Judge Upholds Ruling For Congo The Dog To Be Put Down
The story of Congo, a 2 1/2-year-old German Shepherd, has been making nationwide headlines. There has been debate over if this dog was simply protecting his owner or if he is vicious and needs to be put down.
On Tuesday, Municipal Court Judge Russell Annich Jr. upheld his ruling deeming Congo a vicious dog and that he should be euthanized. Annich also stood by his decision that the four other dogs involved in the incident will be labeled “potentially dangerous” and they will be subjected to stricter muzzling and containment requirements.
Annich, who said he has received death threats over this case, denied Congo’s owners, Guy and Elizabeth James, to allow them to have custody of Congo while they appeal his fate to the Superior Court.
More than 100 protesters, some with their own dogs, carried signs, chanted “Save Congo” and asked drivers to honk their horns as they demonstrated in front of the township municipal building for hours leading up to the sentence hearing.
Last week, the James turned down a plea deal by the state prosecutor that would have allowed all dogs, including Congo, to return back home after being designated as potentially dangerous.
This would require tattooing, $700 per year for each dog in licensing fees, and police notification if released.
The James’ lawyer said, “I don’t think that choice is really a choice. It’s the lesser of two evils … I don’t believe that was the right message to send to the public. ”
James added, “By labeling our dogs, we’re agreeing they’re dangerous.”
The date for Congo’s euthanization has been postponed pending the James’ appeal.
Source: Trenton Times
(Thanks Lynn, Sharon)
November 15th, 2007 at 7:37 am
Too bad Congo wasn’t in the country illegally. He would be labeled a hero. Whatever happened to the Mexican who came onto private property and attacked the dog owner’s wife and tried to use her as a shield? He’s illegal, so I’m sure nothing will happen to him. IMO he is the one who should be put down. He’s the criminal. In Texas he could have legally been shot for coming onto the property when the owner told him not to.
November 15th, 2007 at 7:45 am
The dog tried to save the owner’s wife when she was being attacked. I hope someone attacks the judge’s wife and that no one, human or animal, steps in to prevent it.
November 15th, 2007 at 7:52 am
IF that intruder had been intent on breaking and entering the home and then used the wife as a shield, the dog would be considered a hero. What a bad decision by this judge. I just wonder what his thinking is on this whole situation . . . and once again, the poor dog will suffer because of human ignorance and bias. What a travesty of justice. I hope the local folks will remember this decision if this judge is elected rather than appointed.
November 15th, 2007 at 10:33 am
So the judge says he’s getting death threats. Well, Your *ahem* “Honor”, do you think it might be because you’re doing something STUPID and people are really angry about it? Come on and think about this now, the landscaper guy wasn’t killed. He wasn’t hurt that badly. He came onto the dog owner’s property after being explicitly told not to do so when the dogs were out and then he got into a physical altercation with one of the dog’s owners, leading the dog to believe his owner was in danger.
You want to make the dog owner’s pay the guy’s medical bills? Fine. You want the dog owners to confine the dog more strictly? OK.
Don’t kill the dog for doing something to protect his owner. Does the police department in your city have K9 officers? You better hope the next time one of those dogs bites or attacks a person (even if they are committing a crime) that they don’t decide to sue the city and demand the dog be killed. You can’t say it’s not the same situation, because it is.
It’s not too late for you to do the right thing.
November 15th, 2007 at 10:45 am
Why is it a crime for an animal to protect his owner? This is a travesty.
November 15th, 2007 at 11:10 am
I think all the comments about “Mexicans”…and illegal…are not in anyway helpful to this situation. There is no indication I have seen that they were not citizens…..it does not matter….regardless of their citizenship status …I think they are pulling a scam…and the dog should not suffer for it.
Lets not dilute our mission with speculations that may not be correct…and do not matter.
The judge is a moral idiot.
November 15th, 2007 at 11:18 am
I completely disagree with this judge’s decision. The only rational response now would be for all dog owners to now protect their animals from a similar situation by fencing, gating and locking their gate, so no one can enter without their express permission. Many many perfectly normal dogs would behave the same way in the same situation, don’t think your little Mitzy wouldn’t,they behave totally differently if they perceive violent strangers attacking them or their people on their own property. I have recently put up a very solid fence for my totally non-aggressive large dog for just this reason ,apparently none too soon. I’ve heard of people suing for really minor events, sometimes provoking a dog perhaps intentionally,so at the very least you are facing lawyer fees to defend yourself in court. I’ve actually had members of a certain religious group STEP OVER AN ELECTRIC FENCE BARRIERE designed to keep my dogs in for their on protection from traffic. They must have a lot of faith in the Big GUy upstairs to face several German Shepherds. I’ve also had people come on the property and then get combattive with the dogs. A wise person once said, “You can predict what the dogs will do, but you can’t predict what people will do”.
November 15th, 2007 at 11:49 am
Judge Annich expressed regret that there really weren’t that many precedents that he could base his judgement on. However, he did seem to rely on the warden’s point of view that Congo was unprovoked (same warden whose police reports got “eaten” by a stray dog in his truck), rather than pay attention to public sentiment.
I thought he was rude and arrogant to Elizabeth James when she asked to speak in court. But I suppose he was testy because all those emails and phone calls were disrupting his personal life.
http://www.nj.com/timesoftrent.....thispage=1
http://www.nj.com/news/times/i.....amp;coll=5
November 15th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
The people who are making the decisions in this situation there in N J show me why N J is a joke nationwide, even in N Y. They are as ignorant as it comes concerning the apparently misunderstood Congo and the protecting of his Human Mom.
November 15th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
I read several articles and blogs on this dog, and the biggest problem I have is no one seems to be telling Congo’s story.
The landscaper was wrong to come onto the property after being advised not to. He was wrong to threaten the dog with a rake. He was also wrong to touch the Mrs. in ANY way (I’m sure Congo percieved this as a threat)!
The owner was wrong to not have a fenced yard to not only protect the public from his dogs, but to protect his dogs from the public. The owner was also wrong for not having the dogs vaccinated and taken care of.
The only innocent party in all of this seems to be Congo. This judge has another option. He needs to not only remove Congo, but all of the animals, from this family and place them in new homes where they will be cared for and trained.
November 15th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
Karen, the problem with us humans is that we haven’t much of a clue about how animals think and act, and we have a justice system that is blind to anything but human interests. I agree with you about finding new homes for these dogs with people who DO have a clue, who keep their fences locked, and who put their dogs’ security ahead of a leisurely shower.
November 15th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Carol -
This article refers to “illegal immigrant Giovanni Rivera” at one point. Most of the rest of the articles we’ve been able to find pointedly ignore the gardener’s/landscaper’s status, which is often telling in itself.
The article also has a major humor component, though we doubt the laugh was intended:
“I don’t know why they would believe Rivera,†[Congo owner Guy] James said. “He’s changed his story five times.â€
[Animal Warden Mark] Johnson refuted that claim. “He’s only changed it three times,†the animal warden corrected.
November 15th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
I wish someone would steal Congo and smuggle him out of state.
ALF, you listening?
November 15th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
This “judge” is a POS. I’m with Lynne.
November 15th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
Congo was just freed and given back to his owners! must be leashed and muzzled in public. apparently a wiser judge overturned the ruling :)
local news, i’ll see if i can find a link . . .
November 15th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/st.....id=5759979
November 15th, 2007 at 7:26 pm
OMG! Reason prevails!
November 15th, 2007 at 8:59 pm
Congo was only given a temporary reprieve. A Superior Court Judge has agreed to release him back to his owners while the appeal is pending. Appeal hearing is set for 60 days from now. Poor Congo is still facing the death penalty for protecting his family and his home. Please do whatever you can to save this poor dog from this probable fate. Please call Gov Jon Corzine at 609-292-6000 to overturn this, please sign the petition demanding that Congo be allowed to live…….
http://www.thepetitionsite.com.....save-congo
November 15th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
Anyone know which judge will preside over the appeal in 60 days?
I don’t know the name of the Superior Court who sent Congo home today - if anyone does, please post it. I want to send this person my heartfelt thanks.
Must keep track of this one……there are so many issues at heart.
I am so happy for the James family. That poor dog.
November 15th, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Yes, when I read:
“I don’t know why they would believe Rivera,†[Congo owner Guy] James said. “He’s changed his story five times.â€
[Animal Warden Mark] Johnson refuted that claim. “He’s only changed it three times,†the animal warden corrected.
I thought it was pathetically hilarious.
Someone ought to get rid of the Animal Control Officer and the local judge who pronounced the original sentence. And that insurance company………
November 15th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
I just happened to google “Russell Annich,” the Municipal Court Judge that sentenced Congo before the over-ruling by Supreme Court Judge. Within the link below there’s an interesting issue:
http://209.157.64.200/focus/se.....1631eda100
” ……[Congo’s] tearful local owners can’t spring him on bail. The reason: Dogs don’t rate bail. And why? ‘They’re not human,’ said Judge Russell Annich, whose courtroom here was aswarm in Congo supporters. Meanwhile, the lawyer for the defense says Congo the inmate is anxious, losing weight, and so depressed he keeps pacing his cage in circles
‘This is a most unusual case,’ explained the judge. ‘It’s not a criminal case and it’s not a civil case.’
But that explanation didn’t cut it with the courtroom crowd, whose members grabbed all available seats early after spending most of the morning outside at a pro-Congo rally. Waving “Save Congo†placards, they elicited a cacophony of support from honking motorists passing by on Witherspoon Street.
‘It’s a living being with a heart that misses his family,’ shouted one courtroom attendee.
‘You won’t let Congo go, but you’ll let murderers go!’ hollered another Congo supporter.”
”
OK…….he has an excellent command of the obvious…..
But WHY CAN’T dogs be bailed out pending trial????
November 15th, 2007 at 10:31 pm
I have not heard which Superior Court judge will be hearing Congo’s case. But that is a great idea, Lynn - sending a thank you card to the Court to let them know how much the release of this poor dog is appreciated. From what I have read, Congo has suffered greatly while in the kennel. He has become severly depressed and has lost weight. I have found the website for the Mercer County Superior Court in NJ that will be hearing the appeal - http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/mercer/index.htm. And also found a picture of this “vicious” dog - http://uploads.libertylounge.n.....8_dog.jpg. This entire situation is completely ridiculous. To make matters even worse, the animal control officer lost written statements given to him by the dogs’ owners. Apparently, these statements would have proven Congo’s innocence but unfortunately were chewed up in his truck after he left them inside, where a stray dog found them.
http://www.nj.com/news/times/i.....amp;coll=5
November 15th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
I just happened to read that Municipal Judges in New Jersey are not elected, but are appointed. Hmmmmmmmm, I have to wonder after the courtroom was besieged with animal lovers and the Governor’s Office main phone line was virtually consumed with telephone calls attesting to support of Congo, if in fact the Governor told one of the Superior Court Judges to make the overruling [so they could use their phone again????].
News accounts have mentioned supporters as far away as CA, so this ought to tell the Judges and Governor in New Jersey that all eyes are on them. I daresay they will be careful about whom they appoint to the bench in the future.
Again, just a hunch….but…..
Also, I came across this, a few days old, but note the reference to the puppies and other dog:
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/st.....id=5752093
“Congo was put in a shelter and the other four dogs are now considered potentially dangerous, which means extra fines for the James family. They are fighting those charges as well. ”
Ah yes, dangerous puppies.
November 15th, 2007 at 11:00 pm
Not only are those puppies vicious and dangerous, but the metal rake the landscaper hit them with did not do the damage to their poor faces. It was the owners, according to the Animal control officer “who may have intentionally wounded one of the pups to make it look in worse shape than it was.” The owners have since filed a defamation suit.
November 15th, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Based on the info in those links you provided, there’s such a disparity between what’s on the Animal Control Officer’s report and that filed by the police officer who investigated.
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/st.....id=5752093
“But those written statements…..to the police, were not produced in the municipal court trial over Congo’s fate because [Animal Control Officer] Johnson lost them. According to Johnson, he had left the statements in his truck, where a stray dog in the front seat chewed on all his papers.”
[This, coming from the same man who corrected James’ statement about the number of time that Rivera changed his statement [five or three times.]
Now, as if the “stray dog eating the report” isn’t silly enough, how about the fact that the animal control officer would put a stray dog in the front seat of the truck. After all, it might be DANGEROUS!!!!
Does this ACO KNOW what a dangerous dog is???? I’d say his credibility is lower to the ground than a snake’s belly. [No offense to snakes.]
Not only that, but if the stray dog ate the report, wouldn’t common sense tell you to make out another report and fill in as much as you could and retrace your steps and reinterview people to get the rest of the info?
Nahhh, this ACO is either a real oxymoron or perhaps someone did a little intentional abracadabra on that report.
I’d sue the pants off the animal control agency and the police department for defamation, slander, you name it.
November 15th, 2007 at 11:29 pm
Oh yes, I’d also sue for false imprisonment of my dog and seek restitution there, too.
November 16th, 2007 at 1:49 am
Just got back on line & came to this story first. All I can say is thank God. When will people learn that when we take babies into our home not only do they become part of our family but we are their family.
I haven’t read all the links yet but Lynn I like your idea of a thank you letter, I hope somebody finds the name of the judge. I think your thoughts on all the calls to the govener is right on.
I was hoping that someone would have found some information on this AC (dog catcher), Mark Johnson. I sure would like to call & write him & who he works for, I bet a lot of others would too.
I don’t know if the James family has money but they sure sound like a lot of us whatever they have to do to take care of their babies they will. If they don’t have money they will be paying this off for years. I hope they can go after the landscapers & contractor too.
Looks like a lot of news on the threads. Going to go read them while I waite to give Tornado is next meds. He got really sick, bleeding both ends old & new bleed. Looks like he got something toxic to him. We might still have to get an upper GI. I keep trying to get more water in him so I don’t have to take him back for fulids. We couldn’t find anything outside or inside so right away I was ready to blame the vitamins but all my other babies are ok. Checking account looks bad again but he’s worth every penny & more.
November 16th, 2007 at 3:21 am
Jenny Bark -
Take care of Tornado, as we know you will.
Don’t worry about the threads. Congo is at home for now and the appeal is not for a while yet.
I’ve sent an email to Linda Stein who is the relentless reporter for the New Jersey Times who has been tracking this story, asking her if she would email me the name of the Superior Court Judge who was compassionate towards Congo. Will post it when I find out.
But something odd I just came across, leading me to believe more and more that Rivera milked the event:
In the link http://packetonline.com/articl.....681902.txt
Riechelson, attorney for Giovanni Rivera, said that: “Mr. Rivera had to receive 65 injections of rabies treatment because the dogs were unvaccinated at the time of the attack.â€
WHAT????? I thought that when people didn’t know if the dog[s] had been vaccinated they got 6 injections. My understanding is that a regimen of one dose of immune globulin and five doses of rabies vaccine over a 28-day period are given IF the physicians deem treatment is warranted. [One would think that since the dogs came from a home with 4 children living there that there was little chance of rabies.]Current vaccines are relatively painless and are given in your arm, like a flu or tetanus vaccine.
So if Congo was hauled off to prison, after 10 days in quarrantine there he would have demonstrated no sign of rabies. [The pups were at home, presumably under some quarrantine.] So if Rivera had waited for 10 days, he could have foregone ANY Rabies injections. [On the other hand, since the Rabies injections are relatively painless nowadays, maybe they just administer the 6 shots routinely.]
This being the case…..
1 – why did Rivera need any rabies shot at all, and
2 – why 65 shots instead of the usual 6????
Any healthcare people here who know the answers? Thanks.
November 16th, 2007 at 9:10 am
Lynn, my husband & I had to have the shots for rabies. You are right but we only had to have 5 shots. The first in the behind & the other 4 in the arm. They cost a lot if your insurance does not pay & the price goes by your weight. The price of the shots might have changed but I don’t believe the # of shots have. Our babies if they had not had their rabies shots would have been taken from us for 6 months & put in a shelter of their choice & we would have had to pay the cost. I always thought 10 days too but they said 6 months Since they had their shots they where under house arrest for 6 months. We where dealing with a 20# rabied raccoon. I live in Pa. & this was a few years ago. I don’t understand 65 shots at all.
The James might be like a lot of us & don’t believe in the shot, thou we get ours. I was also wondering if they did have the shots since Congo & the female when to training & the AC had another dog eat the papers.
November 16th, 2007 at 9:42 am
Lynn, just read your link, it said the dogs where unvaccinated at the time. The James might have been just late with the shots.
I didn’t see any pitchers of marks on the face or head. James said if the dogs wanted to really hurt them they would have went for the throat. I believe that because that is where dogs go if they want to kill. When we have gotten wild raccoons or ground hogs on the property & they fight the dogs always go after the throat.
I bet the insurance co. setteled because of the rabies shots & at least one was an illegal. $250 is not a lot of money for them to keep their name out of the papers with so many people being upset about illegals & he had a lawyer.
November 16th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
“2 – why 65 shots instead of the usual 6????”
Lynn, my guess: looks like a typical typo not caught by a proofreading.
65 (I press the 6 key and accidently slide onto the 5)
&
Jenny, hugs to Tornado. Hoping he gets better soon.
November 17th, 2007 at 12:30 am
Traci, Thanks, Tornado is doing a lot better tonight but is still very sick. He is sleeping right here beside me but when he wakes up I’m sure he will send you a kiss.
December 1st, 2007 at 2:31 am
This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard of…this is a family pet that was designed and created to protect the family. All dog owners have dogs for this purpose. That is why we feed them. Hence, let’s set precedence to kill the protector!
Someone needs to find an attorney that could represent the dog for Pro Bono. It would be a great case and I think that we have too many binding laws that violate the people who try to protect themselves. It’s time we start allowing ourselves to be “right” for keeping strangers off of our property.
I hope this judge sees the magnitude of the issues that could be raised by killing a dog for protecting his family. It’s freaking WRONG!
December 1st, 2007 at 8:07 am
well i feel if congo was protecting his family he should not be put down. however dogs do not attack for no reason unless they are trained to do so, and i don’t think an illegal immigrant should get a 250,000 dollar settlement. i think his medical bills should be paid and then send him back to his home country. because he should not have been there to begin with. i also do not agree with the comment the lawyer said, if it was a UPS driver or a mailman this wouldn’t be an issue. it wasn’t a mailman or a UPS driver that would be a totally different situation.
December 1st, 2007 at 8:21 am
i am sorry i was in a hurry. in my previous comment i wanted to say that an illegal immigrant should not get a 250,000 dollar settlement.
December 1st, 2007 at 8:36 am
$250,000.00 for an illegal that was attacking a woman who’s dog protected her……This is the most ridiculas ruling I have heard in years. As for Congobeing put down, he was doing his job. If a police officer was there and attacked the illegal Mexican, would you put him down too? This so-called judge needs to be removed from his position, the mexican needs to be deported without the money, he is here illegally people, he gets no American rights. Congo should be appointed as the new judge, he seems to know right from wrong more than some so called legal professionals, I use this term loosely.
December 1st, 2007 at 10:03 am
Our loved, four legged family members need more protection from the law. The law is oblivious to the fact that our pets are a part of our family and list them as nothing more then a piece of property that they can take away from us (let it be a judge sentencing death, or a cop declaring immunity in shooting one).
December 1st, 2007 at 12:41 pm
It never ceases to amaze me just how cruel the Human species is. That Animal DID NOTHING WRONG! It is our society that has created the atmosphere that we are all forced to live in at this time. The fact is, and it is as simple. THIS MAN WAS TRESSPASSING both on private property and here in this COUNTRY ILLEGALLY. If we continue to absolve these illegal immigrants of any wrong doing than we are condoning their actions. Way to go America! keep up the good work! Keep letting the wrong doers go free! We are no longer the land of the free and the home of the brave. The Home of the Brave would DO THE RIGHT THING! No matter what the cost to their political affiliation. SHAME ON YOU JUDGE FOR PUTTING THIS ANIMAL DOWN! The fact is ANIMALS PROTECT THEIR OWN. WHERE ARE WE IN THAT EQUATION? Before Killing that DOG THINK ABOUT WHAT RAMIFICATIONS this will have for ALL AMERICANS! God are we in trouble! That animal SHOULD NOT BE PUT DOWN. PERIOD THE END.
ShAME ON YOU!
Jacquelyn Sfaelos
December 1st, 2007 at 1:28 pm
The illegal got $250K. WOW! If I were selling drugs (illegally) and obtained $250K I would lose it to the state because I got it through illegal means. Now the dog is scheduled to die because it was protecting its owner. The world is upside down. Break the law get $$$. Uphold the law and be put down. Take your ill got gains and leave.
December 1st, 2007 at 1:46 pm
My dog would be resting in bed. I’d just let my 2 friends SMITH AND
WESSON DEAL WITH THEM
December 1st, 2007 at 1:49 pm
The dog was doing his job!!! you pander to these illegals seeking only to promote lawlesness and violence.Your just a bunch of commy bastards!!that seek AMERICAS overthrow!! so let us know since you want guns out now our dogs cant protect us, how are we suppose to defend ourselves a machetti, see how it worked for Sean Taylor
December 1st, 2007 at 1:52 pm
mexicans treat their pets badly. If you mistreat an animal you are
subhuman. You mistreat gods creatures you will pay
December 1st, 2007 at 1:54 pm
LET CONGO LIVE
I AM SICK OF ILLEGALS IN THIS COUNTRY
THEY HAVE NO RIGHTS AS THEY DID NOT ENTER THE COUNTRY LEGALLY
SEND THE GUY BACK WHERE HE BELONGS AND GIVE THE DOG A METAL FOR BEING THE WONDERFUL PET HE IS
CONGO WAS DOING HIS JOB
December 1st, 2007 at 2:05 pm
Wait a second, so you guys are all saying that because of that incident, now we all should be against illegal immigration for that particular reason? Get real and focus what is important and get the facts. How about if the illegal would have been a Canadian, should we be all against Canadians?
December 1st, 2007 at 2:11 pm
Once again the U.S. Is catering to those who are not citizens, If the “victim” was not in the U.S. illeaglly he would not have been in NJ and therefore would not have been attacked! Why is this guy entitled to insurance money which is paid into an American company by American citizens and why was this guy allowed to have a job that could have been filled by one of our many unemployed CITIZENS? It seems to me in order to have anything in life you have to break the law and go where you are not supposed to be and take benefits and jobs from people who rightfully deserve them! my final comment is, I will bet you the dog was born in the U.S. !!!!!!
December 1st, 2007 at 2:39 pm
Fist of all, taking out anything to do with the gardener being illegal, this man is said to have hit or otherwise acted agressively towards the dog and grabbed the wife. This dog did what every dog owner would want it to, protect its owners. I don’t care what position in society you are, if you threaten my dog and grab my wife you’d be lucky the dog beat me to it.
As far as the court case goes, I find it absolutley rediculous that the man should be awarded anything, much less $250,000 in medical bills. That’s why people have insurance, and employer’s are required to have insurance. So just because this man entered the country illegally and thus could not get insurnce and the fact that his employer did not have insurance, the family should not be penalized for the act of their heroic dog. I am very relieved there was some sense of justice preserved in this case as i just heard Congo will not be executed.
December 2nd, 2007 at 3:39 am
This case just goes to show you how stupid some humans are. My Service Dog is one of the gentlest creatures on earth but let a stranger even look like they are going to get close to me or my Chair and she does her job of protecting her charge.
This “judge” (using the term loosely) needs to have his head removed from the lower part of his body so he can think straight.
December 2nd, 2007 at 3:45 am
FREE CONGO! INPRISON THE IL-LIGAL ALIEN. CONGO IS A HERO! PROTECTING HIS OWNER. THE IL-ILGAL BROKE MORE LAWS.
December 2nd, 2007 at 8:33 pm
David is right.
And may I ask does anybody know what punishment the illegal got for being a criminal?
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:30 am
This story has become something other than what it should be. There are many options to spare Congo’s life. To me the story is even more than about our illegal immigration problem. To me this story shouts; no, screams, “EDUCATE YOUR CHILDREN, EDUCATE YOUR SELF”. I thought that the concept of the ‘Ugly American” was well known and compensated for. It is very much alive people. I have been traveled a bit and found that we Americans have a long way to go toward being worldly. I love America and hold it above all others but it would be much better without all of the low class hate that I have been seeing here.