That's after a lengthy hearing Monday night about the three animals accused of an attack that killed a smaller dog and injured two people in December of 2014.
The board heard from a neighbor whose Basset Hound was also allegedly attacked by the Brinson dogs last January.
That's after hearing previous testimony from another hearing about one of the dogs allegedly killing a neighbor's cat.'
But a witness for Brinson, described as the dogs' caretaker, testified to the animals nature and called them well-behaved.
The board based its decision to deem the dogs dangerous on Macon-Bibb's code of ordinances, which defines a dangerous dog as any dog that meets one of three requirements:
Those requirements are causing a substantial puncture wound to a person, posing an imminent threat or killing a pet outside of the owners property, with exceptions being made for hunting dogs.
During closing arguments, Brinson pled with the board not to designate her dogs as dangerous, citing what she called a lack of evidence.
RIP Ronaldo |
But in the end, the board voted 3-2 to label the dogs dangerous. It's a decision with which Chairman David Gowan agrees. He voted to deem the dogs dangerous, but says he understands the views of the two board members who disagreed.
How could you possibly vote NO on these pit bulls being declared dangerous?!
"Their concerns were a lack of more direct evidence. That came out in our deliberations, but our burden of proof was not beyond a reasonable doubt. It was substantial...substantial evidence. So, each juror or board member had to vote on how they interpreted the evidence and it was a consistent vote on all three dogs," he said.
Brinson can appeal the decision, but if the ruling stands state law says she would have to meet a number of requirements, including carrying liability insurance for the dogs.
(13WMAZ - March 10, 2015)
Earlier:
No comments:
Post a Comment