Police Dog Bites Melbourne Man

[melzawelza]

I'm sorry to hear that, Kaz, specially to hear the level of injury your husband sustained. It would have been terrifying. I hope you get an outcom you're happy with.

[Kaz92]

I'm sorry to hear that, Kaz, specially to hear the level of injury your husband sustained. It would have been terrifying. I hope you get an outcom you're happy with.

[Kaz92]

thanks - much appreciated!

[Yonjuro]

Sorry to hear about the extent of the injuries. Thanks for coming here to let us know the full story, based on what you say I would also be outraged at the Police for their conduct with this incident.

[Kaz92]

Sorry to hear about the extent of the injuries. Thanks for coming here to let us know the full story, based on what you say I would also be outraged at the Police for their conduct with this incident.

[Kaz92]

thanks again! Kaz

[Amax-1]

It's interesting to read all of your comments regarding this, however - do not believe everything you read in the papers. My husband (the victim) did at no time attempt to pat the dog in question. He was walking on a public nature path when approached by a running dog. In surprise at seeing the dog, he muttered "Hello puppy!" at which point the dog lunged at his arm. The dog's handler was not in sight at this point, and caught up quickly - but the damage had already been done. He was simply a person walking in a public place who was attacked by a police dog. There was no attempt to pat or interact with the dog in any way. The police have issued the press release, as no-one from the media have spoken to my husband. He required 2.5hrs of surgery to repair the damage done to his arm and remained in hospital for 3 days. He does not hold the dog responsible for the incident (we are dog lovers & owners ourselves), but is now extremely disappointed with the police for their attempt to "cover their butts" by implying that the attack was in some way his fault. I wish to make no further comment, except to say that we are currently seeking legal advice before making a formal response to this slanderous claim.

Wow!!!, please pass our healing thoughts to your husband Kaz and thanks for your post. :)

I was envisaging a cover up, a reason the handler gave for why the dog bit an innocent person......my thoughts is the handler dropped the leash and the let the dog go in an apprehension command......the dog then would nail anyone who appeared.......it may have also been the first time the handler was able to release the dog so in a bit of cowboy style "yee harrr' get him boy, the dog's ramped for a bite....sees Kaz's husband and dog thinks "we are on, that's my target" and the dog will take the bite like any other training scenario it's done 100 times before with a decoy and hidden sleeve......hence the "arm bite".

Geez, that's bad handling of the dog from sheer incompetence on the handler's part in the circumstances.....the handler would know damn well the dog will bite anyone in that scenario from training alone and I would say in the truth of the matter, the handler has made several breaches of handling protocol that the department needs to be accountable for. The handler MUST be able to abort an apprehension, and to do this, the handler MUST have sight of the dog, in fact the handler should have pulled the dog back in against the leash to heighten drive to hunt, not let him run free ahead and out of sight.....just stupid stuff and I am saddened by the ordeal Kaz's poor husband had to endure

Having said that.....the dog may not have bitten a child simply because the dog works to training scenarios where kids are not used a decoys, so a little person is not something the dog has ever been trained to target for a bite, but may bite a child depending on the dog and the drive, still a very dangerous scenario as seen from the injury Kaz's husband received, the dog bites with exceptional force causing severe injury to unprotected limbs. The biting force felt even through a sleeve is more than anyone would imagine, the jaws of a GSD presents incredible clamping force when trained to bite and grip with maximum strength.

Edited August 10, 2014 by Amax-1

[Kaz92]

It's interesting to read all of your comments regarding this, however - do not believe everything you read in the papers. My husband (the victim) did at no time attempt to pat the dog in question. He was walking on a public nature path when approached by a running dog. In surprise at seeing the dog, he muttered "Hello puppy!" at which point the dog lunged at his arm. The dog's handler was not in sight at this point, and caught up quickly - but the damage had already been done. He was simply a person walking in a public place who was attacked by a police dog. There was no attempt to pat or interact with the dog in any way. The police have issued the press release, as no-one from the media have spoken to my husband. He required 2.5hrs of surgery to repair the damage done to his arm and remained in hospital for 3 days. He does not hold the dog responsible for the incident (we are dog lovers & owners ourselves), but is now extremely disappointed with the police for their attempt to "cover their butts" by implying that the attack was in some way his fault. I wish to make no further comment, except to say that we are currently seeking legal advice before making a formal response to this slanderous claim.

Wow!!!, please pass our healing thoughts to your husband Kaz and thanks for your post. :)

I was envisaging a cover up, a reason the handler gave for why the dog bit an innocent person......my thoughts is the handler dropped the leash and the let the dog go in an apprehension command......the dog then would nail anyone who appeared.......it may have also been the first time the handler was able to release the dog so in a bit of cowboy style "yee harrr' get him boy, the dog's ramped for a bite....sees Kaz's husband and dog thinks "we are on, that's my target" and the dog will take the bite like any other training scenario it's done 100 times before with a decoy and hidden sleeve......hence the "arm bite".

Geez, that's bad handling of the dog from sheer incompetence on the handler's part in the circumstances.....the handler would know damn well the dog will bite anyone in that scenario from training alone and I would say in the truth of the matter, the handler has made several breaches of handling protocol that the department needs to be accountable for. The handler MUST be able to abort an apprehension, and to do this, the handler MUST have sight of the dog, in fact the handler should have pulled the dog back in against the leash to heighten drive to hunt, not let him run free ahead and out of sight.....just stupid stuff and I am saddened by the ordeal Kaz's poor husband had to endure

Having said that.....the dog may not have bitten a child simply because the dog works to training scenarios where kids are not used a decoys, so a little person is not something the dog has ever been trained to target for a bite, but may bite a child depending on the dog and the drive, still a very dangerous scenario as seen from the injury Kaz's husband received, the dog bites with exceptional force causing severe injury to unprotected limbs. The biting force felt even through a sleeve is more than anyone would imagine, the jaws of a GSD presents incredible clamping force when trained to bite and grip with maximum strength.

[Kaz92]

Thanks for your kind words, Kaz

[GeckoTree]

It's interesting to read all of your comments regarding this, however - do not believe everything you read in the papers. My husband (the victim) did at no time attempt to pat the dog in question. He was walking on a public nature path when approached by a running dog. In surprise at seeing the dog, he muttered "Hello puppy!" at which point the dog lunged at his arm. The dog's handler was not in sight at this point, and caught up quickly - but the damage had already been done. He was simply a person walking in a public place who was attacked by a police dog. There was no attempt to pat or interact with the dog in any way. The police have issued the press release, as no-one from the media have spoken to my husband. He required 2.5hrs of surgery to repair the damage done to his arm and remained in hospital for 3 days. He does not hold the dog responsible for the incident (we are dog lovers & owners ourselves), but is now extremely disappointed with the police for their attempt to "cover their butts" by implying that the attack was in some way his fault. I wish to make no further comment, except to say that we are currently seeking legal advice before making a formal response to this slanderous claim.

I hope you go after them, and win a shitload of compensation, not just retraction for the lies they tell........... That is all.

Best wishes to you and your husband.

[Amax-1]

It's interesting to read all of your comments regarding this, however - do not believe everything you read in the papers. My husband (the victim) did at no time attempt to pat the dog in question. He was walking on a public nature path when approached by a running dog. In surprise at seeing the dog, he muttered "Hello puppy!" at which point the dog lunged at his arm. The dog's handler was not in sight at this point, and caught up quickly - but the damage had already been done. He was simply a person walking in a public place who was attacked by a police dog. There was no attempt to pat or interact with the dog in any way. The police have issued the press release, as no-one from the media have spoken to my husband. He required 2.5hrs of surgery to repair the damage done to his arm and remained in hospital for 3 days. He does not hold the dog responsible for the incident (we are dog lovers & owners ourselves), but is now extremely disappointed with the police for their attempt to "cover their butts" by implying that the attack was in some way his fault. I wish to make no further comment, except to say that we are currently seeking legal advice before making a formal response to this slanderous claim.

I hope you go after them, and win a shitload of compensation, not just retraction for the lies they tell........... That is all.

Best wishes to you and your husband.

+1

[OSoSwift]

Thank you for filling in the other side to the story.

I have no idea of training and protocols for training POlice dogs however to allow a dog to get into a position to be able to bite - and obviously quite severely - an innocent member of public is a tremendous error of judgement on the handlers part. The dog should never have been in the position it was.

I wish your husband well in his recovery and also in your legal endeavours.

I woudl be interested when you can down the track to hear what ends up happening. I hope your husband has no long lasting effects, it would have been terrifying.