Praise for man who strangled dangerous pitbull following vicious attack in Limerick estate

A JUDGE has praised the  actions of a man who strangled a dangerous pitbull dog which attacked a puppy in broad daylight.

Judge Peter White made his comments at Limerick District Court where the owner of the dog - a Staffordshire Bull Terrier - was found guilty of several charges arising from the “horrific incident” nearly two years ago,

Claudia Farrell, who has an address at Castlebrook Green, Castlebrook Manor, Castletroy denied the charges, claiming it was her estranged partner who was responsible for the dog as she was on holiday in Portugal at the time.

Inspector  Pádraig Sutton said the incident occurred at around 8pm on June 25, 2024, at Willowfield Green in Castletroy.

READ ALSO | Mango confirm date and details for new store opening in Limerick

A local woman described how she was walking along the Greenway with her young son and her pet dog - a small puppy -  when she saw “two unleashed dogs coming down the hill” against them.

As the dogs passed, one of them — described as a large, muscular dog — lunged and attacked her pet puppy. She described how a member of the public then intervened and caught the large dog “by the neck.”  

Once freed from the pitbull’s grip, her pet dog “started running away” and she ran after it. She said she kept going and did not look back. The woman also confirmed that she did not know who owned the large dog.

The witness said that although her dog initially survived the attack, its wounds later became infected and it subsequently died.

In his evidence, local resident Luis Eduardo said he was outside his home with his family when he heard a “high scream”.

He said he initially thought it was a child crying, as there were “15 to 20 children” playing nearby and gathered around an ice-cream van. He said he then saw “a large dog attacking a small puppy”.

He said it was his “instinct to run over and try to help” as he feared for the safety of people in the area.

READ ALSO | Limerick student served book of evidence for double fatality

Mr Eduardo said he could not get the larger dog to release the puppy so he “took his arm to the pitbull’s neck to try and break his breath”.

He placed the dog in a headlock and with the assistance of another member of the public, the puppy was released and the pitbull died.

Insp Sutton praised Mr Eduardo for his actions on the day - suggesting things could have been a lot worse had he not intervened.

Garda Anthony Marren who attended the scene a short time after the incident said the dead Staffordshire Bull Terrier was under a blue tarp on the side of the road when he arrived.

He said upon inspecting the dog, he found a collar bearing the name “Ronnie” and a phone number. 

He called the number and the person who answered identified herself to hom as Claudia Farrell. 

She told him she was about to board a flight and that her ex-partner had been minding the dog while she was on holiday. 

She provided a contact number for him, but gardaí have been unable to contact him or locate him to date.

READ ALSO | Judge warns young man for illegal hunting on Limerick farmer's land

Garda Marren said the dog was microchipped and that the information on the microchip indicated it had originated in the UK. He added there was no Irish registration recorded on the system.

He said he later attended the injured party’s home, adding that she was in a “distraught state” and  upset.

He told the court he attended Ms Farrell’s home address a number of days later and that he interviewed her under caution.

The defendant informed him her ex-partner was homeless and that he had been staying at her home to mind the animals while she was abroad. 

She said the dog (pitbull) was licensed and she offered to produce documentation. However, no licence was ever produced and Insp Sutton said gardai are satisfied the dog was not licensed.

Under cross-examination by defence solicitor Tom Kiely, Garda Marren confirmed that Ms Farrell’s estranged partner was also being sought in relation to the incident. 

He agreed the defendant was not in the jurisdiction at the time of the incident as she was on holiday in Faro, Portugal.

Interjecting, Judge White said: "The fact she was not in the jurisdiction does not dismiss her responsibility to the dog."

In her direct evidence, Ms Farrell said she had allowed her estranged partner to stay in her home while she was abroad on condition that he minded the animals — his pitbull, her pomsky and their cat, Lucy.

The court heard that in the days before the attack, she had been ringing and messaging him (from Portugal) to ensure he was “feeding, walking and giving water” to the animals.

She said there was a muzzle and lead in the house for the pitbull, as it is a restricted breed, and she told the court she would “never have permitted anyone to let the dog out without a muzzle or lead”.

Ms Farrell said she assumed her ex-partner held a dog licence and she maintained she did not have any (legal) responsibility for the animal.

During cross-examination, Inspector Sutton put it to her that she was the owner of the pitbull. “Your number is on the collar, you are part owner of the dog,” he said, adding that in the “three days before the attack” she had sent messages showing she was concerned, asking: “Why didn’t you do something?”

Insp Sutton then put it to the witness that the arrangements she had made in relation to the dog “were unreliable”.

Ms Farrell replied: “I thought he would do it, take the bare minimum required,” to which Inspector Sutton responded: “You thought, but didn’t ensure.”

Having considered the evidence and submissions, Judge White said what happened was an "horrific incident" for those who witnessed what happened.

He agreed that Mr Eduardo's intervention was “courageous" and he commended him for his actions on the day.. 

The judge said that on the basis of Garda Marren's evidence that Ms Farrell's phone number was on the collar, he had "no doubt" that she was at least a part-owner of the dog.

However, he said he accepted she was not the person in charge of the dog on the day and was, therefore, dismissing one of the four charges before the court.

In mitigation, Mr Kiely asked the court to note that his client has no previous convictions and that she is a single parent of a young daughter.

Having spoken to the woman whose dog was attacked, Insp confirmed she did not wish to make a victim impact statement.

Judge White noted that while it was a contested case, Ms Farrell’s attitude was "not unreasonable”.

Having ruled the State had proved its case in relation to the three remaining charges, he adjourned the matter for 12 months telling Ms Farrell if she pays €810 in compensation (to cover veterinary expenses) the Probation Act will be applied.

If compensation is not paid, a conviction will be recorded and a €1,200 fine imposed.