Terisa Chaudary recently secured an excellent result for our client who had been charged with two offences:
- Being a person in charge of a dog dangerously out of control – although no injury was caused.
- Allowing a fighting dog to be in a public place without a muzzle or lead.
Had our client been convicted of either charge, the court would have considered an application for a destruction order, placing her much-loved pet at risk. In the meantime, the dog was kept in police kennels from the date of arrest until the court hearing.
At trial, it emerged that the complainant had made a previous report to police which was later marked NFA (No Further Action). The same complainant was due to give evidence, but just two days before the hearing he informed the prosecution that he could no longer attend due to other commitments.
The prosecution applied to adjourn the trial, but Barrister Georgina Lane of 5SAH, instructed by Teresa, opposed the application. She argued that the complainant’s explanation was wholly inadequate, while also stressing our client’s young age, her lack of experience within the criminal justice system, and the significant distress she had already endured — particularly the prospect of her dog being destroyed.
The bench agreed and refused the adjournment. Although the prosecutor initially indicated he would seek to secure the complainant’s evidence via live link, he later confirmed that this would not be possible. As a result, the prosecution formally offered no evidence on both charges, and our client was acquitted.
Our client is now looking forward to being reunited with her dog.
