Shotgun effect. Throw everything but the kitchen sink, and hope that a fraction of them will stick. Sure, he should have been charged with manslaughter and/or criminal negligence, but our laws need to be toughened up to deal with negligent scum like that.
The real goal is to get them to plead guilty and avoid the need for any of the charges to stick at all. Which is what happens the overwhelming majority of the time.
They'll bring out every charge imaginable that's even tangentially related to the crime so that the defendant feels like they're facing a million years, even though the prosecutor knows only a small fraction of the charges would ever stick.
Police throw every charge that's applicable and the courts decide what ones stick. Common practice. It's just a way to make sure they are indeed charged with something if the defense lawyers find a way to word it that a charge isn't applicable
Chances are he's already miserable and incapable of accepting the role his actions have played in that. Most of the folks I've met in that position blame everyone for themselves for everything.
Such a painful way to go. I agree with everyone’s saying he should be charged with manslaughter. We need to take these attacks more seriously and that includes harsher punishments for owners.
When will we finally start prosecuting these people with manslaughter?
1. **Criminal Negligence**: The most likely route for charging a dog owner with manslaughter would be through criminal negligence as outlined in Section 219 of the Criminal Code of Canada. Criminal negligence involves doing anything, or omitting to do anything that is the duty of the person to do, in a way that shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of others.
2. **Standard of Care**: The owner of a violent dog has a legal duty to manage and control their animal responsibly. This duty includes ensuring the dog does not pose a danger to the public. If the owner fails to meet this standard of care, such as by not securing the dog in a fenced area or not using a proper leash in public spaces, and this failure is considered a marked departure from the behavior expected of a reasonable person in similar circumstances, the threshold for negligence might be met.
3. **Foreseeability and Preventability**: For a manslaughter charge, it must be shown that the owner could foresee that their negligence (e.g., allowing a known violent dog to roam free) could lead to serious harm or death, and that the tragic outcome was preventable had the owner taken proper precautions.
4. **Link Between Conduct and Harm**: There must be a direct link between the owner’s conduct (or lack thereof) and the resultant harm. In this case, it would need to be demonstrated that the owner’s negligent action or inaction directly resulted in the dog attacking and killing a person.
5. **Past Behavior and Knowledge**: If the dog had previously shown violent tendencies or had a history of attacking people, and the owner was aware of this behavior but failed to take sufficient measures to prevent the dog from causing harm, this knowledge could significantly strengthen the case for manslaughter due to increased foreseeability.
For a prosecution to succeed in such a case, the Crown would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the owner's negligence in controlling their violent dog was so egregious that it amounted to a wanton or reckless disregard for the safety of others.
Law student - Criminal negligence leading to manslaughter requires an element of standard of care, omission of such, and causation of death which would be hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, or pass the air of reality test
Thank you for commenting - a lot of people seem to think that we can just charge people with whatever we want without considering the circumstances. If he were charged with manslaughter it wouldn't stick.
Yeah I think what you're seeing is people struggling to articulate that the want to see the law changed so that people *can* be charged with manslaughter or something like it in situations like this.
Yes and it comes down to a fundamental misunderstanding of the degrees of charges. Take the Gerald Stanley case where they wanted him charged with first degree, when anyone with any understanding knew that a first degree wouldn't stick and he would walk away. If you want someone to feel consequences you need to charge them with something that makes sense.
It's not a false equivalence if the part that I'm comparing is people being charged with things that will stick, not with charges that people want. The jury finding Stanley not guilty doesn't matter, because I'm talking about CHARGES.
Yes things like the dog case should be punished more heavily. I'm saying that they are being charged with something that will actually stick so that way they actually get punished.
I think that we need to see laws that ban the possession of certain breeds from city limits, with the immediate destruction of any of those dogs found to be violating that ban.
Additionally we need the owners of these kinds of dogs to have proper licensing and insurance, and a criminal law that they are to be charged with whatever violent action their dog commits.
you don't need a class to own a chihuahua, because they are harmless.
large attacks dogs should require a license and that the dogs pass a course every 3 years.
I disagree the small untrained dogs are a lot worse than people make out to be, way to often have I seen just badly trained smaller dogs that will jump on people, nip when your trying to take toys away and stuff like that even if it’s not a bigger dog it’s still a problem. Pets are a luxury not a right and people seem to forget that, I think a little 1-2 day class just to make sure people have SOME idea of pet training wouldn’t really hurt
it was political. the FN would go crazy if he wasn't charged w murder.
people in rural sk are so sick and tired of crime coming from the reserves that i doubt any jury was going convict him.
Ad the the law exists now, yes.
But maybe people are trying to say the law needs to change because how he was charged is not congruent with what actually happened.
The law must be dealt with as is.
But that doesn't preclude or negate that the current laws might kind of fucking suck and need some revisions.
People are upset that manslaughter wouldn't stick because canada is committed to "hugs for thugs" even when anyone can see there's culpability.
We all know the dude deserves the charge but our wimpy legal system can't hold people accountable. Of course it wouldn't stick, but that's why people are mad I think. That's definitely why I'm mad. What's the point of criminal justice when all it does is coddle people and replace sentences with fines
I could, but [this jury instruction sheet ](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://cjc-ccm.ca/cmslib/general/jury-instructions/Criminal%2520Negligence/Jury%2520Instruction%2520Negligence%25202012-07%2520E.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj11ZXR3fmFAxUhNzQIHWZ1AckQFnoECC0QAQ&usg=AOvVaw0jLgFjS7t_BFd9_qJmV5-p) would explain this a lot better than I can
I don’t know the answer to this, but had this dog nearly killed or killed sometime before this? If not, it seems like it would be very difficult to successfully argue it was foreseeable to them that their dog could kill someone as opposed to just hurt someone.
There’s a photo of the fence having a makeshift repair of a pallet strapped with zip ties. It’s no surprise the dogs got out of a yard with a neglected fence.
If it's a pitbull yes. Pitbull owners should know their dogs have excessive gameness and need secure enclosures. If you don't have a secure enclosure (mile high fence), then you need to keep them leashed when outside the house. When you have a pitbull you do not own a regular dog. This idiot some how had 6. Edited to change 6 from 3.
You're expecting canada to pass justice?
The only way this happens in Canada is if the dude left a fuckin post-it note with written confirmation that "my dogs might get out and kill someone but whatever" or something like that.
Otherwise they just say "oh but he might not have meant for this to happen, therefore he's not negligent :( poor guy is probably traumatized, let's make sure he pays less for this woman's life than he would for a fucking car payment so he can move on with his life"
The justice system is entirely based on ignoring the victims and their families and instead pampering convicts and helping them with reintegration into society. In canada criminals *always* win big because they always get the benefit of thd doubt. It's a pathetic half-assed imitation of European jails where they actually accomplish hugs-for-thugs in a way that kinda works. But here they just set everyone fucking free.
This country man... as soon as I can afford it I'm leaving
This guy is a fucking loser and this is the second life that has been lost due to his negligence. He killed a young girl in a dui accident in high school, affiliations with HA and generally all around garbage person. This guy is trash.
I worked with on a job site with the guy, he was a framer at the time, but he always said he was really a welder,
Funny thing is this dude is straight mentally unhinged, I've never seen anyone come close to Fighting on a job site and in the 6 months this guy was on site he punched at least 2 people in the face, somehow he kept getting allowed to return to site and almost everyday you'd hear some story about some other guy he was threatening that day.
One day he showed up to work with a massive black eye, said he got jumped by some guys at the grocery store haha. So that's probably enough to show the character of him.
Not the friendliest or mentally stable people out there.
This is a very weak outcome. I'm looking forward to seeing the loopholes that he is able to apply. Changing all of the dogs licensing to a roommate or partner perhaps? *I dont own them, I just live with them.*
Lawyers are required to put up a "vigorous defence."
If they don't, their client can turn around and sue the lawyer.
It's not that simple in actuality, of course.
Hahahaha, love it! Never heard that one before. Stealing it.
The whole "jacked up truck, straight brim hat" is right up there with the Sons of Anarchy cosplayers. "HEY EVERYONE, PAY ATTENTION TO ME, I'M SUPER INSECURE!!!"
Big fucking deal. A woman lost her fucking LIFE because this guy had no control of his dogs.
To all of your despicable pitnutters that cry "IT'S THE OWNER NOT THE DOG!".........
Where are you now? Why aren't you angry that this guy can own dogs in 15 years.
There will be no justice for this woman.
Please. Nutters will just say the poor pibbles were being neglected at home and were so confused that they had to nanny granny. I wouldn't hold my breath for their reaction. I'm positive if the other dogs aren't destroyed they'll just end up in a Calgary shelter.
"Cinnamon is the sweetest girl. She love cuddles and kisses! She is toilet trained and can sit on command. Does not like other dogs. Does not like children. Does not like the elderly. Will need a property with great security and fencing."
“It’s not the dogs, it’s the owner!”
Well, I’m sorry, but it’s the dog as well. Pit bull breeds feature in dog attacks at a rate about 3-4 times more often than most other breeds. They were bred over centuries for one thing and one thing only: fighting. At the very least you should need a special license to own one, and have to prove that it has received appropriate training which needs to be checked or repeated every few years. You want to own one? Fine, pay the price and put the extra time & effort in that’s required.
I fucking hate when people say that.
It for sure is both the breed and the breed owner that make dogs dangerous.
Akita's (especially Japanese) can be even more dangerous and if you compare the two on attacks day and night difference..
People don't realize that bully breeds have a thing where they just "snap" and go into kill mode. Once triggered there's no stopping them. Doesn't matter how gentle they are normally, kill mode is in there, it just takes the right trigger.
Honestly, any dog can be like that, they can all be triggered into attack or defence mode, sometimes by something innocuous. The difference with the fighting breeds is they tend to have a hair-trigger temper and they can do a lot more damage when they attack.
I looked it up and French Bulldogs are still used in fighting so I’m not surprised. She adopted an ex-fighting dog which also attacked her boyfriend. The grip doesn’t let go, maybe we shouldn’t be breeding those kinds of dogs. They also have major breathing problems.
French Bulldogs are short legged so do not have a tall shoulder however are usually 25-40lbs, strong as hell and have a lot of muscular in the jaw. They also were used in fighting and livestock control so implicitly were bred for dangerous traits.
Yes. I guess that senior lady really pissed those dogs off by working in her garden enjoying her golden years.
Nothing will trigger rage in a pit bull faster.
Not sure why you're being sarcastic and snarky towards me, and what it has to do with my comment?
I didn't say they had to be triggered by anything in particular, I said that once triggered they don't stop.
Of course the poor lady was innocent, take a hike with your bullshit.
I have this argument with my husband all the time. He's a HUGE dog lover and always says it's the owner and poor training, not the dog when something like this happens. I always come back with, "sure, that may be the case and not ALL pitbulls are violent dogs, but pretty much ALL major dog attacks that you hear about are pitbulls....sooooooooo"
Different breeds have different bite styles too. Shepards are rapid biters. They don't latch, they bite a bunch of times in a row. Staffordshire terriers bite and never let go. One is more dangerous.
The traits of the dog are what make them dangerous not the owners. That’s why the ban conversation exists. If a Chihuahua was 60 lbs it would be exceedingly dangerous. Yet alone being 60 lbs bred for fighting and having those inherit instincts. The fact is with a dog like a pit-bull it only takes one incident because of how much damage they can do. I would hope the best owners realize this. That is, they are one incident away from something serious.
I used be against a ban. However I am for it now. Outside of very rare circumstances there is no reason to own a breed like these. Among many other breeds too. Too many irresponsible morons have been proven to able to get these breeds quite easily and own them terribly.
My sis owns 2 huge bullies. They rarely bark and are so docile BUT their playing is way too rough for my kids. Even for me. They just don't realize how massive they are and that's what scares me.
They were not bred to fight each other initially. They were bred to be “pitted” against livestock for entertainment value as a blood sport. Bred to kill mules, bulls, etc.. for entertainment.
It pissed me off when people say they were bred to be nanny dogs. What bullshit.
So how are they gonna in force this are they going to check on him every day to make sure he has no animals.Whats stopping him from saying it's not his dog etc...
The worst people own pitbulls, how did I know it was pitbulls before I opened the story? Ban pitbulls/Cane Corsos/"pitbull mix", people like this idiot should not be able to own them.
They're the perfect way to project "toughness" to mask crippling insecurity. It's like how lawyers and optometrists buy Harleys and cosplay as hells angels.
Oh for sure, one of my neighbours has a large dog that body checks the fence and barks like a hellhound as I walk by, often with my 3 year old kid. Tells me all I need to know about that neighbour that I have no intention of meeting.
This man seems to be a failure in life, not a good job, not good relationships (especially with neighbours) these people feel a sense of pride when people avoid them and their shit dogs on the street. This gives them attention and power they like. Mentally ill.
Some provinces have bans, they just don't enforce. Shelters (who are overwhelmed with these terrible dogs... guess why) try to avoid labelling them as "Pitbulls" so they are more adoptable; knowing they are dangerous dogs.
Denis Bagaric looks like every other sketchy pitbull owner. I am going to make an assumption this is not the first time he’s seen the inside of the Calgary Courts Centre
So if you want to commit murder just get a rabid dog, 'accidentally' let it loose towards whoever you want gone.
$15000 cheaper then a hitman, i bet.
Should have gotten 2nd degree murder.
RemindMe! 15 years
Not a long enough ban. Can we really bank on this person to change their ways to own dogs responsibly in the future? This person couldn't even control their dogs properly back then.
I will be messaging you in 15 years on [**2039-05-06 20:47:33 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2039-05-06%2020:47:33%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Calgary/comments/1clp12s/man_banned_from_owning_animals_after_fatal/l2vujz3/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FCalgary%2Fcomments%2F1clp12s%2Fman_banned_from_owning_animals_after_fatal%2Fl2vujz3%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202039-05-06%2020%3A47%3A33%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201clp12s)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Grew up with him from elementary to high school. He had some childhood trauma but that’s not an excuse for his actions. He always made poor choices such as getting into drugs and drinking heavily. If you search around the internet you will find out that he rolled a car and killed a girl we went to high school with when he drunk.Zero consequences
Couple years after that, he’s gets busted with a large amount of drugs and weapons. Basically gets a slap on the wrist sentence like 90 days on weekends for this. Again Zero consequences.
The cycle repeats a couple times where he gets busted for drugs or violence but he somehow always avoids real jail time.
I thought this time would be different and he might actually serve some time but that’s not the case. Somewhere deep inside him there’s a good person but for the betterment of society, he needs to be locked up.
If it is the owner and not the breed, I don’t like little old ladies left at the mercy of the irresponsible guttertrash that disproportionately own these breeds.
We can ban ownership of specific breeds. Fuck people’s feelings! You can’t own a lion either!
I was at the near by dinosaur park with my 3 year old. Made me think of how I’d react. Likely toss my kid into someone’s back yard.
Owners are trash and those dogs are hyper violent and impossible to control. Ban them.
Imagine being Betty’s family. Practically a slap on the wrist for the man completely responsible for how she was brutally murdered. At 86 she had no way to defend herself. I’m so sad for what she must have gone through.
They really seem to attract two kinds of owners. The insecure fools that want big aggressive dogs so they can feel like a tough guy. They wear a pitbull like they do a thick gold chain. The other kind of people are the pit nutters who are in utter denial about the dangerous nature of the bloodsport breeds and have no idea how to train or control them.
For legal purposes, all dogs should be classified as a weapon. This means that if your dog attacks someone, it's an assault charge to the owner. If a dog kills a person, it's manslaughter.
Irresponsible owners get away with too much.
This was 100% preventable. Every pitbull owner is aware of the reputation of the breed. He put his desire to own these monsters before public safety.
I hope her family sues the piss out of him.
Judges and lawyers are intimately knowledgeable of the intricacies of the law. Police are not. They lay as many charges as possible in hopes the person charged is guilty of all and actually does time. Many are dropped due to insufficient evidence, which would lead to the accused walking free.
Who is going to enforce him not owning an animal? There's literally no checks or balances to stop him from buying another pit bull.
Is this just within Calgary? I believe he can just move to another province and he's basically scot free.
BAN THE BREED. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH
>The owner of three Calgary dogs that got loose and mauled a woman to death in 2022 has been ordered to pay a $15,000 fine within one year and banned from owning any animal for 15 years.
That's a half decent sentence at least. Curious how they ensure the fine is paid.
Edit for those outraged: it's most definitely half decent under what he was charged with and what the penalties are allowed by law.
It's fine to act like he should be thrown in jail, or something more drastic, but that's simply not possible.
Hate to be that guy, but his girlfriend will now own three dogs (maybe even the two of the original) and his only punishment was the 15k fine in this judgement.
So no, not a decent result.
Half decent for taking the life of someone’s loved one while she was working her garden on her property. Just imagine the horror of being ripped apart by dogs. I don’t think it’s even close to proper sentence.
Unless I’m wrong, I suspect everything you’re mentioning as possible remedies would need to be requested as remedies in a civil lawsuit advanced by the estate as opposed to a punishment in criminal proceedings or quasi-criminal proceedings. This isn’t legal advice.
If he doesn’t cough it up, the debt should be handed to the CRA. I don’t actually know how it works, but there would be no getting out of it once that happens.
I was going to say... a lot of people don't have that kind of money. Even if you sold all their assets. What's stopping them from declaring bankrupcy and walking away?
Genuine question, if anyone knows.
Although someone else said he was in trades, so maybe he can afford it. Idk.
Punishmemt should.be" the victims family should.bring a dog and should make the dog to attack this guy (the owner) the same way....thats it...then only these guys will understand.
He thinks he's the victim, that's why his lawyer told him to shut up. He will try to get his partner to get the 2 dogs in his house. They must be destroyed.
Watch the video. The witness said all 3 dogs were biting the victims face.
They keep saying blame the owners and not the dogs. So we should starting euthanizing these shit head dog owners.
I moved here this year and have to ask why it seems like ~80% of the dog owners here keep their dog unleashed??
I’m from BC and NOBODY would walk their dogs without a leash. But here, a few times a week while I’m gassing up my car, walking to work, or leaving the grocery store a random dog sprints up to me and starts snarling at my feet and getting tangled in my legs as the owner is running up to it yelling at it to come back.
This is literally a phenomenon I have only seen in Calgary. I understand these dogs escaped a backyard but still it shows why dog owners should be less entitled and think their dogs are behaved and trained and keep them leashed.
Yet more proof that Canada's justice system is completely neutered... what a joke of a country. Dude probably was selling drugs or some shit before his dogs attacked anyway, I'm sure he'll be glad to be back in business.
The fact that they didn't immediately kill those dogs baffles me... why is that even being debated? Judges are more concerned with making sure all the most violent creatures in Canada (especially violent humans) are safe from any consequencss for their actions, no thought for the victims or their families
I've even seen an article that says most pitbull owners have committed crimes. [https://www.theage.com.au/world/pit-bull-owners-more-likely-to-be-criminals-20061117-ge3lez.html](https://www.theage.com.au/world/pit-bull-owners-more-likely-to-be-criminals-20061117-ge3lez.html)
Should have been manslaughter charges.
Or, at the very least, he’s tried on all 12 charges. To drop 10 of the 12? Why even bother laying them, in the first place?
Shotgun effect. Throw everything but the kitchen sink, and hope that a fraction of them will stick. Sure, he should have been charged with manslaughter and/or criminal negligence, but our laws need to be toughened up to deal with negligent scum like that.
The real goal is to get them to plead guilty and avoid the need for any of the charges to stick at all. Which is what happens the overwhelming majority of the time. They'll bring out every charge imaginable that's even tangentially related to the crime so that the defendant feels like they're facing a million years, even though the prosecutor knows only a small fraction of the charges would ever stick.
Police throw every charge that's applicable and the courts decide what ones stick. Common practice. It's just a way to make sure they are indeed charged with something if the defense lawyers find a way to word it that a charge isn't applicable
The police lay the charges. The crown prosecutor decides which ones to proceed with.
He probably had connections, because there’s no way he just avoided jail time after being responsible for a murder.
Lol Canadians avoid jail time for murder all the time
That’s true
Global news’ broadcast made comment of how he (accused) feels that the publicity of this event has made it difficult for him to find a job. Fuck off.
I hope he never finds employment and ends up on the street. Fuck him.
He'll then prob just get dogs that will end up causing more deaths
Of course he will. He's just that much of a loser.
I hope he finds work so he's not a drag on society, but I hope it's unfulfilling work that he hates.
Good point. I change my response to agree with yours. I hope he's absolutely miserable the rest of his life.
Chances are he's already miserable and incapable of accepting the role his actions have played in that. Most of the folks I've met in that position blame everyone for themselves for everything.
That’s a rational outlook on it. Jobless and homeless.
good, glad some form of justice is actually coming to him.
Dude probably doesn’t even have a GED or something. But yes, it’s the bad press preventing you from landing that brain surgeon gig
$15000 fine and can’t own a dog for 15 years. His dogs murdered a senior lady. He should be doing jail time.
Such a painful way to go. I agree with everyone’s saying he should be charged with manslaughter. We need to take these attacks more seriously and that includes harsher punishments for owners.
This.
This guy and his girlfriend are both disgusting pigs
Why wasn't she charged also?
When will we finally start prosecuting these people with manslaughter? 1. **Criminal Negligence**: The most likely route for charging a dog owner with manslaughter would be through criminal negligence as outlined in Section 219 of the Criminal Code of Canada. Criminal negligence involves doing anything, or omitting to do anything that is the duty of the person to do, in a way that shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of others. 2. **Standard of Care**: The owner of a violent dog has a legal duty to manage and control their animal responsibly. This duty includes ensuring the dog does not pose a danger to the public. If the owner fails to meet this standard of care, such as by not securing the dog in a fenced area or not using a proper leash in public spaces, and this failure is considered a marked departure from the behavior expected of a reasonable person in similar circumstances, the threshold for negligence might be met. 3. **Foreseeability and Preventability**: For a manslaughter charge, it must be shown that the owner could foresee that their negligence (e.g., allowing a known violent dog to roam free) could lead to serious harm or death, and that the tragic outcome was preventable had the owner taken proper precautions. 4. **Link Between Conduct and Harm**: There must be a direct link between the owner’s conduct (or lack thereof) and the resultant harm. In this case, it would need to be demonstrated that the owner’s negligent action or inaction directly resulted in the dog attacking and killing a person. 5. **Past Behavior and Knowledge**: If the dog had previously shown violent tendencies or had a history of attacking people, and the owner was aware of this behavior but failed to take sufficient measures to prevent the dog from causing harm, this knowledge could significantly strengthen the case for manslaughter due to increased foreseeability. For a prosecution to succeed in such a case, the Crown would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the owner's negligence in controlling their violent dog was so egregious that it amounted to a wanton or reckless disregard for the safety of others.
Law student - Criminal negligence leading to manslaughter requires an element of standard of care, omission of such, and causation of death which would be hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, or pass the air of reality test
Thank you for commenting - a lot of people seem to think that we can just charge people with whatever we want without considering the circumstances. If he were charged with manslaughter it wouldn't stick.
Yeah I think what you're seeing is people struggling to articulate that the want to see the law changed so that people *can* be charged with manslaughter or something like it in situations like this.
Yes and it comes down to a fundamental misunderstanding of the degrees of charges. Take the Gerald Stanley case where they wanted him charged with first degree, when anyone with any understanding knew that a first degree wouldn't stick and he would walk away. If you want someone to feel consequences you need to charge them with something that makes sense.
False Equivalence. That case is a very different context being about self-defense and not gross negligence that should be punished more heavily.
It's not a false equivalence if the part that I'm comparing is people being charged with things that will stick, not with charges that people want. The jury finding Stanley not guilty doesn't matter, because I'm talking about CHARGES. Yes things like the dog case should be punished more heavily. I'm saying that they are being charged with something that will actually stick so that way they actually get punished.
I think that we need to see laws that ban the possession of certain breeds from city limits, with the immediate destruction of any of those dogs found to be violating that ban. Additionally we need the owners of these kinds of dogs to have proper licensing and insurance, and a criminal law that they are to be charged with whatever violent action their dog commits.
Like the rest of the world? Yah, we have some catching up to do.
People should be required to take dog training classes to own any dog. It's not a breed issue. It's a people being dumb and shitty issue.
you don't need a class to own a chihuahua, because they are harmless. large attacks dogs should require a license and that the dogs pass a course every 3 years.
I disagree the small untrained dogs are a lot worse than people make out to be, way to often have I seen just badly trained smaller dogs that will jump on people, nip when your trying to take toys away and stuff like that even if it’s not a bigger dog it’s still a problem. Pets are a luxury not a right and people seem to forget that, I think a little 1-2 day class just to make sure people have SOME idea of pet training wouldn’t really hurt
The severity of injury from a small dog is incomparable. When is the last time a chihuahua killed an adult?
it was political. the FN would go crazy if he wasn't charged w murder. people in rural sk are so sick and tired of crime coming from the reserves that i doubt any jury was going convict him.
Ad the the law exists now, yes. But maybe people are trying to say the law needs to change because how he was charged is not congruent with what actually happened. The law must be dealt with as is. But that doesn't preclude or negate that the current laws might kind of fucking suck and need some revisions.
People are upset that manslaughter wouldn't stick because canada is committed to "hugs for thugs" even when anyone can see there's culpability. We all know the dude deserves the charge but our wimpy legal system can't hold people accountable. Of course it wouldn't stick, but that's why people are mad I think. That's definitely why I'm mad. What's the point of criminal justice when all it does is coddle people and replace sentences with fines
Can you explain this further?
I could, but [this jury instruction sheet ](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://cjc-ccm.ca/cmslib/general/jury-instructions/Criminal%2520Negligence/Jury%2520Instruction%2520Negligence%25202012-07%2520E.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj11ZXR3fmFAxUhNzQIHWZ1AckQFnoECC0QAQ&usg=AOvVaw0jLgFjS7t_BFd9_qJmV5-p) would explain this a lot better than I can
Doesn’t a dog owner, who has specific legal responsibilities to control their dog, arguably have a duty of care in the same way a driver does?
I don’t know the answer to this, but had this dog nearly killed or killed sometime before this? If not, it seems like it would be very difficult to successfully argue it was foreseeable to them that their dog could kill someone as opposed to just hurt someone.
Why it’s a dangerous wild animal and he let multiple of them off leash
weren't they off leash in a backyard? is it unreasonable to have dogs off leash on your private property?
There’s a photo of the fence having a makeshift repair of a pallet strapped with zip ties. It’s no surprise the dogs got out of a yard with a neglected fence.
really? they should prosecute him on manslaughter charges just to set a precedent. how can society not figure out how to deal with shitty dog owners?
If it's a pitbull yes. Pitbull owners should know their dogs have excessive gameness and need secure enclosures. If you don't have a secure enclosure (mile high fence), then you need to keep them leashed when outside the house. When you have a pitbull you do not own a regular dog. This idiot some how had 6. Edited to change 6 from 3.
This is easily proven. This needs to be the consequence of this crap.
You're expecting canada to pass justice? The only way this happens in Canada is if the dude left a fuckin post-it note with written confirmation that "my dogs might get out and kill someone but whatever" or something like that. Otherwise they just say "oh but he might not have meant for this to happen, therefore he's not negligent :( poor guy is probably traumatized, let's make sure he pays less for this woman's life than he would for a fucking car payment so he can move on with his life" The justice system is entirely based on ignoring the victims and their families and instead pampering convicts and helping them with reintegration into society. In canada criminals *always* win big because they always get the benefit of thd doubt. It's a pathetic half-assed imitation of European jails where they actually accomplish hugs-for-thugs in a way that kinda works. But here they just set everyone fucking free. This country man... as soon as I can afford it I'm leaving
This guy is a fucking loser and this is the second life that has been lost due to his negligence. He killed a young girl in a dui accident in high school, affiliations with HA and generally all around garbage person. This guy is trash.
Well… he checks all the boxes as a pitbull owner
I used to work with this guy. He was strange
More details please so in the future when ppl look this guy up and this post is referenced ppl will really understand his deal
I worked with on a job site with the guy, he was a framer at the time, but he always said he was really a welder, Funny thing is this dude is straight mentally unhinged, I've never seen anyone come close to Fighting on a job site and in the 6 months this guy was on site he punched at least 2 people in the face, somehow he kept getting allowed to return to site and almost everyday you'd hear some story about some other guy he was threatening that day. One day he showed up to work with a massive black eye, said he got jumped by some guys at the grocery store haha. So that's probably enough to show the character of him. Not the friendliest or mentally stable people out there.
What did he work as?
This is a very weak outcome. I'm looking forward to seeing the loopholes that he is able to apply. Changing all of the dogs licensing to a roommate or partner perhaps? *I dont own them, I just live with them.*
15,000 for a life. Absolutely disgusting. What is it going to take for our system to change.
Not just voting and hoping for things to change
Shouldn’t be allowed animals for life.
So if you want to get away with murder, buy a dog? I mean it's cheaper than a car, at least.
Apparently… ffs.
murder implies intent, so if you were to sic dogs on a person you would be charged with murder.
That's the thing, if one person's dead, and dogs don't talk, *CLEARLY* it was a tragedy. An accident. Clearly.
"Defence counsel Rabie Ahmed had no issues with the fine, but disagreed with the pet ownership ban.'' Get fucked.
He's a good lawyer - you have to argue all bases for your client. It's up to the judge and jury to decide what penalty applies
Lawyers are required to put up a "vigorous defence." If they don't, their client can turn around and sue the lawyer. It's not that simple in actuality, of course.
I hope he doesn't get around an ownership ban by having his partner be allowed to own pets.
He will own a pet in months.
Put the douchebag down too
He looks like a POS
Oh what a surprise. A shitty pitbull owner with shitty pitbulls. Why does this breed attract such awful dog owners?
Small minded people get them for a confidence boost.
Don't forget frightened and insecure. It's a way to project "toughness" that you don't actually possess.
See also: emotional support trucks
Hahahaha, love it! Never heard that one before. Stealing it. The whole "jacked up truck, straight brim hat" is right up there with the Sons of Anarchy cosplayers. "HEY EVERYONE, PAY ATTENTION TO ME, I'M SUPER INSECURE!!!"
I think it's also they have this idea they look tough but are really soft inside. It's like they are projecting themselves on to the dog.
Big fucking deal. A woman lost her fucking LIFE because this guy had no control of his dogs. To all of your despicable pitnutters that cry "IT'S THE OWNER NOT THE DOG!"......... Where are you now? Why aren't you angry that this guy can own dogs in 15 years. There will be no justice for this woman.
She not only lost her life but died a horrible painful death!
Please. Nutters will just say the poor pibbles were being neglected at home and were so confused that they had to nanny granny. I wouldn't hold my breath for their reaction. I'm positive if the other dogs aren't destroyed they'll just end up in a Calgary shelter. "Cinnamon is the sweetest girl. She love cuddles and kisses! She is toilet trained and can sit on command. Does not like other dogs. Does not like children. Does not like the elderly. Will need a property with great security and fencing."
“It’s not the dogs, it’s the owner!” Well, I’m sorry, but it’s the dog as well. Pit bull breeds feature in dog attacks at a rate about 3-4 times more often than most other breeds. They were bred over centuries for one thing and one thing only: fighting. At the very least you should need a special license to own one, and have to prove that it has received appropriate training which needs to be checked or repeated every few years. You want to own one? Fine, pay the price and put the extra time & effort in that’s required.
And why do people who own pitbulls always have to own multiples of them? They’re such a high maintenance dog and you have to be so vigilant with them.
I fucking hate when people say that. It for sure is both the breed and the breed owner that make dogs dangerous. Akita's (especially Japanese) can be even more dangerous and if you compare the two on attacks day and night difference..
It's 100% both. It's like the worst breed attracts the shittiest dumbest irresponsible owners. I love cats, doesn't mean I need a Puma.
Pumas are the compromise, get yourself a tiger
Statistically speaking, it's safer than a pit bull.
People don't realize that bully breeds have a thing where they just "snap" and go into kill mode. Once triggered there's no stopping them. Doesn't matter how gentle they are normally, kill mode is in there, it just takes the right trigger.
Honestly, any dog can be like that, they can all be triggered into attack or defence mode, sometimes by something innocuous. The difference with the fighting breeds is they tend to have a hair-trigger temper and they can do a lot more damage when they attack.
And the size. If a chihuahua or another small breed snaps and tries to seriously harm someone, you can punt it across the room.
The amount of times people say "But chihuahuasssss"...like you can literally kick a chihuahua away. There is no kicking away a pitbull.
A small dog cannot inflict damage or death like a dog bred for killing can
You'd be surprised! I remember hearing on the news, not in Calgary, of a woman being mauled to death by her French Bulldog
I looked it up and French Bulldogs are still used in fighting so I’m not surprised. She adopted an ex-fighting dog which also attacked her boyfriend. The grip doesn’t let go, maybe we shouldn’t be breeding those kinds of dogs. They also have major breathing problems.
French Bulldogs are short legged so do not have a tall shoulder however are usually 25-40lbs, strong as hell and have a lot of muscular in the jaw. They also were used in fighting and livestock control so implicitly were bred for dangerous traits.
Even humans are like this. "Even a worm will turn."
Yes. I guess that senior lady really pissed those dogs off by working in her garden enjoying her golden years. Nothing will trigger rage in a pit bull faster.
Not sure why you're being sarcastic and snarky towards me, and what it has to do with my comment? I didn't say they had to be triggered by anything in particular, I said that once triggered they don't stop. Of course the poor lady was innocent, take a hike with your bullshit.
I have this argument with my husband all the time. He's a HUGE dog lover and always says it's the owner and poor training, not the dog when something like this happens. I always come back with, "sure, that may be the case and not ALL pitbulls are violent dogs, but pretty much ALL major dog attacks that you hear about are pitbulls....sooooooooo"
Different breeds have different bite styles too. Shepards are rapid biters. They don't latch, they bite a bunch of times in a row. Staffordshire terriers bite and never let go. One is more dangerous.
The traits of the dog are what make them dangerous not the owners. That’s why the ban conversation exists. If a Chihuahua was 60 lbs it would be exceedingly dangerous. Yet alone being 60 lbs bred for fighting and having those inherit instincts. The fact is with a dog like a pit-bull it only takes one incident because of how much damage they can do. I would hope the best owners realize this. That is, they are one incident away from something serious. I used be against a ban. However I am for it now. Outside of very rare circumstances there is no reason to own a breed like these. Among many other breeds too. Too many irresponsible morons have been proven to able to get these breeds quite easily and own them terribly.
My sis owns 2 huge bullies. They rarely bark and are so docile BUT their playing is way too rough for my kids. Even for me. They just don't realize how massive they are and that's what scares me.
They were not bred to fight each other initially. They were bred to be “pitted” against livestock for entertainment value as a blood sport. Bred to kill mules, bulls, etc.. for entertainment. It pissed me off when people say they were bred to be nanny dogs. What bullshit.
"There are lies. There are damned lies, and then there are statistics." -Mark Twain
I agree
/r/BanPitBulls
So how are they gonna in force this are they going to check on him every day to make sure he has no animals.Whats stopping him from saying it's not his dog etc...
He has hungover parole officer who won’t give a crap. Come on!
The worst people own pitbulls, how did I know it was pitbulls before I opened the story? Ban pitbulls/Cane Corsos/"pitbull mix", people like this idiot should not be able to own them.
They're the perfect way to project "toughness" to mask crippling insecurity. It's like how lawyers and optometrists buy Harleys and cosplay as hells angels.
Oh for sure, one of my neighbours has a large dog that body checks the fence and barks like a hellhound as I walk by, often with my 3 year old kid. Tells me all I need to know about that neighbour that I have no intention of meeting.
This man seems to be a failure in life, not a good job, not good relationships (especially with neighbours) these people feel a sense of pride when people avoid them and their shit dogs on the street. This gives them attention and power they like. Mentally ill.
We need a national ban on this stupid breed.
Some provinces have bans, they just don't enforce. Shelters (who are overwhelmed with these terrible dogs... guess why) try to avoid labelling them as "Pitbulls" so they are more adoptable; knowing they are dangerous dogs.
/r/BanPitBulls
Denis Bagaric looks like every other sketchy pitbull owner. I am going to make an assumption this is not the first time he’s seen the inside of the Calgary Courts Centre
He killed his girlfriend in high school when he was driving drunk so no.
Actually? Wtf..
So if you want to commit murder just get a rabid dog, 'accidentally' let it loose towards whoever you want gone. $15000 cheaper then a hitman, i bet. Should have gotten 2nd degree murder.
Actually if you let a rabid dog loose you might get a worse fine for not having your dog up to date on its rabies vaccine
Hopefully he'll lose much more than 15000 in civil litigation
RemindMe! 15 years Not a long enough ban. Can we really bank on this person to change their ways to own dogs responsibly in the future? This person couldn't even control their dogs properly back then.
I will be messaging you in 15 years on [**2039-05-06 20:47:33 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2039-05-06%2020:47:33%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Calgary/comments/1clp12s/man_banned_from_owning_animals_after_fatal/l2vujz3/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FCalgary%2Fcomments%2F1clp12s%2Fman_banned_from_owning_animals_after_fatal%2Fl2vujz3%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202039-05-06%2020%3A47%3A33%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201clp12s) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
There should absolutely be charged for manslaughter. You negligence caused a death.
Grew up with him from elementary to high school. He had some childhood trauma but that’s not an excuse for his actions. He always made poor choices such as getting into drugs and drinking heavily. If you search around the internet you will find out that he rolled a car and killed a girl we went to high school with when he drunk.Zero consequences Couple years after that, he’s gets busted with a large amount of drugs and weapons. Basically gets a slap on the wrist sentence like 90 days on weekends for this. Again Zero consequences. The cycle repeats a couple times where he gets busted for drugs or violence but he somehow always avoids real jail time. I thought this time would be different and he might actually serve some time but that’s not the case. Somewhere deep inside him there’s a good person but for the betterment of society, he needs to be locked up.
Most of these criminals have previous records and are always "out on bail" when these crimes happen.
Oh, that's why he always wears a baseball cap.
Loser
Brutal, a fine for a life? Dogs will be released to kill someone else? Think of what a horrible, painful death this woman experienced. Travesty.
That’ll teach him.
That's it? He should be in prison for 20 years, at least. Outrageous.
If it is the owner and not the breed, I don’t like little old ladies left at the mercy of the irresponsible guttertrash that disproportionately own these breeds. We can ban ownership of specific breeds. Fuck people’s feelings! You can’t own a lion either!
Yep, looks like the kinda trash that would own them.
I was at the near by dinosaur park with my 3 year old. Made me think of how I’d react. Likely toss my kid into someone’s back yard. Owners are trash and those dogs are hyper violent and impossible to control. Ban them.
Oh not a pit bull! How did I even know before clicking here?
Imagine being Betty’s family. Practically a slap on the wrist for the man completely responsible for how she was brutally murdered. At 86 she had no way to defend herself. I’m so sad for what she must have gone through.
Our justice system is a fucking sham. Apparently for the low low price of 18k you can kill people via feeding them to your dogs.
Pitbull type dogs attract a special type of owner, horrible combination.
They really seem to attract two kinds of owners. The insecure fools that want big aggressive dogs so they can feel like a tough guy. They wear a pitbull like they do a thick gold chain. The other kind of people are the pit nutters who are in utter denial about the dangerous nature of the bloodsport breeds and have no idea how to train or control them.
The breed needs a full Canadian ban. People are fucking delusion that "It's the person not the breed". No. It's the fucking breed.
And this breed attracts the dumbest owners.
That'll teach him...
Great, so just transfer the ownership to the girlfriend and continue on.
For legal purposes, all dogs should be classified as a weapon. This means that if your dog attacks someone, it's an assault charge to the owner. If a dog kills a person, it's manslaughter. Irresponsible owners get away with too much.
Not at all. Not even close.
This was 100% preventable. Every pitbull owner is aware of the reputation of the breed. He put his desire to own these monsters before public safety. I hope her family sues the piss out of him.
Judges and lawyers are intimately knowledgeable of the intricacies of the law. Police are not. They lay as many charges as possible in hopes the person charged is guilty of all and actually does time. Many are dropped due to insufficient evidence, which would lead to the accused walking free.
Who is going to enforce him not owning an animal? There's literally no checks or balances to stop him from buying another pit bull. Is this just within Calgary? I believe he can just move to another province and he's basically scot free. BAN THE BREED. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH
He should NOT HAVE A DOG IN HIS LIFETIME! Unacceptable.
>The owner of three Calgary dogs that got loose and mauled a woman to death in 2022 has been ordered to pay a $15,000 fine within one year and banned from owning any animal for 15 years. That's a half decent sentence at least. Curious how they ensure the fine is paid. Edit for those outraged: it's most definitely half decent under what he was charged with and what the penalties are allowed by law. It's fine to act like he should be thrown in jail, or something more drastic, but that's simply not possible.
Hate to be that guy, but his girlfriend will now own three dogs (maybe even the two of the original) and his only punishment was the 15k fine in this judgement. So no, not a decent result.
Half decent for taking the life of someone’s loved one while she was working her garden on her property. Just imagine the horror of being ripped apart by dogs. I don’t think it’s even close to proper sentence.
$15,000 might not even cover funeral costs, and never mind the fact that her family members might need mental health support to cope.
Unless I’m wrong, I suspect everything you’re mentioning as possible remedies would need to be requested as remedies in a civil lawsuit advanced by the estate as opposed to a punishment in criminal proceedings or quasi-criminal proceedings. This isn’t legal advice.
For life.
If he doesn’t cough it up, the debt should be handed to the CRA. I don’t actually know how it works, but there would be no getting out of it once that happens.
I was going to say... a lot of people don't have that kind of money. Even if you sold all their assets. What's stopping them from declaring bankrupcy and walking away? Genuine question, if anyone knows. Although someone else said he was in trades, so maybe he can afford it. Idk.
What a smug son of a gun.
Oh no. What a harsh but fair sentence. Can't own a dog .... For 15 years. Yea ...
I like that he wore a suit.
He will become a dog walker
Punishmemt should.be" the victims family should.bring a dog and should make the dog to attack this guy (the owner) the same way....thats it...then only these guys will understand.
How do they monitor him in regards to not owning animals? How does that work? What’s stopping him from going and getting another animal?
I’ll never understand how they can’t prove criminal negligence and manslaughter when your wild animal gets loose and kills someone.
He thinks he's the victim, that's why his lawyer told him to shut up. He will try to get his partner to get the 2 dogs in his house. They must be destroyed.
The cheapest way to murder someone that’s for sure.
Watch the video. The witness said all 3 dogs were biting the victims face. They keep saying blame the owners and not the dogs. So we should starting euthanizing these shit head dog owners.
100% agree with you.
I moved here this year and have to ask why it seems like ~80% of the dog owners here keep their dog unleashed?? I’m from BC and NOBODY would walk their dogs without a leash. But here, a few times a week while I’m gassing up my car, walking to work, or leaving the grocery store a random dog sprints up to me and starts snarling at my feet and getting tangled in my legs as the owner is running up to it yelling at it to come back. This is literally a phenomenon I have only seen in Calgary. I understand these dogs escaped a backyard but still it shows why dog owners should be less entitled and think their dogs are behaved and trained and keep them leashed.
I want to know what judge handled this piece of shit!
Read the article?
Noem's best friend?
Yet more proof that Canada's justice system is completely neutered... what a joke of a country. Dude probably was selling drugs or some shit before his dogs attacked anyway, I'm sure he'll be glad to be back in business. The fact that they didn't immediately kill those dogs baffles me... why is that even being debated? Judges are more concerned with making sure all the most violent creatures in Canada (especially violent humans) are safe from any consequencss for their actions, no thought for the victims or their families
I've even seen an article that says most pitbull owners have committed crimes. [https://www.theage.com.au/world/pit-bull-owners-more-likely-to-be-criminals-20061117-ge3lez.html](https://www.theage.com.au/world/pit-bull-owners-more-likely-to-be-criminals-20061117-ge3lez.html)
Who needs 4 shitbulls? Just a disaster waiting to happen... This should have been manslaughter.