 |
Although there is a constant stream of incidents, only the
more horrific, and therefore newsworthy ones, are reported.
Journalists and columnists excel themselves in lurid phraseology.
Follow-up reports often differ as to the details, but by then
public interest is already waning. By the time legal proceedings,
if any, are under way, the press has moved on to other things.
The plight of the victim is no longer of public concern. By
then, also, the dog may well have been destroyed. For most
readers, the story has ended. For the dog owner, however,
it can take on a new life. The dead dog is now a 'much loved
pet', and the owner becomes the injured party. Friends rally
round to give counsel and support. If the destruction order
has not been put into effect, then resort may be had to one
of a number of organisations whose purpose is to mount appeals
against destruction orders.
What had so far been a fairly ordinary matter, becomes something
of a cause célèbre, with nationally-known
solicitors and 'animal behaviourists' making a case for the
dog. Usually the case is won. Usually also, but not always,
token sympathy is expressed for the victim, who is never represented
by such expertise. Injured and traumatised, what would be
the point?
|
