Duty of care

South Waikato News - - OPINION -

Where on earth did the head­line ‘‘$74,000 dog’’ come from?

I think it an in­cred­i­ble shame that that kind of sen­sa­tion­al­ism has in all prob­a­bil­ity com­pletely shut out the real rea­son for the in­cred­i­ble lack of judg­ment by those re­spon­si­ble for the over­all su­per­vi­sion and ini­ti­a­tion of le­gal pro­ceed­ings against the owner of the al­leged rab­bit killer dog and his sub­se­quent fight with an­other dog while in the care of the dis­trict coun­cil’s an­i­mal con­trol arm.

I have lit­tle doubt that Ms King has no doubts left about the suit­abil­ity or not of the peo­ple who were car­ing for Jimbo when he al­legedly killed the pet rab­bit.

I may not have it right as my mem­ory is not per­fect but I am un­der the im­pres­sion that rab­bits are con­sid­ered a nox­ious an­i­mal in New Zealand and to own one is sub­ject to re­stric­tions, as are cer­tain breeds of dog de­pend­ing on the lo­cal coun­cil.

I can see how Ms King could be held re­spon­si­ble for her dog at­tack­ing any per­son or an­i­mal when in the con­trol of oth­ers to

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand

© PressReader. All rights reserved.