My neighbor’s German Shepard was deemed as a potentially dangerous dog by animal services on 11/12/20 after escaping his yard and attacking a minor on the street, resulting in a level 3 bite on the Dunbar bite scale. Animal control seized the dog, deemed it as a potentially dangerous dog (PDD), and gave it back to the owners. For the owners to keep the dog, they were required to sign a memorandum of understanding entailing how they were legally required to contain the dog and they were also required to obtain a permit to keep him.

The memorandum of understanding stated the owners could ONLY contain the dog via either:

1. Fully enclosed and locked kennel
2. Inside a fully locked house
3. If the dog had to be taken outside, it was required to be on a 4 foot leash AND muzzled

As part of this memorandum of understanding signed by animal services and the owners, the owners had to consent to random inspections by animal services to ensure they were containing the dog as required. However, the only inspection animal services conducted based on documentation was on 11/13/21 and it was stated that it was SCHEDULED with the owner. Because of this scheduled visit, the owner was able to only have the dog locked up when animal services came out to inspect and had the dog outside every other time in a farm fence, unleashed, unmuzzled every other time. I was not made aware this dog was dangerous until after my daughter’s attack on 12/10/23 because unfortunately the neighbors and us were friends and he had lied and told us their dogs were all friendly and we believed them at the time. After my daughter's attack, I requested public records and found all of this information. I found out that the dog had attacked before, was a potentially dangerous dog, was supposed to have been kenneled 24/7 or leashed AND muzzled, and wasn't allowed around people. By the time of our attack, my 4 year old daughter was the fourth known person that the dog had attacked (2 minors, 2 adults). Unfortunately, only the two minors were reported to animal services. However, even after the minor and other two adult bites, the owners continued to not contain the dog as appropriate.

The permit issued by animal services to the neighbor, according to the memorandum of understanding was required to be renewed yearly, or otherwise the dog would have to be confiscated and euthanized for safety, yet the permit expired 11/17/22 and the dog was never removed, nor were there any logs of inspection checking on containment of the dog after 11/17/21. My daughter’s attack on Dec. 10, 2023 resulted in a level 5 bite on the Dunbar scale (the only level higher than this one is death).  The owners were in clear violation of Sec 3-36 of the Cumberland county ordinance, as well as their signed memorandum of understanding that both entailed how to contain the dog for public safety. Upon animal services investigating my daughter’s attack, the owners should have also been deemed as nuisance/reckless owner and all domestic animals should have been removed from the property, as they clearly cannot be trusted as responsible owners to keep the public safe from their animals. The definition of nuisance/reckless owner can be found in the ordinance and Sec 3-26 entails the repercussions of this. Animal services, however, did not initially declare the owners as reckless, did not fine them, and did not remove any remaining animals. It was only after 5 months later when I dug into the ordinance myself and spoke with the director that they then backtracked and sent a Nuisance/Reckless Owner letter to the owners. The remaining domestic animals were supposed to be removed from the owner and the owner is not allowed to own, keep, or harbor any domestic animals for a period of three years after being deemed as reckless. However, the animal services director is blaming the sheriff's office saying they cannot seize the dogs themselves. Yet the sheriff's department has said that animal services has that capability themselves and should be handling the case. I am not the only family that has had this issue and there have been multiple cases by which potentially dangerous dogs have not been removed.

Thankfully, the offending dog was put down. However, the owner still resides in Cumberland County and still owns the remaining dogs (some with aggressive known pasts) and also based on documents and logs, never received so much as a fine for choosing to not contain the dog appropriately, keeping the dog without an active permit, and who’s willful negligence and defiance led to the attack of my daughter. I am seeking a change because I will not let what happened to my daughter be in vein, nor will I allow this to happen to other families. I was very lucky we did not lose my daughter that day and I will fight so this doesn’t happen to other families. Had my husband not stopped the dog in less than a minute, or had she not had a full four wheeler helmet on protecting her face and neck, we could have had a very different outcome that day. Please sign this petition to bring awareness to those with authority that we need change. This is not acceptable. We need stricter laws and actual consequences to reckless actions. 

The case was not handled properly by animals services in the following ways and should have been done by the protocols already in place:

1. The "checks" animal services are supposed to conduct on dogs deemed as PDD or dangerous are supposed to be random and unannounced according to their protocols. Yet in the documentation pulled regarding my neighbor's dog, they scheduled the ONE visit with the owner. This allowed the owner to pretend for one day that they were following the laws outlined for the dog. Had they not scheduled this visit, I'm positive they would have found the dog was not being kept appropriately. It is vital for these checks to be random and unannounced to truly ensure safety. My daughter possibly wouldn't have been injured if they had followed up appropriately and seen the dog wasn’t being contained. 
2. Animal services requires a permit to be held and renewed annually in order to keep a potentially dangerous dog. They "ensure permits are up to date by annual payments to renew." However, my neighbor's permit expired in November of 2022, a whole year prior to my daughter's attack. Permits NEED to be kept up with and the dog should have been confiscated after the permit expired. Which would have prevented my daughter's attack. 
3. Animal services should have declared the owner as a reckless owner upon initial investigation of my daughter's case when they saw the dog was a repeat offender with a minor and had already been deemed as a potentially dangerous dog. They saw and documented that the owners had not been following proper protocol for containment (as noted in their reports). But they didn't do this right away, it took myself looking into legal ordinances to discover that this should have been done. It only did get done because I brought it to the director's attention. 
4. Based on records obtained, animal services never even gave so much as a fine/charge to the owners for breaking multiple ordinance laws and whose willful negligence and defiance led to the attack of my daughter. There should not be instances where there are clear violations of ordinances in place with no punishments imposed. 

The owners clearly met the definition in Cumberland County ordinance Sec 3-26 for Nuisance/Reckless owner, violated Sec 3-35 for obtaining and keeping a permit, and violated Sec 3-36 for how to properly contain and own a dangerous dog. 

And according to NC G.S. 67-4.3  Penalty for attacks by dangerous dogs “The owner of a dangerous dog that attacks a person and causes physical injuries requiring medical treatment in excess of one hundred dollars ($100.00) shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.”  

And Cumberland county ordinances:

Sec 3-38. - Violations, penalties, and other remedies.

a.) Violations. Each act or conduct prohibited by this article and each failure to comply with a mandatory provision hereby and each day's continuing failure to comply shall constitute a separate and distinct offense.

b.) State law violations. 

1.) Nothing in this chapter shall be constructed to prevent an animal services officer or any other person from pursuing remedies under G.S. Ch. 67, Art. IA.

2.) The director or his designee is designated as the person responsible for making the determination required under G.S. § 67-4.1(c). In making such determinations, the director or his designee shall follow the procedure set forth in this article.

Sec 3-81. - Penalties for violations. 

a) Any violation of this chapter shall subject the offender to a civil penalty to be recovered by the animal services department in a civil action in the nature of a debt, to include the cost of abating a public nuisance. Any costs of abatement and civil penalties shall be paid within seven days of issuance of a notice of violation. Each day's continuing violation shall be a separate and distinct offense.

b) A notice of violation shall specify the nature of the violation and the sections of this chapter violated, and further notify the offender that the civil penalty specified therein shall be paid to the animal services director at the animal shelter within seven days.

c) Unless otherwise provided in this chapter, the civil penalty for a violation of this chapter shall be $100.00 for a first violation or for a violation more than 12 months after a previous violation. For subsequent violations within 12 months of a previous violation, the penalty shall be $200.00 for a second violation and $300.00 for a third or subsequent violation within a twelve-month period of the first violation.

d) In addition to the civil penalties prescribed in this section, any violation of this chapter, also designated as chapter 3 of the Cumberland County Code, shall also constitute a Class 3 misdemeanor punishable by a fine or not more than $200.00 and imprisonment of not more than 20 days. 

I'm seeking changes to policies in the following ways:

1. Animal services, the sheriff's office, and lawmakers NEED to work together to figure out who has jurisdiction to remove animals from reckless owners. The law states upon being deemed as a reckless owner, you are required to forfeit ALL domestic animals and cannot own or harbor any domestic animals for a period of three years. There also shouldn’t be instances where there are clear violations of ordinances in place with no punishments imposed. 
2. I had absolutely zero knowledge before my daughter’s attack of the dangers that lie in the backyard next to us. If animals services is already tracking these permits to these animals anyway, there should be a potentially dangerous/dangerous animal registry that notifies individuals of the dangers living in the yards next door. At least then you’d be aware of the dog so you can watch and make sure they’re being contained properly. If I had KNOWN about the dangerous dog, I would have made the neighbor abide by the laws to contain him. The state of Pennsylvania has such a database in place. 
3. As has been done in other counties (Wake), there should be a limit to owners being able to obtain permits for potentially dangerous/dangerous dogs. There should be a cutoff based on level of aggression in an attack to which permits will not be given for and rather, the animal must be euthanized. 
4. If a permit is given after a first attack, proof should have to be furnished that the dog is being put through adequate behavioral training. 

I want answers. I want change. My daughter deserves better and our community deserves better. As Judge Meza said in the trial for justice for Mr. Najera “If the first line of defense fails because the owners are not responsible, the second line of defense should not have failed.” 

**Please note: I posted on of the milder photos from my daughter’s attack because the others are more sensitive and I will not post those publicly. 

Timeline of events:

****Sometime prior to this first incidence in 2020, the dog was adopted from Virginia German Shepard  Rescue with “known behavioral issues” as stated in the first minor attack report. 

11/3/2020: the dog escaped from my neighbor’s yard to run down the street and attack a minor child, resulting in a level 3 dog bite on the Dunbar bite scale.

11/5/2020: the dog was obtained by animal services, where he was then deemed as a Potentially Dangerous Dog on 11/12/20 to ensure public safety. A memorandum of understanding agreement was signed by the owners with animal services entailing the legal requirements required to keep the dog and these requirements had to be followed for the remainder of the dog’s life:

• Obtain a permit to keep a PDD and this permit had to be renewed annually
• Maintain liability insurance coverage for the dog 
• Updated rabies vaccination proof
• Beware of dog signed visibly posted
• MOST IMPORTANTLY: Keeping the dog contained in a full, complete locked enclosure 24/7 or in a secured house, or if out in the yard, it MUST be leashed on  a 4 foot leash AND muzzled.
• They had to agree to random and unannounced inspections ensuring they were containing the dog properly for public safety.
  
  

11/13/21: Animal services conducted a SCHEDULED check (this wasn’t unannounced and was the ONLY check done) and concluded that the dog was being kept in the enclosure. The owners proceeded to NOT keep the dog in the enclosure once animal services was no longer present. Neighbors have all stated they have never seen the dog in the enclosure (we also were all not aware the dog was dangerous, as the owner had lied and said he was friendly and had never mentioned prior incidences).

02/2022: The neighbor’s were walking the dog on a leash, UNMUZZLED, and it bit a neighbor on the hand. Unfortunately this didn’t get reported to animal services. However, even after this second bite and after being told in 2020 how they were required to contain the dog, the owners continued to keep the dog out of required enclosures and not follow the legal safety protocols. 

11/23/23: the dog bit another neighbor’s arm and leg at the owner’s house upon the owner inviting the neighbor into the house while the dog was unleashed and unmuzzled inside. This one also unfortunately didn’t get reported, but the owners continued even after this third incident to not contain the dog properly. 

12/10/23: my husband and two older kids were outside riding four wheelers while I studied inside for my final the next day. My husband was trying to fix my daughter’s  four wheeler in the driveway, my son was sitting in the go-kart in our driveway, and my 4 year old daughter walked towards the next-door neighbors in the shared front yard space to say hi to them. As she was walking back by our driveway, the neighbor’s 94 lb German Shepard peeled back the chicken wire on their farm fence and got out because he was unleashed, unmuzzled, and unsupervised in the yard (he was not being kept properly per PDD requirements) and ran and attacked my daughter from behind, knocking her face down onto the ground. The dog continued to attack numerous times, her legs, groin, torso, and attempted to attack her neck/head (that was thankfully protected by the full helmet). My husband didn’t hear the first scream because she was muffled with her face in the dirt and a full four wheeler helmet on and the four wheeler was running, but he heard the subsequent screams and ran over and got the dog off within approximately 40 seconds. He had a bat about 20 feet away but from what he was seeing happen to my daughter, he didn’t go get the bat because he was worried those extra seconds could cost our daughter her life. Thankfully, he got the dog away on his own. 

Had it not been for the full helmet she was wearing and my husband being right nearby, we could have had a very different outcome that day.  We possibly could have lost her. Her attack was deemed as a Level 5 dog attack on the Dunbar bite scale (there are 6 levels, and level 6 is an attack that results in death).

In just that 40 second time frame, my daughter was bitten over numerous times, had multiple deep lacerations with deep tissue hanging out and requiring stitches, underwent weeks of open-wound care, and months of behavioral health therapy. There were literally months that we had to carry her outside because she was too fearful to be on the ground. She also even became fearful to be alone in a room in the house because she said she thought the dogs could break through the door and kill her. She continues to struggle with fear to this day. 

12/11/23: An animal services officer came out to obtain a statement and do a report and stated that he recognized the neighbor's house and kennel and the dog because he has been called out previously for a report there. Since our neighbor did shoot the dog (likely because he realized how deep he was in by lying to everyone for years and not keeping the dog properly), that was the end of the reports with animal services. Zero fines, zero charges.