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!!!

it is an offence for them to be out of control, and if a person is injured while they are out of control it is aggravated offence.

And the dog injured was a service dog. They will throw the book at the owner of this dog if/when they get him.

i hope they do.

can he not get charged for leaving her? i dont know how legally that would stand, but him leaving them there could have left the dog dead and the woman in serious danger without the help of her dog. also, i think leaving the dog to die should be seen as animal cruelty. JMO.

Im sorry which dog was left to die?

Someone asked a question earlier in this thread as what we we would do in the same situation as this guy. Well, for one, I would have secured my dog and helped the other dog and the blind woman

the next thing I would have done is take my dog to the vet and have it put to sleep. I'm sorry but there is no place in this world for dangerous dogs

i

i hope my post has made sense, im tired and dont feel well, so think i may have rambled a bit

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

(1) If a dog is dangerously out of control in a public place—
(a) the owner; and
(b) if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog,
is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person, an aggravated offence, under this subsection.
(2) In proceedings for an offence under subsection (1) above against a person who is the owner of a dog but was not at the material time in charge of it, it shall be a defence for the accused to prove that the dog was at the material time in the charge of a person whom he reasonably believed to be a fit and proper person to be in charge of it.
(3) If the owner or, if different, the person for the time being in charge of a dog allows it to enter a place which is not a public place but where it is not permitted to be and while it is there—
(a) it injures any person; or
(b) there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will do so,
he is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog injures any person, an aggravated offence, under this subsection.
(4) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) or (3) above other than an aggravated offence is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both; and a person guilty of an aggravated offence under either of those subsections is liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both;
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or a fine or both.
(5) It is hereby declared for the avoidance of doubt that an order under section 2 of the [1871 c. 56.] Dogs Act 1871 (order on complaint that dog is dangerous and not kept under proper control)—
(a) may be made whether or not the dog is shown to have injured any person; and
(b) may specify the measures to be taken for keeping the dog under proper control, whether by muzzling, keeping on a lead, excluding it from specified places or otherwise.
(6) If it appears to a court on a complaint under section 2 of the said Act of 1871 that the dog to which the complaint relates is a male and would be less dangerous if neutered the court may under that section make an order requiring it to be neutered.
(7) The reference in section 1(3) of the [1989 c. 30.] Dangerous Dogs Act 1989 (penalties) to failing to comply with an order under section 2 of the said Act of 1871 to keep a dog under proper control shall include a reference to failing to comply with any other order made under that section; but no order shall be made under that section by virtue of subsection (6) above where the matters complained of arose before the coming into force of that subsection.