🐾 Bring Crash Home

Crash is not just a case file.

In the town of Airdrie AB, He is a dog raised on an acreage in a home, around people, with structure, consistency, and care. Those who have met him describe him as social, affectionate, and clearly raised with a lot of love.

He has attended public events involving adults, children, costumes, and other animals, without any history of aggression.

This petition is about awareness, and about bringing him home.

Key Concerns in Crash’s Case

Disclosure of information was provided with approximately 24 hours notice, limiting the ability to properly review, understand, and respond to what was being relied on.

The decision relied on a late allegation of a prior attack that had not previously been raised, was unsupported by documented evidence, and was introduced without meaningful opportunity for rebuttal.

This allegation appears to have come from an involved party, not an independent witness, and no direct witnesses or verifiable proof were presented.

While I could have responded, the allegation was introduced unexpectedly and without documentation. I was not given a meaningful opportunity to prepare a proper rebuttal, including obtaining sworn witness testimony to directly address and challenge the claim, had I known it would be relied on in the decision.

This same source had previously made claims that conflicted with available evidence, including references to blood on Crash that were not supported by real-time imagery that was provided after the claim, but not reflected in the final consideration.
Despite this, the allegation was still used in the decision.

There were no confirmed witnesses to the incident, and no documented history of prior attacks or escapes

Questions regarding causation were not fully explored, including damaged fencing and injuries that may be consistent with fencing rather than direct animal aggression.

Injuries, including a singular linear laceration without corresponding compressive bite patterns, were relied on as indicative of an animal attack.

The decision also referenced an implication that responsibility had been accepted, which is not accurate. The position maintained was that Crash may have been present, but there were significant unanswered questions regarding what actually occurred and how the injuries happened.

The decision permits Crash to be contained in an alternative facility, while no equivalent containment option was offered for him to return home under enforceable conditions.

The behavioural assessment was conducted without clearly established expertise specific to Crash’s unique breed composition and behavioural profile, particularly at this level of decision-making, especially considering his lineage, his consistently demonstrated temperament, and the depth of his lifelong socialization.

The assessment also relied on input from the sanctuary where Crash is currently being held, without clearly defined, standardized credentials supporting its use in a decision of this magnitude.

Since these standards were applied late in the process, additional qualified perspectives have since come forward raising concerns about how this has been handled. While the process may take time, there is a risk of prolonged and potentially irreversible impact.

Summary of Key Inconsistencies

Crash has attended public events involving adults, children, costumes, and animals without any history of aggression.

There is no documented history of aggression, either from Crash or within his known lineage.

There is no documented history of prior escapes or attacks.

This is a first alleged incident, with no prior complaints or reports.

The decision relies heavily on the unsworn account of a single involved individual, rather than independent or corroborated evidence.

Claims made by that same source were contradicted by real-time imagery.
No direct witnesses have confirmed an attack.

No verified prior incidents exist.
A late allegation was introduced and still relied upon.

Alternative explanations were not fully explored.

The outcome imposed the most serious consequences despite the absence of verified evidence.

What We Are Asking

This is not about prolonging a process that has already caused significant and irreversible harm.

This is about resolution.

Crash has already demonstrated that he can be safely managed in controlled environments.

We are asking for:

Crash to be returned home
Under any reasonable and enforceable conditions deemed necessary
With appropriate containment, monitoring, or restrictions as required

There are solutions that protect both the public and Crash.

Final Note

This is a case with:

no prior incidents
no confirmed witnesses
no documented history of prior escapes or attacks
and no clear, verified evidence

Yet the outcome carries permanent consequences.

Crash deserves to come home.

If you believe in reasonable solutions, accountability, and giving this dog a chance to return safely, please add your name.