Aggressive Los Angeles Rescue Dog Released, Attacks Victim


The dog was stabbed 19 times allegedly and then killed at a clinic.

Read story at link below end of post.  Basically it amounts to an aggressive biting dog (owner called it a guard dog) which LA animal Services released to an alleged “rescue”, probably some crazy pitbull lover who knows nothing about APBTs at all from the story……..

Below are portions of the article written online  LA City Watch………from our reading of the dangerous dog codes, the dog would likely be considered dangerous; the dog had already bitten, and then it bit the shelter worker, shelter listed it for adoption, but the shelter released it, and then the dog was stabbed 19 times when it attacked the crazy rescuer or whoever was there trying to get the dog a home……….if in fact they really “were” doing that? Getting it a home??

This is what alleged rescuer wrote to Animal Control BEFORE it  attacked rescuer:

Pursuant to California Food and Agricultural Code section

31108 (b) you are prohibited by law to kill him/her. This is your official notice of rescue interest for ID number A16081234. DO NOT KILL HIM! 

“If you do, you will be in direct violation of FEDERAL CODE and will be prosecuted by intent policy and California Animal Networks will press charges. 

“Pursuant to section 31108 (b) of the California Food And Agriculture Code: 

“(b) Except as provided in Section 17006, any stray dog that is impounded pursuant to this division shall, prior to euthanasia of that animal, be released to a nonprofit, as defined in Section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code, animal rescue or adoption organization if requested by the organization prior to the scheduled euthanasia of that animal. 

“It is surprising that — considering the documented history of this dog — -the GM would release it for adoption, first to the public (before it bit the Animal Care Technician) and then to a ‘rescue.’ Ms. Barnette could have easily determined that the above Food. & Ag. Section did not apply, because this dog was not a “stray.” Additionally, according to legal experts, there are no federal laws governing this issue.”

“So, was Brenda unsure of the law, or intimidated by the threats of an individual who does not appear — nor claim — to have a formal association with either of the groups she identifies in her email? ”

“Secondly, GM Barnette acknowledged that it was a dangerous animal by requiring under the condition of release, according to reports, that Sammy leave the state and be taken to Arkansas. ”

“The safety and lives of not only adopters and their families and pets, but also the dedicated people who care for animals in shelters and humane societies — and the rescuers, themselves — need to be given more thoughtful consideration. At least five shelter employees at LA Animal Services have reportedly been injured in dog attacks in the last three months, two sustaining possibly permanent damage.”

“Rescuer Rebecca Carey, 23, was killed in her home in 2012 by dogs she had ‘saved.’ And, an 18-month-old pit bull, named Lily, viciously attacked her adopter and rescuer Patricia Agnello as she was placed in the car with her new “fur mom.”


“Based upon the rapidly increasing number of tragic attacks by adopted dogs (including the April 22 killing of a three-day-old baby in San Diego by a recently adopted Pit Bull mix,) isn’t it time the CA Food and Agricultural Code that mandates unsafe animals “shall” be released to rescues upon request be reconsidered by California lawmakers?” [emphasis added]

Our understanding of that law that allows rescues to take dogs not fit for general adoption indicates there must be a reasonable possibility of fixing the fault (whether aggression or whatever.)  Also—WE are not saying that every dog should be saved at any cost. It is a true statement that dogs in shelters are expendable, but in an effort to supposedly “save” such dogs, saving them sometimes makes it worse. NOT knowing how to tell a dog that should be rehomed or not is key.

And our experience in rescue is many “rescuers” want to pimp off the worst of the worse–missing a leg, missing an eye,leg and more,  horrible mange, horrendous health issues, dogs that cost $4,000 of medical expense???  None of these dogs should take precedence over easily adopted animals–because rescue is about finding homes and reducing numbers, not failing to find homes because you only take the worst so they can’t be adopted, they cost too much, and you want pity for the animals so you (the rescuer) can then fulfill your own emotional voids in your life.

We have seen bad dogs adopted and re-adopted, biting dogs, dogs that should never be around kids, etc. We would never adopt a dog out which displayed questionable characteristics unless we felt the issues were not severe, and unless it was going to a fully experienced, non novice, highly responsible owner, who had insurance, signed a waiver, and showed us all his identification.

Sending any aggressive animal out to rescue is always dicey. Rescuers do not necessarily have any training, education, or bona fide experience with animals, or dogs and there is no requirement for them  in CA presently, to have such experience.

 What rescuers will do is to keep (for example) 5 dogs of same dicey breed in same room, then claim they all get along fine [but then they kill the rescuer]; OR, rescue a known aggressive dog who has been fence fighting galore, and has lymphoma and tons of battle scars;has been beat up by other dogs; put dog on site for adoption and before (thank God) anyone attempts to look/adopt the dog, the dog attempts to kill the rescuer, severs her vocal cords, does extreme damage to her arm and leg; somehow rescuer survived. Rescuer then admitted later, that she should have known better than to try and rescue that dog. She also quit rescuing dogs and now suffers permanent physical damage.

Tracy Hon is recovering from an attack from a bulldog in her Chico home Thursday. With Hon is her 7-year-old boxer, Sarah.(Ty Barbour/Enterprise-Record)<p class='dotPhoto'>All Chico E-R photos are available <a href=''>here</a>.</p>

THERE is NO criteria for being a “rescuer” or a “rescue” at all. If there was, we would find that many rescues would be instantly shut down. Our experience with rescues is pretty long and varied, but basically most ARs run most rescues and their main concern is NOT placement.

Their first concern is donations, since they can’t be run without any; their 2nd concern is either having too many to get out, or not enough “good” animals to get out. Third, they usually are very picky and try to pick AR adopters. In fact when we did rescue, we were consistently told there are no puppies to rescue.

Of course there aren’t because people buy puppies or get them free. But NOW you can find “rescue” puppies. We would be very leery of any rescue puppy these days where no one knows its background. Better to buy the puppy from someone that has the parent dogs, where you can talk to them about the parent dogs.

Most rescues spend way too much money trying to fix animals that should not be fixed, and by fixed, we mean rehabilitated. Although it cost $2,000,000 (yes 2 million) for Best Friends to “rehab” the Vick dogs— Best Friends is a rabid AR group with questionable background. Best Friends is definitely like HSUS.  Although HSUS has lamely taken APBTs side on paper but still really never likes the breed type, since HSUS wanted shelters to use the DNA testing kits to determine breed type so they could kill more APBTs.