Burnley man's beloved Yorkshire Terrier mauled to death by ‘pitbull’

MAULED Tiger MAULED Tiger

A PENSIONER watched in horror as he saw his tiny dog was savaged and killed by a pitbull cross-breed in a Burnley park.

The town’s magistrates were told how 67-year-old Robert Standen was left bereft by the loss of his ‘constant and only companion’, Tiger, who he had owned for 12 years.

The Yorkshire Terrier, which weighed less than five pounds, was subjected to the awful onslaught as Mr Standen walked him on his lead in Rakehead Park.

The hearing heard the large pit bull terrier cross-type dog, which a year earlier had attacked a man during a violent assault, was being looked after by Kevin Mason as its owner, Leigh Fullard, was in jail.

The attack only ended when a passer-by kicked the animal and it released the dog from its grip.

Fullard, 26, of Leyland Road, Burnley, was last month locked up for five years and four months after he goaded the vicious animal to attack a man and assaulted the victim at the same time.

Burnley Crown Court had been told how the dog sunk its teeth into Ricardo Robinson's thigh and arm in April last year.

Mr Robinson suffered a deep bite wound to his left elbow, leaving underlying muscles visible.

Fullard pleaded guilty to owning a dog dangerously out of control in a public place and wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm.

Related links

After the attack the dog was destroyed.

Speaking at his home on Hawes Terrace, just yards from the park where the attack took place, Mr Standen said that he was angered that the dog had not already been destroyed.

“It should have been put to sleep after the first attack,” he said.

“The animal was obviously a danger. What if it had been a toddler playing on that park?

“I live alone, have never married and little Tiger was my only company. He was no trouble and to see him so violently killed really affected me.”

Mr Standon has since bought another dog, another Yorkshire Terrier, which he has also named Tiger in tribute to his dead pet.

Jobless Mason, of Hobart Street, Burnley, admitted being in charge of a dog dangerously out of control in a public place on May 3.

He was given a conditional discharge for six months and must pay £450 compensation to Mr Standen.

Julie Reddish,prosecuting, said when the attack was stopped, Mr Standen picked up his pet and thought it was still breathing.

The Yorkshire Terrier was rushed to a nearby vet, but had died.

David Lawson, for Mason, said he was looking after the Fullard’s dog for three or four weeks.

He was walking the animal, which had not had any exercise for a significant period of time and took it to Rakehead Park.

The defendant let it off its lead for a run.

Once it started to attack the Yorkshire Terrier he ran across the field to try and help.

The defendant stayed at the scene and spoke to the Mr Standen.

Mr Lawson continued: "He is extremely remorseful. He recognises the upset that it would cause the elderly gentleman, losing his dog and his only companion."

Comments (18)

11:24am Wed 4 Jul 12

useyourhead says...

The dog should either have been destroyed after the first attack or responsibly re-homed by someone other than the owner, not just allowed to ask any Tom, Dick or Harry to watch it while he is inside! very surprised this was overlooked.
The dog should either have been destroyed after the first attack or responsibly re-homed by someone other than the owner, not just allowed to ask any Tom, Dick or Harry to watch it while he is inside! very surprised this was overlooked. useyourhead

11:30am Wed 4 Jul 12

Robbie says...

the owner should have been put to sleep! scum like him should not have pets
the owner should have been put to sleep! scum like him should not have pets Robbie

11:50am Wed 4 Jul 12

alf-abett says...

Once again dogs hit the headlines for the wrong reasons, the vast majority of dogs are well behaved and their owners take the responsibly very seriously. It is the "Unwashed" who negate their duties as owners and allow their animals to defecate without "bagging and binning" it is they who keep disobedient and untrained dogs and it is they who should be banned indefinitely from keeping any animal and no household should be allowed more than one dog, why! because if one attacks it's partner will surely support it, and they behave like this because they ARE pack animals.
I await with interest other readers comments and as an aside who will pay for the DNA tests on the dog poo in Burnley.
Once again dogs hit the headlines for the wrong reasons, the vast majority of dogs are well behaved and their owners take the responsibly very seriously. It is the "Unwashed" who negate their duties as owners and allow their animals to defecate without "bagging and binning" it is they who keep disobedient and untrained dogs and it is they who should be banned indefinitely from keeping any animal and no household should be allowed more than one dog, why! because if one attacks it's partner will surely support it, and they behave like this because they ARE pack animals. I await with interest other readers comments and as an aside who will pay for the DNA tests on the dog poo in Burnley. alf-abett

11:52am Wed 4 Jul 12

Michael@ClitheroeSince58 says...

Still waiting for the Law Makers to do something.......
Still waiting for the Law Makers to do something....... Michael@ClitheroeSince58

12:40pm Wed 4 Jul 12

polluxtroy69 says...

IT's an absolute joke is this, how long will we have to wait until the law tightens it's belt. How many attacks on innocent dogs and people will it take until what us responsible dog owners can feel safer in parks. I get the feeling that the law is not going anywhere when regarding dogs, and standardising laws for owners on thier pets; making microchipping being a legal requirement for starters, this way tabbs can be kept on all dogs and their breeds. Mind you I had two police officers at my door a few weeks ago because my dog chased a cat on out enclosed back street where I was supervising him, as directed by the council. The law in my opinion is a joke!! I feel for the old man who lost his dog, it'd kill me if I lost my dog the same way he did.
IT's an absolute joke is this, how long will we have to wait until the law tightens it's belt. How many attacks on innocent dogs and people will it take until what us responsible dog owners can feel safer in parks. I get the feeling that the law is not going anywhere when regarding dogs, and standardising laws for owners on thier pets; making microchipping being a legal requirement for starters, this way tabbs can be kept on all dogs and their breeds. Mind you I had two police officers at my door a few weeks ago because my dog chased a cat on out enclosed back street where I was supervising him, as directed by the council. The law in my opinion is a joke!! I feel for the old man who lost his dog, it'd kill me if I lost my dog the same way he did. polluxtroy69

12:58pm Wed 4 Jul 12

Truth will out says...

Sickening. Terrible for the old man to have to go through this.

For the other dog owner words can't put how irresponsible you are. I suspect the dog's aggression may have been trained for further utterly sick purposes.
Sickening. Terrible for the old man to have to go through this. For the other dog owner words can't put how irresponsible you are. I suspect the dog's aggression may have been trained for further utterly sick purposes. Truth will out

1:30pm Wed 4 Jul 12

bb3_brfc says...

R.I.P Tiger. This story brought a tear to my eye.

The owner should go to prison for this. That would sent out a message to other dog owners that this kind of incident is totally unaceptable.
R.I.P Tiger. This story brought a tear to my eye. The owner should go to prison for this. That would sent out a message to other dog owners that this kind of incident is totally unaceptable. bb3_brfc

1:33pm Wed 4 Jul 12

hi everyone says...

this dog should have been destroyed after the first attack
this dog should have been destroyed after the first attack hi everyone

1:47pm Wed 4 Jul 12

2 for 5p says...

That's a sad story
When will a law be passed to have all dogs muzzled in public I think they should also bring back a dog licence
That's a sad story When will a law be passed to have all dogs muzzled in public I think they should also bring back a dog licence 2 for 5p

1:55pm Wed 4 Jul 12

midas says...

polluxtroy69 wrote:
IT's an absolute joke is this, how long will we have to wait until the law tightens it's belt. How many attacks on innocent dogs and people will it take until what us responsible dog owners can feel safer in parks. I get the feeling that the law is not going anywhere when regarding dogs, and standardising laws for owners on thier pets; making microchipping being a legal requirement for starters, this way tabbs can be kept on all dogs and their breeds. Mind you I had two police officers at my door a few weeks ago because my dog chased a cat on out enclosed back street where I was supervising him, as directed by the council. The law in my opinion is a joke!! I feel for the old man who lost his dog, it'd kill me if I lost my dog the same way he did.
Who will police the microchipping of dogs? Can you imagine the outcry when "outraged from Worsthorne" complains because a Council official has asked to check their dog? or what happens when "belligerent from Burnley Wood" is stopped and his pitbull isn't chipped?
.
Your dog has chased a cat and the police come round to speak to you about its behaviour - isn't that the sort of response you are expecting?
[quote][p][bold]polluxtroy69[/bold] wrote: IT's an absolute joke is this, how long will we have to wait until the law tightens it's belt. How many attacks on innocent dogs and people will it take until what us responsible dog owners can feel safer in parks. I get the feeling that the law is not going anywhere when regarding dogs, and standardising laws for owners on thier pets; making microchipping being a legal requirement for starters, this way tabbs can be kept on all dogs and their breeds. Mind you I had two police officers at my door a few weeks ago because my dog chased a cat on out enclosed back street where I was supervising him, as directed by the council. The law in my opinion is a joke!! I feel for the old man who lost his dog, it'd kill me if I lost my dog the same way he did.[/p][/quote]Who will police the microchipping of dogs? Can you imagine the outcry when "outraged from Worsthorne" complains because a Council official has asked to check their dog? or what happens when "belligerent from Burnley Wood" is stopped and his pitbull isn't chipped? . Your dog has chased a cat and the police come round to speak to you about its behaviour - isn't that the sort of response you are expecting? midas

1:56pm Wed 4 Jul 12

midas says...

bb3_brfc wrote:
R.I.P Tiger. This story brought a tear to my eye. The owner should go to prison for this. That would sent out a message to other dog owners that this kind of incident is totally unaceptable.
The owner is doing five years!
[quote][p][bold]bb3_brfc[/bold] wrote: R.I.P Tiger. This story brought a tear to my eye. The owner should go to prison for this. That would sent out a message to other dog owners that this kind of incident is totally unaceptable.[/p][/quote]The owner is doing five years! midas

2:00pm Wed 4 Jul 12

midas says...

alf-abett wrote:
Once again dogs hit the headlines for the wrong reasons, the vast majority of dogs are well behaved and their owners take the responsibly very seriously. It is the "Unwashed" who negate their duties as owners and allow their animals to defecate without "bagging and binning" it is they who keep disobedient and untrained dogs and it is they who should be banned indefinitely from keeping any animal and no household should be allowed more than one dog, why! because if one attacks it's partner will surely support it, and they behave like this because they ARE pack animals. I await with interest other readers comments and as an aside who will pay for the DNA tests on the dog poo in Burnley.
You just have to read the reports in the paper to know its not just the "unwashed" who don't pick up after their animals!
.
A Government that has stopped councils being able to use CCTV to identify persistent dog foulers isn't going to introduce DNA tests!
[quote][p][bold]alf-abett[/bold] wrote: Once again dogs hit the headlines for the wrong reasons, the vast majority of dogs are well behaved and their owners take the responsibly very seriously. It is the "Unwashed" who negate their duties as owners and allow their animals to defecate without "bagging and binning" it is they who keep disobedient and untrained dogs and it is they who should be banned indefinitely from keeping any animal and no household should be allowed more than one dog, why! because if one attacks it's partner will surely support it, and they behave like this because they ARE pack animals. I await with interest other readers comments and as an aside who will pay for the DNA tests on the dog poo in Burnley.[/p][/quote]You just have to read the reports in the paper to know its not just the "unwashed" who don't pick up after their animals! . A Government that has stopped councils being able to use CCTV to identify persistent dog foulers isn't going to introduce DNA tests! midas

2:35pm Wed 4 Jul 12

practicalone2 says...

When the multibreed rescue where I volunteer gets a call, "can you take my brother's dog, he's going to prison?", we don't have to ask the breed, as it is always a pit bull.

Even if no child was ever ripped from a stroller to be shaken like a ragdoll, why would anyone who truly cares about dog welfare want to intentionally continue breeding dog- aggressive, expert mauling dogs? The answer: we don't. Those who do want to kept breeding pit dogs do NOT care about dog welfare. They care about themselves and their ability to stroke their own ego owning an aggressive, powerful dog.
When the multibreed rescue where I volunteer gets a call, "can you take my brother's dog, he's going to prison?", we don't have to ask the breed, as it is always a pit bull. Even if no child was ever ripped from a stroller to be shaken like a ragdoll, why would anyone who truly cares about dog welfare want to intentionally continue breeding dog- aggressive, expert mauling dogs? The answer: we don't. Those who do want to kept breeding pit dogs do NOT care about dog welfare. They care about themselves and their ability to stroke their own ego owning an aggressive, powerful dog. practicalone2

3:30pm Wed 4 Jul 12

maxcollie says...

midas wrote:
bb3_brfc wrote: R.I.P Tiger. This story brought a tear to my eye. The owner should go to prison for this. That would sent out a message to other dog owners that this kind of incident is totally unaceptable.
The owner is doing five years!
He should be jailed for longer.
[quote][p][bold]midas[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bb3_brfc[/bold] wrote: R.I.P Tiger. This story brought a tear to my eye. The owner should go to prison for this. That would sent out a message to other dog owners that this kind of incident is totally unaceptable.[/p][/quote]The owner is doing five years![/p][/quote]He should be jailed for longer. maxcollie

3:42pm Wed 4 Jul 12

starling77 says...

Reinstate dog licences at a much higher rate. Force owners to have public liability insurance. Chipping should be compulsory, and get the council to make sure that irresponsible dog-owners clean up their filthy, stinking sh1t-filled gardens.
Reinstate dog licences at a much higher rate. Force owners to have public liability insurance. Chipping should be compulsory, and get the council to make sure that irresponsible dog-owners clean up their filthy, stinking sh1t-filled gardens. starling77

7:11pm Wed 4 Jul 12

DaveBurnley says...

starling77 wrote:
Reinstate dog licences at a much higher rate. Force owners to have public liability insurance. Chipping should be compulsory, and get the council to make sure that irresponsible dog-owners clean up their filthy, stinking sh1t-filled gardens.
But the sub humans with their pitbulls will just ignore any licensing requirements. They will just carry on as before and let the responsible dog owners pay the extra costs.
[quote][p][bold]starling77[/bold] wrote: Reinstate dog licences at a much higher rate. Force owners to have public liability insurance. Chipping should be compulsory, and get the council to make sure that irresponsible dog-owners clean up their filthy, stinking sh1t-filled gardens.[/p][/quote]But the sub humans with their pitbulls will just ignore any licensing requirements. They will just carry on as before and let the responsible dog owners pay the extra costs. DaveBurnley

9:45pm Wed 4 Jul 12

RUinsane says...

maxcollie wrote:
midas wrote:
bb3_brfc wrote: R.I.P Tiger. This story brought a tear to my eye. The owner should go to prison for this. That would sent out a message to other dog owners that this kind of incident is totally unaceptable.
The owner is doing five years!
He should be jailed for longer.
The owners sentence was made up as follows, 6 months prison for every tooth in his head= 2.5 years and a further 6 months for every misspelled tattoo= another 2 years finally he got another 6 months for having a danger dog, called Tyson, to make him look ard. He also got another 2 years to run concurrently for posessing nothing but tracki bottoms and vests.

RIP Tiger you little tinker you :0(
[quote][p][bold]maxcollie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]midas[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bb3_brfc[/bold] wrote: R.I.P Tiger. This story brought a tear to my eye. The owner should go to prison for this. That would sent out a message to other dog owners that this kind of incident is totally unaceptable.[/p][/quote]The owner is doing five years![/p][/quote]He should be jailed for longer.[/p][/quote]The owners sentence was made up as follows, 6 months prison for every tooth in his head= 2.5 years and a further 6 months for every misspelled tattoo= another 2 years finally he got another 6 months for having a danger dog, called Tyson, to make him look ard. He also got another 2 years to run concurrently for posessing nothing but tracki bottoms and vests. RIP Tiger you little tinker you :0( RUinsane

10:42pm Thu 5 Jul 12

hairy mary says...

alf-abett wrote:
Once again dogs hit the headlines for the wrong reasons, the vast majority of dogs are well behaved and their owners take the responsibly very seriously. It is the "Unwashed" who negate their duties as owners and allow their animals to defecate without "bagging and binning" it is they who keep disobedient and untrained dogs and it is they who should be banned indefinitely from keeping any animal and no household should be allowed more than one dog, why! because if one attacks it's partner will surely support it, and they behave like this because they ARE pack animals. I await with interest other readers comments and as an aside who will pay for the DNA tests on the dog poo in Burnley
alf-abett wrote: Once again dogs hit the headlines for the wrong reasons, the vast majority of dogs are well behaved and their owners take the responsibly very seriously. It is the "Unwashed" who negate their duties as owners and allow their animals to defecate without "bagging and binning" it is they who keep disobedient and untrained dogs and it is they who should be banned indefinitely from keeping any animal and no household should be allowed more than one dog, why! because if one attacks it's partner will surely support it, and they behave like this because they ARE pack animals. I await with interest other readers comments and as an aside who will pay for the DNA tests on the dog poo in Burnley hairy mary

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree