Mother of dogs in frenzied attack to also be put down

A dog involved in a ‘‘frenzied and ferocious attack’’ on a 5-year-old boy is to be destroyed after its owner failed to prove it had not taken part in the pack attack.

The dog, named Mushroom, was one of four staffordshire terriers owned by Gisborne man Clint Ward, which attacked his grandson on June 4, 2016.

The other dogs were Chop, Paige and Big Girl. Mushroom was mother of all three.

The attack occurred after Chop pushed through a partially opened ranch slider, knocked the boy to the ground and then bit him on the head.

The other three dogs all joined in the attack, which was witnessed by four people, including the boy’s sister who tried to get the dogs off him and eventually locked herself and him in a bedroom until an ambulance arrived.

The other witnesses were neighbours who heard the attack and ran over to rescue the boy.

The boy suffered three serious wounds; two to his head and one to his thigh.

At one point those present tried to pass the boy over a fence to a neighbour, but the dogs latched on to the boy and pulled him to the ground again.

Three dogs destroyed

After the attack Ward, 44, who was not at home at the time of the attack, volunteered all the dogs except Mushroom to an animal control officer to be destroyed.

He pleaded guilty to three charges under the Dog Control Act (1996) of owning dogs that caused serious injuries.

But he maintained Mushroom was not involved in the attack and pleaded not guilty to the fourth charge.

He was found guilty of the fourth charge in a judge-alone trial before Judge Haami Raumati last year.

He was sentenced to community detention and ordered to pay $1000 for emotional harm. Held at pound

Ward accepted the sentence but he appealed the conviction in relation to Mushroom and the order for the destruction of the dog, which has been held at the Gisborne District Council dog pound since the attack, at a cost of more than $10,000.

His appeal was heard before Justice Susan Thomas at the High Court in Gisborne last month.

Ward argued that Judge Raumati had been wrong to conclude that just because Mushroom was involved in the attack that the dog had caused serious injury.

Through his lawyer, Jonathan Natusch, he said Mushroom was not involved in the attack but had just stood to the side and barked.

Crown lawyer Chris Gullidge said the judge had not erred. It might have been difficult to say with certainty which dogs inflicted the injuries, but it was sufficient to show that Mushroom had been part of the attack that resulted in the injuries occurring.

Gullidge said it was unreasonable to require a prosecution to identity which particular dog caused each particular injury, and pointed to the absurdity of a situation in which charges could not be laid because a pack of dogs injured a victim but it could not be established which dogs caused each particular wound.

Sister adamant

Justice Thomas noted that the boy’s sister had been adamant that all four dogs bit her brother. At the trial the sister said: ‘‘They were all like jumping at him’’; and she had tried to kick them away.

The neighbours also said all four dogs were involved in what they described as a ‘‘frenzied and ferocious attack’’.

Justice Thomas said in her recently released judgment that Mushroom was clearly involved in the pack attack, and it could just as likely have been Mushroom as some of the other dogs to have caused the injuries.

As a result Ward was guilty of the charge, for which destruction of the dog was mandatory, she said.

She dismissed the appeal against conviction and the order for destruction.

Gisborne District Council acting enforcement manager Gary McKenzie said Ward had been invoiced for impound fees of ‘‘around $10,000’’.

He said Ward had been in contact to notify the council that he was arranging for the destruction of Mushroom by a vet.

‘‘The council have not yet received confirmation that a vet has been organised, and council staff are following this up,’’ McKenzie said.