a propensity to violence. In the present case the victim of the attack was a cat. Nobody knows what caused the dog to behave this way to the cat.
"All this dog did was follow its nature and attack a cat. It does not pose any threat to public safety. If the test if whether the dog poses a threat to public safety the answer must be an emphatic 'no' to that.
"We are talking about the destruction of the animal. It is as fundamental a step as can be taken. What we are dealing with is an irrevocable, fundamental and draconian order that should only be taken when necessary."
Mr Shead admitted it was "an unfortunate oversight" which had allowed the dog to get out after a gate was left open by a visitor.
Appeal judge Brian Lockhart pointed out that the report from the justice of the peace said the dog had been found in the street on an earlier occasion.
But Mr Shead contested that and said police received an anonymous call reporting a dog in the street but found no animal out when they arrived.
Lord Bonomy, who heard the appeal with Judge Lockhart, said: "The information before the justice was that the same dog had previously been found in the street and that had been drawn to the appellant's attention. The justice was plainly entitled to proceed on that factual basis.
"He simply regarded it as an indicator or warning that the dog might become out of control."
Lord Bonomy concluded that a control order would not be adequate and ordered the destruction of the dog.
(STV - - November 9, 2011)
