maybe he is scared his dog will be PTS, and i would too, but the his dog attacked another! whether it was an accident or not, if he knew the dog was DA (which it looks like he did) he should have made sure the dog couldnt do what he did. and letting the lead go was total stupidity, and he should never have done it. he needs to face up to what he did, no matter what the consequence is. at the end of the day, it was his fault.

sorry.

exactly.

£200 reward being offered to catch this man:
http://www.disabilityclaims.org.uk/news.html

19th November 2009 - £200 Guide Dog Attack Reward
DCM is offering at least a £200 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of a dog owner who allowed his unleashed dog to attack a Guide Dog in Cricklewood Station, North-West London on Monday 16th November 2009 at 13:30. DCM has been contacted by our customers collecting donations for the reward. DCM will match £ for £ any donations received for this reward. In the event that the reward is not claimed, all monies will be paid to The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association towards the care of injured Guide Dogs. If you would like to make a donation, however small, please visit our fee's page here.
IF YOU HAVE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS ATTACK PLEASE CALL CRIMESTOPPERS ANONYMOUSLY ON 0800 555 111 OR THE BRITISH TRANSPORT POLICE ON 0800 40 50 40.

i really hope they catch him, and hopefully this will get people to help (they should do it anyway, but how people are these days money always works ). surely someone must recognise either him, or the dog!

In the event of him being caught, what is he going to be arrested and charged with????

can he not get charged under the dangerous dogs act?

I dont know, thats why I ask, because with the footage on tape, you can clearly see the man did not set his dog onto another, it was a careless accident,

So unless the dog is siezed as a "type" under illegal dogs, and he is charged with owning a illegal dog, I cant see how he can be charged with anything else.

If your dog was attacked by another, it would be seen as a dog on dog "fight" by the police, so how can this be different.

I am not supporting this bloke, so dont think I am , so its just interesting why this situation (apart from the obvious) would and can be classed any differently than any other dog attack/fight.

i dont really know either but i would of thought he could get charged for not having his dog under control, even though it was an accident... i dont know though...

i am interested to know though, hopefully someone who does know will tell us soon

As far as I am aware, that clause is for dog on human, not dog on dog!!!

Will be interesting to see where it leads!!!

DDA Section 3 with all the jackboots.... almost a classic case with the CCTV footage.