In a rare appeal, a special magistrate this morning affirmed Palm Coast Animal Control’s decision to designate Ghost, a large pit bull mix, a dangerous dog following the dog’s attack on the 13-year-old girl who was walking him on an R-Section street on June 5.
Dangerous dog designations are very costly and restrictive on dog owners, amounting to a form of permanent probation for the dog, with a Damocles sword set to cut the dog’s life short should the dog reoffend. But the burden a local government must meet to impose the designation is high, and hinges on incontrovertible proof of severe injuries to victims (including animals) or unprovoked, wanton attacks. There was no doubt that the city met that burden in Ghost’s case.
“The 13 year old was attacked, honestly, quite gruesomely, with many, many attacks, many, many sutures,” Special Magistrate Stephen Mistoler told the dog’s owners as he announced his ruling after a 70-minute hearing at City Hall, noting the presence of a 2-year-old child in the same household. “I really dread the idea of anything horrible happening to that really young, 2-year-old child.”
Ghost is a roughly 2-year-old male pit bull his owners breed and take to dog shows–a practice that will have to end with the dangerous-dog designation. Any dog that has aggressively bitten, attacked or caused severe injury to a human being on public or private property may be deemed dangerous. A second offense would lead to the dog’s destruction.
Ghost’s owners and the girl’s parents, Jimmie Robinson II and Tenille Payne, had appealed the city’s decision, resulting in this morning’s hearing before Stephen Mistoler, the magistrate. The hearing was similar to a trial, with the city’s attorney, Jennifer Nix, making the city’s case, and questioning witnesses.
Robinson and Payne represented themselves, with little familiarity with hearing procedures, putting them at a disadvantage from the outset. But the case did not appear to have ambiguities, the dog’s owners did not contest the acts of the case, only some of their interpretation, and their legal case added up to contentions that could not stand up against the city’s evidence: no one knows why the dog attacked, and it could have been much worse.
Remarkably, the couple downplayed the severity of the attack despite disturbing images that showed their daughter scarred, punctured, lacerated and scratched on her arms, her legs, her feet, her back and one of her hands, with eight to 10 of the spots requiring stitches.
“It wasn’t an aggressive bite, he was just playing around,” Robinson said, otherwise “she would have been more torn apart.”
The incident took place outside of 8 Ryall lane in Palm Coast at 1 a.m. on June 5, when the couple’s daughter, Danielle (the name has been changed), decided to walk Ghost, though she never has and never does, according to her parents. Payne was asleep on the couch at the time. “She decided to walk the dog on her own at 1 a.m., I didn’t even know she went outside,” she said.
Danielle, who was not in the hearing room, had never walked the dog before. Payne heard her daughter screams, as did neighbors. Neighbors called 911. Ghost had overpowered Danielle, throwing her to the ground and attacking her repeatedly.
There is no evidence that the attack was provoked, the Animal Control officer who investigated the case for the city, Heather Priestap, concluded, and said again at the hearing.
“I feel that Ghost attacked with no warning and kept attacking, and I know from my opinion it sounds like she was rolling around, trying to get away and she was screaming,” Precept said. “There are other children in the house as well. With an unprovoked attack, it’s hard to tell when they will attack.”
Ghost was impounded at the Humane Society, as required by law when a dog has caused a severe injury, pending the outcome of the investigation. At the Humane Society, a kennel worker was again bitten by Ghost while walking him, causing a bleeding laceration. The city made much of that second bite in its case this morning, citing it as reason enough to have warranted a recommendation to euthanize the dog.
Mistoler, the magistrate didn’t put as much weight on the second bite: he was concerned about the humane Society victim’s affidavit, which described an understaffed operation. “‘I wasn’t supposed to be working this day, I was supposed to be off today,'” the magistrate read from the affidavit. “Maybe there’s a little bit more going on at the shelter with staffing. So I’m not really going to consider this so heavily, the second bite that we have.” Had he done so, Ghost’s fate might have been spoken for.
So the magistrate focused on the facts and consequences of the June 5 attack, as presented by Jennifer Nix, the city’s attorney on the case. The magistrate was perhaps startled by the dog owners’ testimonies.
Robinson, when he appealed the case, argued in his appeal that Danielle does not feel that the dog harmed her and is not afraid of Ghost.
“You’re aware he harmed her?” Nix asked him.
“Yes,” he said.
“Did you see her injuries?”
“Yes,” Robinson said. “She says she didn’t feel he harmed her.”
“You’re aware there are stitches in multiple places.”
“Yes.” Robinson said the dog was biting her but in a playful rather than aggressive way.
“Do you consider this to be a serious injury?” Nix asked him, referring to the images.
“She’s fine now,” he said, downplaying the wounds, which he said did not go to the bone, for example.
“Do you feel that it would have to be that severe for you to think it’s problematic?” Nix asked him.
“I don’t feel like that,” Robinson said, “but I feel like it was one incident that occurred, and I feel like, how can you just determine that he’s dangerous on one incident? There’s no one else in the public that he bit or anybody else walking down the street.” Ghost has been to several dog shows without biting anyone, Robinson said. He did not see why that particular bite was singled out as warranting the dangerous dog designation, “just because of one incident.”
Payne’s testimony was not that much different, though she seemed a bit more concerned about the injuries. “We can’t say what happened, we weren’t there,” Payne said.
“What do you think is going on here, that the dog preemptively acts like this?” Nix asked her.
“I don’t know what happened I wasn’t there,” Payne said.
“So as far as you understand it wasn’t though your daughter was tormenting or abusing or assaulting the dog,” the attorney asked.
“I’m not sure what she was doing out there. She’s not going to tell that if she was,” Payne said.
But by then it was really a one-sided case, the magistrate’s decision all but certain. Nix did not let up in her closing argument, portraying the city as merciful enough not to seek the death of the dog, though under the law it would have been entitled to do so. “That is an aggressive dog,” she said, after again summarizing the extent of the injuries that morning. “There’s no evidence that the victim provoked Ghost.”
Robinson and Payne declined to put on witnesses of their own, or to present closing arguments. Perhaps they knew the battle lost, their body language–slumped, deflated soon after they sat down at the beginning of the hearing–suggesting that they knew it lost minutes into the appeal.
Clearly, however, the magistrate was not out for blood, seeking a tempered ruling that reflected the severity of the attack, afforded Ghost one more chance, and imposed the sort of restrictions that would, assuming they are complied with, ensure safety for the dog’s entourage.
Ghost will have to be sterilized, it’ll have to be kenneled or otherwise muzzled even in the house, if children under 18 are present, and will have to follow a series of other measures to comply with the dangerous-dog designation: it’ll have to be tattooed with the designation, his owners’ property will have to display signs at all points of entry indicating the presence of a dangerous dog, his owners will have to buy $100,000 worth of liability insurance if Ghost were to cause damage or injury again, and so on. They will also owe $300 to the Humane Society–and will not get Ghost back until he will have been sterilized.
Ghost’s owners have the right of appeal–not to the Palm Coast City Council, which, like all local governments, dreads the no-win politics of these cases, but to circuit court.
Duane says
If my dog bit my child or grandchild causing the wounds to be closed with sutures, there would not be a reason for a dangerous dog hearing.
Jean says
Exactly, my parents said if our dog bites someone it’s getting put down. And warned us never to take a bone away from her as that would constitute provocation. These were not only unprovoked attacks, they were repeated. Shame on the magistrate for not requiring the dog be put down, but child protective services should step in.
Skibum says
I don’t care what anyone says about this breed of dog being gentle and somehow it is only the owner that somehow makes a pit bull aggressive and dangerous, I think that is nonsense. Some breeds of dogs are gentle, some breeds are hyperactive, some breeds bark their heads off, and some, like pit bulls, are more prone to aggressiveness and will even attack their own owners, provoked or not. The two adults in this story who have two young children in the household are being extremely negligent and endangering the children if they keep that dangerous dog. That is obvious by the sheer denial of the fact that the man will even acknowledge the harm and injury his young daughter suffered when attacked by that pit bull. Any responsible parent would put a child’s welfare above the pit bull! But no, they are trying to defend the dangerous dog while at the same time trying to minimize the wounds the young child received and had to have stitches in various parts of her body. Any reasonable parent with brains would have told animal control to take the dog and put it down after such an attack on their own child, but no, these idiots are in total denial. I sincerely hope the restrictions placed on that dangerous dog prevent any future attacks, but considering the attitude of the adults who own it, I’m not holding my breath for even one second.
Mark says
Wow, it seems they care more about the dog than their own two kids. Hopefully we don’t have to read in the coming months that their kids or neighbors were severely attacked and their kids removed from the home.
Concerned Citizen says
It’s about profit. Or loss of.
I have never seen a larger area of “back yard breeders” than I have in this area. From Pits to Frenchies. People don’t care about these animals. They care about producing a litter and then getting them sold.
I wonder how many are operating legitimately with the appropriate licenses? Animal control or FCSO would do well by conducting under cover buys. And checking to see if they have the appropriate paperwork.
DaleL says
All dog breeds will have individuals that will bite. The late Queen Elizabeth’s corgis may have seemed sweet, but some of them were involved in biting incidents. The first bite occurred in 1954, when a corgi, named Susan, bit the royal clockwinder, Leonard Hubbard. The same dog bit one of the Queen’s Guardsmen one week later. In 1968, a postman was bitten. The Queen mother also had corgis. In 1989, the Queen Mother’s dog, Ranger, led a pack of corgis that attacked and killed Chipper, the Queen’s beloved dorgi (a dachshund and corgi mix). In March 1991, Elizabeth tried to break up a fight among ten dogs, was bitten, and had to receive three stitches in her left hand. However, here in the “colonies”, corgis do not seem to ever be involved in vicious attacks.
However, some dog breeds are involved in a disproportionate number of unprovoked severe disfiguring or even lethal bites. Pit bull and pit bull mix dogs are in that group. It should not be as difficult as it is, to have such dogs designated as dangerous.
Laurel says
Well, these parents are really concerned about their kids, aren’t they? Eight of the ten wounds needed stitches, no big deal.
Pit Bulls are bred precisely to do damage. They are bred to fight in pits, hence the name. They do not feel as much pain, and their jaws have a more powerful bite than most dogs. They are meant to kill their opponent. Their ears are often cut off with scissors as puppies, by their owner, so that the other fighting dog can’t get hold. People say “Oh, they are so sweet.” Baloney. There are plenty of incidents of pit bulls mauling, and even killing, children.
Just play, huh? Palm Coast, and the parents, can wait for the next *play* attack.
Jean says
Every day another story that makes me ashamed to call Palm Coast home. Officers slitting deer throats, magistrates giving the A-OK for dangerous dogs… I can’t wait to leave after 20 years here. No accountability in govt here.
The Sour Kraut says
What is wrong with these parents? I love dogs too, but this dog mauled their CHILD and already bit someone else.
Deirdre says
I had to put a dog I loved to sleep because of biting. I got him from a non-euthanasia shelter and they were aware of his aggressiveness, I was a fool to take him, but when he bit it was no joke. I thought being in a loving home and following the suggestions of experts would eliminate the risk but I was wrong.
He would sink his teeth into you and go for a second bite when you pulled away just for being slightly startled. The bottom line is I knew he could kill someone, I spent $2000 with a professional trainer but after a couple more bites that was it. I tried everything.
Honestly it sounds like the owners just don’t understand how serious this is, he could’ve killed their child – one attack is enough. He was playfully biting? Was the volunteer at the humane society playing with him too? Seriously, IMO this dog is a serious danger and should be euthanized.
Truthful veterinarian says
This is one of the most disturbing cases of child abuse I have seen in my lifetime. The father is more concerned about losing money pimping his dog out than protecting his child. Child protection services, where are you? Please remove these children before they die while his narcissistic father shrugs it off. Please do something now. Not sure why the magistrate dismissed violent attack number two. Do shelter employees not matter?
If the general public knew the reality and death caused by pit bulls, they would not fall victim to buying and adopting these killer dogs.
Please go to dogsbite.org before ever considering these maulers as a pet. The life you say nay be that of your own child.
YankeeExPat says
“It wasn’t an aggressive bite, he was just playing around,” Robinson said, otherwise “she would have been more torn apart.”
The Child Protective Services (CPS) & FCSO needs to intervene here. The Parents/Guardian are not acting in the child best interest.
Deborah Coffey says
It appears that the parents should have been on trial along with the dog. They get to keep the dog with a 2-year old in the house? This doesn’t make sense.
Pat Stote says
Unbelievable. Most parents would want to shoot the dog on site if it harmed their young child.
I think the dog should have been put down immediately after quarantine. Just shocking that it wasn’t. Nine out of 10 even if that happened they both got another pitbull to replace that one.
A perfect example of why some people shouldn’t have children in the first place
Concerned Citizen says
All one has to do is jump over to Facebook. And you will see all the “back yard breeders” and “puppy mills” out there.
They are so frequent that there most not be much in the way of licensing requirements. And it’s sad because some of these folks are breeding so much it can’t be healthy for the animals. All these folks care about is a quick litter of pups. And fast bucks. There should be some way of slowing this down and regulating it more.
Mesa Wind says
The law needs to change in Florida. Dogs that bite don’t get a second chance. This pit should have been euthanized. And CPS called based on behavior of the parents.
#BanPitbulls
1. all pitbull mixes surrendered to shelters must be euthanized -no kill shelters are not exempt
2. any shelter mislabeling a pitbull mix to adopt it out will be held liable for any damage that dog does
3.Current owners must carry $100k dangerous breed insurance . dog must be neutered
4. Muzzled when out in public , owner slapped with criminal negligence and manslaughter charges if pit escapes on a rampage
Current stats of bully breed mixes: two attacks on humans per day. Fatality mostly children every two weeks. 30× that for pets & livestock. = 23K dogs & 75,000 livestock deaths per year.
The pit lobby/ best friend animal society gets 110 million a year in donations to fight #BSL breed specific laws, spreading disinfo like ‘nanny dog’ zero empathy or help to animal victims
More need to know this
Truthful veterinarian says
All of this.
I would add, hefty breeder licenses fees. Heavy fines for breeding them.
Mandatory spay/ neuter is one does not have the very expensive breeder license.
No second chances. Euthanize at first bite.
$1,000,000 (yes, million) insurance policy for damages by your bully. $100,000 does not come close to covering medical bills after an attack. The helicopter ride alone can cost $50,000.
Significant jail time for any owner of a dog that kills a human being.
Veterinarians should put requirements in place that they will not see your pit beyond 6 months of age without it being spayed/neutered.
Hefty fined for running at large.
Dogsbite.org .
Statistics don’t lie. Pit owners do.
Mesawindu says
Thank you! Yes. I wrote to Desantis on BSL and why. Maybe a few of us as a group would get more traction?
Mesawindu on twitter to join me in action. Can share my letter
Atwp says
During times like these, is it wise to have children and dogs at the same time? Can people afford to have both at the same time? They are raising their children and that is expensive then you have a dog, now an expense for the child who was bitten by the dog. Their choice.
Robert Joseph Fortier says
One of my two dogs was rescued by my wife and I and would have been put down if we hadn’t.
I worked with canines. in the military during Nam, so I have a little experience, as well as a lifelong dog owner.
Frankie is now an awesome family member, but I had to train him…a lot.
I also had to become physical with him at times. He needed to know who the alpha was…ME.
We live on large property that is fenced in, so he can run and play with his foster brother (GSD).
Now he is a great protector of his family and friends, one beautiful dog.
Point is…not everyone can take in a dog with aggressive behaviors and make them into a different dog.
And, of-course…too many underestimate the damage those dogs can do.
TR says
There is a single female in her 40s (i would say) that has a pitbull and living with her are her late 20 year old daughter and a kid that’s about 8 -10 yrs old. But on the weekends her older son maybe 30ish comes with his 4 yrs old and a new born. I hate to have the pit turn on one of the kids one day and do some major damage or death. The pit has gotten loose about 5 – 6 times within the last 10 months. They keep a leash attached to the dog at all times to make it look like it got away from them. Even when the dog is in the house. I have witnessed the dog almost rip the owners arm off when it takes off after seeing something like a rabbit. One time the pit got loose and after catching the dog the owner asked me not to call CE or animal control on her. I told her no worries, next time I’ll just shoot the dog and bring it to her to bury in her yard.
The owners of the pit in the article needs to get rid of the dog or I’m afraid someday they will be having a funeral for their child.
DaleL says
Unless the dog is attacking a person, including yourself, be aware that you could be committing a crime under Florida’s animal cruelty statute.
“There is no general statutory authorization to use deadly force in self-defense against an animal attack against a human. Floridians must instead rely on common law and the specific wording of the animal cruelty statute to defend against potential charges if a dog is attacking a human. People are forced to rely on the requirement in the animal cruelty statutes that a killing be “necessary” in order to defend against the charge of animal cruelty.”
https://thefirearmfirm.com/can-you-shoot-an-attacking-dog-or-other-animal/
TR says
Sorry I should have specified that I wouldn’t just shoot the dog because it’s running loose. You are correct though, that if my life or any family members life is being threatened by the dog it will meet its demise.
Deborah C. says
Go visit dogbite.org
I love lions, tigers, and bears too.
Just not as domestic pets.