Caroline Muscat
Animal Welfare Department accuses police of 'frame-up'
The Animal Welfare Department has accused the police of "framing" it over the killing of two dogs.
Police have insisted that the dogs were put down by the Animal Welfare Department a few hours after they were taken from their owner Kevin Caruana's home in Xemxija on August 26.
But Mario Spiteri, who heads the department, is insisting police gave the order, and has even identified the sergeant on duty. "This is a frame-up and I will not stand for it."
Dr Spiteri said dogs are normally put down after consultations with veterinary experts. "My department is assigned the duty of protecting animal rights, so any dogs recovered are put down only as a last resort."
Mr Caruana, who was out fishing when his dogs, named Stone and Achilles, were taken away, said he intends taking legal action to establish who killed them.
Four of the department's staff - Colin Kelly, Victor Tirchett, Paul Debono and Godric Marston - who were present when the dogs were taken, told The Sunday Times they arrived on the scene soon after the police called for assistance to handle a "ferocious" dog.
Mr Marston said the dog was handled and contained. Meanwhile, the police asked him to go for the other dog in the balcony because they feared he was going to jump down and attack them. He did so, using the ladder of the Civil Protection Department, who were also called by police.
"When I got to the balcony, I turned to the police officer and told him the windows were open. I thought this was important since the owner was not home. The sergeant told me he was authorising me to enter, so I did," Mr Marston said.
After bringing the second dog down from the balcony, the animal welfare staff said they asked police what they should do with the dogs and the sergeant said they were too aggressive and had to be put down.
But when contacted, the police denied the department's version of events, saying they received three reports on different days about an aggressive dog in the house in Triq il-Fekruna.
They were the first on the scene and entered the garage. The dog came towards them but then turned back. Police said they requested assistance from the animal welfare department, whose officials arrived within 15 minutes.
The police said the animal welfare staff chose to go for the second dog on the balcony because it was without food and water.
The police said they never instructed the animal welfare department personnel to put down the dogs. They said they informed them to apprehend the roaming dog and detain it, pending a court judgement in view of an incident on July 13.
On that date, a woman filed a police report that a dog from the house had attacked her poodle and killed it.
But Dr Spiteri said: "At no point did the police ask me to keep the dogs pending any court action. Their order was specific - to put the dogs down because there were many complaints about these dogs."
Furthermore, Dr Spiteri said the aggressive dog involved in the July 13 incident was not one of the two dogs taken in August, but another belonging to the same owner.
Several attempts had been made to contact Mr Caruana in relation to the July dog attack and the animal welfare department had left five notices at his home because they never found him there.
On the morning of the August incident, police also said they tried to contact the owner for several hours and then spoke to his mother. Following that, they decided to enter his home.
However, the dispute between the department and the police is no consolation to Mr Caruana: "I am just trying to understand why my dogs were put down within a few hours. The dogs were in good health and did not hurt anyone. They should have been kept for some hours, at least, until someone spoke to me."
36 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
J Zammit
Sep 26th 2009, 18:35
@ Joseph Camilleri
Are you implying that we should get rid of all animals (and by animals I mean all those that biologically speaking fall under the animal kingdom - including humans) that have been known to have aggressive instincts? I believe that the percentage of humans with aggressive instincts is a bit more than the 0.3% that you quote for Rottweilers.
And if you decide to take a very short pause on your sweeping statement of aggressiveness in rottweilers and search some information, you will find that these dogs are actually very helpful to humans.
During the First and Second World Wars, Rottweilers were put into service in various roles including as messenger, draft, and guard dogs. Currently they are often used as search and rescue, assistance, guide dogs for the blind, guard and police dogs in addition to their traditional roles.
If there is a prison for humans, there should be a prison for animals and like humans are not put down but are given life sentences when they act aggressively, so the case should be for animals. After all biologically we all belong to the same kingdom and should be treated with the same respect.
R. Azzopardi
Sep 9th 2009, 13:49
@Joseph Camilleri
Yes I still love dogs more than I love any human being (even though I do not have a dog of my own at present). Flesh wounds heal quickly. The actions of certain fellow humans remain etched in my memory.
Joseph Camilleri
Sep 7th 2009, 11:13
@ L. Mizzi
This contribution is even more worrying to parents since now they know that there are, possibly, several of these dangerous dogs, possibly, in the neighbourhood. But they should take your word that these dogs, though ferocious-looking, are in fact friendly, good tempered and obedient! There is no need for me to take to the side of the promenade as some Rottweiler is walked along the Strand! The chance that one of them will, for some reason, attack a person is remote – just 0.3% according to some statistics. If the victim happens to be your son or daughter, too bad – it’s a chance we all have to take to keep the owners of these breeds happy. What motivates people to keep dangerous dogs - dogs bred for fighting and killing - as ‘pets’ is beyond my comprehension. But I am now convinced that a six-week obedience course is all it takes to change the aggressive instincts of these dogs!
L. Mizzi
Sep 7th 2009, 08:27
@ Joseph Camilleri.
ALL dogs CAN be dangerous, and all dogs CAN bite. That's why owners should take the time to train them and socialise them well, and never leave them unattended with small children - for the safety of the child and that of the dog. If a child hurts a dog, it may attack. On the other hand, if a responsible adult is there to stop the child from hurting the dog.... then that's entirely a different story.
I am lucky enough to know people owning all the breeds you mentioned, because most of them attend the same obedience classes I have attended with all my dogs. They are all well behaved, have very good temperaments and their owners have full control over them. Why? Because they were properly trained and socialised. Of course these dogs are an entirely different matter to the dogs of the same breeds & others that have lived all their life on a roof and hardly ever met another human or dog!
Rather then making a list of dangerous breeds, the authorities should make it mandatory for owners to attend a six week basic obedience class for everyone owning a dog!
isabella peresso fiorentino
Sep 6th 2009, 22:34
The pic I see here shows me nothing of a ferocious dog. How dare these people enter this man's house, take away the dogs and kill them instantly. What is this? The banana Republic or what? If I were Mr Caruana, I would fight this through thick and thin.
I have two very friendly cross-breed dogs who love people and other animals. But no-one would dare enter my house when I am out, because they feel their job is to protect their "pack" and their territory - this is how dogs think.
If these dogs were really that ferocious as many are claiming them to be, then Mr Marston would either not be alive today or severely mauled, but no the dogs were allowed to be taken away only to be killed injustly.
Joseph Camilleri
Sep 6th 2009, 20:43
@ L. Mizzi
Your contribution made for very worrying reading. Attacks on people by large dogs are well known. Now you are saying that even a small dog can kill a baby and "the majority of dog attacks on children were a result of family pets, which were left unattended with small children". The logical conclusion to be deducted from your statements is that ALL dogs are dangerous. As for your list of dangerous dogs, my list differs from yours. Mine puts Pitt Bulls at the top of the list of most dangerous dogs followed by Rottweilers, German Shepherds, Huskies, Alaskan Malamutes and Dobermann Pinschers - all large dogs. Can 'responsible ownership' turn these potential killers into loveable pets that pose no danger to the family and other citizens? I doubt it!
@ R. Azzopardi
Your statement: "I have been bitten by dogs too many times to remember."
My question: "And you still love - or like - dogs?"
R. Azzopardi
Sep 6th 2009, 19:34
@Joe Camiller
I like your sense of humour. Rest assurd that I am not ferocious :) However, I still beg to differ with one of your points. I have been bitten by dogs too many times to remember, however, the nastiest bite was inflicted by a yapping chihuahua. It punctured the skin on my hand and did not let go until it ripped the flesh apart.
@Dr. John Zammit. As far as i know, one does not have the right to kill a dog. The only right one has in these cases is to try to capture the dog and find its owner (or human companion) to sue for damages. in fact that's why I cannot understand how these two dogs were put down in the first place. A few years ago, a farmer I knew shot at and killed two large dogs who would routinely massacre his lovely collection of fowl. He had to pay hefty fines for his actions when caught.
L. Mizzi
Sep 6th 2009, 19:00
@ Joseph Camiller
Quote: "As for your reference to size, as far as I know, every attack and mauling of persons by dogs has always been done by large breeds. "
You are VERY wrong. There have been reports of several small dog attacks resulting in severe injuries and death. I recall a particular incident where a small dog (and I won't mention the breed) killed a new born baby. Large dog attack reports are reported more because the damage is often bigger, plus it creates media sensationalism. Which makes the better news headline? "Pitbull attacks a small child" or "Small cuddly dog attacks child". You decide! As for mentioning breeds, I am a firm believer that this has nothing to do with breeds. In several studies conducted abroad, it resulted that the majority of dog attacks on children were a result of family pets, which were left unattended with small children, and you'd be surprised at the breeds that made it to the top 5! They weren't pitbulls! In fact, pitbulls were 4th from LAST in a particular one. For anyone blaming the pits... Dog attacks are not about breeds, they're about responsible ownership
Ch Vella
Sep 6th 2009, 18:46
@ Vincent Portelli
I gave my opinion like every one.
I love animals that’s all and there’s nothing above in this article that shows that these two dogs where dangerous or ferocious even on others online news there’s nothing that makes such a statement
On another site about this it says: (When the dogs were seized, Mr Marston was reported as saying: “Although they seem to be well cared for and properly fed, these dogs were terrorising the neighbourhood”). So the action should have been against the owner and not the dogs. And you’r saying they were kept in atrocious filthy conditions.
You know what. I live at the seafront in my village, and people stays outside here enjoying the breeze, talking, children shouting, car stereo playing and sometimes dogs barking. Loud exhaust when they are leaving apart the cars spinning wheels and races. All this happens almost every day in the summer sometimes till 01.00 sometimes till 03.00. I called the police at Cospicua because here the police station closes at 20.00 but all this is still going on. What should I do next get gun and shoot them?
We all make noise most of us bark.
Ch Vella
Sep 6th 2009, 17:20
@ Carl Grech
I know no one involved in this matter. What is sad to me is that two dogs have been killed for nothing they have been stamped as ferocious simply because they bark and the owner let them free to run so people are scared from what I can understand. But why they didn’t take legal action against the owner instead of putting them down?
And what about the police sergeant to authorise a third party to enter private premises without the owner's (or the court's) authorisation?
I know that the police and animal welfare are doing a great job lately about animal’s rights and wellbeing but this time I’m sorry they acted wrong in my opinion.
So they left a TIGER to its owner which apart of being a top predator in nature is also protected spices and are letting people keeping snakes and spiders that only God knows what harm they can do and killed two dogs simply because they bark and are left free on the road. If this is not the law of the jungle someone please enlighten me.
Joseph Camilleri
Sep 6th 2009, 16:55
@ R. Azzopard
Considering your height and build, I had second thoughts about answering your comment. But here goes! The news item reads: "Four of the department's staff - Colin Kelly, Victor Tirchett, Paul Debono and Godric Marston - who were present when the dogs were taken, told The Sunday Times they arrived on the scene soon after the police called for assistance to handle a "ferocious" dog." I have no reason to believe that anyone involved in the incident had a pervert desire to put down a quiet, homely, cuddly dog. And I have no reason to believe that the people who made the complaints to the police did not have good reasons to do so. The person or persons who took the decision to put down the dog must have acted according to his/their best reading of the situation. As for your reference to size, as far as I know, every attack and mauling of persons by dogs has always been done by large breeds.
Vincent Portelli
Sep 6th 2009, 16:10
@ Ch. Vella
Just to clarify matters:
(a) the dog that killed the tiny poodle was not inside the house as, according to a recent published statement by its owner, it had been given away soon after the July incident;
(b) how could anyone blame the poodle owner if she was just taking her dog out for a walk in the area where she lives and was holding it on a leash when her dog was brutally butchered by this runaway pit bull-like dog;
(c) how would any normal person whose tiny pet dog has just been slaughtered react to a stupid offer from the killer dog's owner that he will buy her another dog?;
(d) why would the killer-dog's owner take the poodle's owner to a vet if the dog was already beyond any hope;
(e) the whole neighbourhood can verify that this killer dog and two others were kept in atrociously filthy conditions, were causing great inconvenience by their incessant barking, and were literally terrorising the residents near Sea View Apartments at Xemxija.
Dr. John Zammit
Sep 6th 2009, 15:06
That is nothing compared to my case: In Kalkara a fox terrior attacked and bit my left foot, I promptly told the owner that if his dog will bite me again I will kill his dog. Then I was interrogated at the Bormla Police station by Inspector Jesmond Borg and was taken to the criminal court and am still waiting what my future is going to be as the case is still pending. But there are certain people the police seem to be afraid of!
Edward Zammit
Sep 6th 2009, 14:22
To all those people who are condemning the pitbull breed as if they know everything please first get your facts straights beforehand and ignore the urban myths.
Secondly here is a video that might shock you guys
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vL1trl1FMUw
I hope you enjoy it and learn something in return !
R. Azzopardi
Sep 6th 2009, 14:17
The little bit of faith I had in our police force is disappearing by the second.
@Joe Camilleri
As far as I can understand (according to what I read in the newspapers), the dogs were deemed to be "ferocious" because they were large. I am six foot tall and rather well built. Does that make me ferocious? I'm sure that poor Stone barked her head off when the animal welfare officer tried to get into the balcony. what on earth does one expect? dogs protect their territory instinctively.
G Falzon
Sep 6th 2009, 14:02
Dr Mario Spiteri should be commended for always speaking out loud and clear even when the opposing powers tend to be massive and overpowering. Keep it up. Very few are like him in this island country. These are the real gentlemen and genuine citizens.
D Delia
Sep 6th 2009, 13:24
Its always been like as that far as I remember. When our Police (Thug) Force botch something up they always shift the blame on somebody else even on the victim himself. They NEVER own up to their mistakes and they have a very bad arrogant attitude as this case shows.
G Falzon
Sep 6th 2009, 13:05
Another instance of sheer incompetence from the forces of justice! Shouldn't the police have obtained a court (magistrate's) warrant to enter the residence? More so if the sergeant authorised access to other in an ultra-vires manner!
Carmel Brincat
Sep 6th 2009, 13:01
One should note that there is a law stateng that any stray animal caught has got to be given seven days chance before any decision is taken about its fututure ( re-homed or killed).
This is to give ample time for its owner to claim it back. Any other action taken besides this law is a clear abuse of power as in the case of Mr. Caruana's dogs, who should very rightly take legal action against both the police and the 'animal welfare' department. These two government departments not only broke this specific law by taking the law into their own hands, but also broke the law by breaking in Mr. Caruana's property without his consent.
In my opinion the government should see who was irresponsible enough and take action against the responsible parties. Please note that no one is above the law.
Robert Cassar
Sep 6th 2009, 12:54
What i just read is out of this world?
I am not questioning whether the dogs where aggressive or not, that i cannot tell!
What I cannot really understand is how the decision to put them down was taken before even informing the owner. If the dogs were apprehended and were being monitored why putting them so quickly, there was no rush, they were not a threat any longer
If I were the owner and I knew that one of my dogs was killed for nothing just because some bright spark was in a rush to go home I would sue him and spend every cent I have in order to make him understand how cruel and senseless his decision was.
SHAME, SHAME , SHAME on whoever took that decision...... This should be a civilised country were people talk amongst themselves before they act.. especially where matter like this are in question......
J. Borg
Sep 6th 2009, 12:48
If the police are ready to devise a frame up to try and shed responsibility over the death of the two dogs..........one can only wonder to what extent the police would be ready to go to mitigate any responsibility over violence, abusive detetion and death of a person they are supposed to protect!
Some elements of the police are a grave concern - and it seems that neither the Commissioner nor the Minister is effectively addressing such abuses and arrogance.
adrian aquilina
Sep 6th 2009, 12:48
after having to deal with the police on a few occasions when i needed their help and 4 occasions to do with danger to my cats from stray dogs i would not believe a word the police say.the fact is they have proved useless every time and full of excuses and never take resposibility for anything
Eric Camilleri
Sep 6th 2009, 12:45
All those condemning the Animal Welfare Department seem to be forgetting that these were the very same people who risked their limbs and lives to save the Huskey that had been brutally thrown over the cliffs at Zurrieq. From your armchairs you are condemning these AWD staff who on a daily basis have to face the daily dangers of getting bitten, infected or worst.
Claire Busuttil
Sep 6th 2009, 12:11
SHAME, SHAME, SHAME 100 TIMES SHAME ON YOU WHO DECIDED SUCH A THING WITHOUT ANY TOUGHT AND ANY REASON!!!!!!
SOMEONE HAS TO PAY FOR THIS!! JUSTICE!!!!
AND ANOTHER THING WAS THERE A MANDATE TO BROKE INTO MR.CARUANA`S HOUSE?????
Carl Grech
Sep 6th 2009, 12:00
@Ch Vella.
Pit bulls are not illegal per se. The importation of, is illegal. Breeding from local stock is not illegal.
In addition, the dogs confiscated/put down were not pitbulls. One was only partly pitbull, whiclt the other was an american mastiff, which is a completely different breed altogether.
I agree with you regarding the 'JUNGLE" we live in.
Jungle, btw, is when we allow hearsay, and gossip to overtake the rule of law, which from what I gather, seems to have happened here in the article, and is happenning in the comments. We, as humans are not meant to kill other beings, no matter what breed they belong to, unless there is good reason to do so, based ONLY on the rule of law.
In addition the balcony had been aggressive, then the animal welfare officer who stuck his head over the railing wouldn't be alive now, because he would have had his head ripped off, and/or fallen off the ladder when the dog attacked him.
Seems to me that people are being investigated on the basis of who they know, rather than facts. Non dog people against dog people. Dog people against horse people, etc. What a shower!
charles grech
Sep 6th 2009, 11:56
@ ALL.
By the way I forgot to mention that through this sad episode we now have the formation of a new FEDERATION made up of the "ANIMAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT" AND THE "POLICE FORCE". Its called the GHAQDA TAD-DILETTANTI.
Animal lovers demand the resignation of Minister George Pullicino.
Carl Grech
Sep 6th 2009, 11:45
The problem seems to be that the welfare officers are demonstrating more ignorance of the law and compassion than the people they investigate specifically, issues such as entry into private property, how long confiscated/collected animals must be kept for until put down, the reasons for confiscating/culling the animal/s.
In addition, with even sick/undernourished confiscated animals being put down immediately, I very much doubt that any bloodwork and behavioural tests are being carried out, since results usually take a minimum of 24 hours for blood, and more for behavioural analysis. Documented analysis is crucial evidence in court cases, and hearsay is NOT allowed.
Maltese law allows law enforcement officers (NOT ANIMAL WELFARE OFFICERS) to enter private property, but only when a crime is being or suspected of being committed, which could, very marginally have been applied in this case. However, since the dogs involved had done nothing untoward, and demonstrated no aggression apart from reacting towards intruders in their territory I fail to see why such haste for both entry and culling.
In addition, it would be appropriate/pertinent that welfare department personnel got some training in both the law, and more importantly, animal welfare itself, given the decisions being taken.
charles grech
Sep 6th 2009, 11:27
@ ALL.
HISTORY IS A GREAT TEACHER. AND WE LET HISTORY TO REPEAT ITSELF.
WHAT A SHAM. vide link below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcsfFEOuFHo
Lawrence Bonello
Sep 6th 2009, 11:19
Is it legal for a police sergeant to authorise a third party to enter private premises without the owner's (or the court's) authorisation?
And since when is the Head of a government department taking orders from a police sergeant?
Maye some legal beagle can illuminate us!
Ch Vella
Sep 6th 2009, 11:18
@ Mr. Harold Brincat
The dog that killed the tiny poodle was inside the home when Mr Marston went for the dog in the balcony if it’s such a dangerous dog how come it didn’t attack Mr. Marston when he broke in from the balcony? Re the poodle the owner is to blame if she took her dog near a mixed breed from the bull mastiff family.
Looks like the only danger was the poodle owner: (I took her to a vet and offered to buy her another dog, but she kept calling me ‘cruel’ and said she would pay me back. I am told she said she wanted to teach me a lesson,” said Mr Caruana) this is from the above link.
And the lesson in my opinion was given and if this is true the only frame up is on the dog’s owner. It was pure cruelty.
Joseph Camilleri
Sep 6th 2009, 11:10
What a strange country we live in! Instead of being officially commended for doing their duty and putting down two ferocious and dangerous dogs at the risk to their own safety, the Animal Welfare Unit personnel and the Police seem to be afraid of being found in the wrong. No wonder officials are generally reluctant to take the initiative to protect the citizen. Perhaps next time, other officials will turn a blind eye and wait until these dogs maul some person before taking action. It seems that the rights of animals have priority over the rights of human beings.
victor pulis
Sep 6th 2009, 11:04
And yet another polemic. Can't we do anything on this piece of rock which doesn't raise a controversy? It seems to me that the matter was handled in the most amateurish way by the police. From the look of things they just wanted to get the job over and done with and what better way than to get rid of the dogs? Somehow I believe Dr Spiteri's version.
Joseph Schembri
Sep 6th 2009, 10:51
If this is indeed a frame up it is not the first by the police. I know Dr. Mario Spiteri as a dedicated and respectable man but then again I cannot understand why he obeyed the police order to kill the dogs.
Apart from that entry into private property by the police or anyone else without a court order and when there is no emergency is illegal. I agree that the owner should take action against the persons who killed his dogs but he should also take legal action against the people who invaded his private property or gave the illegal order to do so.
One often hears of 'cowboys' on our roads but I believe that there are far more dangerous cowboys as this story highlights.
Why can't a good lawyer or team of lawyers specialised in human rights and abuses by those in authority take this case and make a show of these abusers?
Lawrence Cutajar
Sep 6th 2009, 10:36
What the report failed to mention is that the dogs were Pitbulls. As far as I know these are illegal and very dangerous to other persons. CH Vella is right by saying that this is the jungle we're living in because these last few weeks I have heard of people keeping wild serpeants, tigers, poisonous spiders, pitbulls and other dangerous animals. The Animal Welfare department is the authority in charge to control these animals and they should take reponsability without any fear or excuses. The fact that they managed to apprehend these ferocious dogs is very positive. The Times also failed to mention that the residents of the whole street at Il-Fekruna area, Xemxija said that they were terified even to get out of there houses because of these dogs roaming the streets and when they knew that a few weeks earlier one of these dogs had brutally killed a small poodle. From the article it seems that mr caruana is not responsible enough to take care of animals and theefore action against him is to be taken.
Ch Vella
Sep 6th 2009, 10:02
Another example of the JUNGLE we’r living in and these two dogs are the innocent victims. Is it legal for police entering privet property without the owner being there and elevate the dogs? If they broke in the property without the owner its normal the dogs turned aggressive for me even if their aggressiveness was shown (The dog came towards them but then turned back). And re the one in the balcony if it was an aggressive dog it would have jumped I’v heard stories of aggressive dogs.
Harold Brincat
Sep 6th 2009, 09:53
And so it seems that the fierce dog which, without any provocation, mutilated and killed a tiny poodle being held on a leash on the morning of July, 13 is still alive and kicking. It was this dog which should have been immediately put down but it was not due to its owner failing to reply to notices by the animal welfare department and the police.and, more importantly, due to the procrastination and lack of action by these same authorities.