Wareham Selectmen deem dog dangerous after continued hearing

By Meghan Neely | Jul 31, 2018
Photo by: Meghan Neely Walter Crossman and Animal Control Officer Cheryl Gorveatt-Dill both testify in a dangerous dog hearing.

Wareham Selectmen deemed a female Australian Shepard named Daisy as a dangerous dog following a continued hearing on Tuesday, July 31. Daisy is accused of attacking and antagonizing other dogs and people on both Great Neck Road and Lydia’s Island Road unprovoked.

A mailing error postponed the original hearing on Tuesday, July 10 as the dog's owner, Sandra Crossman, was not present to defend herself.

Animal Control Officer Cheryl Gorveatt-Dill said she had received many complaints regarding Daisy, including incidents which took place on May 29 and May 22.

In one such incident, Daisy attacked another dog while loose on Lydia's Island Road. The other dog, which was also loose at the time, had to be taken to Marion Animal Hospital for puncture wounds sustained to the neck.

Crossman and her husband Walter both stated Tuesday that they took full responsibility for Daisy's actions. The pair was accompanied by a trainer who has been working with Daisy for the last six weeks.

According to the trainer, Daisy has seen considerable improvement and is less aggressive than before.

Neighbors who came before the Selectmen to testify however were not so convinced. They expressed concern for the safety of neighborhood children as well as their own animals.

Ultimately, Gorveatt-Dill recommended that Selectmen deem Daisy dangerous under Massachusetts state law. The recommendation passed unanimously.

Daisy must now be muzzled at all times when off the Crossman's property. The Crossman's will also be required to replace their current fence and provide Gorveatt-Dill with Daisy's chip information.

"It's been an extremely confusing and hurtful process for us," Crossman said. "I hope and pray this will put an end to what our family has been subjected to."

Comments (8)
Posted by: Wareham By The Sea | Jul 31, 2018 23:11

Sounds like good logical decisions were made.  Except that last quote.  Ain't it funny how the culprit cries victim?  He should have been grateful that he got off fairly easy and kept that stupid comment to himself.



Posted by: Society for Suppression of Noise | Jul 31, 2018 23:18

I hope and pray this will put an end to what this scumbag's neighborhood has been subjected to.  What an idiot.



Posted by: noseyrich | Aug 01, 2018 06:31

Come on you guys... this person needs a safe space so he and her can not feel threatened!!! They think denial is a river in Egypt!



Posted by: desertsky | Aug 01, 2018 07:29

The town needs to be hyper vigilant here..it opens itself to lawsuits from victims if it doesnt ENFORCE this new ruling. Was seriously mauled 1996 in another town who kept giving dog back after 6 bites documented.I spent 5 years recovering and learning to walk again. Lawsuit against owner included town who could have prevented my attack if they dealt with dog properly.  Am willing to bet this story in wareham is not over and we will see another incident.dog owner likely wont follow these guidelines. Pet owners like these usually dont. Stay tuned for next installment and lawsuit...this dog shouldnt be allowed off its property. It WILL attack again.

 

 



Posted by: Wareham By The Sea | Aug 01, 2018 08:28

Wow Desert, that happened to you?  That's awful.  I don't understand why dogs that attack and bite are given so many chances and rights.  It must be driven by the irrational dog people that feel dogs can do no wrong.  It should be a "one and done" type thing.  Why is it that other animals (in a zoo for instance or in the wild) are destroyed after their first taste of human blood?  Man's best friend is no longer man's best friend after an attack.  The family pet can never be trusted again.  I know that will upset dog people, but it's the truth.



Posted by: Andrea Smith | Aug 01, 2018 16:24

Congratulations Meghan Neely - The quote with which you ended your article is one of the best quotes of the year!

 

"It's been an extremely confusing and hurtful process for us," Crossman said. "I hope and pray this will put an end to what our family has been subjected to."

 



Posted by: desertsky | Aug 01, 2018 16:49

Yes WBTS,  this did happen to me and it changed my life totally. PTSD, no working, you name it. This could have been prevented and I hope this measure taken by the Selectmen will prevent this from happening again with this dog. The lack of remorse and insight from the owners is one reason these attacks usually happen again as they don't take the situation seriously until someone is brutally injured (like I was) or they lose everything they owned after a lawsuit.  These owners reacted much like the ones who owned the dog who mauled me...I hope they prevent another attack but when it happens again (and it will) I hope the victim lives and sues them for every damn cent they have. They will deserve it.



Posted by: Wareham By The Sea | Aug 03, 2018 00:41

Desert- sorry to hear that such a thing happened to you.  I just can't comprehend why dangerous dogs that have attacked are given back to their owners.  It's just not worth the risk.  Even if the owner is 100% compliant, accidents happen.  A gate latch may fail, a door may be left ajar, a leash/collar may break.  Life is hard enough, why would anyone want to live with the burden of containing a dangerous animal at all times?  The moment my dog attacks a person it's no longer a pet.  I would not want to live in fear.



If you wish to comment, please login.