The fate of rottweiler Chopper, which bit a Tauranga vet, is still undecided after the judge reserved his decision on the sentencing of the dog’s owner on Wednesday.
Helen Fraser was due to be sentenced at the Tauranga District Court after being found guilty of owning a dog causing injury.
Judge David Cameron said there was a lot of material to consider and he needed “sufficient time” before making a decision.
The charge carries a maximum sentence of three years imprisonment or a $20,000 fine, and the court must order destruction of the dog unless exceptional circumstances can be proven.
Fraser’s dog Chopper bit veterinarian Dr Liza Schneider during an appointment to discuss the dog’s neutering in October 2021.
The attack left Schneider, the owner of Holistic Vets, with a fractured ulna, four puncture wounds, nerve and muscle damage and she required surgery.
Tauranga City Council initially failed in its prosecution when Judge Cameron dismissed the charge in July 2022 after a judge-alone trial.
The council appealed this decision, stating it felt the judge had made an “error of law” by focusing on the conduct of the victim, rather than Fraser’s legal responsibility to control her dog at all times.
The appeal judge Justice Timothy Brewer upheld the appeal and convicted Fraser of the charge.
He agreed with the council that “Judge Cameron erred in his consideration of the test [for total absence of fault]”.
”The onus was on Ms Fraser to prove that she was totally without fault. In other words, that there were literally no practical steps she could have taken to avert the attack,” Justice Brewer’s written decision said.
During the sentencing hearing, Schneider read her victim impact statement to a crowded courtroom.
One half of the public gallery was filled with people there in support of Schneider, the other half were there for Fraser.
”This was the most aggressive and unprovoked attack I have ever experienced in my 22-year career as a veterinarian, which has included working with aggressive and dangerous dogs,” Schneider said.
”Had I not put my arm up in defence, the dog would likely have caused damage to my head or neck,” she claimed.
Schneider said the injury and two subsequent surgeries initially prevented her from performing her “normal duties” as a vet.
”My team of four other vets did everything they could to help, but my inability to do surgery and even basic procedures placed a massive strain on our team and we were unable to continue accepting new clients.”
Schneider said the business had lost around $60,000 in revenue and total costs to the business caused by the incident were more than $100,000.
She also alleged harassment and defamation had been caused by social media posts and comments on the “Team Chopper” Facebook page and Fraser’s and her adult son’s personal Facebook and Instagram pages, as well as the Holistic Vets Facebook page.
”The physical injuries as well as the mental and emotional stress associated with Chopper’s attack, pales in significance compared to the psychological damage caused by subsequent harassment, by Helen, her son … and their associates,” Scheinder alleged.
She claimed there were “untruths, discriminatory negative, derogatory and abusive comments” directed at her and her business.
”While not all posts can be attributed to Helen and Ryan, they instigated and host the forums and their followers to attack me and the clinic,” Schneider alleged.
”I wish to make clear that I have not had any part in the decision-making regarding the prosecution against Helen, Chopper’s impoundment, the appeal or Chopper’s fate.
”As a vet, it was my social responsibility and my duty to ensure that a serious and unprovoked attack … was reported to the appropriate authorities.”
Fraser’s lawyer Lynne Mathieson filed for a discharge without conviction, which - if granted by the judge - would mean Fraser was guilty of the offence but have no criminal record.
The euthanasia of Chopper would also be at the judge’s discretion rather than mandatory.
”We’re submitting that the consequences of this conviction will be out of proportion to the gravity of the offending,” Mathieson said.
She said it was “quite a simple case” where the two parties had different expectations of how the process should go.
During the trial, evidence was given that for Chopper’s appointment it was agreed they would meet with the vet in the carpark because Fraser said the dog was anxious around people he didn’t know.
Fraser said they waited about 30 minutes to be seen, so she got Chopper out of the car and had her son hold him while she went into the clinic to find out the cause of the delay.
When Schneider went to meet Fraser in the carpark, she approached Chopper and spoke in a loud voice to be heard through her mask, the court was told.
When the vet was within 2m of Chopper he lunged and bit her arm.
The trial showed there was a dispute over whether Fraser was asked to keep Chopper in the car for assessment.
The clinic staff testified they did so when arranging the appointment but Fraser said she was never asked to leave the dog in the car.
At Wednesday’s hearing, Mathieson said Fraser had no criminal convictions and she was “remorseful for the harm caused”.
Prior to the charge being filed, Fraser worked as a financial adviser and mortgage broker but because of the anxiety and stress, including caring for a dog in the pound, she took up a minimum-wage retail job, said Mathieson.
Fraser visited Chopper at the Tauranga Pound almost daily for the 271 days he was there.
The defendant intended to return to work in the financial sector and a regulatory conviction, although not criminal, could impact that, Mathieson said.
”She certainly intends to return to work in that sector if possible. And she has very real fears that a conviction of this kind will affect those wishes significantly.
”Given the gravity of the offending versus the potential impairment regarding future employment in her chosen field [that] she’s experienced in, I would submit that a discharge without conviction is certainly appropriate.”
Mathieson said a mitigating factor was that Fraser had gone to “great lengths” in consultation with an expert dog trainer to have Chopper “re-socialised and trained to try and make sure an injury like this doesn’t happen again”.
Regarding the claims of harassment and defamation, Mathieson said; “We can’t hold the defendant or try and hold her accountable for the actions of other people that she has no control over.”
She said for the purpose of the discharge without conviction application, “comments regarding social media should be set aside”.
If Fraser were to be convicted, making Chopper’s euthanasia mandatory, they would apply for exceptional circumstances, Mathieson said.
If exceptional circumstances could be proven, the judge would not order that Chopper be put down.
Counsel for the council Jodi Libbey responded to Mathieson’s arguments by saying: “It is time for the defendant to be held accountable for what she’s been found guilty of.
”As the High Court made clear, it is the defendant’s conduct that is under scrutiny here.
”It’s her dog and her responsibility to take all reasonable steps to avert an attack. The High Court found she failed to take two very simple steps: keeping the dog in the car, or otherwise she could have kept control of Chopper herself rather than letting him be held by her 13-year-old son.
”In terms of the gravity of offending the defendant asserts the gravity is low. And I would say that the correct categorisation is moderately serious to serious,” Libbey said.
“The defendant has asserted... as a mitigating factor, the great lengths she’s gone to since the attack to ensure nothing like this happens again, when she is aware, she’s been issued with two recent infringement notices relating to an incident on February 6 where Chopper was off his property and rushed a cyclist chasing her for 60 metres, in breach of his dangerous dog classification.”
”He [Chopper] is not allowed off that property without a muzzle or being under leash control,” Libbey said.
Fraser paid $600 for two infringements relating to the incident, she said.
These were failure to keep her dog under control and failure to comply with effects of a dangerous dog classification, said Libbey.
The sentencing has been deferred until August 21 at the Tauranga District Court.
Public Interest Journalism funded through NZ On Air
CORRECTION
This story has been amended to say Helen Fraser was found guilty, rather than convicted, of the charge, and to clarify what a discharge without conviction is. Information about mitigating factors in the case and Chopper previously chasing a cyclist have also been added.
Thirty-six recruits re-sat psychometric tests without the six-month stand down.