[00:00:10]
GOOD MORNING, LADIES, GENTLEMEN.
WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY.
THIS MEETING IS AN ORDER AND HAS BEEN POSTED APPROPRIATELY THROUGH VARIOUS MEDIA BY THE CLERK'S OFFICE.
WE'LL RISE FOR A MOMENT OF SILENT PRAYER, FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
ITEM NUMBER TWO, ON OUR AGENDA IS THE REVIEW OF THE MINUTES FROM OUR MAIN MEETING.
DID ANYONE NOTICE ANY CORRECTIONS OR ADDITIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE TO THE MINUTES? SEEING NONE, THE MINUTES WILL STAND AS AS, UH, POSTED.
[Call to Order, Roll Call, Affidavit of Posting, A Moment of Silent Prayer, and Pledge of Allegiance]
MOVING ON THEN ITEM NUMBER THREE, HEARING ON REVIEW OF VICIOUS DOG DETERMINATION REQUESTED BY MS. MS. CRYSTAL ZERN.[Minutes]
AT THIS TIME, WE'LL PROCEED[a. May 21, 2025]
WITH THE HEARING ON THE REVIEW OF THE VICIOUS DOG DETERMINATION.ON MAY 19TH, 2025, WASHINGTON COUNTY SHERIFF MARTIN SCHULTE ISSUED A VICIOUS DOG DETERMINATION TO MS. CRYSTAL ZERN DECLARING HER DOG WINSTON
[Hearing on Review of Vicious Dog Determination requested by Ms. Crystal Zurn]
TO BE A VICIOUS DOG.UNDER SECTION 1 72 DASH 13 C OF THE CODE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MS. ZERN MADE A TIMELY REQUEST FOR A REVIEW OF THE SHERIFF'S DETERMINATION.
A COPY OF THE SHERIFF'S DETERMINATION WAS PROVIDED IN THE COMMITTEE'S MATERIALS PRIOR TO THIS MEETING, AS WAS A COPY OF MS. ZERS REQUEST FOR A REVIEW OF THAT DETERMINATION.
ZERS REQUEST FOR A REVIEW OF THE SHERIFF'S DETERMINATION IS BEFORE THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE OF THE WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PURSUANT TO SECTION 1 72 DASH 13 D OF THE COUNTY CODE AND CHAPTER 68 OF THE WISCONSIN STATUTES.
THE PURPOSE OF TODAY'S HEARING IS TO REVIEW THE SHERIFF'S DETERMINATION THAT MS ER'S DOG IS VICIOUS AND TO DECIDE WHETHER TO AFFIRM, REVERSE OR MODIFY THAT DETERMINATION.
A DOG IS DETERMINED TO BE A VICIOUS DOG UNDER SECTION 1 72 DASH 13 A OF THE COUNTY CODE IF IT MEETS ONE OF THREE STANDARDS.
ONE, IF THE DOG HAS A, HAS THE PROPENSITY TENDENCY OR DISPOSITION TO ATTACK, CAUSE INJURY, OR OTHERWISE ENDANGER THE SAFETY OF HUMAN BEINGS OR OTHER DOMESTIC ANIMALS AS EVIDENCED BY A HABITUAL OR REPEATED CHASING OR SNAPPING OR BARKING AND OR SNARLING IN A THREATENING MANNER.
TWO, IF THE DOG ATTACKS A HUMAN BEING OR ANOTHER DOMESTIC ANIMAL WITHOUT PROVOCATION.
THREE, IF THE DOG IS OWNED OR HARBORED PRIMARILY OR IN PART FOR THE PURPOSE OF DOG FIGHTING OR ANY DOG TRAINED FOR DOG FIGHTING, A DOG NEED ONLY MEET ONE OF THESE DEFINITIONS TO BE A VICIOUS DOG UNDER THE COUNTY'S ORDINANCE.
IT IS THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE'S RESPONSIBILITY TODAY TO CONDUCT THE HEARING.
THE COMMITTEE CONSISTS OF FIVE WASHINGTON COUNTY SUPERVISORS.
THEY ARE DISTRICT SIX SUPERVISOR DOUG NEWMAN, DISTRICT 11, SUPERVISOR JIM BERG, DISTRICT 15 SUPERVISOR LOIS KRIEGER, GUND DRUM DISTRICT 19 SUPERVISOR TONY TOMA, AND ME DISTRICT 20 SUPERVISOR MIKE SCHWAB.
I'M THE CHAIR OF THIS COMMITTEE AND I WILL BE PRESIDING OVER THE HEARING TODAY.
THE HEARING WILL PROCEED AS FOLLOWS.
THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE WILL PRESENT ITS CASE.
THE SHERIFF IS REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY DREW HALLMARK.
AFTER ATTORNEY HALLMARK CONCLUDES HIS CASE.
MS. ZERN WILL PRESENT HER CASE.
BOTH SIDES HAVE THE RIGHT TO PRESENT WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE.
COURTROOM RULES OF EVIDENCE DO NOT APPLY TO THIS PROCEEDING, BUT EVIDENCE THAT IS IRRELEVANT, REPETITIVE, OR DEEMED UNRELIABLE MAY BE EXCLUDED AT MY DISCRETION AS PRESIDING OFFICER.
ALL WITNESSES WILL BE SWORN IN AND ARE SUBJECT TO DIRECT AND CROSS-EXAMINATION.
MEMBERS OF THIS PERMIT ARE NOT PERMITTED TO CALL WITNESSES, BUT MAY ASK QUESTIONS OF WITNESSES WHO ARE TESTIFYING AS THIS IS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY NOT SPEAK UNLESS CALLED TO TESTIFY BY THE PARTIES.
IT IS IMPORTANT NOT TO TALK OVER ONE ANOTHER AND TO SPEAK CLEARLY AS A COURT REPORTER WILL BE TAKING DOWN EVERYTHING THAT IS SAID TODAY DURING THE HEARING, DO NOT INTERRUPT ONE ANOTHER AND DO NOT SPEAK DIRECTLY TO ONE ANOTHER.
PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL AT ALL TIMES DURING AND AFTER THE HEARING.
AT THE CONCLUSION OF TESTIMONY, EACH SIDE WILL BE PERMITTED TO MAKE CLOSING ARGUMENT.
CLOSING ARGUMENTS WILL BE LIMITED TO ADDRESSING ONLY THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED DURING THE HEARING.
IF ANY PARTY WISHES TO SUBMIT A BRIEF AT THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING, THEY MUST INDICATE A DESIRE TO DO SO PRIOR TO THE COMMITTEE COMMENCING DELIBERATIONS.
IN DELIBERATING THE CASE, IT WILL BE THE COMMITTEE'S ROLE TO CONSIDER THE FACTS AS PRESENTED AND TO DETERMINE WHETHER WINSTON IS A VICIOUS DOG WHEN APPLYING THOSE FACTS TO THE DEFINITION OF A VICIOUS DOG AS SET
[00:05:01]
FORTH IN SECTION 1 72 DASH 13 OF THE CODE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY.IF A MAJORITY OF THE COMMITTEE BELIEVES THAT THERE IS A GREATER THAN A 50% CHANCE THAT WINSTON MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A VICIOUS DOG, THE SHERIFF'S DETERMINATION WILL BE AFFIRMED.
IF NOT, THE DETERMINATION WILL BE REVERSED.
WE'LL ALSO TAKE A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE COMMITTEE TO MODIFY THE DETERMINATION.
NONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE ARE LAWYERS.
TO THE EXTENT WE HAVE THE NEED TO CONSULT WITH COUNSEL, WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO CONSULT WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY ATTORNEY BRAD STERN, WHO'S HERE.
COUNTY ATTORNEY STERN MAY BE CALLED UPON TO ADVISE US AS TO PROCEDURE OR TO NAVIGATE ANY LEGAL ISSUES THAT MAY ARISE IN FULL TRANSPARENCY.
COUNTY ATTORNEY STERN IS ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY HALLMARK SUPERVISOR.
HOWEVER, COUNTY ATTORNEY STERN PLAYS NO ROLE IN DECIDING THE CASE.
THAT IS STRICTLY THE JOB OF THIS COMMITTEE.
ATTORNEY HALLMARK HAS NO ROLE IN ADVISING THIS COMMITTEE.
THE PARTIES WILL BE PROVIDED WITH A WRITTEN DECISION NO LATER THAN 20 DAYS FROM TODAY'S DATE OR FROM THE DATE BRIEFS ARE FILED.
IF THERE IS A REQUEST FOR BRIEFS SO THAT EVERYONE IS AWARE, UM, AT EACH COMMITTEE MEMBER'S, UM, SEAT THIS MORNING, THERE ARE FIVE PIECES OF INFORMATION.
THE FIRST IS THE SHERIFF'S DETERMINATION DATED MAY 19TH, 2025.
THE SECOND IS A PRINTED COPY OF THE COUNTY CODE IN THIS RE THAT, UH, IS PERTINENT IN THIS REGARD.
THE THIRD IS THE PRINTED EMAIL, UM, THAT MS. ZERN PROPERLY EXECUTED HER WISH TO, UH, FILE AN APPEAL.
THE FOURTH IS THE PACKET THAT MS. ZERN EMAILED, I BELIEVE YESTERDAY HAS BEEN PRINTED OUT AS WELL.
AND THEN FINALLY, THERE'S A SHEET OF, UH, SEVERAL PAPERS WHEREBY COMMITTEE MEMBERS MAY TAKE NOTES ON EACH OF THE THREE AREAS OF LAW THAT MAY BE PERTINENT TO THIS TO HELP THEM DECIDE IF THE DOG IS AFFIRMED, UM, TO BE VICIOUS OR IF THE DOG MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE WASHINGTON COUNTY CODE.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT? SEEING NONE, WE'D ASK THE SHERIFF OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE TO, UM, COME FORWARD.
YOU MAY GO TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE.
UM, WHAT IS OUR PROCESS FOR SWEARING IN OR, UH, THE COURT REPORTER WILL SWEAR WITNESSES VERY WELL.
COURT REPORTER WOULD PLEASE SWEAR IN THE WITNESS OR, OKAY.
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT FOR ME.
AND GOOD MORNING TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
UM, HAVE A HOUSEKEEPING QUESTION TO START.
AND MY QUESTION IS, IS WHILE I'M QUE QUESTIONING A WITNESS AND BUILDING MY CASE, UM, DOES THE COMMITTEE ANTICIPATE MS. STERN HAVING THE RIGHT TO OBJECT TO ANY RELEVANCY QUESTIONS THAT SHE DID EVEN IS NOT RELEVANT? AND IF SO, HOW WOULD THAT BE CARRIED OUT THIS MORNING? MY QUESTION IS IN THE INTEREST OF FAIRNESS FOR MS. CERN, AND SO THAT I'M JUST NOT, SO THAT A PARTY IS NOT ASKING IRRELEVANT QUESTIONS AND DRAGGING THIS ON UNNECESSARILY, IT'S MY OPINION THAT MS. ZERN SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO RAISE AN OBJECTION IF, IF SOMETHING IS, IS RAISED, BUT IT SHOULD BE DONE IN AN ORALLY MANNER.
AND, UM, IF IT IS, IF IT BECOMES OBVIOUS THAT THERE'S JUST DELAYING AND DELAYING AND DELAYING, WHICH I DON'T EXPECT, UM, WE WOULD ADDRESS THAT AT THE TIME, IS THAT SUITABLE? IS THAT A SUITABLE ANSWER? IT IS.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT SHE, IF SHE'S SITTING BACK THERE, THAT SHE HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO OBJECT.
I'M NOT SURE IF THE COMMITTEE, UM, PREFERS HER TO JUST SHOUT OBJECTION FROM HER SEAT OR IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT IDEA.
UM, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE BEST.
AND, AND MS. ZERN, I, I EXPECT YOU'RE GONNA BE RESPECTFUL, SO I DON'T EXPECT THIS TO BE A PROBLEM.
IF IT BECOMES A PROBLEM, WE'LL DEAL WITH IT, BUT THAT'S FAIR.
I JUST WANNA ADDRESS THAT FIRST.
UM, I THINK I SHOULD BEGIN, UM, BEFORE I GET STARTED, I DID READ MS. ZERS PACKET OF APPEAL THAT CAME IN YESTERDAY.
AND ON THE FRONT PAGE THERE ARE, THERE ARE FIVE BULLET POINTS.
AND THERE THERE ARE NO RULES OF EVIDENCE THAT APPLY HERE.
HOWEVER, THERE IS A STANDARD FOR RELEVANCY AND PARTIES
[00:10:01]
CAN OBJECT FOR IRRELEVANT QUESTIONS OR TOPICS THAT ARE DISCUSSED.AND RELEVANCY COMES FROM 2 27 45 STATING THAT IT HAS TO BE MATERIAL TO THE LEGAL REASON FOR BEING HERE TODAY.
AND THAT IS THE, THAT IS THE STATUTE OR THE, EXCUSE ME, THE ORDINANCE 1 72 13.
SO FOR THOSE REASONS, MR. CHAIRMAN, I AM ARGUING THAT BULLET 0.4, TWO, THREE AND FOUR FIVE ARE ALL IRRELEVANT TO THE, TO THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DEAL WITH THE, UM, DANGEROUSNESS OF THE DOG THAT THE DOG, UM, THEY DON'T DEFEND THAT THE DOG BIT ANYONE OR CAUSED INJURY TO ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL.
UM, EVEN THOUGH THOSE ARE RELEVANT OR NOT, THEY'RE NOT RELEVANT, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE, UM, THEY BUILT THE DOG'S CHARACTER, THEIR DOG'S CHARACTER PRE, PREVIOUS TO THE INCIDENT IS NOT RELEVANT.
THE ONLY THINGS THAT ARE RELEVANT IS THAT THE FACTS THAT OCCURRED AND THAT HE, THE DOG HARMED SOMEONE.
SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I JUST WANNA BEGIN BY ASKING THE COMMITTEE TO MAKE A RULING ON THE RELEVANCY OF THOSE BULLET POINTS.
UM, I KNOW MY OPINION, BUT I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO HEAR THE, UH, OPINIONS OF THE COMMITTEE AS WELL.
ANYONE CARE TO SHARE OR IF, IF YOU'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH, UM, THE STATE OR, UM, THE REQUEST AS STATED, THEN WE DON'T HAVE A LOT TO TALK ABOUT.
UM, MS. ERNST SHOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO OBJECT TO THIS AS WELL.
UM, AND THEN YOUR SECOND COMMENT WOULD.
ALRIGHT, WELL, MR. CHIN IS TYPICAL.
IT'S TYPICAL WHEN, UM, OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE OR WOULD ACCOUNT TO MOTIONS IN LIMINE, IF WE WOULD CALL THESE IN A COURT OF LAW ARE MADE THAT OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE WOULD BE MADE AND RULED UPON AS THAT EVIDENCE IS ATTEMPTED TO BE ENTERED.
SO IT MAY BE PREMATURE AT THIS POINT TO, TO GRANT THOSE, UH, OR SUSTAIN THOSE OBJECTIONS BECAUSE THE COMMITTEE HAS NOT YET HEARD MS. ZERS PRESENTATION.
ALSO, AT THE VERY LEAST, IF THE, UM, IF THE COMMITTEE IS WILLING TO ENTERTAIN ATTORNEY HALLMARK'S OBJECTION, I BELIEVE MS. ZER SHOULD BE AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN, UH, WHY SHE BELIEVES THAT THAT INFORMATION IS RELEVANT TO THE DETERMINATION.
BUT AGAIN, I WOULD RESPECTFULLY SUGGEST THAT, UH, UH, THIS BODY'S DETERMINATION IN THAT REGARD MIGHT BE PREMATURE 'CAUSE THE EVIDENCE HAS NOT YET BEEN INTRODUCED.
SO AT THIS POINT, YOUR, UM, TO DENY THESE ITEMS AS EVIDENCE IS DENIED AND WE WILL DEAL WITH THEM AS THEY COME UP DURING THE COURSE OF THE HEARING.
THEN AT THAT POINT, I WILL CALL MR. DAN DITMAN.
HE'S THE, THE DRIVER CONCERNED IN THE MOST RECENT CASE.
WHERE WOULD YOU LIKE HIM TO, AT, AT YOUR, UH, AT YOUR PODIUM.
THIS WITNESS WILL BE SWORN IN BY THE COURT REPORTER IPHONE.
UM, WERE YOU DELIVERING PACKAGES FOR AMAZON ON MAY 18TH, 2025? YES.
AND WERE YOU TASKED TO DELIVER A PACKAGE TO MS. CERN'S ADDRESS? YES.
DID YOU SEE ANY SPECIAL IN INSTRUCTIONS PERTAINING TO THE PACKAGE DELIVERY? THE PACKAGE INSTRUCTIONS STATED THAT IF THE DOG WAS PRESENT TO, I BELIEVE IT WAS EITHER NEAR THE END OF THE DELIVERED TO THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY, BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I SAW A, UH, STEEL DELIVERY BOX.
SO THAT'S WHERE I MOVED THE, OR PROCEEDED TO DELIVER, DELIVER TO THAT LO PARTICULAR LOCATION.
AND, UM, AND YOU EVENTUALLY PULLED UP TO MS. STERN'S ADDRESS? YES.
AND WHERE DID YOU PARK? I PARKED BASICALLY ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE STREET FROM HER RESIDENCE.
AND YOU EXITED THE VEHICLE? YES.
AND DID YOU SEE THE DOG ON THE PROPERTY? AT THE TIME? AS I WAS APPROACHING THE, HOW, AS I WAS APPROACHING THE PROPERTY, I DID SEE THE DOG, UH, TOWARDS THE, I THINK AT THE GARAGE AREA.
AND YOU SAW MS. ERN AS WELL, SHE WAS OPERATING A RIDING LAWNMOWER.
[00:15:01]
SAY THE GARAGE IS FROM THE ROAD? UH, I WOULD SAY AT LEAST 50 PLUS FEET.SO YOU GET OUTTA THE VEHICLE, YOU SEE THE DOG IN THE PROPERTY ALONG WITH MS. ERN.
CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THIS POINT? I APPROACHED THE DELIVERY BOX, AS I'M GONNA CALL IT, THE DELIVERY BOX OF THE PACKAGES.
I PROCEEDED TO SCAN THE PACKAGES I HAD, UM, ONE OF WHICH WAS NOT SCANNING.
I EVENTUALLY DETERMINED THAT I HAD INCORRECTLY GRABBED ONE A PACKAGE OUT OF MY VEHICLE AND BASICALLY THE PACKAGE OUT, ONE OF THE PACKAGES I HAD WAS NOT FOR HER.
SO I TOOK THAT PACKAGE, UM, UPON, BASICALLY UPON DISCOVERING MY MISTAKE, I TOOK THAT, TOOK THAT PACKAGE, UM, TURNED AROUND AND PROCEEDED BACK TO MY VEHICLE TO GET THE CORRECT PACKAGE.
AND IT WAS AT THAT POINT, UM, I'M NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED FIRST, IF IT WAS BARKING OR IF I ACTUALLY FELT CONTACT FROM THE DOG, BUT, UM, NEXT THING I KNOW, THERE'S A DOG IN FRONT OF ME BARKING AT ME.
AND WERE YOU, WERE YOU WALKING TOWARDS OR AWAY FROM THE HOUSE WHEN THE DOG WHERE YOU FELT THE IMPACT? I WAS WALKING AWAY.
AND WAS THERE ANY POINT WHERE MS. STERN DIRECTED YOU TO PUT WHERE TO PUT THE PACKAGE? UM, ON, UH, ON MY APPROACH, UM, I BASICALLY RECEIVED A HAND GESTURE KIND OF DIRECTING ME TOWARDS THE, OR AT LEAST WHAT I BELIEVE TO BE DIRECTING ME TOWARDS THE STEEL BOX.
HOW FAR AWAY WOULD YOU SAY THE STEEL BOX IS FROM THE ROAD? UH, I WOULD SAY SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF AT LEAST 20 FEET.
SO THE BOX WOULD BE ABOUT 30 FEET AWAY FROM THE HOUSE AND 20 FEET FROM THE ROAD.
IS THAT CORRECT? UH, THAT SOUNDS ABOUT, ABOUT CORRECT.
AND WHEN THE DOG HIT YOU, HOW FAR AWAY FROM THE ROAD WERE YOU? I WOULD SAY I WAS, I WOULD SAY I WAS PROBABLY IN PROXIMITY TO THE CULVERT, WHICH WOULD BE PROBABLY ABOUT A GOOD 10 FEET AWAY FROM THE ROAD.
AND, AND TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, SO WHEN YOU FELT THE DOG IMPACT YOU PRIOR TO THAT, DID YOU HAVE ANY CONTACT WITH THE DOG? NO.
I MEAN, I HAD OBSERVED THAT IT WAS THERE AND THEN I STOPPED PAYING, JUST KIND OF STOPPED PAYING ATTENTION MORE, WALKED TOWARDS THE PODIUM AND WENT ON ABOUT DOING MY TASK.
SO IT'S SAFE TO SAY THAT YOU DIDN'T DO ANYTHING TO DIRECTLY PROVOKE THE DOG? CORRECT.
AND THE DOG, DID THE DOG START CHASING YOU AROUND AFTER THE IMPACT? YES.
UH, BASICALLY THE DOG GOT IN FRONT OF ME, WAS BARKING AT ME.
AND, UM, FROM THERE MY MEMORY IS A LITTLE BIT FOGGY, FOGGY AS TO WHAT HAPPENED, BUT THERE WAS DEFINITELY A NEED TO GET AWAY FROM THE DOG.
AND DID YOU, DID YOU USE THE, THE PACKAGE AT ALL TO SEPARATE YOURSELF FROM THE DOG AT A CERTAIN POINT? YEAH, I DID REMEMBER THE TRAINING THAT KICKED IN TO, UH, THAT WE RECEIVED, WHICH WAS TO USE THE PACKAGE AS A SHIELD.
AND UNFORTUNATELY THAT WAS ALSO BITTEN AND TAKEN AWAY FROM ME.
AND WAS IT AT THIS POINT THAT MS. STERN ATTEMPTED TO COME HELP? UM, ACTUALLY SHE HAD BEEN THERE A LITTLE BIT PRIOR TO THE PACKAGE BEING USED AS A SHIELD.
SO SHE WAS THERE FIRST TO SEPARATE YOU AND THE DOG? YEAH.
AND THEN YOU, WHEN WHILE SHE WAS TRYING TO SEPARATE, YOU USED THE PACKAGE AS A SHIELD, AS YOUR TRAINING? YEAH.
AND YOU WERE TRYING, WELL, WERE YOU TRYING TO GET BEHIND HER FOR PROTECTION? YEAH, THERE ENDED UP BEING A LITTLE BIT OF JUST ME RUNNING IN CIRCLES AND THE DOG ALSO, UH, JUST KIND OF MATCHING WITH ME.
SO YOU WOULD SAY THE DOG WAS CHASING YOU? YES.
AND HOW AGGRESSIVELY WOULD YOU SAY THAT THE DOG BIT THE PACKAGE? UM, I, I MEAN, I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY WAY OF, I GUESS I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY WAY OF ANSWERING THAT.
I, THE PACKAGE DID GET PULLED OUT OF MY HANDS.
UM, I DID TAKE A PICTURE OF THAT, UH, BITE MARK IN THE PACKAGE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW RELEVANT THAT IS TO THIS PROCEEDING, BUT I DO HAVE THAT IF THAT'S NEEDED.
AND THE DOG, YOU SAY THE DOG BIT YOU UH, I WAS BIT IN BOTH LEGS AND I BELIEVE, UM, I MAY HAVE ACTUALLY ALSO BEEN BIT A, AT LEAST A THIRD OR FOURTH TIME.
UM, JUST A LITTLE BIT SOUTH, A LITTLE BIT BELOW MY BUTT.
I MEAN, I DO HAVE A PAIR OF PANTS THAT HAS A HOLE IN THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION.
I DO HAVE THOSE PANTS WITH ME AS WELL, IF THAT'S NEEDED.
AND YOU SAID THE DOG BITES DREW BLOOD? UH, BOTH OF 'EM, YES.
AND DID YOU, UH, GET YOUR INJURIES CHECKED OUT AFTER THE INCIDENT? UH, I HAD MY INJURIES CHECKED OUT THE NEXT MORNING.
UM, I DID, UM, SPEAK WITH, I WAS REQUIRED TO SPEAK WITH A NURSE, UM, PRIOR TO, UM, UM, UM, BASICALLY I HAD SPOKE WITH A NURSE WITHIN A HALF HOUR OR
[00:20:01]
AN HOUR OF, UH, THAT PARTICULAR INCIDENT OCCURRING.AT THIS POINT, MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT THE PACKAGE, THE BITE MARK ON THE PACKAGE AND THE PICTURES FOR THE BITE MARKS ON HIS LEGS AS EXHIBITS ONE, TWO, AND THREE AT THEY BE MARKED AND ENTERED AS EXHIBITS.
I HAVE THEM HERE AND I HAVE COPIES FOR MS. S VERY WELL.
PLEASE SUBMIT THEM AND SHARE THE COPIES WITH MS. ZER.
IF THERE'S, UH, ONE SET JUST PASS, I WOULD JUST DO ONE TO, IT DOESN'T MATTER.
I HAVE NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS WITNESS.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE FOR THIS WITNESS? NONE.
THE WITNESS IS EXCUSED WITH OUR THANKS.
UM, MS. ZERN, DID YOU HAVE ANY, UH, BEFORE YOU LEAVE, SIR? I, I LEAVE.
AT THIS POINT I'LL CALL, UM, MISS DEPUTY PETERS TO THE STAND.
IS IT OKAY IF I BEGIN MR. CHAIRMAN? PLEASE DO.
DEPUTY PETERS, WERE YOU ON DUTY ON MAY 18TH, 2025? YES.
AND WERE YOU DISPATCH DISPATCHED FOR AN ANIMAL BITE COMPLAINT LOCATED AT 52 83 MEADOWVIEW DRIVE? UH, I BELIEVE IT'S, UH, 42 83 MEADOWVIEW DRIVE? YES.
AND THAT IS KNOWN AS MS. STERN'S ADDRESS? YES.
AND WAS THE CALLER DANIEL DITMAN? YES.
AND DID YOU MAKE CONTACT WITH MR. DITMAN? YES.
WHAT DID YOU LEARN FROM, FROM DISPATCH? UH, MR. DIMAN CALLED INTO THE WASHINGTON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO REPORT AN ANIMAL BITE AND MR. AND HE WAS ADVISED TO MEET HIM DOWN AS HE WAS WITNESS.
AND WHEN YOU MADE CONTACT WITH MR. DITMAN, DID YOU NOTICE ANY INJURIES ON HIS, HIS PERSON? YES.
HE PROVIDED, UH, HE RULED UP HIS PANT LEGS ON BOTH LEGS.
HE HAD BITE MARKS, UH, ONE LEG.
HE HAD A BITE MARK IN THE AREA OF HIS CALF AREA AND ANOTHER ONE BEHIND HIS, WHICH WAS POSSIBLY GONNA BE TWO LIGHTS.
AND DID YOU SEE THAT BLOOD WAS DRAWN ON HIS LEGS AT ALL? YES.
DID YOU ALSO MAKE CONTACT WITH MS. ZERN? YES.
AND DO THE DOG REPORTED, WAS THE DOG NAMED WINSTON IN THIS CASE? YES.
SHE STATED THAT SHE TOLD YOU THAT WINSTON WAS UP TO DATE ON HIS RABIES VACCINATIONS AT THE TIME? YES, SHE PROVIDED THE DOCUMENTATION.
AND DID SHE INDICATE AT ALL THAT THE DOG WAS WEARING THE SHOCK, A SHOCK COLLAR? YES.
AND SHE ALSO STATED THAT THE DOG WENT OVER THE UNDERGROUND FENCE LINE WHEN IT CAME TO BITE MR. DITMAN? YES.
DO YOU KNOW OF ANY PREVIOUS SIMILAR INCIDENTS INVOLVING THIS DOG BITING SOMEONE? YES.
THERE'S TWO PRIOR REPORTED INCIDENTS.
SO IT WOULD BE SAFE TO SAY, IN YOUR OPINION, THAT MR WOULD PREVIOUSLY BE ON NOTICE THAT TWO SEPARATE INCURSIONS OCCURRED THAT HER DOG BIT SOMEONE, AND THIS, IN YOUR OPINION, WOULD BE REPETITIVE AT THIS POINT? YES.
YOU WOULD AGREE THAT IT HAS A TENDENCY OR DISPOSITION TO ATTACK OTHER PEOPLE? YES.
DID MS. STERN AT ALL EVER STATE TO YOU THAT THE DOG
[00:25:01]
WAS PROVOKED IN ANY MANNER? NO.MS. ZER, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? DOES ANYONE ON THE COMMITTEE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? IF THERE ARE NO OTHER OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMITTEE, UH, DEPUTY PETERS, HOW DID YOU BECOME AWARE THAT THERE HAD BEEN PREVIOUS INCIDENTS, UH, WITH THIS DOG AT THIS RESIDENCE? THERE'S A, THE CALL HISTORY, YOU CAN SEE IF THERE'S ANIMAL COMPLAINTS.
SO THAT CAME THROUGH WITH DISPATCH? YEAH, WE LOOK AT THE PREMISES FOR YOU AND IF THERE, OKAY.
SO SOUNDS LIKE STANDARD PROCEDURE.
I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS WITNESS.
WITNESSES AS, AS EXCUSED WITH OUR THANKS AT THIS POINT, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'LL CALL DEPUTY LAAK AS WELL.
DEPUTY LAAK, WERE YOU ON DUTY AUGUST 27TH, 2024? YES, I WAS.
AND WERE YOU DISPATCHED TO MS. ERNS ADDRESS REGARDING AN ANIMAL BY COMPLAINT? UH, INITIALLY I WAS DISPATCHED TO THE VICTIM'S ADDRESS, BUT THEN TO MS. SNS.
AND I WAS INITIALLY DISPATCHED TO THE VICTIM'S ADDRESS AND THEN TO MS. SNS.
WHAT DID YOU LEARN, LEARN FROM DISPATCH AT THIS TIME? UH, THAT A FEDEX SILVER DRIVER HAD BEEN BITTEN BY A DOG AT THAT LOCATION AND THE DOG IN QUESTION.
UM, YOU LEARNED THAT DOG'S NAME IS WINSTON? YES.
AND DID YOU MAKE CONTACT WITH THE VICTIM? I DID.
DID YOU NOTICE ANY INJURIES? SHE HAD A BANDAGE RIGHT WRIST SHE HAD ALREADY SAW.
DID YOU, DID YOU SEE SEVERITY OF THE INJURY AT ALL? SHE HAD A PICTURE THAT SHE HAD TAKEN PRIOR TO GETTING MEDICAL TREATMENT, I ASSUME, FOR HER WORK THAT HAD THE BLOOD AND THANK YOU.
AND DID THE VICTIM TELL YOU THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING THE BITE? SHE STATED THAT SHE WAS DELIVERING.
YOU SAID SHE WAS DELIVERING PACKAGES.
COULD YOU BRIEFLY DESCRIBE, I'M SORRY, STRIKE THAT QUESTION.
DID YOU ALSO MAKE CONTACT WITH MS. STERN? YES.
AND DID MS. STERN'S STORY CONTRADICT WHAT THE VICTIM TOLD YOU AT ALL? NO.
WHAT DID EITHER MS. STERN OR THE VICTIM INDICATE TO YOU THAT THE BITE WAS PROVOKED IN ANY WAY? ARE YOU FAMILIAR, UM, WITH THE FACTS THAT CAME FROM AURORA HEALTHCARE ON AUGUST 27TH, 2024? YES.
AND THAT, THAT FAX SAYS THAT THE BITE WAS NOT PROVOKED? CORRECT.
MR. CHAIRMAN, AT THIS TIME I WOULD ASK THAT THAT FAX BE ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE AS EXHIBIT FOUR.
I HAVE A COPY FOR MS. ERN AS WELL.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD ASK, UH, KINDLY THAT THE COMMITTEE ASK MS. CER IF SHE HAS ANY OBJECTION TO THE ADMITTANCE OF EVIDENCE.
AND ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH ANY DOG BITES REGARDING WINSTON PRIOR TO THIS INCIDENT? YES.
SO YOU WOULD AGREE THAT MR. STERN WAS ALSO ON NOTICE PR AT THIS EVENT, THAT HER DOG HAD A PROPENSITY TO PRETEND SEE OR DISPOSITION TO ATTACK OTHER PEOPLE? YES.
I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS WITNESS.
MA'AM, CAN WE HAVE YOU COME TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE? SURE.
[00:30:01]
UM, WE ASKED IF SHE NEEDED MEDICAL ASSISTANCE OR WHATEVER? MY UNDERSTANDING IS SHE DID NOT WANT TO AT ALL AS IT WAS A BANDAID FOR LIKE, HER, SHE FELT WAS, DID SHE FEEL IT WAS MINE OR NOT? THAT IT DIDN'T REQUIRE MEDICAL ASSISTANCE? I OBJECT ON RELEVANCE, MR. CHAIRMAN.IT DOESN'T GO TOWARDS THE DANGEROUSNESS OF THE DOG, WHETHER THE SHE WANTED MEDICAL ASSISTANCE OR NOT.
IS THERE ANY DISSENT FROM THE COMMITTEE? THAT, UH, OBJECTION IS SUSTAINED.
DO WE KNOW WHY THERE? I THINK WE'LL RESERVE THAT FOR THAT QUESTION FOR WHEN YOU'RE UP.
I THINK I HAVE NO, WELL DID, JUST BRIEFLY, DID THE VICTIM TELL YOU AT ALL, UM, SITUATIONS SURROUNDING WHAT, LIKE WHEN THE DOG BIT HER REGARDING PLACEMENT AND WHERE THE PRESENCE OF ANOTHER PARTY, SUCH AS THE OWNER, CAN YOU DESCRIBE THE, THE INSTANCE THE VICTIM STATED THAT SHE APPROACHED THE DOOR? UH, MS. AARON CAME TO THE DOOR, SHE WAS HOLDING WINSTON, UM, BY THE COLLAR AND WINS AND WAS WINSTON WAS BARKING, UH, PRETTY EXCESSIVELY.
SHE STARTED BACKING UP BECAUSE SHE WAS FEARFUL OF THE DOG AND THEN THE DOG LUNGED AND BIT HER RIGHT WRIST.
SO JUST TO SUMMARIZE, THE DOG WAS BEING RESTRAINED BY MS. STERN AND WAS STILL MANAGED TO BITE THE VICTIM? YES.
MS. ZERN, DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE? SEEING NONE, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY.
AT THIS TIME I'LL CALL DEPUTY RUSSELL.
WERE YOU ON DUTY ON JUNE 4TH, 2022? YES.
AND WERE YOU DISPATCHED TO MS. ZORN'S RESIDENCE DUE TO A REPORT OF AN ANIMAL BITES? YES.
AND DID YOU MAKE CONTACT WITH THE VICTIM? YES.
AND THE VICTIM WAS UNDER THE DUTY OF DELIVERING A PACKAGE? YES, FOR AMAZON.
DID THE VICTIM FILL YOU IN ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING THE DOG BITE? YES, HE DID.
AND CAN, CAN YOU DESCRIBE FOR US WHAT THE VICTIM TOLD YOU? HE STATED HE RESPONDED TO THE RESIDENCE TO DELIVER A PACKAGE IN THE BACK OF HIS TRUCK, GET THE PACKAGE ABOUT TO EXIT THE TRUCK.
AND DID THE WITNESS SAY THAT HE SAW THE DOG PRIOR TO EXITING THE VEHICLE? YES, HE SAW IT INSIDE.
SO IN YOUR SUMMARY, THE DOG, WHEN HE EXITED THE VEHICLE, THE DOG WAS SOMEHOW LET OUT AND RAN TO THE DELIVERY DRIVER BIT.
HE WAS UNSURE HOW THE DOG GOT OUT OF THE HOUSE.
AND THE DOG IN QUESTION IN THIS CASE, HIS NAME IS WINSTON AS WELL? IT IS.
AND DID YOU NOTICE ANY INJURY ON THE VICTIM? I DID.
AND HOW SEVERE WOULD YOU SAY IT WAS? DID, DID YOU SEE ANY BLOOD? UH, THERE WERE SOME PUNCTURE MARKS ON HIS ABDOMEN AND I SAW HIM AT THE HOSPITAL.
AND DID ANYONE AT ALL INDICATE TO YOU THAT THE DOG BITE WAS PROVOKED IN ANY WAY? NO.
IS THIS THE FIRST DOCUMENTED REPORT OF WINSTON BITING SOMEONE? YES, IT WAS.
AND AFTER THIS INCIDENT OR WHEN AND AFTER THIS INCIDENT OCCURRED, WOULD YOU END YOUR MEETING WITH MS. SA? WOULD YOU AGREE THAT I MEAN, MS. STERN, EXCUSE ME, THAT SHE WAS PUT ON NOTICE THAT HER DOG HAD A PROPENSITY TENDENCY OR DISPOSITION TO ATTACK OTHER PEOPLE AFTER THIS BITE? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT TWO PHOTOS OF THE PUNCTURE WOUND AND THE CLOSE OF THE VICTIM AT THIS.
AT THE I'D ASK IT TO BE LABELED FIVE AND SIX.
UM, PLEASE SHARE THEM WITH MS. ZERN AS WELL.
THANK I HAVE NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS WITNESS.
MS. ZERN, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS WITNESS? UM, DID THE DRIVER STATE,
[00:35:01]
UH, WHETHER HE NOTICED INSTRUCTION DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS? YES.THERE ARE SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS NOT TO APPROACH THE HOUSE.
AND DID THE DRIVER IN THE POLICE REPORT, I BELIEVE DID HE NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THAT HE READ THOSE NOTES IN ADVANCE AND DETERMINED THAT HE CHOSE TO DISREGARD THEM? HE SAW THAT THE DOG WAS INSIDE OF THE RESIDENCE.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE SUPERVISOR TOMA IN THE DRIVEWAY, THE ABDOMEN? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SUPERVISOR KRIEGER GUN ROOM? I BELIEVE IT WHEN HE WAS ABOUT TO STEP OUT OF THE TRUCK.
I DON'T KNOW IF HE STEPPED OUT.
I THINK IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN A FLUID MOTION AS HE WAS STEPPING OUT OF HIS ROOM.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SUPERVISOR TOLA SHOT, SHOT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY OR EXCUSED.
MY ONLY QUESTIONS REMAINING, UM, ARE REGARDING MS. STERN IF SHE CHOOSES TO TESTIFY.
SO I'M NOT SURE THE COURT, I MEAN THE, THE COMMITTEE'S PREFERENCE ON, IF WE PREFER TO SEE, IF SHE WANTS TO TESTIFY FIRST BEFORE I ASK QUESTIONS, IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE FOR ME TO CROSS-EXAMINE HER AFTER SHE GIVES HER QUESTIONS, BUT I'D BE, I'D BE WILLING TO REST UNTIL THAT HAPPENS.
I HAVE NO OTHER WITNESSES TO BUILD MY CASE.
I'M GONNA SEEK ADVICE FROM OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY.
IF THE, UH, SHERIFF'S OFFICE THROUGH ATTORNEY HALLMARK IS RESTING, THEN UH, IT WOULD BE, UH, MS. Z'S OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT HER CASE.
IF SHE CHOOSES TO TESTIFY, SHE WOULD ALSO BE SUBJECT TO CROSS-EXAMINATION AS ANY WITNESS WOULD.
UH, YOU'LL BE EXCUSED FOR THE MOMENT.
AND MS. ZERN, IT'S YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER YOUR TESTIMONY.
UM, DOES THIS WITNESS NEED TO BE SWORN IN OR AS AN APPELLANT? VERY WELL, THANK YOU.
UM, YEAH, AS OBVIOUSLY EVERYONE HAS STATED, I LIVE AT 42 83 MEADOWVIEW DRIVE AND WE HAVE A DOG NAMED WINSTON.
UM, HE WAS OUR COVID RESCUE DOG.
UH, HE WAS A STRAY PRIOR TO US RESCUING HIM.
UM, WE BELIEVE HE WAS ABOUT SIX OR SEVEN MONTHS OLD WHEN WE, WHEN WE GOT HIM.
UH, ALL WE KNOW IS HE WAS A STRAY IN TEXAS.
UM, SO I DON'T, I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT HIS LIFE WAS LIKE PRIOR TO JOINING OUR HOME.
I CAN'T SPEAK TO, UM, WHAT HIS SITUATION WAS, BUT I DO RECOGNIZE THAT HE HAS, UH, FOR WHATEVER REASON THERE'S A TRIGGER WITH DELIVERY DRIVERS.
UM, OBVIOUSLY AS WE GO THROUGH, YOU HAVE THE PACKET.
UM, I HAVE LOTS OF OBVIOUSLY CHARACTER STATEMENTS FROM, HE'S BEEN GOING TO WAGS AND BARKS DOGGY DAYCARE FOR THE ENTIRE FIVE YEARS WE'VE HAD HIM.
UM, NO INCIDENTS EVER WITH ANY OTHER DOGS, EMPLOYEES.
[00:40:01]
MY HUSBAND AND I ENTERTAIN A LOT AND WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD FRIENDS AND FAMILY COME OVER ALL THE TIME.UM, IN FIVE YEARS THERE HAVE BEEN ZERO, ZERO BITES, NIPS, AGGRESSION TOWARDS ANY NORMAL VISITOR TO OUR HOME.
UM, SO AGAIN, THERE'S A, A PATTERN.
UM, I WOULD ALSO, I DON'T WANNA READ MY ENTIRE PACKET TO YOU.
UM, I WOULD ACTUALLY LIKE TO CALL MY HUSBAND JASON ZERN TO GIVE HIS, UH, TESTIMONY OF INCIDENT NUMBER ONE, WHICH WAS THE JUNE 4TH, 2022.
UH, BECAUSE HE WAS THE ONE PRESENT AND HE DID HAVE DIRECT INTERACTION WITH THE DRIVER DURING THAT, UM, INCIDENT.
SO WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THE VERY FIRST INCIDENT WITH THE AMAZON DRIVER.
UM, I WOULD ACTUALLY JUST BRIEFLY LIKE TO READ A SNIPPET FROM THE INTERVIEW WITH THE DRIVER.
UH, HE HAD UGANDA ADVISED THAT HE'S FAMILIAR WITH HIS RESIDENCE AND HE SAW THE SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS NOT TO COME TO THE DOOR.
UGANDA ADVISED THAT HE SAW THE DOG WHEN HE, THE DOG WAS INSIDE, SO HE DROVE UP THE DRIVEWAY.
UGANDA ADVISED HE GOT THE PACKAGE AND WAS ABOUT TO STEP OUT OF THE TRUCK.
HE STATED THAT WINSTON CAME RUNNING AT HIM AND BIT HIM IN THE STOMACH.
UM, JASON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ELABORATE ON YOUR INTERACTIONS WITH HIM? WELL, THE VERY FIRST TIME HE WAS WALKING AT THE END OF MY DRIVEWAY AND I CLEARLY TOLD HIM TO JUST SET THE PACKAGE DOWN AND, AND THE DISTANCE FROM OUR HOUSE TO THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY IS WELL OVER A HUNDRED FEET.
AND I SAID TO HIM, PLEASE SET IT DOWN.
AND HE SAID, NO, I'M GOOD WITH DOGS.
AND I SAID, NO, PLEASE SET IT DOWN BY MY MAILBOX.
AND AGAIN, HE SAID, DOGS DON'T BOTHER ME, I'M FINE.
HE KEPT COMING AND THEN I JUMPED UP AND TRIED TO GET BETWEEN HIM AND THE DOG AND I MUST HAVE TOLD HIM THREE, FOUR TIMES TO PLEASE OR ASKED HIM TO PLEASE SET THE PACKAGE DOWN ON THE ROAD.
BUT HE CONTINUED TO TELL ME HE WAS FINE WITH DOGS, DOGS ARE GOOD, DOGS ARE HIS FRIEND.
AND WHEN HE GOT CLOSE THE TIMES THAT I'VE SEEN OR THAT I SAW, HE STARTED SWINGING THE PACKAGE AT WINSTON CAUSING HIM TO BECOME AGGRESSIVE AT HIM.
SO HIM SWINGING THE PACKAGE COULD BE EASILY CONSTRUED AS A PROVOCATION OF THE DOG? YES.
AND HOW FAR AWAY FROM OUR HOUSE WAS THE DELIVERY DRIVER? OH, HE CAME ALL THE WAY UP INSIDE.
WHAT WOULD BE HIS RANGE FOR HIS ELECTRIC FENCE.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO THE COMMITTEE WHAT WINSTON'S RANGE DOES? HE ALWAYS WEAR HIS ELECTRIC COLLAR ALL THE TIME.
AND SO IN THE COMMITTEE'S PACKET ON, UH, PAGE THREE, THERE IS A IMAGE, AN AERIAL IMAGE OF OUR HOME, OUR RESIDENCE.
UM, COULD YOU KIND OF MAYBE EXPLAIN WHERE WINSTON'S UNDERGROUND FENCE AREA IS AND WHERE IT STOPS AS IT PERTAINS TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND THE DRIVEWAY? OKAY.
THE BIGGER BUILDING IS OBVIOUSLY THE MAIN STRUCTURE OF THE HOUSE.
SO IT IS JUST A SHORT RANGE AROUND AND IT PROBABLY COMES IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE, 10 FEET, 15 FEET.
SO WAS THE DRIVER WITHIN HIS ELECTRIC FENCE RANGE OR WAS THE DRIVER OUTSIDE OF WINSTON'S FENCE RANGE? HE WAS INSIDE OF IT.
HE LITERALLY WALKED UP THE ENTIRE DRIVEWAY AS I REPEATEDLY ASKED HIM TO SET THE PACKAGE DOWN.
I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS WITNESS.
ATTORNEY HALLMARK, DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? PLEASE PROCEED.
JASON, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WITH YOU THAT, UM, YOU SAY THE DOG, YOU SAY THE, SORRY, THE DELIVERY DRIVER SWUNG THE PACKAGE AT WINSTON MM-HMM
[00:45:01]
AFTER WINSTON APPROACHED THE DRIVER? IT WAS, UM, NO, HE APPROACHED THE DOG OR WITHIN HIS RANGE AFTER I ASKED HIM TO SET THE PACKAGE DOWN.AND IT WASN'T A PACKAGE, IT WAS A CLIPBOARD.
AND ARE YOU AWARE OF THEIR TRAINING TO USE THE PACKAGE OR A CLIPBOARD AS PROTECTION? MY INSTANT WOULD BE FOR PROTECTION IS TO HOLD IT AND NOT TO SWING IT, BUT THE DOG WAS ALREADY IN CLOSE PROXIMITY.
HE WAS BARKING, BUT HE WAS NOT LUNGING.
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE? UH, SUPERVISOR NEWMAN.
YEAH, SO IT WAS AMAZON AND AMAZON HAS A AREA IN YOUR ACCOUNT WHERE YOU CAN DESIGNATE, YOU KNOW, REPEATED WHETHER IT'S A, A CODE OR SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS.
UM, AND I HAVE HAD FOR YEARS IN ALL DELIVERY NOTES, INSTRUCTIONS, SPECIAL REQUESTS, ET CETERA.
PLEASE LEAVE ALL PACKAGES AT THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY.
UM, AND I WOULD SAY IN OUR FIVE YEARS, EVEN WITH THOSE RULES, AND STRICTLY SPEAKING, AMAZON, UM, AT LEAST 50% OF THE DRIVERS TO THIS DAY CONTINUE TO DELIVER PACKAGES TO OUR FRONT DOOR, WHICH IS WITHIN OUR DOG'S RANGE.
UM, OBVIOUSLY OUR REASONING FOR MAKING THESE NOTES IN OUR ACCOUNT IS BECAUSE WE SEE THAT HE, HE'S PROTECTIVE, I'M HIS PERSON.
UH, AND WHEN I'M THERE, HE'S VERY PROTECTIVE OF ME.
UM, AND THEREFORE WE HAVE INSTALLED THIS DELIVERY BOX.
WE REQUEST EVEN DON'T EVEN COME TO THE DELIVERY BOX.
RIGHT? LEAVE IT AT THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY COMPLETELY.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHILE OUTSIDE OF HIS RANGE.
SO, UM, THAT, THOSE ARE THE, THE NOTES I'M REFERRING TO.
UM, I ACTUALLY DID ALSO, AFTER THIS FIRST EVENT, I REACHED OUT TO AMAZON BECAUSE I WAS CONCERNED SAYING, I HAVE THESE NOTES IN OUR ACCOUNT FOR ALL DELIVERIES.
UM, UM, AND SHE SAID, OH, WELL I'LL MAKE SURE TO PUT THE NOTES IN A DIFFERENT SPOT SO THAT DRIVERS REALLY SEE IT MOVING FORWARD.
AND UNFORTUNATELY THAT HASN'T, I DON'T, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR SOFTWARE IS OR WHAT HAVE YOU, BUT I AM SHOWING GOOD FAITH THAT I'M MAKING LOTS OF EFFORTS TO KEEP EVERYONE, UH, SAFE FOR ALL DELIVERIES.
UM, I DO RECALL THAT I ASKED THE DEPUTY, UM, WHO WAS WITH THE SECOND INCIDENT WHEN SHE CAME TO INTERVIEW ME AND I, I STATED THESE FACTS AS WELL AND I ASKED WHAT RECOURSE DO I HAVE? UM, AS AN OWNER, WE HAVE AN INVISIBLE FENCE.
HE'S NEVER UNATTENDED OUTSIDE HIS COLLAR'S ON AT ALL TIMES.
WE HAVE IT IN OUR DELIVERY NOTES THAT HE, OR THAT THEY LEAVE PACKAGES AT THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY.
WE'VE PURCHASED A BOX WHICH IS ALSO AT LEAST 10 20 FEET OUTSIDE OF HIS ELECTRIC FENCE RANGE.
AND, UM, SO AGAIN, I'M, WE'RE WE'RE MAKING EFFORTS AND I, SHE SAID, I SAID, WHAT, WHAT RECOURSE DO I HAVE IF, IF THIS HAPPENS? AND THEY BLATANTLY DISREGARDED OUR INSTRUCTIONS, ET CETERA.
UM, AND SHE SAID, WELL, YOU COULD BUILD A FENCE, WHICH SURE I OWN AN ACRE, IT WOULD BE ABOUT $50,000 TO FENCE IN THE ENTIRE THING.
UM, AND I DO HAVE A FENCE, UH, INVISIBLE, RIGHT? SO AGAIN, THERE'S REASONS THAT WE MAKE THESE NOTES IN OUR ACCOUNTS.
UM, AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE WHEN DRIVERS DISREGARD THEM AND THEN AN INCIDENT HAPPENS LIKE THIS.
I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE FOR YOU.
SUPERVISOR NEWMAN HAS ANOTHER QUESTION.
SO BE THAT ON THE INSTRUCTIONS OR
[00:50:01]
IT'S SOMETHING THAT I VALUE, I DON'T WANT HIM TO DO THATAND SO MY REASONING INITIALLY WAS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THE PACKAGES IN WITHIN WINSTON'S AREA.
'CAUSE IF I'M NOT HOME, HE'LL JUST TAKE IT AND RUN AROUND WITH IT.
UM, SO THO THAT WAS MY REASONING FOR SETTING THOSE MESSAGES INITIALLY.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CHAIRMAN? UH, WE'LL, UH, SUPERVISOR NEWMAN GO FIRST, WHICH IN BASE THE SPECIAL DELIVERY.
I BELIEVE I PURCHASED IT AND INSTALLED IT SHORTLY AFTER THE SECOND INCIDENT.
ANYTHING ELSE? SUPERVISOR NEWMAN.
MR. ZERN STATED THAT THE DELIVERY DRIVER GOT THERE.
HE STEPPED BETWEEN WINSTON AND THE DELIVERY DRIVER.
HOW DID WINSTON GET TO THE DRIVER IF YOU WERE BETWEEN THAT? OH, I, I MEAN OBVIOUSLY HE'S FASTER THAN ME, SO I TRIED TO GRAB HIM AND I WASN'T ABLE TO GRAB HIS COLLAR SLIPPED PAST ME, BUT HE WAS, I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT GOING ON WITHIN TWO FEET OF YOU.
AND I THINK I, I WAS LITERALLY RIGHT THERE.
LIKE, CAN I ADD, JUST TO BRING CLARIFICATION, UM, WE HAVE A DOG DOOR ON THE BACK OF OUR HOUSE.
IT'S POWERED SO WE CAN, IT'S NOT ONE OF THOSE FLAP ONES, IT'S BULLETPROOF GLASS THAT COMES DOWN.
HE'S ONLY ALLOWED OUTSIDE WHEN WE'RE HOME WHEN SOMEONE'S THERE.
AND SO THAT MAY BE WHAT YOUR CONFUSION WITH WHY THE DRIVER STATED HE SAW THE DOG IN THE HOUSE AND THEN SUDDENLY HE WAS OUTSIDE THE HOUSE.
SO HE, WE WERE HOME, THE DOG DOOR WAS OPEN, SO HE KNOWS HE HAS THAT FREEDOM TO GO OUT THE DOG DOOR.
AND THEN HE CIRCLED THE H EXCUSE ME, CIRCLED THE HOUSE AND CAME IN FRONT WHERE THE DRIVER WAS NEAR THE DOOR SUPERVISOR TOMA.
THE SHOT COLLAR, IS THAT JUST FOR THE, THE INVISIBLE FENCE OR IS IT ONE THAT YOU ACTIVATE? IT'S JUST FOR THE INVISIBLE FENCE SUPERVISOR, KARD GUNDER.
SO I WAS AT THE FRONT DOOR, THE FEDEX WOMAN CAME AND UH, YES, HE WAS BARKING.
SO I HAD HIS COLLAR WITH MY RIGHT HAND, OPEN THE DOOR.
SHE WAS STANDING THERE, HE LUNGED, NIPPED HER.
AGAIN, IT, I DOUBT SHE EVEN NEEDED A BANDAID, BUT REGARDLESS, NIPPED HER, RIGHT? HE'S PROTECTING ME.
SOMEONE AT THE DOOR WITH A PACK WITH A PACKAGE,
SO HE NEVER WAS OUT OF MY GRASP IN THAT INCIDENT.
I HAD HIS COLLAR THE ENTIRE TIME HE LAUNCHED.
SO THEN I PUT HIM IN THE HOUSE, LOCKED THE DOOR, AND THEN I CAME OUTSIDE TO COMPLETE THE TRANSACTION WITH THE DRIVER.
NO, WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
I DON'T BELIEVE MOST PEOPLE DO FOR INVISIBLE FENCES, BUT, UM, WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE ANY SIGNAGE REGARDING THE FENCE.
RARELY, I WOULD SAY IN INCIDENT THREE, UM, WINSTON WAS BARKING RIGHT AT HIS LINE, WHICH IS AGAIN, 10 20 FEET AWAY FROM THAT DELIVERY BOX.
UM, AND HE BARKS AND IT SOUNDS, IT'S LOUD, HE'S A BIG DOG, BUT REGARDLESS.
AND THEN I WAS THERE ON THE RIDING LAWNMOWER, I'M COMING OVER 'CAUSE I CAN SEE HIM WALKING UP WITH THE PACKAGE AND THERE'S WINSTON RIGHT AT THE BORDER BARKING LIKE CRAZY.
AND THEN I, AGAIN, EVERYTHING HAPPENS IN FIVE SECONDS.
SO I'M GETTING OFF THE LAWNMOWER.
[00:55:01]
WINSTON BREAKS THROUGH, HE'S GOING TOWARDS THE DRIVER.I'M TRYING TO PLACE MYSELF BETWEEN THE DRIVER AND THE DOG BECAUSE I KNOW HE WON'T HURT.
YOU KNOW, LIKE HE, HE, HE'S TRYING TO PROTECT ME.
AND SO WE, WE DID A LITTLE DANCE, UM, WITH THE DRIVER AND THE DOG AND ME.
UM, AND AGAIN, HE, THERE WAS A PACKAGE BEING SWUNG, WHICH TO WINSTON IS SHOWING AGGRESSION TOWARDS US.
UM, YEAH, AND IT, IT HAP SO I'M SORRY, THAT'S, THAT'S SO HE WAS OUTSIDE.
UM, I WAS LOOKING AT THE COLLAR AND THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE THAT MAYBE IT JUST WASN'T CHARGED OR THE BATTERIES WERE ACCIDENTALLY DEAD IN IT, BUT HE DID STOP AND I THINK HE REALIZED THAT THE BATTERIES WERE NOT DOING ANYTHING BECAUSE IT DOES GIVE A LEAK BEFORE.
AND MAYBE THE BATTERY WAS DEAD AT THAT TIME.
AND NOW WE ARE PROCEEDING TO TAKE EVEN FURTHER CAUTIONS WITH A FULL SIX FOOT FENCE AROUND OUR HOUSE TO ENSURE THAT NOTHING EVER HAPPENS AGAIN.
AND I ALSO WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR THAT THE ELECTRIC DOOR ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE IS ONLY IN OPERATION WHEN WE ARE HOME.
THAT IS NOT SOMETHING WE LEAVE ON.
IF YOU TURN THE POWER OFF, HE CANNOT USE IT.
THIS IS, I'M SORRY, THIS WAS A STOCK PHOTO, RIGHT? THIS IS JUST AN IMAGE FROM THE INTERNET THAT IS THE EXACT DELIVERY BOX THAT I PURCHASED, BUT THAT'S NOT OUR HOME
I, I APOLOGIZE, THAT WAS JUST A STOCK IMAGE JUST TO SHOW THE SIZING OF, YOU KNOW, HOW LARGE THIS BOX IS.
BUT THE BOX ON OUR PROPERTY IS PLACED NEAR THAT YELLOW CIRCLE ON, UM, THE AERIAL HOME MAP ON PAGE THREE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UM, MS. ZERN, WOULD YOU WANT THIS, YOUR, THE PACKET THAT YOU EMAILED ENTER INTO, UM, EVIDENCE AS YOUR TESTIMONY? YES, PLEASE.
I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT TO EVIDENCE AS PART OF MY TESTIMONY.
AND SO THAT WOULD BE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, EVIDENCE? I DO, YES.
WHICH YOU'VE OBVIOUSLY SEEN THE PACKET.
UM, AND, AND WHICH SEGMENTS OF THE PACKET DO YOU THINK SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED INTO EVIDENCE? PLEASE COME FORWARD.
I THINK RESPECTFULLY, IT MIGHT TO BE EASIER FOR ME TO TELL YOU WHICH ONES I THINK SHOULD BE ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE.
I'M, I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE AERIAL VIEW OF THE HOUSE OR THE DELIVERY BOX.
UM, I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE INTRODUCTION AND REQUEST FOR APPEAL PARAGRAPH THAT'S ON PAGE TWO, SPECIFICALLY THAT PARAGRAPH AND THE MITIGATION EFFORTS ON PAGE ONE FIVE, UM, STATES MITIGATION EFFORTS AND HAS THE BULLET POINTS, I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THOSE BEING ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE AS WELL.
AND ALSO THE, THEY DID TESTIFY ABOUT THE NEW FENCE INSTALLATION IN GENERAL, SO I WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THAT BEING ENTERED.
UM, THE, UM, THOSE WERE WHAT I WOULD AGREE TO BEING ENTERED IN EVIDENCE AS THEY WERE COVERED IN TESTIMONY.
[01:00:02]
FIRST PAGE IS ALLOWABLE.IF, IF WE, CAN YOU RUN ME THROUGH IT BY PAGE AGAIN PLEASE? THE SECOND PAGE, FIRST PARAGRAPH ON THE SECOND PAGE, ONLY THE FIRST PARAGRAPH.
AND THEN THE, THE PICTURES ON THE THIRD PAGE THAT HAS THE DELIVERY BOX IN THE AERIAL PHOTO THAT WAS ALSO ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE OR THAT WAS ALSO TESTIFIED ABOUT, EXCUSE ME.
AND THEN ON PAGE FIVE, THE SPECIFIC PARAGRAPH REGARDING MITIGATION EFFORTS.
SHE DID, MS. STERN DID TALK ABOUT THOSE.
SO I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THOSE.
THAT'S WHAT I WOULD AGREE TO MR. CHAIRMAN.
I THINK THOSE ARE ALL RELEVANT AS WELL, AT LEAST AT THIS POINT FOR THIS HEARING SPECIFICALLY.
ANY COMMENT FROM THE COMMITTEE? YEP.
UH, WE'LL HOLD THAT UNTIL, OKAY.
LET'S FINISH THIS ISSUE FIRST.
IT'S MY RECOLLECTION BASED ON THE TESTIMONY THAT WAS OFFERED, THAT THE, THE AREAS OF THE DOCUMENT THAT ATTORNEY HALLMARK HAS OUTLINED WERE ACTUALLY REFERRED TO IN DURING THE TESTIMONY OF MS. ZERN AND HER HUSBAND.
AND SO IT'S MY OPINION THAT THOSE SHOULD BE ALLOWED.
THE OTHER ITEMS, UM, ARE, ARE GOOD EXTRANEOUS INFORMATION, BUT THEY WERE NOT PART OF THE TESTIMONY, IN MY OPINION.
DOES THE COMMITTEE AGREE WITH THAT? THANK YOU.
AND NOW SUPERVISOR TOMA HAD A QUESTION FOR THE WITNESS.
WE HAVE A VERY FRIENDLY DOG, NEIGHBORS AND KIDS COME UP TO OUR DOOR.
STRANGERS, SOLICITORS ALL THE TIME, NO INCIDENTS EVER.
UM, SO AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT HIS SENSITIVITY IS OR HIS REASONINGS FROM WHEN HE WAS A STRAY.
UH, WHY HE FEELS STRONGLY ABOUT DELIVERY DRIVERS.
BUT AGAIN, IT, IT, IN MY EXPERIENCE, IT'S JUST BEEN, WE KNOW THAT HE HAS A SENSITIVITY TO THOSE TRIGGERS AND SO THEREFORE WE HAVE AN INVISIBLE FENCE.
WE HAVE NOTES ON OUR AMAZON ACCOUNT 'CAUSE WE PRIMARILY GET OUR DELIVERIES FROM AMAZON.
WE, UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE'VE INSTALLED THE DELIVERY BOX IN TWO OUT OF THE THREE OF THESE INCIDENCES.
A DRIVER WAS SWINGING A CLIPBOARD OR PACKAGE AT HIM, WHICH AGAIN, HE FEELS PROVOKED TO DEFEND.
UM, AND THEN THE OTHER INCIDENT WITH THE, THE FEDEX DRIVER, UM, I GUESS I WOULD SAY YEAH, IT'S UNFORTUNATE, BUT ALSO I WOULD SAY THE NIP BARELY DREW BLOOD.
SHE STATED IN HER REPORT SHE DID NOT WANT TO GO TO THE HOSPITAL.
SHE DID NOT WANT MEDICAL ATTENTION.
SHE WAS ONLY DOING IT BECAUSE SHE HAD TO BY HER, UM, BY HER EMPLOYER'S PROTOCOL.
UM, AND SHE AND I KNOW I HAVE SEEN THIS PARTICULAR DRIVER MANY TIMES BEFORE.
SHE HAS SEEN OUR DOG BEFORE, I BELIEVE.
WELL, NO, SHE DELIVERS TO OUR STORE A LOT, SO A DIFFERENT LOCATION.
UM, SO I I I DO FEEL THAT HE WAS PROVOKED SURELY IN INCIDENT ONE AND INCIDENT THREE.
I WILL ACKNOWLEDGE INCIDENT TWO.
I WAS HOLDING HIM BY HIS COLLAR AND HE NIPPED HER.
SHE NEEDED A BANDAID IF THAT, UM, SO I, I VERY STRONGLY ASK YOU TO PLEASE CONSIDER REMOVING THE VICIOUS DOG DETERMINATION.
UM, WE'RE, WE'RE GETTING A BIT FARFIELD FROM THE, THE QUESTION ABOUT THE BEWARE OF DOG.
NO, THERE'S NOT, NOT CURRENTLY ASSIGNED, I'M SORRY.
SUPERVISOR TOMA HAD A FOLLOW UP QUESTION AS WELL.
DELIVERY BOX, THERE'S NO BEWARE OF DOG SIGN ON THE DELIVERY BOX.
IF I WAS DELIVER, I WOULD ASSUME THAT'S, THERE'S NO MENTION ABOUT WHY
[01:05:01]
YOU WANT STAND IN THERE.IF YOU HAVE A SIGN THAT SAYS BEWARE OF DOG, OBVIOUSLY PROBABLY WOULD NOT GO BEYOND THAT DELIVERY BOX.
AND, AND WE'RE GETTING A BIT FAR AFIELD HERE TOO.
YEAH, THE DELIVERY BOX IS WELL OUTSIDE OF HIS INVISIBLE FENCE RANGE, SO I DON'T, IT HAD NOT CROSSED MY MIND TO PUT UP A SIGN BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S MAYBE 10 FEET OFF THE ROAD AND 30 40 FEET FROM OUR FRONT DOOR.
UM, SO I, I DIDN'T FEEL THAT I HAD TO AT THIS POINT.
BUT SUPERVISOR KRIEGER GUN HAD A QUESTION AS WELL.
LEMME KNOW IF THIS IS HE HE PERSON.
WE'VE HAD, LIKE I'VE SAID, WE'VE HAD STRANGERS, SOLICITORS, JEHOVAH'S WITNESS DELIVERY DRIVERS, NEIGHBOR, OR EXCUSE ME, NEIGHBORHOOD CHILDREN COMING OVER TO ASK IF OUR KIDS CAN COME OUT AND PLAY.
I MEAN, THIS IS LIKE A EVERY OTHER DAY OCCURRENCE.
JUST THE FACT OF YOU CARRYING A CLIPBOARD WOULD NOT INSTIGATE HIM.
UM, IT'S WHEN YOU START SWINGING IT AT HIM, I BELIEVE THAT HE VIEWS THAT AS A THREAT.
UM, WHEN IT COMES TO THAT, I THINK IT, HE KNOWS WHEN IT'S LIKE A VERY LARGE TRUCK TO BE HONEST.
SO LIKE IF YOU, THAT SAME PERSON COULD WALK UP OUT OF A NORMAL CAR.
SO I'VE HAD HIM BARK AT ME WHEN I COME UP AND I HAVE BIG Q VANS AND, BUT THEN HE OBVIOUSLY REALIZES IT'S ME, BUT THEN THE SAME PERSON COULD COME BACK IN A NORMAL CAR AND HE'LL JUST BE HIS FRIEND AND LICK HIM AND EVERYTHING ELSE, PLEASE.
UM, A BIG LARGE, LIKE A COMMERCIAL, LIKE A COMMERCIAL BOX FAN, LIKE A 16 FOOT BOX, 10 FOOT TALL, YOU KNOW, LIKE A, LIKE A PENSKE OR LIKE A, A BIG CUBE VAN LIKE AMAZON DELIVERS IN A LOT OF VERY LARGE VEHICLES.
OUR FATHER AND MY FATHER-IN-LAW HAS A F THREE 50, WHICH IS A BIG OLD LOUD DIESEL TRUCK AND HE HAS NEVER, THERE'S, THERE'S NEVER BEEN ANY INCIDENTS WITH THAT VEHICLE, WITH ANY LARGE STANDARD VEHICLE, I GUESS I WOULD SAY.
AND, AND I WOULD REMIND THE COMMITTEE THAT REALLY OUR FOCUS IS ON ACTIONS, INCIDENTS THAT, THAT HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED AS OPPOSED TO CONJECTURE ABOUT WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE.
WHILE, WHILE WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, UM, WE CAN'T GO TOO FAR AFIELD THAT WAY EITHER.
UM, WERE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THIS WITNESS? SUPERVISOR NEWMAN TESTIMONY THAT NO, OUR, OUR INSTRUCTIONS ARE TO LEAVE HIM AT THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY.
HE PROCEEDED TO WALK UP THE DRIVEWAY TOWARDS THE DELIVERY BOX AND I, UH, THE GESTURE, I BELIEVE AS I WAS ON THE RIDING LAWNMOWER, I WENT, STOP, STOP.
UM, SO HE DID NOT STOP, HE DID NOT READ THE DIRECTIONS IN HIS AMAZON INSTRUCTIONS.
IF THAT'S THE CASE, WHY? SO WE INSTALLED THE DELIVERY BOX AFTER OUR INCIDENT TWO AND WE'VE HAD NO ISSUES.
HOWEVER, AGAIN, WELL, AND ACTUALLY YOU ARE, IT'S BEEN WINTER, SO WE CAN'T MOVE THE BOX.
IT WAS FROZEN TO THE GROUND, BUT YOU ARE ACTUALLY IN THE PROCESS OF PUTTING IT NEXT TO OUR MAILBOX SO THAT THE DRIVERS WON'T EVEN NEED TO TURN INTO OUR DRIVEWAY AT ALL.
THEY CAN JUST COME UP AND STAY COMPLETELY OFF SITE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I SORRY, MR. BIRD, GO AHEAD.
[01:10:01]
I'M GOOD.ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMITTEE? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY.
YOU'RE EXCUSED FOR THE MOMENT AND ATTORNEY HALLMARK IF YOU WANTED TO MAKE ANY CLOSING STATEMENTS.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE AT THIS POINT, YOU'VE HEARD ALL THE TESTIMONY AND HEARD ALL THE EVIDENCE, WITNESS THE EXHIBITS AND BASED ON THE EVIDENCE PROVIDED, IT'S CLEAR THAT WINSTON IS A VICIOUS DOG AS DESCRIBED IN BOTH 1 72, 13 A ONE AND A TWO.
VICIOUS WINSTON IS A VICIOUS DOG UNDER SUB ONE DUE TO HIM REPEATEDLY CHASING AND ACTIVE ACTING AGGRESSIVELY AND ULTIMATELY ULTIMATELY BITING THREE PEOPLE ON THREE DIFFERENT OCCASIONS.
THESE BITES BROKE THE SKIN ON ALL OCCASIONS AND DREW BLOOD AND ALL OCCASIONS AS WELL.
MS. ZERN WAS PRESENT IN DURING TWO OCCASIONS AND STILL COULD NOT STOP HER DOG FROM HARMING INNOCENT DELIVERY DRIVERS.
ONE ON THE OTHER OCCASION, OCCASION THE DOG WAS INSIDE INITIALLY, BUT WAS LET OUT.
THROUGH THESE REPEATED INCIDENTS, THE DOG HAS SHOWN THAT IT HAS A PROPENSITY TO CAUSE INJURY TO ANOTHER HUMAN BEING BY HIS HABITUAL SNAPPING OF OTHER PEOPLE.
ALSO, THERE IS BARKING INVOLVED IN THESE INSTANCES AS WELL.
WINSTON IS ALSO VICIOUS UNDER SUB TWO DUE TO HIM ATTACKING HUMAN BEINGS WITHOUT, I'M SORRY.
WINSTON IS ALSO VICIOUS UNDER SUB TWO DUE TO HIM ATTACKING ANOTHER PERSON WITHOUT BEING PROVOKED.
AND THESE, IN TWO CASES, THE DOG RAN UP TO THE DELIVERY DRIVER ON ITS OWN VOLITION WITHOUT PROVOCATION TO BITE THE AND INJURE THE DRIVER.
IN THE OTHER CASE, THE DOG WAS BEING PHYSICALLY HELD BACK BY MS. ERN, BUT THE DOG WAS SO UNCONTROLLABLE THAT MS. ERN COULD NOT SUCCESSFULLY PREVENT IT FROM BITING THE DRIVER.
IN THE MOST RECENT CASE, THE DOG WENT OVER THE UNDERGROUND PROPERTY LINE AND AND IGNORED IT SHOT COLLAR IN ORDER TO BITE THE DRIVER.
AND IF EVEN IF THE SHOT COLLAR WAS NOT OPERATIVE, IF IT WAS DEAD, THAT SHOWS THAT THE OWNERS ARE NOT PAYING CLOSE ENOUGH ATTENTION WHILE THE DELIVERY DRIVERS ARE ON THE PROPERTY IN ORDER TO KEEP THEIR SHOT COLLAR WORKING.
MS HAS SHOWED THAT SHE'S UNABLE TO SUCCESSFULLY RESTRAIN THE DOG EVEN WHEN IS IN HER VIEW.
TO BEGIN WITH, THE SHERIFF HAS GIVEN MS. SERN TWO PRIOR OCCASIONS TO GET HER DOG UNDER CONTROL.
HOWEVER, IT WAS NOT UNTIL THIS INCIDENT THAT MS. SERN HAS DECIDED TO TAKE PRECAUTIONS.
SHE HAS FAILED TO GET HER DOG UNDER CONTROL, EVEN TO THE EXTENT THAT THE SHOCK COLLAR IS NOT ENOUGH TO KEEP THE DOG FROM RUNNING AND BITING INNOCENT SAMARITANS.
ON THE THIRD INCIDENT, THE DOG WAS IN VIEW AS SHE STATES THAT THE DOG IS ALWAYS SUPERVISED.
HOWEVER, SHE CANNOT GET TO THE DOG OR STOP THE DOG FAST ENOUGH FROM BITING THE THE DRIVER THREE DIFFERENT TIMES.
THE SHERIFF MADE THE VICIOUS DOG DETERMINATION TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DOG DOES NOT INJURE ANYONE ELSE AND PROTECT THE PUBLIC SAFETY BEFORE THE, BEFORE SOMEONE ELSE IS BITTEN AND OR BITTEN MORE SEVERELY GETS FATALLY INJURED OR LOSES A LIMB.
I JUST WANNA REMIND THE COMMITTEE, WE'RE NOT HERE TO PUT THE DOG DOWN.
THE SHERIFF DOES NOT WANNA PUT THE DOG DOWN IN ANY CAPACITY.
THE SHERIFF IS JUST ASKING THAT MS. STERN COMPLY WITH THE REMEDIES IN 1 72 13 B ONE THROUGH SIX, WHICH INVOLVES A MUZZLE OR LEASH WHEN THE DOG IS OFF THE PROPERTY AND THE DOG IS CONFINED WITHIN A FENCE OR KENNEL WHEN OUTSIDE AS APPROVED BY THE SHERIFF.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR THE TO HARM THE DOG, WE'RE NOT ASKING TO REMOVE THE DOG FROM MS. CERN'S CARE.
WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO TAKE THE DOG.
AND WE'RE ALSO ASKING FOR MR. STERNER TO CARRY THE PROPER INSURANCE IN CASE A DOG HAS BIT, BIT SOMEONE ELSE.
AND THAT IS A CONCERN AND THAT IS A MUST BECAUSE SINCE MS. ER IS ON NOTICE, THERE IS A STATUTE THAT SAYS THAT IF SHE'S ON NOTICE AND THE DOG INJURES SOMEONE ELSE, SHE HAS TO PAY DOUBLE DAMAGES, WHICH IS AN ISSUE THAT NO ONE WANTS TO SEE HERE.
SO FOR THOSE INSTANCES, THOSE REASONS WE'RE ASKING, UM, THE DECISION TO MUZZLE TO CONFINE THE DOG IN INTEREST IS IN THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND TO KEEP THE PUBLIC SAFE, AS IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS COMMITTEE HERE THIS MORNING.
NONE OF THESE INSTANCES WOULD'VE HAPPENED IF THE DOG WAS WEARING A MUZZLE FOR INCIDENTS.
MS. ERN STATED SUBMITTING FACTORS, AND I'LL BRIEFLY GO THROUGH THOSE.
AS DISCUSSED, THE ELECTRIC FENCE HAS PREVIOUSLY NOT BEEN ENOUGH TO RESTRAIN THE DOG AND HAS NOT PROVEN EFFECTIVE.
THE LARGE PACKAGE DELIVERY BOX WAS PRESENT DURING THE MOST CURRENT INCIDENT AND DID NOT PREVENT THE DOG FROM COMING
[01:15:01]
TO ATTACK THE OWNER.PLUS THE DRIVER HAD TO WALK ABOUT 20 FEET ON THE PROPERTY TO ACCESS THE BOX.
SO SPECIFIC DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS ARE NOT SUFFICIENT.
HERE SHE STATES THAT SHE NEVER LEAVES WINSTON UNINTENDED, BUT HER ATTENDANCE AGAIN AND ATTEMPTS AT PHYSICAL RESTRAINT HAVE PROVEN INEFFECTIVE TO CONTROL THE DOG, THE PURCHASING OF A FENCE FOR THE BACKYARD AND ALSO HER PREVIOUS PURCHASE OF A DELIVERY BOX AND UNDERGROUND FENCE SUGGESTS THAT MR KNOWS THAT HER DOG IS DANGEROUS AND POSES A THREAT TO OTHERS.
EVEN THOUGH SHE CLAIMS TO BE PUTTING A FENCE IN, SHE COULD JUST EASILY TAKE IT DOWN OR NOT PUT ONE IN IF THE COMMITTEE DOES NOT ORDER THAT, IT MUST BE THERE.
WINSTON BEING UP TO DATE ON HIS SHOTS IS THE BARE MINIMUM FOR A DOG OWNER IS NOT MITIGATING FACTOR HERE AS LISTED IN HER PACKET AS ADMITTED IN EVIDENCE WITH THAT, WINSTON IS CLEARLY A VICIOUS DOG AS DESCRIBED IN 1 72 13 AS EVIDENCE CLEARLY SHOWS, MS. STERN STATED THAT THE DOG HAS A SPECIFIC TENDENCY TO DELIVERY DRIVERS.
AND THAT IS WHAT OCCURRED AT THREE IN, IN INCIDENTS, EXCUSE ME, WHICH IS FURTHER PROOF THAT THE DELIVERY DRIVERS DID NOT PROVOKE THE DOG.
THE DOG APPROACHED THE DRIVERS AND THEN GOT AGGRESSIVE AFTER THAT.
AND THE DRIVERS WERE SIMPLY USING THEIR TRAINING TO PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM THE DOG THAT WAS ACTING AGGRESSIVELY.
THE DOG'S BACKGROUND AND CHARACTER REFERENCES ARE NOT MATERIAL TO THE ORDINANCE, THEY'RE NOT MATERIAL AT ALL TO THE CHARACTER OF THE, UM, THE DANGEROUSNESS OF THE DOG AND ARE THEREFORE IRRELEVANT AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED BY THIS IN THIS COMMITTEE'S DECISION.
THE BOTTOM LINE HERE IS THAT THE LAW APPLIES TO EVERYONE AND THE SHERIFF MUST UPHOLD THE LAW.
IF THIS IS NOT A CASE WORTH A VICIOUS DOG AS DESCRIBED IN THE COW IN THE ORDINANCE, THEN WHAT IS? THANK YOU.
YOUR CLOSING STATEMENT PLEASE.
SO, UM, CHAPTER 1 72 13 A ONE UNDER VICIOUS DOG DEFINITION SAYS, ANY DOG WITH A PROPENSITY, TENANCY OR DISPOSITION TO ATTACK CAUSE INJURY, ET CETERA.
UM, SO I DID INCLUDE THESE CHARACTER STATEMENTS IN MY PACKET BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT THEY DO SPEAK VOLUMES ABOUT HIS PROPENSITY TENDENCY OR DISPOSITION TO ATTACK.
UM, DEBBIE CEDAR, THE WAGS AND BARKS DOG DAYCARE OWNER STATES THAT HE HAS, HE GETS ALONG WITH ALL THE DOGS, EVEN THE LITTLE ONES AND PUPPIES.
I HAVE DEALT WITH AGGRESSIVE DOGS.
WINSTON IS NOT AN AGGRESSIVE DOG, MADAM.
YES, I'M, I'M, UH, INFORMED THAT SINCE THAT THE CHARACTER STATEMENTS, AND I'M SURE THE COMMITTEE HAS READ THEM ALL, BUT WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED THEM INTO EVIDENCE AS PART OF THE, UM, PACKET.
SO THOSE ARE NOT TO BE REFERRED TO IN THE CLOSING STATEMENTS.
THEN I WILL JUST CLOSE WITH STATING, UM, TWO OF THESE THREE INCIDENTS OCCURRED BY THE DRIVER SWINGING A CLIPBOARD OR A BOX, AGAIN, INITIATING WHAT THE DOG VIEWS AS, UM, AGGRESSION.
UM, AND THE ONE INCIDENT WHERE THE DRIVER CAME TO THE DOOR AND I WAS HOLDING HIM, I ACKNOWLEDGE WAS UNFORTUNATE, BUT ALSO UNCHARACTERISTIC, AS I'VE STATED, MANY, MANY CHILDREN, NEIGHBORS, STRANGERS, SOLICITORS, ET CETERA, DELIVERY DRIVERS FOR PIZZA TWO NIGHTS AGO, UM, ALL COME TO THE DOOR AND HAVE FOR FIVE YEARS.
AND THERE'S NEVER BEEN A SINGLE OUNCE OF AGGRESSION IN THAT DOG.
UM, WE, AGAIN, I I OUTLINE ALL THE STEPS WE'VE TAKEN THROUGHOUT THE TIME THAT WE'VE HAD HIM, AND I ALSO CONFIRM WE'RE WE'VE PAID A $6,200 DEPOSIT ON A FENCE THAT'S SIX FEET HIGH FOR OUR BACKYARD, WHICH WINSTON WILL A HUNDRED PERCENT BE CONTAINED IN THAT AREA MOVING FORWARD.
AND MY REASONING FOR DOING THAT IS NOT ONLY FOR WINSTON'S CARE, BUT ALSO OBVIOUSLY TO CONTINUE TO KEEP EVERYONE SAFE, INCLUDING THE DRIVERS.
THEY'RE, I UNDERSTAND THEY'RE JUST GOING TO WORK AND DOING THEIR JOBS.
[01:20:01]
UM, HOWEVER, I DO BELIEVE THAT I'VE TAKEN A LOT OF STEPS TO PROTECT AND GIVE NOTICE AND, UM, WHEN DELIVERY DRIVER ONE CONFIRMED, HE READ THE NOTES AND DISREGARDED THEM, UH, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT MEANS MY DOG WAS UNPROVOKED, UM, AND THE THIRD INCIDENT AS WELL.SO I DO ASK YOU TO CONSIDER ALL OF THESE THINGS.
UM, I DON'T BELIEVE I HAVE A VICIOUS DOG.
UH, AND AGAIN, I, I THINK MOVING FORWARD, WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO KEEP EVERYONE SAFE AND CONTINUE TO GET THIS FENCE.
AND SO THERE'S NO OTHER INCIDENTS AT ALL.
UM, AND AGAIN, WE'RE JUST DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN CONTROL.
I CAN'T CONTROL A DRIVER WHO DOESN'T OBEY HIS RULES.
I CAN'T CONTROL A DRIVER WHO COMES WITHIN HIS FENCE AREA WHEN WE'VE STATED NOT TO.
UM, SO I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO CONSIDER THOSE THINGS IN MY APPEAL TO, UM, REMOVE THE VICIOUS DOG DETERMINATION.
AT THIS POINT, UM, DOES ANY PARTY WISH TO SUBMIT A BRIEF AT THE CLOSE OF THIS HEARING? EITHER, UH, THE COUNTY? I APPRECIATE THE COMPLIMENT.
THEN IT'LL BE TIME FOR, UM, THE COMMITTEE TO DELIBERATE.
WE HAVE ON THE AGENDA THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION.
WE DON'T NEED TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION FOR THIS DISCUSSION.
WE MAY HAVE IT OPENLY IF WE DO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION.
WE ARE GONNA HAVE TO EXPLAIN OUR, OUR THOUGHT PROCESS AND EVERYTHING AFTERWARDS, AFTER WE DO MAKE A DETERMINATION.
SO I'LL LEAVE IT TO THE COMMITTEE.
EITHER, UH, SOMEONE CAN MAKE A MOTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION.
WE HAVE A, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? THEN WE'LL TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE, STARTING WITH SUPERVISOR NEWMAN A AYE AYE, AYE.
WE'LL GO INTO CLOSED SESSION FOR A INDETERMINATE AMOUNT OF TIME TO INCLUDE, UM, THE CLERK,
[Closed Session]
UM, THE COUNTY CHAIR, UH, LEGISLATIVE CLERK AND COUNTY ATTORNEY.AND, UH, DOES COURT REPORTER NEED TO BE PRESENT FOR THAT OR IS HER WORK FINISHED AT THIS POINT? UH, SHE'LL NEED TO RETURN WHEN THE COMMITTEE RENDERS ITS DECISION, NOT BE IN THE CLOSED SESSION.
ANYONE ELSE THAT WE SHOULD DO.