Solomon's Riddle

from tonight's Herald
Brindi's owner found guilty of animal bylaw charges
By STEVE BRUCE Court Reporter UPDATED 7:05 p.m.Tue. Feb 23 - 3:52 PM
The owner of Brindi the dog has been found guilty of violating Halifax Regional Municipality's animal control bylaw.
Now the judge has to decide what to do with the dog, which has been held at an SPCA shelter since it was seized by the municipality 19 months ago.
Francesca Rogier was convicted in Dartmouth provincial court Tuesday of three charges — being the owner of a dog that was running at large, owning a dog that attacked another animal and failing to comply with a muzzle order.
Judge Alanna Murphy, who presided over the three-day trial, adjourned the sentencing hearing until March 9.
The municipality is expected to argue that Brindi, a mixed-breed dog that Rogier had rescued from a shelter, needs to be destroyed to protect the public.
Rogier will ask that the dog be allowed to go home with her to East Chezzetcook.
The court also could hear from a dog trainer who's prepared to have Brindi spend the rest of her life at his kennel in South Rawdon, Hants County.
“Brindi was in my obedience classes where she did very well,” Bob Ottenbrite said outside the courtroom. “She was also in agility classes where she got to interact with other dogs.
“I don't believe that she deserves to be put to death. I think there can be alternatives.”
Rogier told reporters she would be willing to have Brindi live with Ottenbrite temporarily but not permanently.
“That would be completely acquiescing to an unfair process, an abusive process that is over the top,” Rogier said.
“She doesn't belong there. She belongs with me.”
The dog was under a muzzle order in July 2008 because of earlier complaints about her behaviour. On the morning of July 20, she ran off Rogier's property and attacked a dog that was being walked along East Chezzetcook Road.
Rogier said the dog got away from her as she was trying to put on the muzzle.
Animal control officers, acting on a complaint from another pet owner, seized Brindi and ordered her euthanized.
But a Nova Scotia Supreme Court judge ruled last January that the bylaw that authorized the killing of Brindi exceeded the power of the municipality. Justice Duncan Beveridge also said Rogier was never given a chance to oppose the decision to seize and destroy her dog.
Three days later, and one day before the six-month limitation period would have expired, the municipality laid the charges against Rogier.
Rogier, who represented herself at trial, argued that the charges should be stayed because of an abuse of process by the municipality.
But the judge ruled that she could find no evidence of “any improper or oblique motive or bad faith or any acts so wrong that it violates the conscience of the community. ... It seems to me that the laying of the charges was an attempt to remedy a previous effort which had been deemed to have been circumventing the proper process.”
Murphy also rejected Rogier's defence of due diligence. “What occurred could have been prevented by taking a very simple preventative measure – putting the dog on a leash and putting the muzzle on before leaving the house.”
Outside the courtroom, Rogier continued to argue that the judge ignored a lot of evidence that she said would have supported her case.
“There's a preponderance of other cases that shows that dogs that have done worse than my dog — bitten people and really savaged animals — have only been fined,” she said.
“I have a behavioural assessment that says my dog should not be put down ... but HRM refused to consider it.
“HRM has failed to consider reasonable alternatives in this case. They have contradicted their own pattern of enforcing the law – wildly contradicted it.”
She said she hasn't been allowed to visit Brindi at the SPCA shelter since December.
“I just believe that this dog is a good dog and she should be in my home.”
With The Canadian Press
(sbruce@herald.ca)
Now that legal culpability has been determined, the only big question that remains is who will wind up paying the price for this. Should Brindi be penalized for the conditions at Celtic Pets which created her original issues? Should Brindi be killed because an adoption was permitted without ensuring that the adopter's dog experience and skills were an appropriate match for the dog? Is it appropriate to kill a dog whose human was either unwilling or unable to react appropriately to an (admittedly flawed ) series of administrative actions by HRM?
Killing Brindi would serve no positive purpose.
So that leaves one of two options ... either Brindi gets to go home with her owner ... or she is given the opportunity to start a new life elsewhere. Although my compassion makes it easy to understand why her owner wants her back ... there is the very real concern for Brindi's own safety after so many bridges have been burned in her neighbourhood.
If Brindi moves on to a new life, there should be absolutely no other consequences for her owner. Honestly .... what bigger penalty could any dog lover pay?
Life is such a precious and valuable thing. In a world where so many are so careless with the lives of those who only want to please ..... the life of a good dog should matter.
I found this on the society website tonight, Sentencing Recommendation Submitted to HRM

Superintendent Bill Moore
Community Projects
Halifax Regional Police
February 12, 2010
Bill:
In follow up to our conversation yesterday, I would like to request that the Crown Attorney in the Rogier/Brindi case make a further submission to the court to suggest an alternative sentence to euthanasia.
The Nova Scotia SPCA would be willing to assist HRM in making alternative arrangements for Brindi; such as adoption to home in which her needs could be met, and the community could be assured of public safety.
It is the Society’s belief that Brindi could be safely placed. Brindi has demonstrated over the last 18 months that she can live peacefully and happily with a responsible owner.
Please feel free to contact me directly to discuss further.
Best Regards,
Kristin Williams
Executive Director
Nova Scotia SPCA
I would imagine that feedback from HRM residents would be most effectively addressed to individual councillors ( if you don't know , go to Who is my Councillor? ) I would also suspect that this would be a very appropriate time to send in letters to the editor of the Herald. No matter how passionate, this is not a time for animal advocates from "away" to contribute.
What time is it? It is never ever time to kill an innocent animal when there are better options on the table.