Happy Birthday Jazz!!!
2 years old today.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Update: Row Gets to Go Home!
Hi Everyone. Here is a further update about Row. A commentor on his blog was able to attend the hearing and has posted a report in the comments section. I have reprinted below.
Long and short, Row will be able to go home. He will be neutered, not SUCH a bad thing - better than a trip over the Rainbow Bridge. He is to be suitably confined - don't know what that really means but I will find out and post.
In a horrific situation like this the outcome - though perhaps not entirely fair (two sides to every story, read below) - could have been worse and fatal for Row.
I still hold that the situation could have been avoided, first by Row's owner, and second by the alleged victims - come on folks use your head! I think the worst offender here was not Mr Scott, nor the lady victim, but the man that was with her. HE attacked Row by his own admission, Row didn't bite him now did he.
We'll really never know, but at least Row will go home and live.
Post to Free-Row.com:
Betty Ann January 12th, 2010 at 18:35
Here is the truth concerning Brevard County vs Row (Scott)
I attended a hearing to determine if the Akita Row (Scott) could be declared a dangerous dog.
On December 9, 2009 there was an encounter between the dog, Row (Ronin), and an elderly couple. Row’s owner was visiting his ex-wife’s house and the dog was tethered with a plastic covered steel cable to a tree in the front yard.The elderly couple approached the house and clearly saw the dog in the yard.The dog barked at the couple but they took no action to avoid the dog and continued forward. The law states that people have every right to remain on the sidewalk. This was a quiet residential street so the ability to cross the street or walk in the street was not limited by traffic. It is completely legal for the couple to remain on the sidewalk and to take no evasive action to avoid the dog.
Unfortunately for Row, his tether was long enough for him to reach the sidewalk. Row was able to leave the property if only by a few feet. He was able to reach the couple and he jumped up on them. At this point testimony and evidence diverge and statements are contradictory. The man states that he punched the dog and grabbed its collar and hit the dog with “the other end of the leash” when it jumped up on the woman who stated that she was behind the man. The woman states that she stumbled backward into the street and injured her arm. She does not believe she was bitten. When the dog jumped up he was face to face with the woman. The only damage shown at the hearing was a photo of the woman’s right arm showing a cut or scrape at the elbow. She refused to allow her medical information to be released to the hearing so there is only one photo taken 7 days after the event available to the hearing committee.
The committee determined that Row did meet the minimum requirement to be declared a dangerous dog because he was able to approach these people on public land and the woman had an injury as a result. It was determined that there was no evidence to support a bite. There were no deep bruises no puncture no opposing bite marks just scratches. It could not be determined if the marks on the woman’s arm were from the fall or from the dog’s feet.Remember she claimed he was looking into her face not clamped onto her arm.
According to law, Row’s owner will have to neuter the dog and keep him in suitable confinement. The dog will be returned to the owner. The owner has the right to appeal.
The decision to declare Row a dangerous dog was made by a committee of 2 volunteers. It was a unanimous decision. In conversations post-hearing it was agreed that Row was not a dangerous or aggressive dog but he had committed an act that met the minimum requirements of the law by leaving the property and there was injury involved.
Row will be allowed to return home and the owner will be required to bring the dog’s accommodations up to what is required by county law.
Now let’s do the math. The tether was 19.5 feet long. The actual tether was displayed at the hearing.
Row’s tether was high up on the limb of a very large oak tree with thick limbs. Lets assume the tree limb is 1 1/5 feet thick based on the photo of the tree. If tree is 7 feet from the sidewalk and the tether was 7 feet up from the ground, we now have all tree sides of the triangle.
If a is Upright side of triangle 7 feet
If b is Horizontal side of triangle 7 feet
Formula for diagonal side c is
a squared + b squared = c squared
so the length of c is square root of c
that value is 9.8995 feet
How much tether was needed to encircle the tree limb?
That value is 3.14159 times the thickness of the limb
3.14159 times 1.5 feet = 4.7124 feet
9.8995 feet plus 4.7124 feet = 14.61 feet
19.5 feet total length of tether minus 14.61 feet = 4.89 feet
If sidewalk is 3 feet wide then the dog can get 1.89 feet past the sidewalk.There is a wide area of grass between the sidewalk and the street. I’m guessing another 7 to 8 feet.
So why didn’t these people just step over into the quiet residential street and save us all a lot of grief? They clearly saw the dog. What is wrong with this picture?
Betty AnnWinter Springs FL
Long and short, Row will be able to go home. He will be neutered, not SUCH a bad thing - better than a trip over the Rainbow Bridge. He is to be suitably confined - don't know what that really means but I will find out and post.
In a horrific situation like this the outcome - though perhaps not entirely fair (two sides to every story, read below) - could have been worse and fatal for Row.
I still hold that the situation could have been avoided, first by Row's owner, and second by the alleged victims - come on folks use your head! I think the worst offender here was not Mr Scott, nor the lady victim, but the man that was with her. HE attacked Row by his own admission, Row didn't bite him now did he.
We'll really never know, but at least Row will go home and live.
Post to Free-Row.com:
Betty Ann January 12th, 2010 at 18:35
Here is the truth concerning Brevard County vs Row (Scott)
I attended a hearing to determine if the Akita Row (Scott) could be declared a dangerous dog.
On December 9, 2009 there was an encounter between the dog, Row (Ronin), and an elderly couple. Row’s owner was visiting his ex-wife’s house and the dog was tethered with a plastic covered steel cable to a tree in the front yard.The elderly couple approached the house and clearly saw the dog in the yard.The dog barked at the couple but they took no action to avoid the dog and continued forward. The law states that people have every right to remain on the sidewalk. This was a quiet residential street so the ability to cross the street or walk in the street was not limited by traffic. It is completely legal for the couple to remain on the sidewalk and to take no evasive action to avoid the dog.
Unfortunately for Row, his tether was long enough for him to reach the sidewalk. Row was able to leave the property if only by a few feet. He was able to reach the couple and he jumped up on them. At this point testimony and evidence diverge and statements are contradictory. The man states that he punched the dog and grabbed its collar and hit the dog with “the other end of the leash” when it jumped up on the woman who stated that she was behind the man. The woman states that she stumbled backward into the street and injured her arm. She does not believe she was bitten. When the dog jumped up he was face to face with the woman. The only damage shown at the hearing was a photo of the woman’s right arm showing a cut or scrape at the elbow. She refused to allow her medical information to be released to the hearing so there is only one photo taken 7 days after the event available to the hearing committee.
The committee determined that Row did meet the minimum requirement to be declared a dangerous dog because he was able to approach these people on public land and the woman had an injury as a result. It was determined that there was no evidence to support a bite. There were no deep bruises no puncture no opposing bite marks just scratches. It could not be determined if the marks on the woman’s arm were from the fall or from the dog’s feet.Remember she claimed he was looking into her face not clamped onto her arm.
According to law, Row’s owner will have to neuter the dog and keep him in suitable confinement. The dog will be returned to the owner. The owner has the right to appeal.
The decision to declare Row a dangerous dog was made by a committee of 2 volunteers. It was a unanimous decision. In conversations post-hearing it was agreed that Row was not a dangerous or aggressive dog but he had committed an act that met the minimum requirements of the law by leaving the property and there was injury involved.
Row will be allowed to return home and the owner will be required to bring the dog’s accommodations up to what is required by county law.
Now let’s do the math. The tether was 19.5 feet long. The actual tether was displayed at the hearing.
Row’s tether was high up on the limb of a very large oak tree with thick limbs. Lets assume the tree limb is 1 1/5 feet thick based on the photo of the tree. If tree is 7 feet from the sidewalk and the tether was 7 feet up from the ground, we now have all tree sides of the triangle.
If a is Upright side of triangle 7 feet
If b is Horizontal side of triangle 7 feet
Formula for diagonal side c is
a squared + b squared = c squared
so the length of c is square root of c
that value is 9.8995 feet
How much tether was needed to encircle the tree limb?
That value is 3.14159 times the thickness of the limb
3.14159 times 1.5 feet = 4.7124 feet
9.8995 feet plus 4.7124 feet = 14.61 feet
19.5 feet total length of tether minus 14.61 feet = 4.89 feet
If sidewalk is 3 feet wide then the dog can get 1.89 feet past the sidewalk.There is a wide area of grass between the sidewalk and the street. I’m guessing another 7 to 8 feet.
So why didn’t these people just step over into the quiet residential street and save us all a lot of grief? They clearly saw the dog. What is wrong with this picture?
Betty AnnWinter Springs FL
Monday, January 11, 2010
Row Scott Update: It Breaks My Heart
It breaks my heart to report that Row has indeed been declared a dangerous dog and will likely suffer the most horrible consequence. It pains me even more to say that perhaps, the circumstances were not as we thought. There are indeed two sides to every story - and the truth lies someplace in between.
I am not above admitting that I may have been wrong in this case. I may have fallen into the knee jerk reaction of any dog owner - that of defending the animal (and by default it's owner) against what seemed like false accusations.
Do we, any of us know what the real story is? No we do not, I do not. Apparently we were not given the entire picture by the owner on Row's website. There are two sides to every story, the truth lies someplace in between. I cannot blame him, I love my dogs and would be devastated if I were facing the eminent loss of my companion. Even though my head would tell me that Row may have a problem, my heart would be as blind as justice. I hold no fault to Mr Scott for defending Row. I hold him at fault for not protecting this animal in the first place, for not understanding his responsibility to KEEP ROW OUT OF HARM"S WAY.
We will never truly know if Row was acting aggressively or speaking in the way all Akita owners find dear. Row should not have been in the situation, he should not have been tied unattended, it was a mistake, we all make them. A teaching moment, yes, but what is taught, nothing but pain and sadness.
That all being said my heart goes out to Row's owner, I am sure he will forever remember Row and the part he played in Row's life. I hope that he will continue to defend Row and will be successful in bringing him home and getting him the help and training he needs. But, more so my heart goes out to Row, who at one point in his life rode high as a champion.
It is my hope dear Row that you do not go to the bridge, but if you do, run free and happy.
Below is the letter I received from Brevard County regarding Row's case as well as a single photo of the victim's injury. I do not profess to know if this is a bite or not judge for yourself, but does it matter?
Ms. Lynch,
A brief summary of the findings of the Council on the events of that day are as follows;
The victim and her husband were walking down a public sidewalk towards Mr. Scott's house, Mr. Scott had Row aka Ronin tied out to a tree limb of a tree approximately 6 to 7 feet from the sidewalk on a cable that measured 19' 9" long (20 ft cable that had kinks in it from usage). The Council found that the based on the length of the tether, the distances from the tree to the sidewalk that Row was able to at least reach the sidewalk and possibly as far as into the public street. Mr. Scott had given the actual cable used to tie Row out with and it was shown to the Council during the meeting. Photographs of the sidewalk clearly showed paw prints as well as the drag marks made by the victim as she was scrambling to get away from the dog. They did find that the injuries sustained by the victim were made by Row and not caused by "falling" by this I mean her contact with the ground or roadway caused the injuries she had to her right arm/elbow.
The Basis for the Determination of the Council stated that they found that Row aka Ronin did, without provocation, chase or approach a person on a public sidewalk in an aggressive, menacing fashion and apparent attitude of attack and caused injury to a human.
At this point Mr. Scott has 10 business days in which to appeal the council's decision to the County Court or 14 days in which to come into full compliance with the provisions set forth by County ordinance, his third option would be to sign ownership of the dog to the County.
I’ve also attached one of the pictures of the injury sustained by the victim. I also believe the Mr. Scott’s page fails to mention that Ronin had also bit his niece the day prior.
I hope this answers your question.
Sincerely,
Kim Strob
I am not above admitting that I may have been wrong in this case. I may have fallen into the knee jerk reaction of any dog owner - that of defending the animal (and by default it's owner) against what seemed like false accusations.
Do we, any of us know what the real story is? No we do not, I do not. Apparently we were not given the entire picture by the owner on Row's website. There are two sides to every story, the truth lies someplace in between. I cannot blame him, I love my dogs and would be devastated if I were facing the eminent loss of my companion. Even though my head would tell me that Row may have a problem, my heart would be as blind as justice. I hold no fault to Mr Scott for defending Row. I hold him at fault for not protecting this animal in the first place, for not understanding his responsibility to KEEP ROW OUT OF HARM"S WAY.
We will never truly know if Row was acting aggressively or speaking in the way all Akita owners find dear. Row should not have been in the situation, he should not have been tied unattended, it was a mistake, we all make them. A teaching moment, yes, but what is taught, nothing but pain and sadness.
That all being said my heart goes out to Row's owner, I am sure he will forever remember Row and the part he played in Row's life. I hope that he will continue to defend Row and will be successful in bringing him home and getting him the help and training he needs. But, more so my heart goes out to Row, who at one point in his life rode high as a champion.
It is my hope dear Row that you do not go to the bridge, but if you do, run free and happy.
Below is the letter I received from Brevard County regarding Row's case as well as a single photo of the victim's injury. I do not profess to know if this is a bite or not judge for yourself, but does it matter?
Ms. Lynch,
A brief summary of the findings of the Council on the events of that day are as follows;
The victim and her husband were walking down a public sidewalk towards Mr. Scott's house, Mr. Scott had Row aka Ronin tied out to a tree limb of a tree approximately 6 to 7 feet from the sidewalk on a cable that measured 19' 9" long (20 ft cable that had kinks in it from usage). The Council found that the based on the length of the tether, the distances from the tree to the sidewalk that Row was able to at least reach the sidewalk and possibly as far as into the public street. Mr. Scott had given the actual cable used to tie Row out with and it was shown to the Council during the meeting. Photographs of the sidewalk clearly showed paw prints as well as the drag marks made by the victim as she was scrambling to get away from the dog. They did find that the injuries sustained by the victim were made by Row and not caused by "falling" by this I mean her contact with the ground or roadway caused the injuries she had to her right arm/elbow.
The Basis for the Determination of the Council stated that they found that Row aka Ronin did, without provocation, chase or approach a person on a public sidewalk in an aggressive, menacing fashion and apparent attitude of attack and caused injury to a human.
At this point Mr. Scott has 10 business days in which to appeal the council's decision to the County Court or 14 days in which to come into full compliance with the provisions set forth by County ordinance, his third option would be to sign ownership of the dog to the County.
I’ve also attached one of the pictures of the injury sustained by the victim. I also believe the Mr. Scott’s page fails to mention that Ronin had also bit his niece the day prior.
I hope this answers your question.
Sincerely,
Kim Strob
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Please go sign to save Row
PLEASE GO TO THIS SITE RIGHT NOW AND SIGN PETITION TO SAVE ROW FROM AN UNDESERVED DEATH!
WWW.FREE-ROW.COM
“Hello, My name is Row
I am a 3-year-old Akita, who was adopted by my new owner in March 2009. I’m a competitive dog, which participated in many dog shows, both National and International, and I am proud to say I have won many ribbons and awards for my excellent showmanship.
I am a very vocal dog and enjoy singing and talking to myself. Unfortunately, my deep voice and physique have a tendency to scare people who have not met me.
I am currently being held at the Brevard County Animal Shelter, and just want to go home. I am here because the Animal Service and Enforcement Department thinks I am “dangerous”, and my feelings are extremely hurt. They don't know me like everyone else does.
On December 9th 2009, I was visiting my granddad and hanging out in his front yard. He has a special spot next to a tree that I love. It’s special spot because I can watch the neighborhood and relax. After a a while, I noticed some neighbors were walking by and stopped at our house. I wanted to say hello and find out what they wanted. However, as I approached the elderly couple, the woman became frightened. I didn’t want her to be scared, so I decided to talk to her. Unfortunately, as I spoke, she jumped back, lost her balance, and fell. I felt really bad and didn’t know what to do. When her husband helped her up I noticed she had bruises and scrapes. I did not mean to scare her!
After this, I was taken away from my family. I was all alone for Christmas and New Years. I am not sure what my outcome is going to be. ...
I promise! I never touched the couple or caused any harm. I just wanted to say Hi. Unfortunately for me, since the neighbor fell and hurt herself, I’m being blamed for her injuries.
I love my family and miss them very much and I just want to go home. Please help me!”
PLEASE PLEASE show your support for this misunderstood dog.
WWW.FREE-ROW.COM
“Hello, My name is Row
I am a 3-year-old Akita, who was adopted by my new owner in March 2009. I’m a competitive dog, which participated in many dog shows, both National and International, and I am proud to say I have won many ribbons and awards for my excellent showmanship.
I am a very vocal dog and enjoy singing and talking to myself. Unfortunately, my deep voice and physique have a tendency to scare people who have not met me.
I am currently being held at the Brevard County Animal Shelter, and just want to go home. I am here because the Animal Service and Enforcement Department thinks I am “dangerous”, and my feelings are extremely hurt. They don't know me like everyone else does.
On December 9th 2009, I was visiting my granddad and hanging out in his front yard. He has a special spot next to a tree that I love. It’s special spot because I can watch the neighborhood and relax. After a a while, I noticed some neighbors were walking by and stopped at our house. I wanted to say hello and find out what they wanted. However, as I approached the elderly couple, the woman became frightened. I didn’t want her to be scared, so I decided to talk to her. Unfortunately, as I spoke, she jumped back, lost her balance, and fell. I felt really bad and didn’t know what to do. When her husband helped her up I noticed she had bruises and scrapes. I did not mean to scare her!
After this, I was taken away from my family. I was all alone for Christmas and New Years. I am not sure what my outcome is going to be. ...
I promise! I never touched the couple or caused any harm. I just wanted to say Hi. Unfortunately for me, since the neighbor fell and hurt herself, I’m being blamed for her injuries.
I love my family and miss them very much and I just want to go home. Please help me!”
PLEASE PLEASE show your support for this misunderstood dog.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
