Judge Philip Crayton decided the fate of Maru and Boss in the Hamilton District Court on Tuesday.
However, Maru failed to turn up and so was not there to hear his pet would be “destroyed”.
Maru, 41, had earlier pleaded guilty to a charge under the Dog Control Act of owning a dog that attacked a person.
His counsel, James Buckle, said he had hoped that the case would be adjourned again but Judge Crayton was not keen to incur any more costs by delaying,and sentenced Maru in his absence.
The court heard Maru, a self-employed painter/decorator, took Boss with him to a job on June 18 last year.
At about 3.30pm the victim and his son arrived at the house to do a carpet quote.
The front door was open and as the victim approached, Boss came out barking and growling aggressively.
A voice was heard from inside and although the dog quietened slightly, it then lunged at the victim and bit his left calf.
The man remained standing by holding onto a nearby fence but Boss held tight onto his calf with his teeth.
The victim tried hitting the dog and pulling him off but fell to the ground in the struggle.
The scuffle continued and the victim managed to prise the dog’s mouth open and free his wrist before Maru dragged the dog away.
Boss continued to bark and lunge at the contractor.
Maru told police the attack was the victim’s fault for not calling out to him.
Prosecuting on behalf of Hamilton City Council, Drisana Sheely sought a fine of $1500, saying the dog was previously classified as dangerous, and $734 in costs.
Sheely said she was unable to get an official victim impact statement, but he had suffered “quite significant negative impacts from this”.
The judge said there were no exceptional circumstances that would prevent Boss from being put down.
“I’m not sure I can accept that position on behalf of my client,” Buckle told the judge, explaining the dog was normally tied up.
Maru had just taken Boss for a walk and he was either feeding or drinking when the victim came to the door.
Judge Crayton said it was Maru’s obligation, not the victim’s, to “ensure the safety of those who come into the home or workplace”.
“It could in no way be appropriate to pass culpability or responsibility for what occurred onto the victim.
“Any person is entitled to go about their lawful business, behave in a lawful way without fear of being attacked by an animal which may be on the premises.
”This was not Mr Maru’s home, it was a place where he was working.
“It couldn’t even be said that Mr Maru was closely monitoring the dog because the attack was under way before Mr Maru was able to make his presence felt.”
Judge Crayton ordered Boss to be put down citing ongoing safety to the public.
He also ordered Maru to pay the victim $850 in emotional harm reparation and $400 towards council costs.
Belinda Feek is an Open Justice reporter based in Waikato. She has worked at NZME for eight years and been a journalist for 19.
