Judith
Hot Topics Subscriber
This blog looks at the facts behind canine aggression and fatal dog attacks. The data used here largely comes directly from Jim's on-scene and personal investigations into these cases.
THURSDAY, JULY 12, 2012
Lennox: The gloves come off.
PRE-AFTER NOTE (It makes sense in just a second) IN RESPONSE TO CONCERNED COMMENTS:
For those concerned about my comment that I had remained in the background on this up 'till now: I was working along with Victoria for about a year. We presented me as an independent, unallied and qualified expert to come re-evaluate Lennox. I kept my prior comments on this blog thoughtful and low key in order to try and be able to do what I do-give a fair, balanced, and professional assessment. Making a public fuss, even though I already had my reservations, would not have helped to gain the possible access we sought. And in all honesty (which was expressed to the parties in charge), if I had gone to NI and evaluated Lennox and found him dangerous, I would have publicly said so! Now I am able, since there is no longer a chance of coming in from "outside" as a non-threatening presence, to put my feelings and the story of my/our efforts out there. My prior reticence was in Lennox' interest; too much said too soon without full access and information would have done nothing to help. Please know that, out of the public spotlight, I have been eager, ready and willing to step in at any point and bring my professional experience to bear. Believe me when I tell you that I am sick thinking that, just maybe, if I had gone sooner.....and then, as we all do, I guess myself into a corner. The BCC has had the controls the entire time. We can only know go forward and try to keep this from happening again.
Jim
First warning: This is going to be a long one. Grab a drink and settle back-we have some talking to do.
From the beginning of my involvement with the Lennox case (which dates back almost a year to when Victoria Stilwell brought me in) I have stayed as neutral and professional as possible. I have resisted criticising the BCC and their evaluator, as we were trying to get me to Northern Ireland and get access to Lennox to give a fair, objective, and behaviorally sound evaluation. Sarah Fisher had done a great job, but I brought extensive "Pit Bull" experience coupled with unparalleled experience with "killer dogs" (dogs that have taken human lives). So I kept my opinion considered and low key, hoping that I could have come in as an "outside" expert, supplemented Victoria and Sarah's efforts, and gotten the BCC to listen. Now that Lennox is dead and the case is over, I no longer have to hold my tongue.
Let's look at the "qualifications" of the only evaluation that the BCC or Court accepted. The BCC "evaluator" is, admittedly, a former police Constable. So am I, except that instead of being a Constable, the equivalent here in the US to a base Patrolman, I retired as a Lieutenant and Watch Commander, the UK equivalent of a full Inspector with the Metropolitan Police. I am also a certified Behavior Consultant (he has no such training), have been certified as a Professional Dog Trainer, and am trained and certified as a behavior evaluator by several organizations-and he is not. I have further, over the years, worked with, trained, and evaluated what are probably over a thousand Pit Bulls and other breeds prohibited in the UK, certainly more than the BCC evaluator.
In fact, their evaluator, who's evaluation history seems to be summed up by "knows a Pit Bull when he is paid to find one" isn't even a dog show judge. Wouldn't a conformation expert such as a show judge have been a better choice if we were going to see if a dog physically met a breed standard?
Sarah Fisher, a bona-fide behaviorist, issued her opinion as to Lennox' safe demeanor, but her opinion was spurned. One suspects that the BCC had issues with the opinion of a "mere woman" despite her clear qualifications.
So another outside evaluator, with credentials, was brought in by the Barnes family, this time a man. David Ryans conducted a second evaluation, and was also rejected by the BCC. Rumor had it at the time that they did not consider Ryans experienced enough with prohibited breeds.
All that said, I have looked carefully at the video of Mr. Ryans, and would like to walk you all through what I see.
The video I am referring to is posted online here: http://lennoxsandielightfoot.blogspot.com/2012/07/video-of-sandie-lightfoot-and-belfast.html The times given refer to the times listed on the running video.
The test starts with Lennox on leash, held by a female Animal Control person, with both the Animal Control person and David Ryans (presumably a stranger to Lennox), a behaviorist, seated in chairs. Lennox is being petted by the female. Lennox is seated and seems to be relaxed.
As Mr. Ryans is placing a notebook into a bag at his side, Lennox approaches under Mr. Ryans' leg to see what he is doing. He shows no fear or reticence towards Ryans, just mild interest in the bag. Ryans places his open hand directly on Lennox snout to pet him and guide him back from under Ryans' legs.
Lennox returns to the seated female and seeks her attention (about 32 seconds in). Mr. Ryans then proffers a treat repeatedly to Lennox, extending it and then removing it from Lennox' reach. Lennox is focused on the treat, but allows Ryans to take the treat back repeatedly with no sign of possession aggression or reluctance. Lennox never snaps, lunges, or does anything other than wait for Ryans to surrender the treat. Lennox does, for a moment, try to get up and approach Ryans and the treat, but immediately returns to a sit when asked. Lennox' responses are positive and he readily seeks appropriate, positive contact with Ryans' Lennox does briefly try to get in Ryans' lap, but responds immediately when asked to get off. Ryans appears to "pop" Lennox on the snout several times with an open hand (about 1:27) to elicit a response. Lennox briefly and calmly retreats, but continues to try and make positive contact with Ryans with no defensive or aggressive display.
Ryans then stands up. Lennox continues to make appropriate positive contact, and shows no negative response to Ryans despite his looming stance over Lennox. Lennox watches as Ryans turns away and reaches for more treats. Lennox makes no attempt to go after Ryans while his back is turned.
Lennox then allows Ryans to approach frontally and back him up, almost to the wall, with Ryans maintaining a tall, directly frontal stance. Lennox sits attentively. Ryans then challenges Lennox with a direct, frontal stare. Lennox responds peacefully, turning his head, and remains calm, retreating briefly and returning to the handler, then partially turning away to defuse the challenge of Ryan's. At no time did Lennox show even the most remote aggressive response to this stranger, Mr. Ryans.
Now, please compare my notes here to an evaluation I conducted regarding a frankly aggressive animal we will call "JoJo" (not his name). Remember-these following notes are an aggressive dog, NOT Lennox!
"JoJo did not allow me to make direct contact. JoJo is very suspicious of others. When he was out XXX was holding him. JoJo was tense and alert. JoJo reacted violently to sustained eye contact, in full lunge and attack mode, teeth bared and barking/growling strongly. Once JoJo reacted to me he kept a very wary eye on me and did not relax. WARNING: JOJO HAS DISPLAYED HUMAN FOCUS AGGRESSION. JOJO MAY BE A THREAT TO HUMANS. JOJO IS A HIGH LIABILITY DOG. Humane containment and management is the best strategy for him."
Does this look a little different from the objective appraisal of Lennox? I certainly think so."JoJo" was clearly an aggressive dog, and reading my assessment of Lennox, or watching the video, shows the reality of Lennox' interaction with Mr. Ryans-completely non-aggressive.
For those wanting to see the evaluation of another dog accused of aggression that turned out NOT to be an aggressive dog, please watch the following: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHdpQP76WKs
You will see that this evaluation is far more extensive, and is conducted with this "killer" dog unrestrained. Helo's evaluation included substantial direct contact between me and the dog, and let me see far more of Helo's true behavior. Mr. Ryan was operating under the constraints imposed by the BCC. I will bet that the BCC evaluator never interacted freely with Lennox. I also suspect that the BCC evaluator never grabbed Lennox by the face, never met his gaze eye-to-eye, never tried to take a food bowl away-in fact, I would guess that their evaluator's whole opinion was derived from a closely limited situation like they imposed on Mr. Ryan. That is not a fair or appropriate evaluation.
The evaluation for that dog, Helo, is summarized here:
"I first observed Helo inhis kennel. He came to the front of thekennel as I passed and was alert and quiet. I then proceeded to the fenced play area at the facility and had Helobrought out to me to interact and greet off leash. Helo greeted me readily and appropriately,sniffing and alert. He approached headup, with no show of shyness or aggression. He readily sought contact but was also interested in checking out theimmediate area.
Helo readily allowed me topet him, and then allowed ready manipulation of his head, ears, mouth, andtail. He allowed me to manipulate hisrear feet, but was sensitive to handling of his front legs, consistent with theexpected behavior of an animal that has recently received a leg injury. His right front leg still showed visibleswelling. I grasped Helo by the sides ofhis face and, at close range, met his gaze directly. Helo broke eye contact first and did notgrowl, stiffen his posture, or show any typical signs of stress oraggression. Helo repeatedly allowed meto grab his collar, stand over him, and examine his bite and teeth formeasurements. I conducted a “squeezetest” wherein the tester grabs handfuls of fur and skin and gently squeezes todetermine the tested dog’s reactions. Helo did turn his head towards my hand as I proceeded down his body, butdid not open his mouth, snap, nip, or muzzle-punch in reaction. His body posture remained neutral during thistest.
I offered Helo high-valuetreats (Pupperoni) and he took them readily. Helo allowed me to proffer the treats and then remove them from his bitewith no resistance or attempt to guard or protect the treats. I also gave Helo a bowl of food (he had notreceived his morning feeding yet) and he allowed me to present and remove thefood repeatedly. Helo allowed me tomanipulate his face while eating, and only gave a minimal grumble when Iphysically placed my hand into the kibble he was eating while he ate.
Helo is fairly wellbehaved, sitting on command fairly often (approximately 70%) and has a lesserresponse to being called (about 30%).
Helo exhibited nosensitivity to loud noises or strange objects."
Note that my written evaluations of Lennox, "JoJo", and Helo never use language such as "the most dangerous dog I have ever seen" or any of the other nonsense that the BCC's evaluator has used. Such emotional language has no place in a behavioral assessment. My evaluations never mention the dogs' appearance, as physical appearance has absolutely no bearing on behavior. In fact, "JoJo" wasn't even a breed banned in the UK. Neither was Helo.
Lennox certainly got short shrift in this incident. The evaluator that the Court relied upon is clearly unqualified to assess temperament and behavior. He doesn't even have the credentials to assess adherence to a breed standard.
And frankly, if their evaluator thinks that Lennox was the "most dangerous dog" he had ever seen-please come meet some off the guys I have handled and evaluated after they have killed humans. I have seen more dangerous Cocker Spaniels. Please, if you are to be considered a professional, try not to embarrass yourself with such twaddle.
I am so sorry Lennox. We tried to get you a fair shot. I just hope your death serves to be the seed for change, and that your sacrifice motivates others to fight unfair laws based in ignorance and hate.
Posted by James W. Crosby CBCC-KA at 1:11 PM
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook
183 comments:
Lennox: The gloves come off.
PRE-AFTER NOTE (It makes sense in just a second) IN RESPONSE TO CONCERNED COMMENTS:
For those concerned about my comment that I had remained in the background on this up 'till now: I was working along with Victoria for about a year. We presented me as an independent, unallied and qualified expert to come re-evaluate Lennox. I kept my prior comments on this blog thoughtful and low key in order to try and be able to do what I do-give a fair, balanced, and professional assessment. Making a public fuss, even though I already had my reservations, would not have helped to gain the possible access we sought. And in all honesty (which was expressed to the parties in charge), if I had gone to NI and evaluated Lennox and found him dangerous, I would have publicly said so! Now I am able, since there is no longer a chance of coming in from "outside" as a non-threatening presence, to put my feelings and the story of my/our efforts out there. My prior reticence was in Lennox' interest; too much said too soon without full access and information would have done nothing to help. Please know that, out of the public spotlight, I have been eager, ready and willing to step in at any point and bring my professional experience to bear. Believe me when I tell you that I am sick thinking that, just maybe, if I had gone sooner.....and then, as we all do, I guess myself into a corner. The BCC has had the controls the entire time. We can only know go forward and try to keep this from happening again.
Jim
First warning: This is going to be a long one. Grab a drink and settle back-we have some talking to do.
From the beginning of my involvement with the Lennox case (which dates back almost a year to when Victoria Stilwell brought me in) I have stayed as neutral and professional as possible. I have resisted criticising the BCC and their evaluator, as we were trying to get me to Northern Ireland and get access to Lennox to give a fair, objective, and behaviorally sound evaluation. Sarah Fisher had done a great job, but I brought extensive "Pit Bull" experience coupled with unparalleled experience with "killer dogs" (dogs that have taken human lives). So I kept my opinion considered and low key, hoping that I could have come in as an "outside" expert, supplemented Victoria and Sarah's efforts, and gotten the BCC to listen. Now that Lennox is dead and the case is over, I no longer have to hold my tongue.
Let's look at the "qualifications" of the only evaluation that the BCC or Court accepted. The BCC "evaluator" is, admittedly, a former police Constable. So am I, except that instead of being a Constable, the equivalent here in the US to a base Patrolman, I retired as a Lieutenant and Watch Commander, the UK equivalent of a full Inspector with the Metropolitan Police. I am also a certified Behavior Consultant (he has no such training), have been certified as a Professional Dog Trainer, and am trained and certified as a behavior evaluator by several organizations-and he is not. I have further, over the years, worked with, trained, and evaluated what are probably over a thousand Pit Bulls and other breeds prohibited in the UK, certainly more than the BCC evaluator.
In fact, their evaluator, who's evaluation history seems to be summed up by "knows a Pit Bull when he is paid to find one" isn't even a dog show judge. Wouldn't a conformation expert such as a show judge have been a better choice if we were going to see if a dog physically met a breed standard?
Sarah Fisher, a bona-fide behaviorist, issued her opinion as to Lennox' safe demeanor, but her opinion was spurned. One suspects that the BCC had issues with the opinion of a "mere woman" despite her clear qualifications.
So another outside evaluator, with credentials, was brought in by the Barnes family, this time a man. David Ryans conducted a second evaluation, and was also rejected by the BCC. Rumor had it at the time that they did not consider Ryans experienced enough with prohibited breeds.
All that said, I have looked carefully at the video of Mr. Ryans, and would like to walk you all through what I see.
The video I am referring to is posted online here: http://lennoxsandielightfoot.blogspot.com/2012/07/video-of-sandie-lightfoot-and-belfast.html The times given refer to the times listed on the running video.
The test starts with Lennox on leash, held by a female Animal Control person, with both the Animal Control person and David Ryans (presumably a stranger to Lennox), a behaviorist, seated in chairs. Lennox is being petted by the female. Lennox is seated and seems to be relaxed.
As Mr. Ryans is placing a notebook into a bag at his side, Lennox approaches under Mr. Ryans' leg to see what he is doing. He shows no fear or reticence towards Ryans, just mild interest in the bag. Ryans places his open hand directly on Lennox snout to pet him and guide him back from under Ryans' legs.
Lennox returns to the seated female and seeks her attention (about 32 seconds in). Mr. Ryans then proffers a treat repeatedly to Lennox, extending it and then removing it from Lennox' reach. Lennox is focused on the treat, but allows Ryans to take the treat back repeatedly with no sign of possession aggression or reluctance. Lennox never snaps, lunges, or does anything other than wait for Ryans to surrender the treat. Lennox does, for a moment, try to get up and approach Ryans and the treat, but immediately returns to a sit when asked. Lennox' responses are positive and he readily seeks appropriate, positive contact with Ryans' Lennox does briefly try to get in Ryans' lap, but responds immediately when asked to get off. Ryans appears to "pop" Lennox on the snout several times with an open hand (about 1:27) to elicit a response. Lennox briefly and calmly retreats, but continues to try and make positive contact with Ryans with no defensive or aggressive display.
Ryans then stands up. Lennox continues to make appropriate positive contact, and shows no negative response to Ryans despite his looming stance over Lennox. Lennox watches as Ryans turns away and reaches for more treats. Lennox makes no attempt to go after Ryans while his back is turned.
Lennox then allows Ryans to approach frontally and back him up, almost to the wall, with Ryans maintaining a tall, directly frontal stance. Lennox sits attentively. Ryans then challenges Lennox with a direct, frontal stare. Lennox responds peacefully, turning his head, and remains calm, retreating briefly and returning to the handler, then partially turning away to defuse the challenge of Ryan's. At no time did Lennox show even the most remote aggressive response to this stranger, Mr. Ryans.
Now, please compare my notes here to an evaluation I conducted regarding a frankly aggressive animal we will call "JoJo" (not his name). Remember-these following notes are an aggressive dog, NOT Lennox!
"JoJo did not allow me to make direct contact. JoJo is very suspicious of others. When he was out XXX was holding him. JoJo was tense and alert. JoJo reacted violently to sustained eye contact, in full lunge and attack mode, teeth bared and barking/growling strongly. Once JoJo reacted to me he kept a very wary eye on me and did not relax. WARNING: JOJO HAS DISPLAYED HUMAN FOCUS AGGRESSION. JOJO MAY BE A THREAT TO HUMANS. JOJO IS A HIGH LIABILITY DOG. Humane containment and management is the best strategy for him."
Does this look a little different from the objective appraisal of Lennox? I certainly think so."JoJo" was clearly an aggressive dog, and reading my assessment of Lennox, or watching the video, shows the reality of Lennox' interaction with Mr. Ryans-completely non-aggressive.
For those wanting to see the evaluation of another dog accused of aggression that turned out NOT to be an aggressive dog, please watch the following: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHdpQP76WKs
You will see that this evaluation is far more extensive, and is conducted with this "killer" dog unrestrained. Helo's evaluation included substantial direct contact between me and the dog, and let me see far more of Helo's true behavior. Mr. Ryan was operating under the constraints imposed by the BCC. I will bet that the BCC evaluator never interacted freely with Lennox. I also suspect that the BCC evaluator never grabbed Lennox by the face, never met his gaze eye-to-eye, never tried to take a food bowl away-in fact, I would guess that their evaluator's whole opinion was derived from a closely limited situation like they imposed on Mr. Ryan. That is not a fair or appropriate evaluation.
The evaluation for that dog, Helo, is summarized here:
"I first observed Helo inhis kennel. He came to the front of thekennel as I passed and was alert and quiet. I then proceeded to the fenced play area at the facility and had Helobrought out to me to interact and greet off leash. Helo greeted me readily and appropriately,sniffing and alert. He approached headup, with no show of shyness or aggression. He readily sought contact but was also interested in checking out theimmediate area.
Helo readily allowed me topet him, and then allowed ready manipulation of his head, ears, mouth, andtail. He allowed me to manipulate hisrear feet, but was sensitive to handling of his front legs, consistent with theexpected behavior of an animal that has recently received a leg injury. His right front leg still showed visibleswelling. I grasped Helo by the sides ofhis face and, at close range, met his gaze directly. Helo broke eye contact first and did notgrowl, stiffen his posture, or show any typical signs of stress oraggression. Helo repeatedly allowed meto grab his collar, stand over him, and examine his bite and teeth formeasurements. I conducted a “squeezetest” wherein the tester grabs handfuls of fur and skin and gently squeezes todetermine the tested dog’s reactions. Helo did turn his head towards my hand as I proceeded down his body, butdid not open his mouth, snap, nip, or muzzle-punch in reaction. His body posture remained neutral during thistest.
I offered Helo high-valuetreats (Pupperoni) and he took them readily. Helo allowed me to proffer the treats and then remove them from his bitewith no resistance or attempt to guard or protect the treats. I also gave Helo a bowl of food (he had notreceived his morning feeding yet) and he allowed me to present and remove thefood repeatedly. Helo allowed me tomanipulate his face while eating, and only gave a minimal grumble when Iphysically placed my hand into the kibble he was eating while he ate.
Helo is fairly wellbehaved, sitting on command fairly often (approximately 70%) and has a lesserresponse to being called (about 30%).
Helo exhibited nosensitivity to loud noises or strange objects."
Note that my written evaluations of Lennox, "JoJo", and Helo never use language such as "the most dangerous dog I have ever seen" or any of the other nonsense that the BCC's evaluator has used. Such emotional language has no place in a behavioral assessment. My evaluations never mention the dogs' appearance, as physical appearance has absolutely no bearing on behavior. In fact, "JoJo" wasn't even a breed banned in the UK. Neither was Helo.
Lennox certainly got short shrift in this incident. The evaluator that the Court relied upon is clearly unqualified to assess temperament and behavior. He doesn't even have the credentials to assess adherence to a breed standard.
And frankly, if their evaluator thinks that Lennox was the "most dangerous dog" he had ever seen-please come meet some off the guys I have handled and evaluated after they have killed humans. I have seen more dangerous Cocker Spaniels. Please, if you are to be considered a professional, try not to embarrass yourself with such twaddle.
I am so sorry Lennox. We tried to get you a fair shot. I just hope your death serves to be the seed for change, and that your sacrifice motivates others to fight unfair laws based in ignorance and hate.
Posted by James W. Crosby CBCC-KA at 1:11 PM
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook
183 comments:
- Jaqi BunnJuly 12, 2012 1:26 PM
Well done Jim. Many professional assessors over here have exactly the same views. We are working to clear the decks of unqualified, inappropriately experience people asessing dogs.
Reply - Carrie Galvan CPDTJuly 12, 2012 1:38 PM
I'm not sure I have ever seen someone scared of a dog start an assessment sitting down. I know I certainly start ALL of mine standing, and I especially won't sit if I know the dog had shown aggression in the past. I'll only sit in a chair if I've had a lot of positive feedback from the dog. If they were so scared of him, why didn't they show a little self preservation?
Reply
Replies
- KimberlyJuly 13, 2012 3:01 PM
I thought exactly the same thing. If Lennox was 'the most dangerous dog' I had ever met, I do not think I would be sitting calming in the chair. Ridiculous. RIP Lennox. - Brenda WhiteJuly 13, 2012 9:23 PM
My thoughts also! I certainly would not be in any position except preservation as Carrie mentioned... Be on the ready, so to speak!
RIP Lennox. - carolle kennedyJuly 15, 2012 9:21 AM
unbelieveable isn't it,my maltese showes more aggression than lennox,i watched the video spoken about and everything is exact as it is in above article,and i am no expert,but i saw no signs in his body language of fear or aggression,nor that of the handler,who had the leash loose at all of the assessment,none of the articles i have read,seen,heard justified council seizing lennox to begin with,and in the two years of confinement,never showed any aggression,belfast council will surely regret all the stupidity of their actions,and the world questions why weren't real experts allowed to see lennox?victoria stillwell offered a solution,council would not liasion with her why ?why were the owners of the dog not allowed to visit or be with their pet at the end,why were they not able to access lennox's body after he was murdered...????????????????what are u hidding belfast cc....???was he in such a bad state,physically that u couldn't release him,?????????????????,rumours and threats have been abounding,but the facts have been presented to the world to see how the BSL laws are not ridding dangerous dogs from our streets,they are seizing family innocent dogs and murdering them for their appearance"pitt bull" like.this insanity has to be stopped,any dog is dangerous in the wrong hands,backyard breeders,dangerous criminals,they are the ones that should be accountable not innocent family dogs,no matter what the breed,blame the one at the end of the leash,not the breed - Reply
- MuttShack Animal RescueJuly 12, 2012 2:43 PM
Thank you Jim for a great post! It's obvious why the BCC's Evaluator was chosen. The die had been cast, they wanted the dog to die and needed to control the outcome of the investigation. There was no room for objectivity.
Reply
Replies
- Sandra WoodhouseJuly 13, 2012 8:42 AM
Agreed MuttShack. They have shown themselves to be so lacking in credibility, and honesty that not a word can be considered. It's laughable if it wasn't so serious. The dog got shafted just because his family had the gall to exercise their right to challenge his siezure. - Amy McIntireJuly 13, 2012 2:11 PM
the Barnes family and Lennox were shafted because they spoke out against bsl and Lennox paid the ultimate price. - Carol WatermanJuly 15, 2012 10:39 AM
Thank you Jim. It is obvious that Belfast wanted to lynch Lennox from the start!! I would like the see the video/report that the court accepted. This requires a full investigation. It won't bring sweet Lennox back, but will expose the BCC and hopefully prevent further murders of innocent dogs!!
“Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well-being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way.”
― Martin Luther King Jr. - Reply
- MojiJuly 12, 2012 4:04 PM
BCC have failed and betrayed its people. Their insisting to destroy Lennox was not to protect the public from harmful dog, and we can see it as clearly as reading our own palms. I don't what their motivation was, but this is so dirty and disgusting. Such a bent and distort justice system they have utilized there in Lennox's case.
Thank you for your detailed, neutral, and professional writing. The world needs to see this, just in case there's someone who hasn't yet seen through BCC's corrupted scheme.
Reply
Replies
- NiseSloJuly 14, 2012 1:51 PM
Corrupt is the best description here of the BCC. I am not familiar with the law and structure of this government branch in Ireland (I'm in the US), but I'm curious to know if there is any recourse against their inept and biased and neglectful actions? - Reply
- Caroline MurphyJuly 12, 2012 4:37 PM
Thank you so much for you expert opinion which backs those of the qualified people involved in the case. For reasons unknown Lennox was never given a chance and I believe from the first day his fate had been sealed.
Reply - DeniseJuly 12, 2012 4:50 PM
God Bless you Jim. I loved talking to you on the phone the other day about MY two pit bulls and this excellent professional appraisal is much appreciated.
Someone needs to get it to the BBC, Midlands TV, Anglia TV and all other broadcasting stations in GB.
Reply - LaurenJuly 12, 2012 4:52 PM
Thank you for this post.
Reply - Carolyne LewisJuly 12, 2012 4:53 PM
fabulous article Mr Crosby, i would also like to know why if Lennox was 'the most dangerous and unpredictable dog' the warden had ever encountered then why is there pictures of her all over the internet allowing lennox on her lap and to lick her face ?
Reply
Replies
- LemurJuly 13, 2012 8:01 PM
Lennox was obviously the most "dangerous and unpredictable" because the warden had obviously never met a dog before in her life. Thus nothing to compare with, so she could get away with making those silly statements.
Has to be that! Can't be corruption, right? - Reply
- Elizabeth McCannJuly 12, 2012 4:55 PM
Thank you for your evaluation and your professional opinion. Even the dogs on the street know that Lennox's fate was sealed the day he was seized from his family. Belfast City Council wanted Lennox killed from day one, it was a stitch up. RIP dear Lennox, your death will not be in vain if cruel BSL is abolished.
Reply - LynJuly 12, 2012 4:57 PM
A wondefully written article that sadly breaks my heart all over again for poor Lennox. He never stood a chance with an incompetent accessor.
There are so many answers that needs to be given because BCC are certainly corrupt.
Reply - MoyraJuly 12, 2012 4:58 PM
Brilliant post Jim. So good to hear an educated opinion after all the twaddle that BCC have dished out. Human ego's got in the way of Justice and poor Lennox paid the price with his beautiful life. Thank you for speaking out. We can only hope that something good will come out of all of this and that Lennox will not have died in vain.
Reply - RichieJuly 12, 2012 4:58 PM
It is great to read such a detailed pos by someone who is an expert in the field. It completely destroys BCC's case and makes one wonder just exactly what they were up to. It is distressing that Lennox was killed, I only saw that video for the first time today and I have to ask what the courts in Northern Ireland were up to when they came to their decision. I hope Lennox's death won't be in vain and the reactions of you, Victoria, Sarah and many more can help bring about a change in the implementation of the law up their. However, judging by the spinning in the media I think it will be a be job, requiring lots of pressure.
Reply - Anne ZoutsosJuly 12, 2012 5:18 PM
When every single professional's assessment I have read of Lennox has affirmed his good behaviour, other than Belfast City Council's own unqualified 'expert' one can only wonder why Belfast City Council were so keen to kill Lennox and indeed why the case was judged in court in such an extraordinary manner with the qualified experts being ignored. A very strange and sorry tale.
Reply - Prudence HalliwellJuly 12, 2012 5:28 PM
There is a certain part of Northern Irish society who feel the need to draw blood and those persons will create windows of oportunity for themselves,this poor dog was just that ,a window of oportunity.The same group are now mocking the rest of the planet by using social networking sites and also those on the ground in the Belfast Council ,when answering their main phone line to enquiries about this case reply to the public by making animal noises.The BCC and its minions dont need education ,oh no what they need is incarceration!!!!
Reply - Linda RiceJuly 12, 2012 5:33 PM
If you could have sound you'd hear me cheering you right now Sir! THAT was a TRUE evaluation of Lennox and to coin your own phrase not the "twaddle" BCC's (unprofessional and clearly uneducated) so call "expert" spouted! I've seen scarier kittens! Bless you for making a stand.
Reply - Vlinda VentressJuly 12, 2012 5:34 PM
thank you for this qualified evaluation. i have owned laid back pit bulls and vicious little poodles and i can distinguish one from the other. why couldn't they?? i think they were just trying to prove their need for their jobs and budget. i don't think there was anything more than that. i do believe though that Lennox was not PTS yesterday but that he was murdered months ago, as that is the only reason a logical person could could come up with, for the fight they have put up and are just trying to cover their tracks.
the family couldn't be there for him in his time of need because there IS NO body to mourn or collar to remember because they never saved anything of that poor soul.
they just wanted to think that people would forget because he was "just a dog"!!
would they really agree to pay to feed, water, tend to medically and house a "dangerous,undeserving" dog for 2 years?? i think not!!!
i would really hate to live in these peoples lives.
how heartless and unenlightened they all are!!!
well, i know that i for one, "WILL NOT FORGET LENNOX" or this role that they (BCC) have played in this torturous, confused, short lived, little life!!
Reply
Replies
- LynnethJuly 12, 2012 7:22 PM
well said. I could not have expressed my view, which matches yours, any more eloquently myself.
We will NOT forget. We will NOT forgive. - Sandra DeClueJuly 12, 2012 10:00 PM
They should be transparently investigated and prosecuted for any and all wrong-doing in this case and all that were involved in any kind of illegal cover-up of the truth, prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I will never forget this gentle baby LENNOX. - nhallJuly 12, 2012 10:31 PM
Vlinda I completely agree with you. I truly feel that they either put him to sleep along time ago or he died from neglect a long time ago. When was the last time someone from outside saw him alive? There is another possibility...maybe someone else has actually taken him home. - UnknownJuly 13, 2012 2:15 AM
My thoughts exactly. Either they killed Lennox outright long ago or were still responsible for his death from illness or pining for his family due to their policy of enforced isolation and confinement. Cowards such as the BCC don't deserve to call themselves "human" OR "civilized".
I will NEVER forget OR forgive for the sake of Lennox, the thousands that suffer like him, and for the fortunate five rescued "pit bull types" free to share my home and heart (three AmStaffs, two Bull Terriers). - plurockJuly 13, 2012 6:34 PM
I completely agree with your statements, Vlinda. I have long thought that the only reason the BCC would not allow the family to see their beloved Lennox (and more recently to not even grant the child's wishes to have Lennox' collar as a momento) is because he was either killed long ago or he died of neglect and a broken spirit in their prison.
WE WILL NEVER FORGET YOU DEAR LENNOX AND WILL CONTINUE TO FIGHT FOR THE END OF CANINE RACISM. - Reply
- Jayne Vanessa CarleJuly 12, 2012 5:35 PM
Crying!!!!!poor poor lad!
Reply - VasskoJuly 12, 2012 5:37 PM
Thanks for sharing and educating people
Reply - uglybuffyJuly 12, 2012 5:41 PM
Thank you so much for this brilliant post. RIP Lennox.
Reply - PeacefulPitBullHSAlabamaJuly 12, 2012 5:43 PM
Thank You so very much... We can only pray with people like you and everyone around the world to see the negative affect the BSL causes. Their are so many who have lost their lives to the miss labeling of the BSL. Please continue with the fight and God speed to end this continuing discrimination.
Reply - Lyndsey BaileyJuly 12, 2012 5:53 PM
Well done - this say's it all. You are in a position to make judgement and everything said is clear and makes perfect sense!
Reply - Karen Rose SchavoniJuly 12, 2012 6:04 PM
Thank you Jim. Your professional opinion confirms my thoughts on this situation and makes it easier to cope with the outcome. Let's hope we get some justice and an end to BSL.
Reply - BeverleyJuly 12, 2012 6:16 PM
Thank you for such an informed post and helping to raise awareness x Please come and support us also in the same BSL fight :/ We would really appreciate your support. http://www.facebook.com/groups/377337078999773/
Reply - MikeandHollyJuly 12, 2012 6:23 PM
Thank You and I am sure Lennox is watching down saying Thank you also.
Reply - Amanda NelsonJuly 12, 2012 6:25 PM
Thank you!! The world knew the truth..there was nothing aggressive about lennox. He was a dog that wanted affection and just to be loved. I hope we get justice so other dogs dont have to go through the same situation. bcc needs to be stopped
Reply - SageJuly 12, 2012 6:31 PM
Wonderful post..Thank you so much..
Reply - kaceeJuly 12, 2012 6:46 PM
Thank you for this post. I am not any sort of behaviorist but rather your run-of-the-mill dog lover. I watched the video earlier today and was once again dumbfounded at the very obvious discrepancies between what I was seeing and what had been reported. I read a post by someone yesterday that said "Sometimes in order to help many animals it takes caring about one". I hope that this travesty of justice can be a catalyst of change to help the BSL cause.
Reply - CDeesJuly 12, 2012 6:48 PM
My question is: was someone in the BCC trying to get back at this family for some reason? Thats the only thing that makes sense to me as you can tell the handler nor behaviourist are concerned for their safety around this dog. I wouldnt be surprised this was an act of someone using their power in a high position to hirt this family for a vengence reason. I think the top minister in Ireland should pull the entire BCC from office and not allow them to run for office.again. Their respose to phone calls was a display of immature behavior not becoming a high ranking city official also which tels me they should be removed from office.
This has brought a very bad light to Belfast and the country of Ireland as well as all of the UK in my opinion considering te Queen herself wouldnt step in and do something. Im just appalled this would happen in the manner it did with so much proof that Lennox was not a danger nor a pit bull. Ive handled many pit bulldogs and all have been very sweet animals. Im not afraid of them as a breed and no one should be. Be afraid of the people who treat any dog inhumanely for they will treat a human the same. It is people who make mean and vicious dogs not their breed.
Reply
Replies
- LoveMyPetsJuly 13, 2012 12:56 PM
I agree with you, I also agree there was a cover up and Lennox was killed or died of neglect long time ago. I do believe BCC had and has a vendetta against the Barnes' family and an independent investigation of the actions of everyone, BCC, dog warden and the courts, are in order. I am sending a request to that effect to the Queen's press office, the Prime Minister's office and a copy to every major world media outlet. BCC are corrupt and unfit to lead and govern Belfast and need to be removed from their position, including the judges who participated in this sad and sorry charade. - JoJuly 13, 2012 7:08 PM
I so agree that someone in power (perhaps more than one) had "an axe to grind" with the family, and were so hard headed, conceited, stupid and just plain evil that NO ONE was going to tell them what to do. How do the majority of the people of Belfast feel about this situation? They need to consider that next time it could be them..whether over a dog or property or even a human family member..Beware people of Belfast..you and your could be next. The world is watching! - Belinda GJuly 15, 2012 12:06 PM
Are BCC elected authorities? If yes, do not vote on those people EVER again! - Reply
- UnknownJuly 12, 2012 6:56 PM
Thank you for taking the gloves off! It is so redeeming to hear these words from a real expert. Such a sad, sad thing they did to that poor dog.
Reply - AlastairJuly 12, 2012 7:00 PM
I wasn't aware of this case before but the end result doesn't surprise me coming from a nation that prides itself on paranoia, blind panic and lurid headlines. From one end of the country to the other I see people in power with neither the sense nor intuition to look at things objectively and logically. I for one am not afraid of dogs, even the so called dangerous dogs and I don't consider myself especially brave. I just know how they think. I would guess they wanted to destroy the dog and stacked the jury to make it happen. Whatever happened to common sense?
Reply - MatrayiJuly 12, 2012 7:15 PM
Thank you for your insight. I wish this had surfaced much before Lennox was murdered. What a shame that an innocent dog and his family had to pay such a heavy price for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, really.
Reply - Blackbird MarshJuly 12, 2012 7:20 PM
Thank you for your real expert evaluation. I think this family have grounds for a lawsuit. I hope they pursue it aggressively. This poor dog didn't have a chance with these obsinate people. Thank you again.
Reply - JenJuly 12, 2012 7:31 PM
I'm very glad to read your opinion on this. I just can't wrap my head around breed bans, and especially not around Lennox's case. It seemed to me that he just became an embarassment, and that the BCC was going to order his death even if the Queen herself gave him a pardon.
Reply - strongsmJuly 12, 2012 7:47 PM
I am one of the uncountable anonymous people fighting to bring justice to the Barnes Family in Belfast and their dog, Lennox, recently killed by the Belfast City Council. The story is heart-breaking, and appalling! Here in Brazil, we have shared the story via Facebook and prayed that someone, some place, can do something to ensure justice is done. There are so many unanswered questions in this case – why was Lennox kept away from the family for so long? Why wasn’t the DNA proof that Lennox was NOT a pit-bull or “part” pit-bull allowed in Court? Why did Lennox license (issued by BCC!!!) state that he was a BULLDOG? Pictures show him hurt and with a skin condition, while under the “care” of BCC – isn’t that abuse? There is video in YouTube showing Alexandra Lightfoot, the warden who said under OATH that Lennox was dangerous and unpredictable, SLAPPING the dog, trying to extract an aggressive response from him and failing entirely. There are pictures of Lennox licking her face and being petted/cuddled by her. Would you do that with a dangerous animal? Why didn’t the BCC let Brooke, the young child to whom Lennox belonged, say goodbye to her beloved pet? And why in heaven would BCC refuse to give her back his COLLAR as a memento?? Could Lennox have been killed long ago?
This story reeks of a cover-up.
We count on you to bring justice to this family and this poor animal, who did not deserve to die like this.
Reply
Replies
- sam smithJuly 12, 2012 11:45 PM
I also wonder why theyw ouldnt let the family say goodbye to Lennox or return his remains or collar? Is it because he had been destroyed before they said he was I know alot of people feel that he was and in a way I do hope this is true so that he wasnot permitted to suffer the abuse at the kennels where he was kept for as long as he may of been subjected to it. I know of supposed dangerous dogs who are so soft and soppy tha you just wouldnt think they were a banned or dangerous breed and of course poor lennox was neither of these. I think this whole situation is completely disgusting and that yet again a miscarriage of justice has occurred just beause fo the looks of a dog. If you cant illicit an aggresive responce from repeatedly slapping a dog then there is no way a dog is dangerous I know of more dangeorus YOrkshire terriers and chihuahuas and yet you never hear of one of them being euthanaised for aggression. I hope Just ice can be done for Lennox's family in this case and the others where innocent dogs have been murdered just because of their looks. hell my minaiture poodle is probably more agressive than Lennox was and she doesnt have an aggressive bone in her body either. BSL needs to be stopped now and deed not breed legislation put into place and people trained to know the difference between aggression and affection instead of this stupidity we have int his country at the moment - Reply
- PatJuly 12, 2012 7:51 PM
Thank you for sharing this with us. It is most intelligently written and confirming of what so many people throughout the world strongly believed.
Would you be able to write a detailed post about Breed-Specific Legislation, containing information about it and its shortcomings? I think that at such a time as this it would be very helpful to many people. I was shocked last night to read that even Airedales, Labradors, St Bernards and Golden Retrievers are on a Restricted/Banned list in the US. What is the world coming to?!
Reply - janine petersJuly 12, 2012 7:53 PM
Thank you for your expert opinion. It's really sad how many dogs are misunderstood and mistreated. Thanks for helping out Lennox RIP.
Reply - Social MangeJuly 12, 2012 8:08 PM
Thank you for your expert, objective evaluation. Your last paragraph is also my belief about the BCC dog "evaluator".
Reply - LMFowlerJuly 12, 2012 8:08 PM
I have seen more aggressive Labradoodles. Pitiful. Thank you to all who tried and we can only hope this spurs change.
Reply - UnknownJuly 12, 2012 8:17 PM
sure this is a great behaviourist, and as you can see, he sees what even we can see, and we are not behaviourists..this is what happens when an organization uses one of their own..its like the police investigating the police..there should have been a second and third opinion..I am not sure why these jerks had it in so bad for lennox, other than they could not back down on their decision because of stubborness..this is a disgrace and a real tragic tragic loss..I feel sick over this, just sick RIP sweet boy who did nothing at all except love, and Lightfoot, i hope you rot in hell in a shitty old seniors home
Reply - LauraJuly 12, 2012 8:27 PM
Beautiful post. Thank you. The BCC had no intention of doing the honorable thing. It was a sham and for what purpose?
Reply - WillyJuly 12, 2012 8:30 PM
When watching that video, all I could think of was that was probably one of the last times they got to see their dog alive. It made me think of a hostage situation . . . because it was.
The family should sue for a wrongful death because there is tremendous evidence against the BCC. I would certainly contribute to a legal fund to not let this topic lose traction.
Reply - factfinderJuly 12, 2012 8:38 PM
This isn't only a case of cruel and unusual punishment of Lennox the dog but also his family including their poor daughter. If the BCC can get away with this unreasonable unprovoked seizure and destruction of this families personal property to say nothing of a beloved pet, then no citizen of Belfast can be safe in assuming they have a right to their possessions. They could be next. The people responsible for this travesty need to be removed from positions of power and decision making immediately to ensure the rights of all Belfast citizens. They have also angered millions of citizens of the free world and I have to say that you couldn't pay me to travel to that hell hole. They have a reputation for violence and intolerance and they just demonstrated to the World that it's a well deserved one!
Reply - JulieJuly 12, 2012 9:07 PM
Thank you Jim!! I met you in Fred Kray's Animal Law class at Barry.... I was so impressed with you at the Animal Law Forum, then in your class presentation, but most of all, for giving us the facts and story behind this tragedy! I concur in the hope that Lennox's death was not in vain and that the people will see the wake up call to end BSL!!!! Thank you so much!!!!
Reply - KimmOJuly 12, 2012 9:10 PM
RIGHT ON JIM!!! EXCELLENT article/response to the unnecessary/unjustified/unfair/untimely death of Dear Lennox! Definitely worth the read...and great links, etc. All should take some time to add Jim's expert information to our "arsenal" of informed/educated facts to back up our support of bully breeds/mixes...and other assumed "dangerous" dogs! Please share far and wide!!! Thanks & GOD bless!
Reply - Michael HaslamJuly 12, 2012 9:35 PM
Lennox died from ignorance and prejudice. I don't know how the Council's expert can claim to be a expert on dog behaviour, in fact anyone who can say because Lennox averted his gaze when he made eye contact showed him to untrustworthy and dangerous goes against reason.To also claim Lennox lured him into a false sense of security would be laughable if it wasn't so dangerous. I had a very smart border collie and even he couldn't think like that, no disrepect to Lennox but I doubt he had human cunning. This man is dangerous and should never be allowed near a dog again. He is now calling for all Staffordshire Bull Terriers to be included in this insane law.
Reply - Anna ThomasJuly 12, 2012 9:36 PM
I am by no means a professional but I know the difference between a potentially aggressive dog and one that shows no signs and I did watch the video last night with Lennox and came to the same conclusions that you have. There wasnt an aggressive bone in that dogs body. Its interesting how any evidence that wouldve freed Lennox to at least be re-homed was not allowed in court. Have you heard the latest where the BCC refuses to even allow Brooke to have her dogs collar as something to remember him by?
Reply
Replies
- Jarek KowalskiJuly 12, 2012 10:59 PM
I suspect they don't want to release the collar fearing his DNA can prove again that he was not a pittie, or something else these bastards lied about. - Reply
- f5cb72d0-b8f0-11e1-9a9d-000bcdca4d7aJuly 12, 2012 9:38 PM
Does anyone know why these 51 dog killing nazis had such a hard on for this one poor meek creature? Or was it a hard on for a little girl that had complete trust in her beloved dog? Personally - from some of the posts I have read from certain residence of Belfast seems the nazis are alive and well and living in that city. They all need to get an education because they certainly can not get by on their common sense! I don't understand how the top of the food chain has survived with the lack of compassion that was shown to this family to the extent they are even refusing the return of his f'n collar!!! HORRID PEOPLE THEY ARE! And I thought all the nazis were put to death for their crimes after the war and as they were gathered - seems a number have been missed because their BSL is equal to what hitler was doing!
Reply
Replies
- LazyLadyJuly 13, 2012 3:39 AM
No, the actions of the Belfast dog wardens and City Council in enforcing BSL is NOT equal to what Hitler was doing. Hitler killed 6 million Jews (and many other innocent people, Gypsies, homosexuals, Catholics, political prisoners, etc.) and set Europe and North Africa and Russia afire in a devastating war. BSL is an inadequate solution to the problem of dog bites/attacks; and definitely responsible for the needless killings of many innocent dogs. Both are immoral, but not equal on the scale of tragedy. Thankfully, there are no World Wars going on; and we can focus our attention on smaller tragedies, such as that of Lennox and all the dogs like him who have been killed because of their "type".
Lennox was treated horribly and unjustly; and his family was also put through h*ll. I am not the owner of an American Pit Bull or other 'bull' breeds, but I despise unfairness, and Lennox' story reeks of it. I wish that Mr. Crosby would have been allowed to personally evaluate Lennox. The supposed "expert" who testified that Lennox was so dangerous sounds like, from what I have heard of his reactions and words during the trial, a man who hates and fears Pit Bull "types" (and that word, "type" seems to be the BCC's justification for the seizure of Lennox in the first place - this was not justice!) and is rather emotional and nervous. I really appreciate this article, for the intelligent, rational approach to the evaluation of aggression in various dogs as well as the insight into David Ryan's video'd evaluation of Lennox. - Reply
