Dog-bite victim receives hate mail
By Bill Scanlon, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published December 6, 2007 at 12:30 a.m.
Updated December 6, 2007 at 3:43 p.m.
Photo by George Kochaniec Jr. © The Rocky
Laura Hagan visits her dog Rolo at a Golden shelter.
The woman bitten by a German shepherd that is scheduled to be euthanized has received hate mail from dog lovers and is moving out of her Arvada neighborhood, her lawyer said today.
"We shouldn't forget that she is the victim," attorney Howard Zucker said of his client, 33-year-old Kathy Hardin.
Hardin, who was bitten by Rolo the German shepherd on July 1, is still receiving in physical therapy for back pain, a result of the bite and of her twisting quickly to keep the dog away from her 14-month-old baby, Zucker said.
Rolo's owner, Laura Hagan, maintains that Rolo never broke the skin, and only attacked Hardin because she screamed loudly when she saw the dog nearing the baby.
A judge ruled that Rolo is a dangerous dog and that he should be put down. Hagan appealed and is awaiting a decision. Meanwhile, Rolo has been kept at an animal shelter the past four months.
Dog lovers rallied around Rolo after Hagan began picketing outside the Jefferson County Government Center in Golden to try to save her dog.
But there are two sides, Zucker said.
Hardin wasn't the one to make the decision that Rolo should be destroyed, he said. "That was up to the city attorney and the judge."
Hate mail started arriving as more and more news outlets picked up the story, he said. Eventually, Hardin and her family decided to move, a direct result of the dog-bite incident.
Today, he showed a reporter a picture of Hardin with a large black-and-blue bruise. He noted that Animal Management ordered Rolo quarantined for two weeks, something, he said, that wouldn't have been done if the bite hadn't broken the skin.
Rolo's owner said that Hardin didn't show up for the first court appearance, but only wanted money for medical bills.
On Aug. 8, the city of Arvada dismissed a charge of having a dog at-large, in return for Hagan pleading guilty to having a dangerous animal and agreeing to put up a six-foot wooden fence, attend a pet-ownership class and send Rolo to obedience training.
When Hardin showed up for a later court appearance in the case, she was accompanied by seven neighbors who supported her contention that Rolo was a dangerous dog.
Animal Management had not asked that Rolo be put down, nor had the City Attorney's Office.
Neighbor Sharon England, who lives across the alley from Hagan in Old Towne Arvada, said Rolo is so aggressive that her husband feared that if the dog managed to knock down the fence, it would go after him.
She said the dog had been outside the fence, free, several times.
"The feeling in the neighborhood is that many people feel unsafe," England testified. "I've heard from numerous people that they're afraid to walk down not just your street but 57th as well."
Neighbor Carolyn Thomas said Hagan has to strain with all her might to keep Rolo at bay when he sees a cat, which makes her worry what would happen if Rolo got loose and his instincts trumped his obedience training.
Danelle Sandoval, another neighbor, said, "We have to ask ourselves very, very carefully if one of the children in this neighborhood has to die to save a dog."
Hardin, who also owns a dog, said two of Hagan's dogs charged her and the baby, although only Rolo bit her. If she hadn't quickly picked up her baby, "I'm absolutely certain with every bone in my body that he would have been mauled to death."
She said she was also concerned that Rolo underwent a surgical procedure to soften his bark which, she says, only makes it more difficult to know when he is nearing.
Hagan told the judge that she has nephews and nieces over to the house often, and that they've never been hurt by the dog. She said Rolo had never bitten anyone until the incident with Hardin.
Arvada Municipal Judge George W. Boyle ruled that Rolo is a clear and present danger to the neighborhood and should be euthanized. "Certainly, it is more important to protect the neighborhood than it is to protect the animal."
Hagan shouted, "Oh no. It's my baby, it's my child."
Since then, Hagan has won permission to visit her dog a short time each day, and has started a Web site, rolodog.com, at which she appeals for help in saving Rolo and urges dog owners to immediately get a lawyer if they get in to a situation like hers.
A final decision on Rolo's fate is expected by Tuesday.
In the meantime, Hagan is hoping many people turn out for two rallies this weekend to protest the judge's order.
"We want to be in a place where a lot of people are going to show up and bring dogs," she said.
The rallies are from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. Saturday and Sunday at the corner of 13th and Washington streets in Golden.
Hagan said she's been getting a good response on her Web site, rolodog.com, which she created to tell the public about her case. So far, she said 465 people have signed her online petition protesting the punishment.
Rocky staff writer Tillie Fong contributed to this report.
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
December 6, 2007
4:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
cdog writes:
Any dog can be a biter in a bad moment - when they feel threatened or scared. The fact that this is a first offense and the owner took measures to make sure it does not happen again should have been taken into account.
I read the transcript of the trial. One of the neighbor witnesses actually said she only has heard the dog bark ("walked in front of the house and heard the dog bark")- didn't witness any aggressive activity, yet she joined in the chorus to have the dog euthanized. Why did the judge accept this ridiculous testimony? Why didn't he ask more about the statement of the paramedics, that the bite didn't break the skin? Why did he disregard the advice of the animal control officer and the city lawyer, neither of which recommended that the dog be put down?
Rolo deserves a second chance.
December 6, 2007
10:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
js writes:
I can't imagine how difficult it would be to be the owner, but you can't have a dog that bites (breaking the skin or not) a person walking down the street.
December 6, 2007
2:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Oh_Wise_One writes:
Some parents get hysterical when they perceive a danger to their kiddies. Case in point- "Danelle Sandoval, another neighbor, said, "We have to ask ourselves very, very carefully if one of the children in this neighborhood has to die to save a dog.""
That statement is ridiculous, meant only to arouse emotion which is a typical tactic of the Leftwing.
Danelle predicts Rolo will kill a child. I predict Danelle will drown at age 40 on a rafting trip down the river. Equally ridiculous as her statement about Rolo.
Most dogs will want to chase cats, even ones from training. I was bit by a dog in a dog training class. It happens, get over it.
December 6, 2007
2:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Scott writes:
Keep in mind that Zucker is being paid to say what it is excreting. It's a lawyer, what would you expect!? Example, Zucker did not point out that animal control will also quarantined an animal if there is a question regarding rabies. Remember, Zucker is being paid to only say that animal control will quarantine an animal if it breaks the skin.
A previous RMN article, "Owner goes all out to save dog", states that the only reason that this went before a robed liar (judge) is that Hagan and a bunch of the neighbors signed a complaint? But Zucker didn't say that because it is being paid NOT to say that fact.
Question: How can you tell when a lawyer is about to lie?
Answer: Its lips start to move.
Scott
December 6, 2007
2:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
benn writes:
OWO drags his ignorance to the story comments
December 6, 2007
3:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Spencer writes:
OWO decides to make it a left or right issue. What a tool.
December 6, 2007
3:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Starling writes:
Obviously there's nothing exciting happening in that neighorhood and residents are getting a kick out of lynching...an animal.
Only in America, right?
December 6, 2007
3:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
joggle writes:
I think this incident is entirely the fault of Rolo's owner. She should not treat a large, potentially dangerous, dog as a human baby/child. These are excellent, very intelligent dogs that can be taught to behave very well. However, just babying them all the time encourages them to run amock leading to situations like this. If a parent sees a large dog they don't own coming close to their baby they are often going to freak out. If 7 other neighbors felt similarly (some of which were dog owners no less) I strongly suspect how well Rolo had ever been trained. To be clear, I'm not blaming Rolo for this since he would never had done this in the first place if he had been owned by a responsible person who trains their dog or pays to have their dog trained. They are NOT human children and should not be treated as such.
This is really a sad story to me because German shepherds are one of my favorite breeds and I have particular sympathy for them, especially when they're owned by a clueless owner.
December 6, 2007
3:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
spikagirl writes:
Unless they start allowing (and mandating) that children be leashed, or at least kept in the yard, then dogs should not be criminalized for others behavior.... I see many more obnoxious, belligerent, and disorderly children (who on occasion hurt others as well as property) than I do dogs in the average park, store, bank and restaurant... Ugggg..
December 6, 2007
4:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Alive writes:
Does that mean people who raise gang banger offspring can be punished for what their little homies do? Now that would be justice!
December 6, 2007
4:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Golden writes:
I own a GSD now, the fifth of my lifetime. If the dog was doing something because it percieved danger, it obviously has a problem with threat identification. If the dog was going over to sniff the baby causing the mother to go nuts with screaming and yelling, then the dog has a problem with threat identification.
Dogs should only attack when they are protecting themselves or their owner. GSD are so popular because they excell at this. They are loyal, strong, obedient and smart.
The dog should be put down. If it were my dog, I'd shoot her myself that very day. A dog that attacks unwarrentedly is of no use to anyone. Get another GSD, there are plenty out there.
December 6, 2007
4:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
joggle writes:
Yes, the owner is irresponsible. We are talking about one of the best breeds available and one of the most intelligent dogs around. They are easily trained and very obedient when you behave towards them appropriately. Just the fact that he was debarked gives a clue to his lack of training. It is inconceivable to me that a trained German shepherd would not heel or obey voice commands.
Try watching the Dog Whisperer sometime. You'll see that almost every instance of dog misbehavior is a direct result to how they had been treated by their owners. They are usually pampered and not treated any differently than a spoiled human kid. Owners need to realize that their pets are dogs and should be treated as dogs. This won't make their pets sad, but the reverse. It will promote a healthier relationship between the owner and dog and also prevent the dog from getting various mental disorders (such as depression, etc.).
While I love German Shepherds, it's important to keep in mind that they are certainly dangerous, even more so than a pit bull I would think if trained to fight. In Europe, German shepherds are thought of in much the same way as pit bulls here. But that is only because, like here with pit bulls, their aggression is encouraged by their owners.
December 6, 2007
4:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
Alive writes:
I think humans are much more dangerous than dogs. They don't just bite, they destroy other humans lives. THAT really matters.
December 6, 2007
4:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
joggle writes:
To those that keeping comparing dogs to children: dogs aren't kids. Believe it or not, dogs are much easier to train to behave than a kid. Also, you are directly, legally responsible for the actions of your pets (and to an extent your kids depending on their age). If you live in the country and your dog maims or kills someone else's goat, the dog is put down by the owner and compensation is given to the owner of the goat (this actually happened to my uncle's dog). There's no hard feelings, that's just the way it is. If you can't control your dog then the dog may need to be put down at some point and you, the owner, should reflect on what went wrong and correct YOUR behavior so it doesn't happen again.
December 6, 2007
4:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
It's the dog owner's fault, pure and simple. No one should have to contend with the aggression of someone else's pet, if they are not even on the pet owner's property. Now the owner wants to save the dog. Control the dog properly in the first place.
December 6, 2007
4:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
Jim writes:
I thought up a response to this article but Joggle beat me to it and said it better. I've owned dogs all my life. Presently have a Westie and an Aussie. Both have obedience training, fenced yard, tags and are not off lead in a populated area. They respond to voice commands most of the time. Ought to be a better way than to kill a misguided animal.
"posted by joggle on December 6, 2007 at 3:44 p.m. I think this incident is entirely the fault of Rolo's owner. She should not treat a large, potentially dangerous, dog as a human baby/child. These are excellent, very intelligent dogs that can be taught to behave very well. However, just babying them all the time encourages them to run amock leading to situations like this. If a parent sees a large dog they don't own coming close to their baby they are often going to freak out. If 7 other neighbors felt similarly (some of which were dog owners no less) I strongly suspect how well Rolo had ever been trained. To be clear, I'm not blaming Rolo for this since he would never had done this in the first place if he had been owned by a responsible person who trains their dog or pays to have their dog trained. They are NOT human children and should not be treated as such.
This is really a sad story to me because German shepherds are one of my favorite breeds and I have particular sympathy for them, especially when they're owned by a clueless owner."
December 6, 2007
4:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
schwarzengel writes:
The judge should punish the owner for NOT controlling the animal so why is the judge allowing the hippie to roam and protest along the highway in Jefferson county? Secondly, why are so called SMART people sending hate mail to the victim when the hate mail should be directed to the judge for ordering the execution of the animal? The victim is just that she was ATTACKED by an animal which wasn't CONTROLLED by the ANIMAL'S owner who could have PREVENTED the UNPROVOKED attack. Its that simple people and by sending hate mail to the victim what is that proving? the victim can't stop the execution of the animal. think before you act.
December 6, 2007
5:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
LFC writes:
Oh my Gosh
I was in a similar situation as this lady. My dog didn't even bite anyone, was just around the dog that did. They wanted to keep him for months, it was ridiculous! The unprofessionalism of the Denver Animal Control is sad. They sad my dog was the ring leader, it was hard not to laugh at them.
Anyway back to this story. The lady should be fined big time. I don't think $500 or more is too much if your dog bites someone. If you can't control him, it is your fault. I don't think for a first offense of a bite a dog should be put down by the city. If it kills/mauls someone absolutely. If the neighbors are afraid of that dog.....good. Who cares about that? It will keep criminals from breaking into her house. You don't have to pet the dog or feed it, stay away from him if you are afraid.
If a dog goes after my kid, he dies or gets mauled by me by any rock, foot, weapon I can find at that time. Just that simple. I have two Aussies. I am a dog lover. Get over it Denver and give this lady her dog back, and get off the lady who got attacked. It is not her fault if the dog is put down.
December 6, 2007
5:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Alive writes:
One of my neighbors MS13 larve got out of it's yard the other night. It went on a rampage spray painting peoples garage doors and selling drugs to children. It assalted a complete stranger to the point of sending him to the hospital. The police caught it but soon remanded it to the custody of it's owner. People around the neighborhood are afraid it will get out again because it's "parent" does not watch or train it properly. Should it be put down?
December 6, 2007
5:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
coley2680 writes:
A dog is only as smart as his owner trains him to be. And it is unfortunate that Rolo has to be put down, but would you rather wait until he malls a small child to justify him being euthenized. C'Mon, if this were a pitt bull, there would be no question!
December 6, 2007
5:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
joggle writes:
Hate mail shouldn't be mailed to anyone under any circumstance. What does that ever accomplish? You get off feeling avenged somehow by terrifying some complete stranger while you hide in cowardice behind your anonymity. Props to you (not).
The judge is carrying out the law, which is, you know, his job. Laws like this have been on the books for ages. Now if he is given evidence to contradict the victim and 7 other witnesses and is able to stay the execution, then great. If not, then hopefully the owner will reflect on this and raise a better-trained dog next time.
December 6, 2007
5:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Finn writes:
Breath of common sense by LFC? What are you talking about? "A bite is okay. Let's wait until the dog kills or mauls someone, and then by all means put it down if you must." Ridiculous!
Can we please stop comparing children to animals. Animals do not have rights. They live in a human society. Next we'll be calling for all dogs to vote.
December 6, 2007
5:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
darla.geyer writes:
Good luck to you both. I went to the website, and I was offended and mostly discouraged at first because I thought I would have to pay money to sign a petition; however, I just received an email that said they took it without a payment. Let's not make this about money, folks.
I too had a GSD for many years, and I would have one again. I know they are loyal and very obedient, and mine was incredible around children. I used to take him to a park in Lakewood so he could run (off leash too, he was that good). I do not feel this dog should be put down based upon no priors, a Judge's decision, and the neighbors' comments. While I, too, have a little baby girl, I know how much an animal can become a part of your family, and I sympathize with the victim because as a mother, you will do whatever it takes to protect your child.
Give this woman a break, she tried very hard to make it up to the victim - she went to court, she paid restitution, she has done whatever she can to make it "right" (except for yelling in front of her house one early morning). (Her bad.)
It seems to me that the owner has taken steps to alleviate the "escape" problem with her fence, paid restitution, enrolled the dog in a class, etc.
December 6, 2007
5:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
Alive writes:
No, we can't stop comparing children to animals. That is, as long as some people continue to raise theirs as such. (Frustratin' ain't it?)
December 6, 2007
5:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
Finn writes:
I think people should stop raising their animals as children. (Pathetic ain't it?)
December 6, 2007
5:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
joggle writes:
I feel sorry for the woman too, but where does the blame belong? Either a) the dog, b) the owner, c) the victim or none of the above (some accident that is blameless). I haven't heard anyone try to place the blame anywhere other than ones who agree with me that the owner was at fault. She is ultimately (and rightly) held accountable for the actions of her pet. She did everything required by the judge to keep her dog and I do feel that the dog may not need to be euthanized (although I don't have access to all of the facts). However, she should have trained the dog long ago and is now paying the price for her ignorance/whatever you want to call it.
To Alive: No, these kids aren't being raised as animals (or at least not as pets). A properly trained pet is raised with discipline and aren't allowed to do whatever they want. These kids are probably either being neglected or being raised in much the same way as Rolo probably was: they get away with anything for as long as they can because the don't know where boundaries lie and have no respect for any authority because, to them, there is no authority figure other than themselves.
December 6, 2007
5:59 p.m.
Suggest removal
Alive writes:
But Finn, who really cares what you think? By the way, animals do have rights. Good luck with that ego issue.
December 6, 2007
6:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
4sammie4 writes:
Whether people raise their pets as children is not the issue here - that is their business. Animals have rights - who else is going to speak up for them but their owners. Do you remember recent news stories of the dog left on the railroad tracks to die by their owner. Or the dog that was not fed and almost starved to death because the owner "forgot" to feed her dogs. There are some horrible pet owners out there. This woman is trying everything in her power to save her dog. Trying to meet every request of the court. I truly believe Rolo should be given a second chance! The penalty issued by this judge is too severe.
I
December 6, 2007
6:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
curious writes:
RememberThis- "buncha crazy whackos who want a dog murdered for nothing"...
Good grief! Please re-evaluate the facts. Clearly the judge didn't agree that Rolo did "nothing".
December 6, 2007
6:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
jlw25 writes:
Moved to Denver just over 5 years ago, and am still amazed by the dog-child cult that permeates this city. Armchair analysis of dog psyche, dog-rights, not-the-dog-but-the-owner, first offense exemptions, etc. Dogs are not people.
The dog is obviously an issue, and has been for some time. Several neighbors share the same opinion. The dog has been roaming around several times, it had a bark procedure - surely prompted by prior complaints. The animal then attacked a woman holding a child after all of this history. Do some people really think that it is the "severity" of an attack, or the "provocative response" of a victim that somehow mitigates the incident - and history - and thereby pardons the animal? Maybe we should offer Rolo a plea deal.
Shoot the dog. Sue the hell out of the owner. She is fostering harassment and has driven someone out of their home.
December 6, 2007
6:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
LFC writes:
Finn
Please, if you are going to quote get it right. It is not okay if a dog bites someone, and that is why I say fine the owner on the first offense. If it bites again, put it down. If it mauls or kills someone put it down. If I am there when it is happening to me or my child, then I will put it down.
Slow your reading down there Sparky.
December 6, 2007
8 p.m.
Suggest removal
Jim writes:
Rolo has a home with a family who knows dogs and has the space for a large dog. The link is to to the classifieds in a Montana paper. Rolo would be adopted quickly.
http://www.mtstandard.com/admarket/an...
December 6, 2007
8:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
TW writes:
Finn has a good idea. Maybe dogs should vote, they couldn't possibly do worse than electing a joke like George Bush.
December 7, 2007
5:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
cmrobe40 writes:
A few years ago, I was approached by a large dog loose in our neighborhood while with my then 5 year old daughter. It stance was aggressive (hackles raised, ears back), I put my child behind me and managed to drive it off by picking up a rock and shouting at it, maybe not the best solution but I was in panic mode. After, I was not mad at the dog, but if the owner had been there we would have had an entirely different problem. No one should have to fear walking the streets where they live, hoping some irresponsible HUMAN will not put them or their children in danger by allowing a poorly trained, dangerous animal loose on the streets. What would you apologists be saying if the owner let, say, a tiger roam?
December 7, 2007
6:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
Oh_Wise_One writes:
Benn and Spencer, it is a left or right issue. The left has whined and complained avoiding personal responsibility for so long now, the climate has been poisoned. Call it Liberal Warming and it must be stopped.
December 7, 2007
7:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
teacher5000 writes:
My first reaction to this story was that the dog should be put down. The more I read the more second thoughts I have. This is not the dogs fault it is the owners fault!
Last summer I was rollerblading down by Cherry Creek and a German Shepard puppy ran up to me and bit me in the leg. He was being playful, not aggressive, but it still hurt. The owner sat there smiling, I assume he thought his puppy was playing. I yelled at the owner and went on my way (no real harm done). But the fact is that dog should have been on a leash and never should have been allowed to run up to me like that! It is the owners repsonisbility to teach the dog right from wrong!
Multiple neighbors have complained about this dog running the neigborhood! This owner clearly does not have this dog trained. Big dogs are a big responsiblity, they need a lot of time and proper security (a fence) this women clearly did not take the proper steps to make sure her dog was contained! I chose to get a small dog, and a six foot fence. Becasue I do not have the time it takes to properly train a large dog. This women should do the same.
Saying this women caused by her screaming is ridiculus. How is she supposed to react when she is carrying her baby down the street and a large dog runs up to her? How is she supposed to know if this dog is nice or mean?
Rolo should get a second chance, with a responsible owner!
As for the people comparing adults to kids. I agree it is ridiculus how some people let their kids act! They should not have excuses made for them and neither should this owner. And, yes parents can be held legally responsible for the actions of their minor children, if it can be proven that their neglect contributed to the kid harming someone or their property.
Get Rolo into a GOOD home!