9 Year Old Girl Attacked by Neighbor’s Dog (Presa Canario) in Brookland


From the Brookland listserv:

“Our 9-year-old daughter was attacked by a pit bull on the way home from tae kwon do just now. It came out of nowhere. And bit her face. My husband had to kick it away. There are two pit bulls roaming the neighborhood. Please keep your kids inside. (6:30 PM Wed)

An update: The dog was a presa canario, not a pit bull. Apologies for the misinformation, but it was dark and we thought it was a pit bull at first and wanted to get the information out as soon as possible so others could know to stay away from the dogs. The presa canario is also an aggressive breed, however, from what we understand. In any event, the dog was a neighbor’s and got out through an open gate. It has been put in a 10 day in-house quarantine. Our daughter was checked out at the hospital and will be okay. Thanks for your concern.”

and in a heartbreaking update from the father of the little girl:

“Ironically, earlier today I promised my daughter that I would post something on the list tonight regarding her business, PUPPY LOVE. She loves dogs (mom’s allergic so we don’t have any) and makes gourmet dog treats from scratch that she sells to the dog owners in the neighborhood. I hope this incident doesn’t discourage her from pursuing her business or her love of dogs.”

107 Comment

  • Aggressive Breed? Elaborate

    • These are VERY large dogs (125-plus lbs). They are bred to be territorial. As such, they ARE at a higher risk than most other breeds for developing aggression issues if not properly socialized. Any dog can be aggressive, but some in particular require especially responsible and experienced owners. I hope they put the owner if this dog behind bars.

      • Wow, this was a really thoughtful, well-informed post until it called for the immediate jailing of the owner. As you said, any dog can be aggressive and Presa Canarios are very large dogs, but it is also possible that the gate was left open on accident and not because of any purposeful malicious intent on the part of the owner.

        • Still negligent. If you own a dangerous pet, it is your responsibility to make sure it doesn’t attack people. Pretty simple really. Maybe jail isn’t the appropriate punishment, but then again, I think that negligent drivers should be locked up too.

    • I think it has been pretty well established that Presa Canarios can be aggressive and when they are it can be fatal. There have been a number of well-publicized attacks, including the woman in San Francisco who was mauled to death in 2001 by 2 Presa Canarios in her own apartment building.

      • The woman killed in San Francisco was Diane Whipple, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diane_Whipple

        “Whipple was returning from a trip to the grocery store when Bane—and possibly Hera—attacked her in the hallway.[3] (Hera’s role in the mauling has never been firmly established.) The dog(s) caused 77 wounds to Whipple, with only her scalp and feet escaping harm, A person called 911.[7] Whipple died at San Francisco General Hospital; the cause of death was “loss of blood from multiple traumatic injuries (dog bite wounds)”.[4](pp. 10,28) It is believed that the dogs killed her for food”

    • aggressive breed, like a pit bull. pit bulls are bred to kill.

      • ^^^ IGNORANT. Pit bulls are not bred to kill. Stop spreading misinformation.

        • From Wikipedia (not saying it is gospel, but…):

          The Pit Bull Terrier was created by breeding Old English Terriers and Old English Bulldogs together to produce a dog that combined the gameness of the terrier with the strength and athleticism of the bulldog. These dogs were bred in England, and arrived in the United States where they became the direct ancestors of the American Pitbull Terrier. In the United Kingdom pit bulls were used in bloodsports such as bull baiting, bear baiting and cock fighting. These bloodsports were officially eliminated in 1835 as Britain began to introduce animal welfare laws. Since dogfights were cheaper to organise and far easier to conceal from the law than bull or bear baits, bloodsport proponents turned to pitting their dogs against each other instead. Dog fighting was used as both a bloodsport (often involving gambling) and a way to continue to test the quality of their stock. For decades afterwards, dog fighting clandestinely took place in small areas of Britain and America. In the early 20th century pitbulls were used as catch dogs in America for semi-wild cattle and hogs, to hunt, and drive livestock, and as family companions. Some have been selectively bred for their fighting prowess.
          Pit Bull Terriers successfully fill the role of companion dogs, and police dogs, and therapy dog. Pit Bull Terriers also constitute the majority of dogs used for illegal dog fighting in the America In addition, law enforcement organisations report these dogs are used for other nefarious purposes, such as guarding illegal narcotics operations, use against police, and as attack dogs.
          In an effort to counter the fighting reputation of pit bull-type dogs, in 1996 the San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals renamed pit bull terriers to “St. Francis Terriers”, so that people might be more likely to adopt them. 60 temperament-screened dogs were adopted until the program was halted, after several of the newly adopted pit bulls killed cats. The New York City Center for Animal Care and Control tried a similar approach in 2004, relabeling their pit bulls as “New Yorkies”, but dropped the idea in the face of overwhelming public opposition

          • This isn’t gospel, but it’s precisely correct. People who think that pit bulls were bred for aggression towards people are misinformed. In fact, they make poor guard dogs. They’ve been bred to be aggressive toward other animals. It’s a distinction that’s lost on those who advocate breed-specific bans. If pit bulls were banned, thugs and idiots would make their German shepherds or dobermans aggressive with worse consequences.

          • justinbc

            All dogs are descendants of wolves, which hunt to kill. No matter what the species, it’s always going to have some of that aggression built in. The most aggressive dogs I have ever encountered are those little annoying Pomeranians, but they’re so small that people just discount it. Big dogs only have the reputation they do because in the few instances where they are vicious it actually hurts.

          • The statement was they were not bred to kill, but they were, in fact, bred to kill/fight. Maybe they were bred to kill/fight other animals and not humans, but last time I checked, an animal that is bred to attack a bear would probably not have any problem attacking a human (and a human is in fact an animal). The point is they were bred to be muscular and aggressive and are not smart enough to differentiate what they are supposed to be aggressive towards if they are not properly trained. Sure, a pit could be a great dog if properly bred, raised in a good home, socialized, and trained, but the fact of the matter is many of the pits around are not coming from that situation. People who think an untrained dog that is bred to be aggressive toward whatever animal will somehow differentiate between that animal and a human are misinformed.

          • “People who think an untrained dog that is bred to be aggressive toward whatever animal will somehow differentiate between that animal and a human are misinformed.”
            Actually, you’re misinformed. Many/most dog breeds have certain “drives” that tend to exist and remain in the dog regardless of how well or poorly trained it is. As this article discusses, there are basically five drives: play, pack, prey, food, and defensive/fight. http://www.beaglesunlimited.com/training/dog-psychology-behavior-drives-dogs
            I have a husky/German Shepherd with a huge prey drive. If he sees a squirrel, cat, or even a deer (yes, he’s tried to go after deer), his instinct is to hunt and kill it. The most I can do is train him to stay on command, so he won’t go after an animal. But even then, you can see every fiber of his being wants to kill the animal he sees. He’s caught several animals, including a pigeon in mid-air. This drive will not go away. On the other hand, he is not the least bit aggressive to other dogs or humans. My friends’ kids climb on him, jump over him, and pull on his fur and the most he’ll do is walk away. He’s completely useless as a watchdog and I’m fairly sure he’d stand by and watch if a mugger was beating me. He has also started running towards small dogs that are far away and as soon as he’s close enough to see it’s a dog and not some other animal, the prey drive is gone.
            So, it’s simplistic to say a dog can’t differentiate between other animals and humans – some can and do. The issue with dogs that have a defensive/fight drive is that they are “ruled by self-preservation and survival.” So, a nine year old girl might seem like a threat to a presa canario, whereas my dog would completely ignore her, and a beagle would probably see if it could get the kid to feed it.

          • You are missing the point. I have nothing against pits. I have friends with pits that are great dogs, but if you are trying to argue that they were not historically bred to fight, then you are absolutely wrong. If you think that giving a breed the title “aggressive” based on historical breeding is incorrect, then you are also wrong. No one said that the aggressive nature cannot be overcome by a good home, but sadly, these breeds are often not from good homes.

            As for your article, I see nothing in there that really proves anything. It is a bunch of basically non-statements. Who cares if their bite frequency is the same as other breeds? Many dog’s bite because they are provoked, so let’s see a page that talks about unprovoked attacks or maybe attacks per capita. I would bet pits are high on those lists. Furthermore, the reason pits have a bad reputation is because when they bite, it causes serious harm because they were bred to cause serious harm. When a small dog bites (as someone mentioned), no one makes a stink about it because there is no real harm caused. Here is an article for you to read: http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics.php. There is also a wiki page that monitors fatalities caused by dogs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States). Let me know which breed you see most on the list. As I said, I have nothing against pits and they can be great dogs, but this whole conversation started by someone saying they were bred to kill and someone else saying that was not true, but the reality is it is true.

        • If my pit was bred to kill, the breeders failed miserably. She loves adults, but is utterly terrified of children, and hides behind me when they approach. In theory, any dog can be aggressive if it is treated poorly or has never been properly trained. The only kills that my pit can chalk up are tennis balls, although her gas attacks are fairly incapacitating.

      • I was waiting how long it would take before the ignorant pitbull comments showed up, wow, didn’t even make it past ten comments.

  • That dog owner better hope he has some good liability insurance.

    Point of clarification: is it illegal in DC to let you dog off the leash?

    Most of the dogs I see in big NPS parks (Meridian Hill, Lincoln Park, etc.) are off-leash, so I presume it’s either legal or (more likely) NPS just don’t enforce their rules. But I also see a lot of people walking their dogs with no leash in neighborhoods. One guy who lives *across the street* from the MPD 3rd District HQ walks his two labs and pit at the same time and all without a leash, so clearly MPD doesn’t give a damn, either.

    Even the best-trained dogs can sometimes get aggressive for something weird. Seems like such a dumb risk to take.

    • Yes. It’s definitely illegal in DC to be off-leash in public. I think initial offense is $50 (or $100?) fine. Of course, it’s never enforced. But the law is on the books.
      The only place it can legally be off-leash is private property or an official fenced-in dog park. If the attacking dog in this incident escaped from the yard, then the owner is on the hook. The dog should have been tethered.

      • Huh? If the dog can be legally off-leash on private property, doesn’t that suggest that if a dog is in a yard or in a house that it DOESN’T have to be tethered? I’m guessing — but don’t know — that if the dog is in a yard without a fence, that it would have to be tethered, but if there is a fence, on private property, does that mean that it doesn’t?

        • It can be off-leash on private property so long as it stays on the private property (i.e. you have a fenced in area it can’t escape or otherwise never leaves). If your property has no fencing – or if the fencing is too low or has places for the dog to escape – then it should be tethered. Once your dog leaves your property, it needs to be leashed and you’re on the hook for whatever it does.

      • Don’t forget that tethering can also be illegal if not done carefully –

        (b) For the purposes of this section, “cruelly chains” means attaching an animal to a stationary object or a pulley by means of a chain, rope, tether, leash, cable, or similar restraint under circumstances that may endanger its health, safety, or well-being. Cruelly chains includes, but is not limited to, the use of a chain, rope, tether, leash, cable or similar restraint that:

        (1) Exceeds 1/8 the body weight of the animal;

        (2) Causes the animal to choke;

        (3) Is too short for the animal to move around or for the animal to urinate or defecate in a separate area from the area where it must eat, drink, or lie down;

        (4) Is situated where it can become entangled;

        (5) Does not permit the animal access to food, water, shade, dry ground, or shelter; or

        (6) Does not permit the animal to escape harm.

    • For people who walk their dogs off leash, yeah you can have a very well trained dog that won’t run in the street or chase anyone or whatever, but you don’t know what my dogs are going to do…If your dog comes walking up to mine while they’re on leash, the have a tendency to be more defensive (not agressive) and there’s more likely to be tension. It’s just not a good idea all around.

      I’ve seen park police give people tickets for off leash dogs in Lincoln Park but it doesn’t really seem to be taken very seriously. My guess is its one of those situations where yeah it’s illegal but there’s a lot worse happening.

      I’m glad the little girl is ok and I hope it doesnt stop her from continuing her treats business!

      • I’m the owner of a reactive dog who loves to walk but cannot be approached by other off-leash dogs while he is on-leash. People who let their dogs roam off-leash in our neighborhood make it near impossible to get my pup the exercise he needs without major stress to him and me. I love that other people can walk with their dogs off-leash (I wish my pup was one of them), but it is just so irresponsible for everyone involved. Please leash your pups!

        I hope this little girl is okay and that the owners of the dog are apprehended appropriately. I hope she keeps selling her treats to her neighbors and that this scary incident doesn’t deter her from her love of animals!

        • I completely feel your pain. I have a dog who is very dog-reactive (fine with people) and the amount of people walking their dogs off-leash has caused me to have to muzzle her on walks for her own safety. Unfortunately people then cast judgment when they see me walking a muzzled dog, but really I am trying to do the responsible thing (since many others simply care about what works for them).

    • You are correct. MPD does not give a damn about dogs off leash in any neighborhood.

    • justinbc

      I see more dogs off-leash in Lincoln Park than actually on them. If it is in fact illegal to do so there it seems like it would be a relatively easy thing to enforce.

      • The Park Police come by quite often to write tickets, but they’re very obviously about it (parking their vehicle on the park sidewalk) and a silent alarm goes off where all the dog owners warn the others and suddenly everyone’s leashed. I think they should just fence off a portion of the park for off-leash dogs.

  • Ten day quarantine? What happened to euthanizing dogs who bite children? Don’t we do that any more? Has the dog-as-child obsession gone THAT far??

    • seriously? most jurisdictions have a one bite type rule. if the dogs bites again, then there is a problem. this is coming from someone who was mauled by my friend’s dog when i was 10 at a slumber party.

      • That’s not really true. The so-called 1 bite rule means that dog owners are held to a negligence standard when facing liability for dog bites. In other words, if an owner had no reason to know that a dog might bite, he or she usually isn’t liable the first time the dog does. And if an owner either knows or should know that the dog is dangerous — a dog bred for fighting or one who has acted aggressively in the past — then there is no “free bite.” When deciding whether to put a dog down, I’ve never heard of any jurisdiction that has a codified 1-bite rule either. Usually a determination is made about future dangerousness, and that might include past bite history but also might include a finding that the dog is too aggressive to be given back to the owner, despite only biting someone once.

        • All dogs with teeth “might” bite. Owners need to know this and take precautions before it happens. Common sense.

          • True enough. Bad wording on my part. What I meant was that if the owner has no reason to know that the dog has more of a propensity to bite than an average, non-aggressive dog does, the owner usually isn’t liable for the first bite.

    • Agreed. Euthanize the dog. Then consider doing the same to the owner.

      • Yes, we should kill a human because their dog caused minor injuries to a child. Seems reasonable. Following your logic, we should probably also execute anyone at fault in a traffic accident.

        • Honestly, if anyone deserves to get punished, it’s not the dog, but the absent/clueless/selfish owner. As is almost always the case.

    • saf

      You have GOT to be kidding. Kill the dog for one bite? Kill the dog for its owner’s failings?


      • In the case of a large, aggressive-breed dog that has shown a tendency to escape and attack a child unprovoked? Absolutely, no-doubt, 100% put that dog down. No question about it.

      • Nope, not kidding. The dog needs to be destroyed. I say this without any kind of glee or vengefulness. I will feel awful for the owner’s sadness at its loss. But it’s a simple matter of public safety.
        The dog “came out of no where and bit her face” as she was walking with an adult. If she tried to chase it or hug it, I will change my position. If the “came out of no where” is straight fact, that’s a dangerous animal that must be euthanized.

        • justinbc

          I think the reason they don’t immediately kill dogs here is that often there is more to a story than the one telling it leads on. I’m definitely not saying that’s the case here, but many people think their child is infallible (as do dog owners), so to simply take their word as to what happened would be a bit unjust.

          • Hence “If she tried to chase it or hug it, I will change my position.”

          • Yeah, but the parents of a child are probably going to say they did nothing to provoke it (not implying that was the case here). I can imagine a scenario where my dog gets loose and encounters a kid who grabs his paw which is very sensitive, and he snaps at her because she hurt him. My dog’s normally sweet and well trained, but sometimes things happen. Of course, if it happens multiple times that’s a sign that the dog needs to be put down, but I don’t think first offenders should be exterminated.

          • So you’re going to come up with a blanket rule because someone *might* lie about the circumstances of a dog bite? I hope you’re not in any public policy role, ’cause that’s a really bad way to make policy.

            And your statement that a parent is “probably” going to lie is just nonsense. You have absolutely no foundation for that, other than your apparent need to preemptively defend your dog against something that hasn’t even happened.

          • I’m not talking about lying necessarily. I’m talking about these situations not being very clear-cut. Even the most honest and straightforward person will remember events differently than they actually occurred, especially in an emotionally-charged situation that happens rapidly. People are also highly susceptible to outsider influence, so if a bystander says “Yeah man, that dog came outta nowhere!” or the child cries “But I didn’t DO anything!” it will alter their memories of what actually happened. And yes, protective parents could do anything, including lying, to make sure the attacker is euthanized. It’s parental instinct.

    • Sadly, I tend to agree.

      If an unprovoked dog attacks a child I think it should be put down. I don’t think there should be any “free passes.”

    • I thought that Baltimore City had this rule, but after some web searching I found that they have to hold a hearing after each animal bite/attack to determine whether the animal is dangerous enough to give the order for it to be euthanized. That makes sense to me — not a one-size-fits-all policy, but it should be considered in every case.

    • The 10-day quarantine is to make sure the dog doesn’t have rabies, not a “punishment.” The dog will most likely be euthanized.

  • Who let the dogs out?

  • I know this little girl and she’s amazingly kind and mature for her age (9). I’m so sad this happened to her. I can say first hand that her dog treats are the best around. My dog loves them and so do all of his friends in our building in Chinatown. I wish her a speedy recovery and hope she continues her little business. My pup would really miss those treats if she doesn’t.

    • Aww, she sounds so sweet! For what it’s worth, I got attacked by a dog around this age, and though I was really jumpy for a few years after, I am still very much a dog lover. They are the best!

    • My best friend was bitten in the face by a dog at a very young age (she still has the scars to prove it) and is very much still a dog lover. This little girl sounds similarly mature and I doubt she’ll write off dogs forever.

  • Pressas are some serious dogs, by that i mean size and strength
    but they are not an agressive breed like everyone is claiming lol, any dog can do just what this one did and hurt a kid. its more about how they are trained and socalized

    they should be leashed just like the many dogs i see off a leash every day in my neighborhood (cap hill), more specifically stanton & lincoln park

    dogs are dogs and should be treated as such
    labs, dalmations, pits, etc. should all be leashed at all times as any of those dogs would seriously hurt someone, especially a child, if they were to attack someone

  • I think anyone whose dog attacks a person should be charged with the same offense as if they had physically assaulted the person themselves. I don’t see any difference. You are 100% responsible for the actions of your dog.

    • Never thought about it that way, but good point.

    • So if you have a kid (a minor, under 18 who is considered your dependent), and they assault and injure someone should you be charged with the same offense as if you did it since they are 100% your responsibility?

      • poor comparison. dogs are property; kids are people. there is a distinction between a dog owner and a parent and the associated responsibilities. if a minor is violent and commits an assault, that minor should be punished – not the parents. if a dog is not properly secured and bites somebody as a result, it is due to the negligence of the owner – so it makes sense to hold the owner liable.

    • Should the same go for kids?

  • I also know the little girl and the dog/dog owner. I am in no way condoning this situation, but I don’t necessarily believe that the dog should be put down. I think their should be some kind of hearing and the victim should be able to address what they think would be appropriate and a court should decide. Unfortunately, historically, there have been a lot of dogs running free in Brookland, not off leash, but loose. It has become less over the years, as more and more neighbors do call animal control. Many neighbors previously thought it was ok to open the door, let the dog out to run around in the neighborhood and let the dog back in when it returned. Most of that has stopped. I have never seen this dog loose before (or even out walking on a leash). It is not usually loose in the yard either unless the owner is in the yard too. It is kept in an appropriately sized kennel with a dog house in the back yard or in the house, along with several other dogs. Although I personally don’t agree with leaving dogs in kennels, this owner has, up until now, been a responsible owner. It is truly awful that this happened. BTW – My dogs think her treats are delicious too. They do not usually like crunchy treats, but they like hers.

    • I’m sorry to say it, but if the dog is being kept in a kennel in the backyard and you’ve never seen it being walked, the owner doesn’t really sound all that great. I’ve lived in neighborhoods where “backyard” dogs were pretty prevalent and exactly none of those owners treated the dogs as pets. They were protection, pure and simple.

      • So because none of the “backyard” dogs that you’re personally aware of were treated in a way that meets your personal standard of being “pets” — it therefore follows that these dogs couldn’t possible be well cared for? That’s kind of a leap, don’t you think?

        • Judging from the below post from the OP, it sounds like this dog is being used as protection. Chained in the yard? Yeah not a pet. The owner might be responsible as in, up till now they’ve kept their dog on its own property (which it sounds like they actually haven’t), but it is a guard dog.
          If you ever buy home insurance and you tell them you have a dog they will ask you if you use the dog for “guard purposes” or if you “kennel or chain it on your property.” This matters because more often than not dogs who are not treated as pets (that is animals who are integrated with the family and socialized both in and outside the house) are more liable to be dangerous.

          • Thanks for the explanation.

          • justinbc

            As many times as I’ve had home insurance at various properties and with different companies I’ve never been asked that specific of a question after telling them I owned a dog.

          • Not sure if the dog is used for protection, but she has definitely been bred. There was a huge litter of puppies there within the last few months, you could hear and see them from the street penned up in the backyard.

      • This dog does get walked on a leash sometimes. And I don’t think it’s usually kept in a kennel – there is another dog in a kennel in the backyard that is owned by a friend of the family. I’ve seen this on a leash, in the backyard under supervision and in the backyard alone on a tether. This dog spends most of her day in the house.

        I think that the owners should be required to have a more secure fence along the front of their property (the current fence is an old iron fence with plenty of gaps).

    • By definition a dog owner cannot be responsible if he or she leaves it outside.

  • This little girl seems like a special young lady, and her parents seem very cool. In regard to the dog treats, I think that’s a really great idea, but I’d be tempted to keep the entrepreneurial endeavor on the down low, lest the District get involved per the sixth-grader who just got busted for selling cupcakes in Illinois:


  • Nothing like a classic PopVille dog debate to make the afternoon interesting. The only thing that would be more classic is if we went down the biker versus car rabbit hole.

  • This just came in via the Brookland listserve:

    Thank you for all of the supportive emails we have received about the dog attack. I do want to emphasize that our daughter is going to be okay and clarify that, while the dog bit AT her face, once we were able to clean her up a bit, we were able to determine that it appears the dog did not actually succeed in biting her face. The blood appears to have been attributable to scratches and abrasions from the dog’s paws.

    For that we are grateful because these injuries were near her eye and eyelid and could have been much worse (and very likely would have been much more severe had my husband not been present to pull the dog off of her).

    In response to some questions we have received:

    –The dog is large and dark brown or black with brown stripes and named Angel. If you want to see a picture, you can google the breed.
    — We understand that it’s actual owner lives elsewhere in the city, but the dog is housed by a relative of his who is our neighbor.
    — The dog is housed on the block of Kearny Street between 13th and 14th.
    — This attack was entirely unprovoked. Our daughter did not try to pet the dog or approach it. In fact, the dog crossed the street to the sidewalk where my daughter and husband were and they did not see it until it was nearly on her.
    — We called animal patrol and the police. We were told by animal control that they could not take the dog unless there is a history of such attacks, hence the 10-day quarantine instead.

    The owner of the dog personally apologized to my husband, which we greatly appreciate. That said, we do believe this dog is dangerous. We have seen it act aggressively when chained up outside and have learned that the dog has bit at least one neighbor in addition to the unprovoked attack on our daughter. Thus, we will follow up with animal control with this information and see what other action we can take to ensure that others do not have similar encounters.

    I don’t wish to have a debate about different breeds and aggressiveness. I sent out my original email to warn neighbors as quickly as possible of a potential imminent danger to their kids while also trying to tend to my daughter. I sent out the follow-up email to provide some assurance that the immediate danger had subsided. It was a long evening and we had just spent several hours at the hospital; I admit I could have chosen my words better.

    I would rather focus on ensuring no one else encounters such a scary incident with this dog, so if you have has an encounter with this dog please email me directly so that I may provide that information to animal control.

  • I’ve read many of the comments here and as the father of the child who was attacked by this dog I can clarify a few issues:

    1) we were walking home from Taekwando on the OPPOSITE side of the street from where the dog lives. He made first contact, to my daughter’s face, unprovoked and had I not been there to pull the dog off my kid she probably would be dead or seriously injured. The dog tried to bite her but only managed to cut up her face a little bit with its paws. We didn’t call the dog and didn’t see the dog until it was lunging at my child.
    2) The dog also tried to attack the responding police officer who had to jump on a nearby car to avoid being bitten. He almost shot the dog but the owner came out to corral the dog.
    3) We usually give this animal wide berth as it is not properly socialized, is very aggressive, and several neighbors including myself has seen the owner treat the dog poorly.
    4) The dog has had run ins with other neighborhood dogs and has bitten another neighbor.

    • We live on the 1300 block of Irving and know this dog. In fact, it was recently bred and there are a backyard full of puppies. This dog has gotten out of its yard in the past and is absolutely aggressive. Put it down and confiscate the puppies.

    • Thank you for clarifying. This city is full of inconsiderate people who don’t believe that dogs can do bad things.

      I’m glad your daughter is safe. Unless and until that dog is removed, I urge you to carry something to protect yourself. Please follow up with the City. This has to end.

      This dog should be put down, period.

  • Is the owner posting on craigslist for a place to “store his dog”? There’s a listing for a Presa Canario that can’t be around children.

  • Oh no! My parents have a Presa, and he is a sweet boy who only wants to love you, sleep in the sun, and get belly scritches. That being said, I know there are dogs out there, including Presas, that are aggressive – hope this little girl is alright.

  • There are so many breeds. There is no need to have a Presa in this city. The dog and the owner should be shot.

  • Terrible to hear of a story like this. I hope the girl will be okay after the ordeal.

Comments are closed.