A woman and a man and a dog named Charlie were injured when an unleashed dog went on the attack at a Hadspen exercise area, the Launceston Magistrates court heard.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Matthew Philip Williams, 47, of Perth pleaded guilty through his lawyer Mathew Williams to a count of being the owner of a dog that caused serious injury or death to another an animal and two counts of being the owner of a dog which attacks a person. The crime occurred about 2.30pm on December 22, 2022.
Police prosecutor Beri Kurdistan said the complainants had their nine month old Australian Shepherd Charlie on a leash at a large park area alongside the South Esk River when a black Staffordshire cross ran up and attacked.
"The dog MJ attacked biting Charlie to the chest and neck," she said.
"The complainant tried to prise MJ's mouth off Charlie and MJ bit the male complainant on the hand and then bit the female complainant twice causing puncture wounds on the cheek and under the chin."
"The defendant appeared and tackled MJ."
Ms Kurdistan said Charlie was taken to a veterinary clinic and received treatment costing $1251.
The female complainant received a stitch to the chin when treated at the LGH.
In March 2023 Mr Williams voluntarily attended the Longford police station and reported the incident admitting that his dog was not registered.
Mr Williams' lawyer said his client was a jogger who took MJ to work daily and didn't think the dog needed to be registered.
He said Mr Williams owned several dogs but had never had a previous problem.
He said Mr Williams was coming from an off leash area with the six-year-old Staffy cross to the leashed area when the incident occurred.
He said MJ had initially been friendly and had sniffed at Charlie who reacted and snapped at MJ.
Magistrate Sharon Cure said the issue in the case was that one dog was on a lead and the other wasn't.
She expressed surprise that a council had not taken action saying that a dangerous dog declaration could have been made.
"This could have been a lot more serious, a woman was bitten on the face and man bitten on the hand and a dog injured quite seriously," she said.
"You need to make sure this does not happen again or the dog could be destroyed.
"This is a serious example of a matter under the Dog Control Act."
She made a $1251 compensation order to the complainants for the cost the vet fees and convicted and fined Williams $1500.