Mara's Musings

Lennox (Source N.Country Gazette)

The saga continues....Belfast City Council are now refusing to release information about the death of Lennox and the payment of it's "experts" under the Freedom of Information Act.

The full article can be read here.


This begs the question:  If they have nothing to hide why are they spending so much time and energy covering up the events surrounding the death of this dog.

The dog warden at the centre of this case Alexandra "Sandie" Lightfoot, has been promoted to another position in Atrim.  Judging by the video footage of this woman petting Lennox who then subsequently claimed in court that she was terrified of him, this could be seen either as a reward for services rendered or as a convenient way of shifting her out of the city and hoping people will forget about her role in this matter.


Lightfoot, who has been the target of a lot of hatred, has been a very convenient scapegoat for the City Council. She has been very useful in terms of directing public anger towards one individual and then using that for justifying their own silence in this case.   When you look at her testimony, and compare it to the video footage one can only guess what sort of pressure could lead to someone making statements that could leave them personally open to charges of lying under oath.  I'm obviously not accusing Belfast City Council of putting undue pressure on this woman to comply, but considering the absence of evidence forthcoming regarding their actions surrounding this case it is food for thought.  That said, her  role in the initial seizure of Lennox and his eventual destruction is still her own responsibility and was incompetent at best.

Picture Source OurDogs.co.uk

As far as Peter Tallack is concerned I can't see any reason why he would have testified as he did, apart from the fact that he was paid to give an opinion, and he gave the council what they paid for.   His actual fee is a closely guarded secret, according to Belfast City Council, who are also refusing to release information about this under the FOI Act.  If the council wanted a real opinion they would have employed a proper canine behaviourist and not a dog walker/retired police dog handler who had by his own admission no qualification to comment on the dogs behaviour at all.  His own behaviour in this has been far from savoury and included threats to sue Victoria Stilwell when she pointed out his lack of qualifications. This was not about protecting his repuation, but rather more about trying to get money out of Ms Stilwell, which failed because it is pretty well impossible to sue someone who is telling the truth.

Dog lovers worldwide campaigned to save Lennox, but this is about more than one dog.  Lennox has become the focus for a wider campaign to end Breed Specific Legislation where a dog can be killed based on its breed, or its type, even when it has not shown any sign of aggression.  Calls are growing for an end to the BSL contained within the Dangerous Dogs Act from campaigners, animal welfare organisations and the wider public.  Not only has it proven not to work it has also led to the destruction of thousands of innocent family pets.

The actions of Belfast City Council in this case has also highlighted a need to ensure that dogs in the "care" of local authorities need to be monitored.  Regular visits from the owners should be permitted both as reassurance to the owner that the dog is well cared for, protection for the dog, and to ensure that the relationship between the 2 is maintained as much as possible during a stressful time.  There is no real reason why this should not be permitted.  Local authorities MUST be held accountable for what they do.  They should not be able to hide behind the monolithic structures of their own bureaucracy.

"Any society, any nation, is judged on the basis of how it treats its weakest members ; the last, the least, the littlest."  Cardinal Roger Mahony (1998)