Yeah - we are at this stage with Ben. He is fine now on the whole, but in close quarters - say on the canal towpath - he will lunge aggressively at some dogs, by no means all. We are still left with the hatred of male black labs, which we cannot seem to cure. But as you say these lunges are very lack lustre, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. It looks and sounds nasty, but he does not and will not bite now or pin - he can't in any case, because my husband has him firmly on the harness lead, but he still goes through somewhat lack lustre motions just to show the other dog how 'ard he is!! He is a git is Ben, and I doubt we will see much improvement over what we have, but we will never give up trying.

The only man in the pic who was the owner is the guy without a hat, the guys pictured with hats on were golfers who came through from the golf course when they heard the cavvi owner screaming, and helped to pull the dogs off, also when he is seen behind the owner and dog its because he makes the guy go towards the cavvi owner so she can get a picture of him (for streetmutt) xx

No, that is not the case, please see "The Law" in my post.

A court could decide that your dog is dangerously out of control if:

it injures someone’s animal
the owner of the animal thinks they could be injured if they tried to stop your dog attacking their animal.
Penalties
You can be fined up to £5,000 and/or sent to prison for up to 6 months if your dog is out of control. You may also not be allowed to own a dog in the future.

Interesting stuff - it'll be a story to watch. I agree with what has been said above that in reality I doubt a lot will happen to him - but we might all be pleasantly surprised.

I wonder what injuries the dog suffered - does anybody know? He obviously reuqired veterinary treatment so the vet's testimony will be vital.

I think the fact that she identified him with a facial picture may sadly be her legal downfall.

Interestingly in the link it also says that farmers can shoot dogs that worry livestock - I have done quite a lot of research on this and I'm pretty much 99.9999% certain that farmers cannot just shoot dogs that are "worrying" livestock with impunity. There are a number of steps that they have to take before shooting dead a dog. Anyway - that's a whole new thread!

Home Office - the current legal situation regarding privacy.

"There is no legal restriction on photography in public places, and there is no presumption of privacy for individuals in a public place.

It is for the Chief Constable to ensure that Officers and Police Community Support Officers are acting appropriately with regards to photography in public places, and any queries regarding this should be addressed to the Chief Constable.

However decisions may be made locally to restrict photography, for example to protect children. Any questions on such local decisions should also be addressed to the force concerned."

If you're on a public right of way - such as a public pavement, footpath or public highway - you're free to take photographs for personal and commercial use so long as you're not causing an obstruction to other users or falling foul of anti-Terrorism laws or even the Official Secrets Act (frankly, this one is unlikely).

Sorry - just one other thought, if you can be prosecuted and your dog destroyed if considered "dangerously out of control" and injures another animal - aren't we all at risk? All dogs have punch-ups from time to time. I suspect to prove the dog was dangerously out of control and injured your dog as a result is extremely difficult certainly if they were both off-lead. Although I understand he has had previous accusations levelled at him.

No - I meant in terms of a legal prosecution, she has "identified" him as the perpetrator. You're right in the general sense that we have no legal right to our image.

Yes, agreed, we are all at risk.

I guess if it ever came to court it would be down to what is considered reasonable.

If your dog is one of the fighting breeds, or is large and has a guarding or aggressive instinct, etc and you leave it running free to attack another dog, (particularly a much smaller one) then it could be said that there was an expectation on your part that your dog might fight and you did not take reasonable precautions. In this case, as you say, he has some previous so that might go against him as regards a decision to prosecute.

I guess we just have to manage our dogs to the best of our ability and avoid getting into these situations.

Definitely not criticising owner for her actions, but just commenting it would be the last thing on my mind, and who knows what internal injuries the poor fella could have sustained after the 25min attack? I just know it it happened to mine they would be scared and in pain and I would rather get that sorted first. But I agree she was brave to confront them and if it stops it happening again then that is a good thing. As I've said before we all act differently and also in those situations might act different to what we think we would.

"No - I meant in terms of a legal prosecution, she has "identified" him as the perpetrator. You're right in the general sense that we have no legal right to our image."

Well i am not sure how different that is to identifying him in a police line up. I mean, the photo clearly shows him bending over the dogs while they are fighting. The police often use images captured by CCTV to bring perpetrators to justice so cant think why this is any different.
Remember the lady who stuffed a cat in the rubbish bin and was caught on CCTV?