NEW YORK -- Will Jack the Shetland sheepdog have to die?
Jack, once again, will have his day in court soon. This time, his supporters will argue that New Hartford town Justice James Van Slyke shouldn’t have ordered him to be euthanized after the dog bit his owner’s 2-year-old granddaughter in the face.
Now it will be in the hands of Oneida County Court Judge Michael L. Dwyer to determine whether Van Slyke’s decision should stand that Jack is a “dangerous dog.”
But in the days since the bite resulted in four stitches, Jack’s behavior has been anything but dangerous, Beratta said.
Stevens-Swan Humane Society officials have sent a letter to town of New Hartford’s attorney Herb Cully stating that the dog’s current behavior no longer makes it necessary to quarantine Jack as a high-risk dog.
The humane society has lowered the daily fee for housing Jack from $40 to $15, since it no longer needs to provide the same level of care as it would for a “dangerous dog,” Beratta said.
Beratta is able to take Jack out of his cage to play without the presence of an animal control officer, she said.
And state Assemblywoman Claudia Tenney, R-New Hartford, even stopped by May 14 to see Jack, and then wrote a letter on the Sheltie’s behalf to Van Slyke, Beratta said.
“The whole thing has just been emotionally draining,” Beratta said. “It’s a terrible, terrible thing and an accident. I just don’t feel that there was enough evidence at the hearing for the judge to make the determination that he did.”
Dwyer is waiting for Cully to submit the town’s response to Jack’s appeal. Then, a court date could be scheduled for both sides to make their arguments.
So, yes, Jack hasn’t shown any violent behavior since the bite. But will that make a difference to his fate?
Cully said no.
None of these positive developments can be considered when it’s Dwyer’s turn to review the matter, Cully said, since Dwyer will be limited to only whatever evidence was presented at the April 1 hearing that resulted in Van Slyke’s euthanization order.
That means nothing new can be brought up, including the letter from Stevens-Swan, Cully said.
“That’s not part of the record, and that was Stevens-Swan’s determination based upon how the dog has behaved at the facility, which can be totally different than how the dog behaved otherwise,” Cully said.
“Judge Van Slyke has been the finder of fact, so all Judge Dwyer can look at is if Judge Van Slyke applied the proper law and the proper standard of proof,” Cully said.
(Utica Observer Dispatch - May 31, 2013)
Earlier:
No comments:
Post a Comment