Official Statement From Lennox’s Family

We apologise for the silence as we know our many friends and supporters around the world have been desperate for news but until we had further talks with our legal team we had nothing new to share. We needed to explore all possible options before we issued another statement as we did not wish to give those that have campaigned so tirelessly any false hope or for anything to be taken out of context as has happened in the past.

Whilst there may well be errors in the Judge’s ruling from a point of law this has little bearing on whether we can or should progress by taking the case to a higher court. The ruling is based on the Judge’s decision that he deems Lennox to be unsafe despite evidence given by those qualified to assess and understand dog behaviour that contradicts the testimony of the Prosecution that was presented in court. This has given us little room for manoeuvre.

Our concern and priority has always been the welfare of our beloved boy. We have fought to have Len returned to our family from the moment he was seized but we have been advised that the legal fight is at an end. We are obviously distraught but have to consider the impact that any future lengthy legal battle would have on Len if we chose to go against the advice that we have been given. We cannot subject him to any more as there are no grounds for a further appeal and we do not wish to prolong his suffering any longer by engaging in a battle that we simply cannot win.

We have attempted to write this statement many, many times but have struggled to put in writing that the fight to spare Lennox’s life may well be over. It has been almost impossible for us to accept that we have to admit defeat. We always believed that there was some hope and that justice would prevail. We were wrong. There have been many dark days for us since Len was taken and we want you all to know that it is your support and kindness that kept us going through the blackest times.

This is all we can share with you at the moment and we are finding it hard to come to terms with the fact that there is nothing more that we can do from a legal point of view and that Lennox may well be killed. We have one last hope that Belfast City Council will allow Lennox to be rehomed in the USA. The offer is there but we have no say in whether this offer will be accepted. We have never refused to rehome Lennox. That decision was taken out of our hands from the moment Len took his final walk with us from our house to the Dog Wardens van.
If the offer is turned down we will fight for our right to say goodbye. We cannot bear the thought that Lennox will die without being reminded of the hearts and hands that love him.

Thank you.

America’s Huffington Post Feature Lennox Article

America’s largest news website the Huffington Post today published Lennox’s story. The article by columnist Joan Smith reads as follows:

An Outrage In Belfast:
The Sad Case Of Lennox, The Dog.

The Huffington Post LogoThose of us living in what we consider free societies often feel secure that if we comply by laws, pay our taxes, and maintain other civic duties we should not live in fear of government officials entering our homes and disrupting our families.

Not so in Belfast, Northern Ireland, where a tragic situation that is nothing short of Orwellian has played out for over two years. Lennox, a Labrador/American Bulldog mix, was seized from the Barnes family under the U.K.’s “Dangerous Dogs Act” (DDA) and sentenced to death due simply to his physical measurements. Under the DDA, if a dog’s measurements are in line with their standard for “pit bull types”, the dog can be seized without warrant and sentenced to death (a recent amendment stipulates the that the dog must also be proven dangerous). The DDA assumption that physical traits dictate a dog’s behavioral tendencies is contradicted by well known dog experts and virtually every major veterinary, animal control, and emergency medical associations worldwide – all of whom have spoken out against these laws .

It’s hard to image a more unlikely target for the law than the Barnes family. Lennox is an American Bulldog/Labrador mix who had never been reported for any act of aggression, and in fact had never exhibited a single sign of misbehavior. He is not only a family pet, but has served as a therapy dog and soulmate for a disabled girl, Brook Barnes, who is now 13. Lennox’s family had provided a stable, loving home environment. He had been microchipped, neutered, DNA registered, insured, and even had a valid city-issued dog license. By all accounts, Caroline Barnes, a former veterinary nurse, is a model pet owner.

Yet on May 19, 2010, the City of Belfast saw fit to turn their world upside down, in the most baffling way imaginable: Two dog wardens (who operate under the auspices of Belfast City Council) came knocking at the Barnes door bearing a warrant with an entirely different address; it’s still unclear whether the visit was a simple mistake or prompted by Ms. Barnes’ recently renewing the city dog license. The Barnes related that after smoking cigarettes and pleasantly chatting over tea, they produced a tape with which they measured Lennox; they then announced they were seizing him because, by their assessment of his measurements, he was “of type.*

That was nearly two years ago. Since then, in spite of massive worldwide outcry, including pleas from noted dog behavioral experts and celebrities, a petition that now bears over 127,000 signatures, and a growing “Boycott Belfast” movement, Lennox has been held in a secret location while the family pitches a desperate legal battle for his life.

It’s no exaggeration to say that prosecution case against Lennox has been rife with inconsistencies, errors, and even accusations of perjury. The absurd twists and cast of characters could make this case darkly comic — Samuel Butler or Dickens would have had a romp with it — if it didn’t ultimately hinge on one innocent life, and the suffering of a heartbroken girl.

One would think the case would have been put to bed in September 2011, after two expert animal behaviorists, Sarah Fisher and David Ryan, presented the results of their separate, extensive evaluations of Lennox. Both came to the conclusion that Lennox is friendly and of no danger, and presented these reports to the court.

Inexplicably, the judge dismissed those evaluations, and instead relied on the opinion of one Peter Tallack, a police dog handler and noted supporter of the DDA, whose official role in the case was simply “breed identifier.” In a quirky bit of testimony, a flustered Tallack offered the opinion that Lennox was “waiting to go off,”

Apparently using this as the basis, Judge Rodgers called Lennox “a disaster waiting to happen” in a ruling that upheld Lennox’s death sentence not on the basis of any past or current behavior, but on a projection that he might be aggressive at some point in the future. (Imagine if a human defendant were convicted on these grounds!)

When the defense appealed again in late January of this year, the case was reviewed by the very same Judge Rodgers, who – surprise – chose not to overturn his own ruling.

Outrage sums up the reaction of Victoria Stilwell, celebrity dog trainer and host of the program “It’s Me or the Dog,” with whom I spoke earlier this year. Stilwell has been outspoken in her support for Lennox, devoting a number of articles and a podcast to it, and against breed specific legislation in general (which she sums up as “addressing the wrong end of the leash”). Stilwell has studied the video assessments of Lennox and reviewed Sarah Fisher’s report, and simply can’t believe the judge would have taken the word of Tallack – who is, by his own admission, not a behaviorist – over the the opinions of two highly regarded professionals.

Concurring with Stilwell is Jim Crosby, a dog trainer and expert in canine aggression. By his account, he has personally assessed more dogs involved in fatal attacks than anyone else on the planet. He stresses that breed is most certainly not a factor in determining whether a dog is dangerous or not; it is the individual characteristics of a dog. This is a man who knows aggressive animals, and he cries foul in the Lennox case. “This poor dog didn’t do anything, he was minding his own business, happily at home,” he said in a January conversation. “That’s the baffling thing.”

Also like Stilwell, Crosby questions why the testimony of Tallack, a police dog handler, was given credence by the judge. He says to have someone with Tallack’s highly focused skill set evaluate a family dog like Lennox for aggressive tendencies is “like asking a guy who works on Piper plane to repair the space shuttle.” It’s a very different type of dog in a completely different situation.

Both Stilwell and Crosby continue to speak out passionately about the Lennox case, and Stilwell has especially expressed alarm over evidence that Lennox’s health is deteriorating further, based on photo evidence showing massive hair loss and sores.

A final appeal to high court is set for May 24. If it is ruled that Lennox cannot be returned to his family, the defense is asking at least to allow a friendly party in the Republic of Ireland (where there is no breed specific legislation) to adopt him.

Meanwhile, somewhere in Belfast, a family’s beloved pet – a dog who has never spent so much as a day in a boarding kennel — remains locked in a small dank cell surrounded by sawdust and feces, a victim of misused policy and a few humans who would rather see him put to death than admit a mistake. Now, that’s a crime.

Article Source & Courtesy Joan K. Smith, Huffington Post

Statement On Lennox By Sarah Fisher

Statement On Lennox By Sarah Fisher

It has been brought to my attention that a small clip of my assessment of Lennox has been put on the internet.  This clip has been taken completely out of context and whilst I have remained relatively quiet on this case since I spoke in court, I feel that I am now forced to make a statement to clarify what actually happened during the time I was with Lennox.

Wrongly or rightly many documents and details about this case have been passed onto different parties. I do not feel it is appropriate for me at this moment to discuss in detail everything that has been said to me, nor to put forward my own ideas regarding all the statements made, as everyone is entitled to their own opinion and beliefs.  What I am qualified to do however is to discuss behaviour. My assessments, statements and videos of those assessments have been accepted in other court cases at Magistrates, County and Crown Courts here in the UK so the field of assessment in cases such as this is not unknown to me.

I do not care if I am to be criticized by members of the public or even other professional bodies as I have a wealth of experience handling and working with many breeds of dogs, large and small and I also work with horses with behavioural issues so do not need to defend the claims that I have little or no experience of working with powerful animals such as Pit Bull Types. I would however like to clarify that a Pit Bull Type is often a mix of dogs.  Nothing extraordinary happens to the psyche of a dog when it conforms to certain measurements.

I do care however that Lennox is being portrayed in a poor light through this video clip as my experience of handling Lennox was thoroughly enjoyable and I now feel the need to explain in greater detail the truth, as I see it, about my assessment.  I know that Victoria Stilwell has been what I would consider to be a sane voice amidst the madness that surrounds this case and she has seen full video footage of the assessments carried out by myself and David Ryan plus other documentation.

When the door to the van was first opened Lennox barked.  He barked at me three times when I approached.  As I said in my report this is not uncommon behaviour in any dog that is in a confined situation in a crate, kennel or in a car.  He was also shaking like a leaf but this does not come over in the video that my assistant took of this assessment.  He was clearly frightened as he could not have known what was going to happen to him and again this is not an uncommon behaviour in the dogs that come to me for help. No one has ever disputed that Lennox can be anxious around some strangers but I believe the key word some has sadly been overlooked.

I asked for someone that Lennox knew to take him out of the crate to keep his stress levels low. Entry and exit points can be a source of conflict for any dog. I was told I had to handle Lennox on my own for the entire assessment and that he had bitten the last person that came to see him.  This is the clip that has been released.  Had I had any concerns for my safety or those around me given that I was to be fully and wholly responsible for a dog that I do not know and that I had been told has bitten, I would not have continued with the assessment if I believed that dog to be a danger either to myself or those who were standing in the car park. Lennox gave me a lot of information about his temperament whilst in the crate.  In court however, and therefore under oath, Ms Lightfoot the Dog Warden stated that in fact Lennox had not bitten anyone so I have to assume on the evidence placed before the court that the statement made to me at the start of my assessment was untrue.  Given the publicity surrounding this case I am also confident that had Lennox actually bitten anyone whilst in the care of his family as has been suggested someone would have come forward by now.

I spent approx 15 minutes with Lennox prior to being taken from the crate, working with a clicker and some treats to see if, even in the environment that was causing him some anxiety, he could still learn and take direction from a stranger. He could. His eyes were soft and he was friendly. At this point I would also like to clarify the meaning of the word friendly.  It does not mean confident.  Was Lennox anxious? Yes.  Hostile?  No.

I believe that Lennox would have been totally at ease had I indeed taken him out myself but I also believe I have a duty of care to reduce stress where possible when handling any animal in a situation that is causing them distress.  No doubt this statement will also be taken out of context by those who wish to discredit me and to discredit my belief that Lennox is not a danger to the public based on my experience with him and also based on the video assessment carried out by David Ryan which I have also seen.

I use food in an assessment to monitor the dogs stress levels and emotions at all times. It is not a bribe. A habitually aggressive dog will generally seek out conflict in my experience but even these dogs can often be rehabilitated. No amount of food can disguise this behaviour and giving food to a dog with aggression issues can be extremely dangerous. The dog may be lured to a person by the promise of food but once it has taken the food it may panic as the offering of the food has now brought that dog into close proximity with the threat i.e. a stranger. I have worked with dogs with aggression issues and whilst some may well take the food, the person delivering the food may not be able to move once the food has gone as the movement of the person, even the smallest movement of their arm, may trigger the dog to lunge and bite. I would not hand feed a dog that I deem to be aggressive. The delivery of the treat must come from the person that the dog knows and trusts – not the stranger. The dog can learn to approach a threat and then turn back to the person that the dog trusts for the reward if the approach to the person is appropriate.  I use food throughout an assessment to monitor what is happening with the dog on an emotional and physical level not to make him my best friend.

Lennox was so gentle with the taking of the food both in the crate and also later in the car park.  He was also appropriate in his behaviour with the games we played. He was also gentle when he jumped up at me to see if he was allowed the food that I was withholding in my hand. When he realised it wasn’t forthcoming he politely backed off. This would suggest to me that he has been around a family. Not chained up in a yard as has also been claimed by people who do not know the family or the dog.

Lennox showed excellent impulse control at all times and at no point did he grab me or my own clothing which many dogs do when getting excited by a game.  I have worked with some truly challenging dogs and some will become increasingly aroused by lead ragging or games with toys and start seriously mouthing or biting the handlers arms or clothing. This can quickly flip over to more overt aggression and these dogs can be dangerous particularly if they are being handled by just one person.  It is imperative that dogs with this behaviour are taught a more appropriate way of interacting with people and responding to the leash and also greater self control. There are many ways to help dogs that have been encouraged, through mishandling and misunderstanding, to behave in such a manner.  Kicking and beating them is certainly not the answer.

Lennox does rag on the lead but it is very self controlled. He did not exhibit any of the behaviours that I have mentioned above. Regardless of what some uneducated people may wish to think, it is possible to glean a lot of information about a dog through games and food as many behaviour counsellors and trainers will confirm.

I wrote a fifteen page report on my experience with Lennox and my thoughts about the David Ryan assessment. In this report I state that I have concerns about the appearance of Lennox’s neck. In the video I explain this too.  His ears are unlevel and there was a change in the lay of his coat over the Atlas in line with the nuchal ligament that is present between T1 and C2 vertebrae.  Coat changes often occur in dogs, cats and horses that have suffered injury or those that are unwell. I have studied this over seventeen years of handling many animals. In all cases where I referred an animal back to a vet, whether it was in the care of a shelter, owned by my private clients or students that I teach changes to the soft tissue or skeleton were noted on further detailed investigation.  When I see this around the neck in a dog I know that it is likely to give the dog cause for concern when someone unknown to that dog attempts to handle the collar or put on or take off a lead.  Coat changes may well be present where deep bruising has also occurred. Pain and pain memory is a key factor in many behavioural problems.

Lennox was quite rightly put on Amitriptyline. I do not believe that the Council have failed in their duty to care for Lennox when it comes to the stress that he has been under and I understand that this drug is used to treat anxiety and depression.  It was with interest, though, that I discovered that this drug is also used to treat chronic pain in dogs. Again this was mentioned in my written report.  This may explain in part why my experience with Lennox seems to fly in the face of other evidence presented before the courts. He was not on Amitriptyline when he was assessed by David Ryan.

I would absolutely move on to touch an animal all over its body in any assessment that I do.  I may or may not choose to muzzle a dog that is unknown to me to do this if I have concerns about the body language that I have seen prior to this part of my assessment.  I elected not to stroke Lennox all over because of my concerns about his neck, the newly forming scabs that were present on his flanks and the blood that was present around the nail beds around his right hind foot. This decision was made based on the physical evidence before me not because I felt I would be in danger.  I talked about this in court which was open to the public and at the end of my assessment which is also on film I explained this to a representative from the BCC Dog Warden team and asked if there was anything else that she would like me to do with Lennox.  She said no.

I cannot comment on what happened when Lennox was seized or measured by Peter Tallack because I wasn’t there. I can explain behaviour though and any frightened animal can be intimidating. I have recently been in Romania working with traumatised horses and two stallions had not been mucked out for months as the staff (men) were too scared to go in with them. They called them ‘pitbulls’ such is the misguided impression of this type of dog.  Hay had been simply thrown over the stable doors and their water buckets were hanging crushed against the stable wall.  I went in with them, not because I have any desire to be a hero, but because I can read an animal well and within minutes they were quiet, standing at the end of their stables albeit it pressed up against the walls. I was calm with them and we took out all the filthy bedding and fetched new water buckets for them too. They didn’t attack anyone. They were simply terrified and they were not provoked. I spent time with one of them on my own, hand feeding him and was finally able to touch his face. This process probably took less than half an hour. I was totally absorbed in what I was doing and when I turned to walk out I realised that one of the Romanian men had been watching me. He raised his eyebrows, gave me the thumbs up and walked away. Other people could then go in with this magnificent horse too and hand feed him the fresh sweet grass that we had picked from the surrounding fields so it isn’t simply that I am quiet in my handling of animals nor possess some extraordinary skill that can make even the most savage lion behave like a lamb when in my company.

I can perhaps, help an animal that is struggling, gain trust in human beings as many people can.  I can perhaps work with a difficult animal and make it look as though that animal is calm but all the time I am reading that animal. Every second of the way. I am looking at the eyes if it is safe to do so, I am watching the respiration, I am studying the movement, the set of the ears and the tail and so on and my opinions about an animal are based on many years of working in this way.  One case that will always stand out in my mind was a large member of the Bull Breed family.  I believe she was two years old.  I won’t go into the details here but I will say that when I worked with her she appeared to be very good to the member of kennel staff that was watching.  At the end of my assessment the member of staff asked me what I thought.  I sadly had to say that I thought the dog should be put to sleep. The member of staff was horrified and I remember her saying ‘but she’s been so good with you’.  But I had noticed some worrying signs.  The shelter ignored my advice and rehomed the dog who savaged the new owner so badly the owner ended up in the ICU. Of course the dog was immediately destroyed.

I knew what I was walking into when I agreed to go and assess Lennox for the family.  To have to defend Lennox outside of the court has, however, come as a surprise.  I have made this statement to shed a little more light on what is a distressing case for all those involved,  knowing full well that I will no doubt be subject to further scrutiny and criticism. So be it. I am not afraid. If nothing else this case has highlighted some important issues about the fears and prejudice concerning dogs, their breed types and their behaviour. Certainly it highlights the sad truth as Xenephon said so wisely in 400 BC. Where knowledge ends, violence begins.

The Save Lennox Campaign © 2011 Sarah Fisher

Belfast City Council's Intimidation Tactics

Many frequent followers of the Save Lennox Campaign will already be aware of the numerous reports over the past months of Belfast City Council’s dog warden team parking just meters away from Lennox’s owner’s home for lengthy periods of time. These almost daily occurrences have continued and get more regular on the lead up to any of Lennox’s court hearings. As unbelievable as some people may find this, it seems this is the tactics being employed by Belfast City Council and one can only assume that Belfast City Council management are aware of these “stop outs” by their dog warden staff and if not why not? someone surely had to authorise this? yet another waste of public money.

A few pictures of Belfast City Council’s dog warden team have been taken over the past months when they have decided to sit and watch Lennox owners home but the one below seems to have caused most anger by the powers to be within Council HQ, so much so that Belfast City Council rushed to alert their legal team who subsequently just hours after this picture was captured issued Lennox’s owner with a legal letter threatening action if picture taking and following of their staff did not cease. Following? Yes you heard correct, Belfast City Council accused the Family of following their staff as they left their home and the council dog warden sat at the entrance to the cul-de-sac where Lennox’s owner lives, as if the Family haven’t enough on their plate but to follow warden staff! The occupant of this van sat outside Lennox’s home for a recorded time of twenty two minutes, engine switched off, one foot up on dashboard, cigarette lit, watching the home. On this occasion Lennox’s owner was leaving home to attend a meeting with Lennox’s legal team and again noticed this warden sitting watching the house. After twenty two minutes of observing the Belfast City Council dog warden staff member, Lennox’s owner left her home, in doing so the woman in this van immediately sat up, started the engine, trying not to make eye contact by hiding her face behind her arm as she sped off the kerb, over a speed ramp and out of sight. Knowing she had been pictured there’s no doubt she returned to her superior and gave some sort of cock and bull story about being followed hence the Belfast City Council’s superb reaction time in sending out threatening letters of legal action to Lennox’s owner, just a pity Belfast City Council weren’t as fast to reply to emails, letters and telephone calls regarding Lennox’s condition!

This incident was reported to the Family solicitor. The Council staff member was seen by several people smoking once again in a company van and was reported to Council HQ. The lady on the phone from Belfast City Council who answered the complaint line stated she would have “this serious complaint looked into” not surprising Belfast City Council have never followed up on this and are yet to reply to those that complained about this Council staff member even though the complaint department asked those who called if they “would like a follow up call back regarding their complaint” which all replied “yes”.

Now why did the Belfast City Council get so angered by this photo and none of the others that they would have been aware of? Was it because this time the dog warden in this photo was clearly caught smoking in a company vehicle which is against the law and is something the Belfast City Council like all UK Councils publicly promote stopping? Was it because they know this staff member has done this on many occasions and she clearly is not going about her daily work routine as Belfast City Council like to put it in their threatening legal letter to Lennox’s owner or maybe it was because just several weeks previous a Belfast City Council spokesperson made public through a media article that a dog warden who was involved in the seizure of Lennox back in May 2010 had went on indefinite leave due to the unseen and unconfirmed hate mail she was apparently receiving from some idiotic people claiming to represent the Save Lennox Campaign? Well if the later is the reason you can see why this would have the big wigs in City Hall and Linen Hall Street going red in the face, even now after the big wigs who frequent this site have read this article you can be assured that they will be charging down corridors and running to their big red phones that are hot linked straight to Belfast City Council legal department boasting orders and demanding action.

In review of the matter and not to make light of it, if Belfast City Council dog warden staff are going to continue to intimidate people especially just prior to each court appearance then no matter how many legal threats are received from Belfast City Council’s legal team your staff who do wrong, illegally stalk will be photographed and documented, because you are clearly making the Family in question feel threatened and uneasy in their own home and it shouldn’t be this way, furthermore by sending threatening letters of legal action doesn’t help matters or for that fact Belfast City Council’s already globally tarnished reputation, nonetheless should it continue to happen and as Belfast City Council have already been made aware, the Police will also be informed.

Knowing how Belfast City Council go about things there’s no doubt in the next coming weeks articles will begin popping up from various sources claiming certain Belfast City Council staff are right, have done no wrong and are being attacked and so on and so forth, the public are intelligent regardless what Belfast City Council may think, the public seen through the Councils last ditch attempt to discredit this peaceful campaign with certain statements released to the media by a Council spokesperson’s stating supporters of the Save Lennox Campaign had attacked Council staff homes, this again was unproven and as you are only far too aware the Save Lennox Campaign also released a statement explaining that if anyone had done such hateful activities they weren’t acting for or in the name of Lennox, his Family or the peaceful Save Lennox Campaign calling for his freedom and should the Belfast City Council continue to claim otherwise in an attempt to damage the Save Lennox Campaign and score points then once again the public will see straight through your non factual gibberish. So again please do not insult this campaign, the Family, the people of Northern Ireland or the hundreds of thousands of peaceful supporters and campaigners around the world gazing upon you right now by stating to media that your staff were going about their legal and rightful work duties because for the reasons previously mentioned all can see and know this is untrue. Regarding said attacks, isn’t it quite strange that these unproven attacks were reported in June 2010 by Belfast City Council yet Belfast City Council thought they could win back public support by telling media that the attacks were recent, don’t reuse stories that you have already put out to media just because no-one paid attention the first time you released the exact same stories. If those reported attacks occurred at all, they occurred once in early 2010 which is when Belfast City Council first made them public, not recently, not in 2011, and not just days before each and every court hearing! Surely there is Police records and statements for such attacks? The public can see these stories are being released by Belfast City Council just days before each court hearing as an attempt to discredit and tarnish Lennox’s case, campaign, Family, and the suspicious minds amongst us would say that such stories are also possibly being released again to help sway a courts decision in favor of Belfast City Council, as said the public are intelligent.

Just to set the record straight for the benefit of the Councils head of dog control who continually makes reference to her staff simply carrying out their “legal and rightful duties” as set forth by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) and by Government legislation, no-one has ever had any issue with Belfast City Council dog warden staff doing their rightful duties, the problem so many people around the world have with this case is how your staff went about applying their “rightful and legal duties” on the day of May 19th 2010 by their heavy handed approach, use of incorrect documentation, threats and even now continual lies about Lennox and Family members, the way in which this whole case has been handled and not forgetting the fact that Lennox should never have been seized let alone by untrained, unqualified staff or the conditions Lennox is being kept and lets not forget the vast amounts of tax payers money being spent dragging this case and many like it through courts whilst also wasting huge sums of tax payers money paying the fees of certain individuals whose credibility, knowledge, qualification, and previous public statements can only be seriously questioned, it is for these reasons people around the world have taken notice of Belfast City Council and their use of “rightful legal duties”. Finally knowing that Belfast City Council is Northern Ireland’s largest Council yet has quite a small dog warden team and must provide dog warden patrols for the entire greater Belfast area why is it then that this particular dog warden can be going about her rightful daily work duties as Belfast City Council like to announce if she is frequently seen and continually locates herself in her van in the same part of Belfast? Doesn’t greater Belfast extend further than Lennox’s home?

“It’s about time Belfast City Council
stopped helping themselves and
instead began helping the people that
put them in their positions of power.”

To Avoid Revealing Too Much Of This Council Staff Members Identity The Save Lennox Campaign Has Kindly Taken
It Upon Themselves To Censor Out Her Angered Face As She Sped Away In Her Dog Van After Clearly Being Caught Out.

Yet More Council Lies!

It seems not a day goes by that the Belfast City Council don’t make yet another mistake or blunder and tell yet another lie regarding Lennox. This recent one however can be proven and this Blog intends to do just that. In a recent Belfast Telegraph Newspaper article dated 17th November 2010 regarding Lennox a Belfast Council spokesman said; “while I couldn’t comment on Lennox’s individual case because of legal proceedings, dog wardens acted within the law” Lets just reiterate that council spokesman’s statement “Acted Within The Law” So what law would that be I wonder? Is this the law as set forth by Belfast City Council? It seems to be just that as the below documents clearly show that Belfast City Council did not act within the law on more than one occasion where Lennox’s seizure was concerned. One final time for the Blog readers Mr council spokesman… “Dog wardens acted within the law” Now lets have the images attached tell the rest of the “Within The Law” story.

Incorrectly Addressed Warrant Given To Lennox's Owner

Incorrectly Addressed Warrant Given To Lennox's Owner

This is the warrant which was gave to Lennox’s owner by Belfast City Council Dog Wardens on the day of Lennox’s seizure. As most people will know by now and as it has been printed many times already in various papers, Lennox’s owner and little Daughter live in the North of Belfast and the address shown on this warrant clearly is not the owners address. The Save Lennox Campaign Blog has blocked out the door number on this warrant.

BCC Freedom Of Information Reply

BCC Freedom Of Information Reply

In this image you can see a reply to a Freedom of Information Request (FOI) from the Belfast City Council’s Dog Control Manager. The Dog Control Manager was asked what guidelines and procedures are used to identify apparent Pit Bull type dogs. In the reply Ms Elwood clearly states that the council use American Dog Breeders Association (ADBA) breed standards guide. Strange as the ADBA have never gave Belfast City Council any authorisation, legal pardon or any licence to use any version or derived version of the breed standards guide. The ADBA copyrighted their breed standards guide in 2005 to stop councils and certain self acclaimed breed experts from using the ADBA guide to misidentify dogs for the purpose of court proceedings and to help secure death sentences on innocent dogs owned by responsible dog owners… just like Lennox and his human Family!

ADBA Cease & Desist Order To BCC

ADBA Cease & Desist Order To BCC

And finally the response sent from ADBA Inc to the Belfast City Council for their illegal use of copyrighted ADBA material. As you can see the CEO of the American Dog Breeders Association isn’t well pleased by the councils illegal use of the copyrighted breed standards and has stated ‘Cease & Desist’

And the final word again comes from the Belfast City Council Spokesman…

“Dog wardens acted within the law”