Francesca Rogier edited a doc.
BULLET POINTS
In March 2012, Brindi's owner, Francesca Rogier, will be put on trial for by-law infractions stemming from a minor scuffle with a dog in front of her house on September 14, 2010. The dog was not seriously harmed. The owners were related to the people who first reported Brindi to the city, and one of them works for the ...city of Halifax.
If the court finds Francesca guilty on any charge, the prosecutor for Halifax will invoke a law allowing the court to order a dog put down as an "additional penalty".
BACKGROUND
In this case, Halifax is seeking a court order to kill Brindi as an “additional penalty”. This is a repeat of the first trial, where her owner was charged for three by-law violations – six months after the event, and immediately after the city lost its case in supreme court, but refused to return Brindi.
DOG LAW MUST BE ENFORCED USING REASON AND DISCRETION
Cities have a role to insure public safety, but within reason: they must also treat dogs and owners fairly. By-law infractions are minor offenses that are meant to be fined. Killing a dog is not a fair or moral penalty for any by-law infraction. If a city seeks to kill a dog it says is dangerous, it must present proper grounds. It must have proof that it has attacked with the intent to kill or do serious harm. It cannot fairly ask for “pre-emptive” action. Dogs that fight dogs are not necessarily a threat to public safety (dogs are not part of the public – if they were, they would have rights!). Dogs typically fight dogs as a way to establish dominance. It is no indication they will attack humans. And dogs can be trained out of this behavior. Fatalities due to dog attacks rank very low on the list of causes of accidental death and injury. They are not even among the top fifty.
UNFAIR TREATMENT OF DOGS AND OWNERS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE
Cities should be held to a consistent standard that is in keeping with their usual enforcement of the by-law. Halifax decided in 2008 to muzzle, then seize and destroy Brindi, fully aware that she had never attacked a person and had not injured dogs at all, except for one minor injury that was treated with first aid. Halifax’s decision to kill Brindi was thus way out of line with its customary enforcement. Its decision to seize Brindi once again is not only cruel and unusual punishment itself, but also in stark contrast with its handling of a recent case of a pit bull that attacked a woman in the throat and face. The city has never had Brindi’s behavior evaluated professionally. It will not be bringing an expert witness to the stand next week. (An animal control officer will testify, but she is not qualified in dog training and behavior.) Clearly Halifax is not pursuing this case in the interest of public safety.
BOTTOM LINE: BRINDI IS NOT A KILLER AND MUST NOT BE KILLED
Brindi was evaluated by several trainers and behaviorists at the request of her owner. None of these deemed Brindi dangerous. They regard her as territorial, and suggested more training. Brindi’s owner, Francesca Rogier, observed all court-imposed conditions for Brindi’s return. The conditions are: following a muzzle order, building and maintaining a dog run, and doing further training. The conditions were identical to the conditions she originally offered to the city in 2008, but were met with no response from the city. The incident leading to Brindi’s second seizure and third year behind bars was an accidental event. Freak accidents do happen: people should not be punished for them by the destruction of a beloved family member. Moreover, the incident was no more serious than previous incidents. Like those, it occurred on or near her property (i.e. at most, a few feet from the boundary). Brindi simply needed more time to readjust to her surroundings after being locked up for two years without contact with other dogs. Francesca worked with trainer Susan Jordan. She did more training that was required and continued after Brindi was released – not because a court ordered it, but because she wanted Brindi to be as perfect as possible.
Francesca needs support and prayers as she continues to prepare for the trial.
.......................................................
Minister of Justice Ross Landry: justmin@gov.ns.ca
Minister of Municipal Affairs: Hon. John MacDonnell snsmrmin@gov.ns.ca
Mayor Peter Kelly: kellyp@halifax.ca
HRM elected councilors: harveyb@halifax.ca , adamss@halifax.ca, barry.dalrymple@halifax.ca, brad.johns@halifax.ca, darren.fisher@halifax.ca, David.Hendsbee@halifax.ca, sloaned@halifax.ca, humd@halifax.ca, jennifer.watts@halifax.ca, karsteb@halifax.ca, lorelei.nicoll@halifax.ca, mcclusg@halifax.ca, mosherl@halifax.ca, outhitt@halifax.ca, peter.lund@halifax.ca, rankinr@halifax.ca, streats@halifax.ca, smithj@halifax.ca, utecks@halifax.ca, walkerr@halifax.ca, wilema@halifax.ca
local media:
ehowe@ns.sympatico.ca, news@globaltv.com, cbcns@cbc.ca, news@cbc.ca, atlanticnews@ctv.ca, jackie.foster@ctv.ca, radionews@halifax.cbc.ca, news957@rogers.com, newsroom@herald.ca, halifax@broadcastnews.ca, news@ckdu.ca, editor@metronews.ca, coast@thecoast.ca, editor@tridentnews.ca, newspaper@msvu.ca, info@dalgazette.ca, thejournal@gmail.com, mackins@halifax.ca
See More
about an hour ago
Now I make special note of Frannie's following statement:
"Francesca Rogier, observed all court-imposed conditions for Brindi’s return. The conditions are: following a muzzle order, building and maintaining a dog run, and doing further training. The conditions were identical to the conditions she originally offered to the city in 2008, but were met with no response from the city. The incident leading to Brindi’s second seizure and third year behind bars was an accidental event.""
Well SFB you got it somewhat right,but left out the leash bit as ordered by the Judge,however that is a mute point as Brindi was not even wearing a muzzle,during the last attack,let alone the leash. Of course accidents happen but lets look at it this way,you do drive through a red light and kill someone,yes its an accident however you will be charged and in all likely hood be found guilty; now do the same thing a few months later and kill another person,what in fuck are you going to do stand in front of the Judge and say it was just an accident,oh I'm sure the Judge will say ok it was just an accident so you are free to go....Like HELL SFB,you will pay the price,however in Brindi's case She will pay the price and you will get lots of media attention; IMO its you that should be locked up and Brindi should be free to run in the country on a large farm, Now go back to ONS and try to impress them, BTY I see you arn't doing to good there,on the tapes I seen you seem to be brushed off as a real nut case....what can I say but if it looks like a duck,walks like a duck,must be a duck,just change duck to nut and you will get it.
Its so nice to have a tracker attached to this blog I notice several visits from you Fran and your clown Robert Riley...........CHEERS........
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I like the bit about the dog can be trained out of this habit. Yes they can, but in Fran's case she got the training more than once and it just didn't work. Wonder why?? Is it because the owner refused to recognize the problem and brushed it off? Remember more than one top trainer refused to work with Fran. The woman is impossible and put Brindi where she is now.
ReplyDeleteOh she trained the dog ok,yep to sit,roll over,and jump on people,check out her FB group and blog there are videos there, The mutt never was trained in proper obedience and to say so is pure bull.
ReplyDeletesuppose training doesn't work when you think the behavior to be modified is just Doggy Stuff--yanno dogs being dogs. (Rather than an order from a Judge which Brindi's life depended on.) As for the muzzle, she's rejected that from the day Hamm served the order on her. No plot--he had to do something & said she’d get a fine but she emailed Bernie-Joe that if fined, she 'couldn't' pay vet bill as had promised. So B-J just forwarded her email to Tim, saying "I told you so." No plot, no collusion--just a cheapskate trying to save herself a few bucks. NOTE: I guess she DIDN'T save $$$, did she? hohohoho But that's just part of her character--see the number of times she's been in Small Claims Court--suing and being sued, makes no diff to her. Ya gotta fill an empty life, when you have run thru all local friends (mmmm--they don't just stop being friends--that woman has a knack for leaving them loathing her and vowing revenge--which they have been and will continue to get--in spades.) You ain’t seen nuttin’ yet, lady!
ReplyDelete