During the appeal process, we were denied the opportunity to articulate our comprehensive plan for rehoming Bucee. What's disheartening is that the decision from the Gwinnett Animal Control Hearing Board seemed to hinge on the owner's perception of a "lack of compassion" rather than a fair assessment of Bucee's behavior. If given the opportunity to speak, my statement would have conveyed compassion for the victim, her family, and my own, along with a sincere commitment to find a solution that benefits everyone involved. We find it perplexing how we could have demonstrated more compassion, having already offered sincere apologies for events that were not definitively proven to have occurred. The decision appeared to be driven more by emotion than a careful consideration of the actual events. When Bucee was labeled as a vicious dog and we sought an appeal, we noticed a distinct difference in treatment. Despite also being Bucee's owner and a listed defendant in the bite case, I was denied the opportunity to speak during the appeal hearing. I strongly suspect bias from the Gwinnett County Animal Shelter's officers overseeing the process, as it seems they are favoring the victim's family and actively working against us. Despite our efforts to prevent Bucee's euthanasia, each step forward is met with new obstacles, complicating the process of bringing Bucee home. I believe I faced discrimination during the appeal process by not being allowed to speak as a defendant. It appears discriminatory that the county is not permitting compliance with restrictions at my home, even though my address is also listed as Bucee's residence. 

Furthermore, we have a letter from the Grayson Veterinary Hospital, where Bucee underwent a 10-day rabies quarantine. The kennel workers and vet techs, who actively engaged with him, wholeheartedly affirmed that Bucee exhibited no signs of aggression towards any staff members. Additionally, we also have Bucee’s dog file from the Conyers Animal Hospital, documenting Bucee's annual check-up and updated shot record. During the visit, Bucee displayed a friendly demeanor, showed no signs of aggression from the start, and notably, he did not require muzzling. Neither of these papers were allowed to be presented during the appeal.

Most significantly, the parents of the victims strongly insisted on Bucee being euthanized, going as far as mentioning it in court when we appeared in regard to the citations that were given by the county. They emphasized their unwavering belief in this course of action, going as far as expressing a clear intention to shoot him if they were to encounter him again. Despite their claim of being pitbull lovers, they weren’t open to giving our pitbull, Bucee, a second chance.

I'm being denied the right as his owner to rescue Bucee, with the explanation that only the person who signed the citations can comply. Despite being Bucee's owner and showing proof of such, I'm not allowed to retrieve him and improve his current situation. I, as the owner of Bucee, am being denied the opportunity to adhere to the imposed restrictions. Even when providing evidence of my legal ownership of Bucee, I was informed that I couldn't obtain further information on the case and was advised to seek legal counsel. According to the state of Georgia, veterinary medical records should suffice as proof of dog ownership. Yet the Gwinnett County Animal Shelter is not acknowledging me as such.