Town Square

Post a New Topic

Pair charged after dog attacks child twice

Original post made on Jun 9, 2013

A Pleasanton man and a Dublin woman have been charged with felony child neglect and endangerment after the man's dog attacked the woman's 5-year-old son twice in less than three months.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Sunday, June 9, 2013, 7:38 AM

Comments (41)

Posted by Unbelievable!
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 9, 2013 at 8:15 am

My heart goes out to this poor, traumatized five year old child. How dare people put animals first and humans' safety and well-being second!!
Doggie rehab in Ohio??? Give me a break!! Of course it's very sad when an animal is "humanely euthanized", but it is far better than acting "inhumanely" to this poor child who has been bitten twice by allowing the dog to live and giving it another opportunity to bite. Why would anyone in his/her right mind want this?? Certainly, the "right thing to do" in this scenario is to euthanize the dog. It sure sounds like the Pleasanton Municipal Code needs to be changed ASAP. Put this one on the the most pathetic human "ridiculist" story ever.....disheartening.

Posted by Freddie
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 9, 2013 at 8:51 am

This Kornberg fellow seems to be able to afford the price of a dog ticket to Ohio, as well as subsequent dog rehab. I think this is about right. He earned or inherited his money, and in America we can still do with it what we like. I'm certain the Founding Fathers who wrote our Constitution did not want nosy city governments intervening in dog owners' lives.

Posted by Bob
a resident of Amador Estates
on Jun 9, 2013 at 9:28 am

Rehab for a vicious dog? Why? So, the idiotic owner can subject other people to this fighting dog once it has been "cured." Put the damn thing down. No one should own a Presario Canarios. That is the same type of dog that killed a woman (Diane Whipple?)in SF some years back. Who would have a Presario in an apartment with a little kid around no less? The neighbors must have loved that.

Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Jun 9, 2013 at 11:12 am

I agree with putting the dog owner and his gal down. SAVE THE DOG!

Posted by chris
a resident of Castlewood
on Jun 9, 2013 at 11:32 am

wow. if this was a pitbull it would have been destroyed already. not sent to rehab?? what the heck.

Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Jun 9, 2013 at 2:59 pm

It's NOT a pitbull. Why are folks more wrapped up with killing the dog and not the owners?

Posted by MrsJJHH
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Jun 9, 2013 at 3:10 pm

This decision seems illogical and inexplicable. Not one attack, but two. Why on earth was the dog not destroyed?

If there's no court corruption involved, then the only reason I can think of is that there was some legal barrier to an order for its euthanization. If that's the case, then there needs to be change in the law.

It sounds as though the authorities might be working toward taking the poor child into care. In this case, I guess the family's reluctance to have the dog destroyed might help provide justification. But the reluctance alone is reason enough isn't it? Surely the vicious dog doesn't actually have to be kept alive as proof?

Posted by Pleasanton Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 9, 2013 at 4:42 pm

Tired, exhausted dogs equal good dogs, along with good training and obedience instruction for both dog and well-chosen owner. I hope the little boy recovers quickly and isn't traumatized or afraid of dogs his entire life. That would be very sad indeed.

Posted by D W
a resident of Livermore
on Jun 10, 2013 at 9:30 am

Amazing that Kornberg realized his cluelessness. For now.

Posted by William Tell
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 10, 2013 at 3:24 pm

Child Protective Services should be involved if the parents have this little common sense or regard for the welfare of their child. They should be allowed to keep the dog, but not the child.

Also, it would behoove the apartment complex owner to put out a warning to all of the tenants that a vicious dog lives on the premises so people can get mace or tasers and use accordingly. Unfortunately, there's been a change in California law that doesn't allow apartments/condo's to bar pets, but only set size/weight limitations.

While these people seem to have caucasoidial nommenclature, we must remember that vicious attack dogs are often a status symbol in the minority community, so this type of thing will increase as we build more low-income housing.

Posted by JC
a resident of Dublin
on Jun 10, 2013 at 4:04 pm

I will never forget the horrible death of a lady in San Francisc a few years back, who was attacked in the hall outside of her apartment by a Presa Canario, and was killed. These dogs are inherently dangerous. What were this child's parents thinking when they left their son alone, again, with this dog??? Too bad there isn't an intelligence test that people have to pass to become parents.

Posted by jaycee
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 10, 2013 at 4:33 pm

This breed's orignal purpose way back was for dogfighting! It takes an extremely vested and dominant person to be the owner of this breed. He has to know that ALL humans are above him in the pack order of things. I'm guessing this little 5-yr old didn't make the cut. Disgusting this poor child was not bit once but twice by this animal. Doggy rehab? I hope this mother comes to her senses and gets her son out of that situation if/when the dog returns! I'm also glad to see this fine couple was arrested for child endangerment.

Posted by P-Town Tish
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 11, 2013 at 8:52 am

I believe the right action is to euthanize the dog. I also believe the laws should be changed so that dog's owners have the same culpability and liability as if the owner's committed the act themselves. If a dog kills someone, the owner should be tried for second-degree murder or manslaughter. If the dog seriously injures someone, the owner should be tried for aggravated assault. These dog attacks have gotten completely out of control.

Posted by GetaClue
a resident of another community
on Jun 11, 2013 at 9:01 am

GetaClue is a registered user.

This dog is not going to a dog rehab and the judge and Ac were prewarned of what type of place this aggressive dog is going to. They don't care it is out of their hands now and out of their state. They should be ashamed for putting the Ohio community in danger. I hope the Ohio news picks up on this real quick and looks into what qualifications this person has to be a behavioral trainer of a human aggressive dog, look where the animal will be kept and know that said person is already over the legal limit of animals in her care as well as how many times her children have been biten and it has gone unreported to the authorities. I pray this dog does not get out like so many have , that have been running at large from her so called rescue. The Judge should be ashamed because even the AC recommended the dog be pts. Any dog that bites a child not once but twice in the face is aggressive. It does not matter if the child hugged the dog that is not cause for a dog to bite a child. I also agree the owner and the parent are at fault but something should have been done the first time. I hope all her supporters reading this thread start looking into who and what you are supporting because you do not know what type of person you are dealing with.

Posted by amazed
a resident of Birdland
on Jun 11, 2013 at 9:41 am

A 96 Pound dog in an apartment? Really? And they can afford to send their doggie to rehab? This does not add up.

Posted by George
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 11, 2013 at 10:03 am

This is just another example of why a well-armed citizenry is necessary. Want to bet dog bites would go down if more people were allowed to carry guns?

Posted by Silly Girl
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 11, 2013 at 4:19 pm

Are we stuck on stupid?
Based on this story,. . .

Posted by Beth Wedebrook
a resident of another community
on Jun 13, 2013 at 9:14 am

First, I know personally the Rescue this guy has been sent to, I have worked side by side with the owner. I don't know who out there in CA seems to know so much about anything here in Ohio, but come and see for yourself! Second, this dog was worth the fight to save him, with the proper guidance and training he will be fine. The dog cannot be blamed for what his owner's allowed! The lesson here, weak people should not have strong dogs, everyone jumps in and buys this breed and similar ones so they can look cooler and tougher than they really are...this is why Boston attacked! Weak owners. Heck, what about the molester who lives down the street from you? There are bigger things to worry about. The dog is thankfully out of CA and away from the attitudes I am seeing here...granted, Ohio animal laws suck, but those of us in rescue know a lost cause when we see one, and Boston is not a lost cause. As for those bashing my Rescue friend...people who live in glass houses should not be throwing stones! Beth A. Wedebrook, Lucasville, Ohio.

Posted by Bob
a resident of Dublin
on Jun 13, 2013 at 9:19 am

How do you know anything about the rehab facility in Ohio? There was no mention of the facility's name or location.

Posted by No Facts - Big Opinions..Ouch!
a resident of another community
on Jun 13, 2013 at 10:33 am

Comments, personal agendas and self righteous indignation based on presumption and not facts are dangerous to all citizens, of this here USA, including you! Statements about the judge, the "parents", the rescue and even the child with only facts from a newspaper article, carefully and selectively written as expected, to elicit a sensational reaction from the readership and THEY GOT IT....YOU! Shame on y'all for being such predictable sheep without the facts. Know the real deal? Don't know the dog? Don't know the judge? Don't know the parents? Don't know the rescue? Don't know the child? But feel free to make comments? Smarten up! Get the facts and think on your own....unless that's just not possible.

Posted by angila
a resident of another community
on Jun 13, 2013 at 11:55 am

im sorry but i dont agree with you idiots. the dog was not raised properly which is why it would go to a place where someone can teach it how to be good. it disgusts me to see how many people can just say "put it down" without giving it the chance it deserves. SAVE THE DOG

Posted by Terri Crispin
a resident of another community
on Jun 13, 2013 at 2:52 pm

FYI - The dog was just placed on by Presa Canario Rescue and Rehabilitation Center without any mention of his bite history.

Posted by Lee
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 13, 2013 at 3:59 pm

What kind of parent lets their child around a huge dog that has already bitten them? What kind of pet owner lets this happen not once, but twice?

This dog may be able to be rehabilitated, at least give it a chance. But the owner should not be allowed to have another large dog!!

Posted by Do Your Research
a resident of another community
on Jun 13, 2013 at 6:04 pm

Boston was sent to a rescue and rehab center to be evaluated and rehomed to a responsible presa experienced owner with no kids.As it states clearly on the petfinder pages hes actually been on for weeks now. Obviously Terri Crispin has a personal vendetta or some jealousy issues against the ownere of the rehab center and like many other people do not know the entire story on what happened with this dog.You have a 6yr old dog whos never been around kids and all of the sudden one is all over him something is bound to happen.Boston is a very social(to everyone)obedient and kind dog.He has no behavioral issues at all.He doesnt dislike kids but no he don't like being hugged or jumped on!If Boston was vicious and a danger to the public no judge,animal control officer or city would want this dog alive let alone placed in a rescue where he can be rehomed.Come on people you really need to do your research before attacking a rescue who busted there ass to save this dog and get him in the right home.They have 23yrs experience with dogs like Boston ..if he wasn't suitable for adoption he wouldn't be alive.90% of the dogs they take have had issues or something similar like this situation.Not every dog they take is rehomed some cannot be but most are and not once has any of them ever attacked anyone after being placed in the PROPER home.There put through a rigorous evaluation,training and rehab process before there even considered for adoption.All this was done before boston even came to Ohio.The animal control officer,sherriff bostons dog walker and several neighbors all spoke with the rehab center before they even agreed to take him.Not one negative thing was said about this dog other than the horribly situation that got him here.Not everyone thinks that he should've been saved and that's fine if you know the whole story but to come on here and post personal info about someone or assume you know everything is very ignorant and immature.Terri you need a life sweetie..apparently you don't have one cause you seem pretty obsessed with the rehab center..jealousy is ugly:(

Posted by MrsJJHH
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jun 13, 2013 at 6:07 pm

Beth Wedebrook wrote:

>> Second, this dog was worth the fight to save him, with the proper guidance and training he will be fine. The dog cannot be blamed for what his owner's allowed! <<

I disagree that the dog was worth saving. It attacked a child that it knew and that lived in the house. By all accounts, Presa Canario dogs are often bred to be used as attack dogs - often by criminals - therefore the breed must have certain innate qualities of aggression. And this dog has tasted blood.

Even ordinary domestic dogs will sometimes attack sheep. Once a dog has successfully attacked sheep, it will invariably do so again should the opportunity arise. I am certain that if this dog lives, it will one day attack again. Its next victim may not survive. I don't care how or why it attacked - in my opinion that is now largely irrelevant. The dog should be destroyed.

Posted by MrsJJHH
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Jun 13, 2013 at 6:48 pm

"Do Your Research" - You stated:

"Obviously Terri Crispin has a personal vendetta or some jealousy issues against the owner[..] of the rehab center".

I'd never heard of the Petfinder web site, but I imagine that it's familiar to many an animal lover. However, I went to the site and, armed with the wealth of information in the article, it took me literally mere seconds to find a dog named Boston that met all the relevant criteria. Plus, of course, the details of the rescue center.

I do not know the poster in question at all. Do you?

If not, then your conclusion about Ms. Crispin was not in the least "obvious" and your unpleasant attack on her was completely unjustified. However great your dedication to animal welfare and rescue work, your post does little credit to your cause.

Posted by Terri Crispin
a resident of another community
on Jun 13, 2013 at 7:31 pm

Not sure why my comment was removed, I simply stated that the "rescue" on Ohio has posted the dog as adoptable on with no mention of his bite history. I AM familiar with the "rescue" as is Amy, but obviously we disagree about it. The rescue was called Utopia Kennels one year ago, then it was Utopia Rescue & Rehabilitation, then it was Presa Canario Rescue & Rehabilitation. I would tell you to look for it on Facebook, but it appears the page was taken down tonight.

Posted by Kristine Maxwell
a resident of another community
on Jun 13, 2013 at 7:54 pm

The constant bickering on here is not only immature but its unnecessary.Im the one who owns the rescue where Boston is.It was my decision after much research on this case to bring him here to my rehab facility.I don't want anyones approval here cause this is my rescue and ive ran it successfully for 23 years and I definatly don't want anyone speaking on my behalf which is why im reluctantly posting this.Ive been a part of this case since the day after the bite happened,and not just with the owner but with the magistrate,Sheriff,and animal control officer.Boston is not a vicious dog or he would never have been released to me and he will be rehomed when I see fit in an adult only home..which is the case for all adult dogs we rescue.Ive had presas my whole life and like pits,rotties or any other breed if there with an uneducated owner they can and will get into trouble.They like all the others are not born mean.If you havnt owned one don't judge one cause of a paragraph you read on google.I have more than 20 yrs experience with behavior modification so im fully capable of making the decision to rehome this dog or not and after all the stress hes been under hes been nothing but a very sweet dog the first few days hes been here(which can be when they show the most aggression if there going to).On Boston page on my petfinder it clearly states no children in several places.not just on his bio but my main page also.It also states to email for the info in how he came to be at the rescue which we write this often as most of the dogs we get at the rehab center have bitten a human or another animal and no dog with a bite history is ever adopted out without the adopter knowing 100% of the entire situation .Its a small bio not room to write a story and its something id rather say than type.My rescue started 22yrs ago and was called Utopia..the reason it was changed was to mnay people thought we were an all breed rescue and no one new there was a rescue for hidden agenda there just a name change to help the shelters find us.There is no fb page for my rescue and hasn't been for a long time cause I have zero tolerance for drama and that's all rescue is.I don't need fb to justify my experience and many wonderful references speak for themselves.I would never adopt out a vicious dog or a dog I thought was a danger to the public,i have kids to.Boston has been evaluated by several people and even at the shelter shown nothing but kindness to comeplete strangers.My own dogs wouldnt be as behaved as he has been if they went through what he did.Its disturbing the lies being posted on here..and more so about my kids.Its really sad that no one has yet to call or email me personally but would rather post things publicily that they cannot prove.All my contact info Is on my home has always been open to anyone so if anyone has doubts about my rescue,me or boston feel free to email,call or come over.We are very proud of what we do,how hard we work and the rescue weve built and always welcome visitors.And if my name isn't on a post here its not from me so please don't assume it is.I will not respond or post here anymore.Thank you

Posted by Sleeping Dogs Don't Lie
a resident of another community
on Jun 14, 2013 at 7:24 am

MrsJJHH...and others..Do you know anything other than what the newspaper let you see and your personal opinions not based on facts? This dog did not bite a sheep for food to "taste" the blood. On good authority, I learned that the dog was asleep on a couch. The child approached, put his face in front of the dog's and woke him up from a dead sleep. If you know anything about dogs and animals in general, I'm sure you know that this is perceived as a major threat in any environment. The first reaction is to lash out for protection which he did and then quickly withdrew. END of story. Unfortunate as it may be that's the reality and no more. This is not even remotely related to the "attack" in SF where dogs chased and attacked someone with pure malice while the owners looked on. Now that you know at least a few "facts", suggest you apologize and search out the truth as it might just set you free! Pontificating from a soap box made of innuendo won't get you there. Give it a shot and if the facts bear you out, state your opinion. However, if they don't, have the good conscious and dignity to set the record straight and count the sheep at night instead of comparing them to a little boy in an unfortunate circumstance for all involved....which doesn't include you!

Posted by Check the Laws
a resident of another community
on Jun 14, 2013 at 7:52 am

Boston HAS been deemed vicious by Animal Services in Pleasanton CA. The options were to have him pts or transferred to a rehab, of course the owners choose to relocate him. Who wouldn't want the chance to safe their dogs life? It seems the question isn't whether or not Boston should have a chance at rehab, but the integrity/qualifications of the rehab he was chosen to be received by.

The vicious status stays with Boston for his life & went with him to OH & must be disclosed & declared upon any transfer of ownership. Any person who owns him must be in accordance of the Ohio Revised Code. The ORC has conditions pertaining to dogs that have been deemed dangerous and/or vicious: Web Link also the City in which this rescue resides in has conditions pertaining to dangerous/vicious dogs:


(a) As used in this section:

(1) “Animal control officer” means the person employed by or under contract with the City for animal control services.

(2) “Dangerous animal” means an animal that, without provocation, has chased or approached in either a menacing fashion or an apparent attitude of attack, or has bitten or attempted to bite or otherwise endanger any person, or has bitten another animal, while the former animal is off the premises of its owner, keeper or harborer and not under the reasonable control of its owner, keeper, harborer or some other responsible person. Further a “dangerous animal” means an animal that without provocation has bitten any person while on the premises of its owner, keeper or harborer. “Dangerous animal” does not include a police canine unit.

(3) “Menacing fashion” means that an animal would cause any person being chased or approached to reasonably believe that the animal will cause physical injury to that person.

(4) “Police canine unit” means a dog that has been trained for law enforcement work and is used to assist one or more law enforcement officers or animal control officers in the performance of their official duties for the City.

(5) “Serious physical harm to persons” means any of the following:

A. Any mental illness or condition of such gravity as would normally require hospitalization or prolonged psychiatric treatment;

B. Any physical harm which carries a substantial risk of death;

C. Any physical harm which involves some permanent incapacity, whether partial or total, or which involves some temporary, substantial incapacity;

D. Any physical harm which involves some permanent disfigurement, or which involves some temporary, serious disfigurement;

E. Any physical harm which involves acute pain of such duration as to result in substantial suffering, or which involves any degree of prolonged or intractable pain.

(6) “Vicious animal” means an animal that, without provocation, meets any of the following:

A. Has killed or caused serious physical harm to any person;

B. Has killed or caused serious physical harm to another domestic animal while the prior animal is running at large.

(7) “Vicious animal” does not include either of the following:

A. A police canine unit;

B. An animal that has killed or caused serious physical harm to any person while a person was committing or attempting to commit a criminal offense on the property of the owner, keeper or harborer of the animal.

(8) “Without provocation” means that the animal was not teased, tormented or abused by a person, or that the animal was not coming to the aid of the defense of a member of its owner's household who was not engaged in illegal or criminal activity and who was not using the animal as a means of carrying out such activity.

(b) No owner, keeper or harborer of a dangerous animal shall fail to do the following:

(1) Identify the dog by having the dog wear, at all times, a distinctive collar available upon payment of a fee of ten dollars ($10.00) from the Police Department.

(2) Post on the premises, in a conspicuous place where the dog is kept, at least one City-issued warning sign, available upon payment of a fee of ten dollars ($10.00) from the Police Department. The sign shall be visible and capable of being read from the public highway or street.

(3) Keep the dog secured at all times by one of the following means:

A. Inside a building with the consent of the owner of the building;

B. In a locked enclosure which has a top, and has a concrete base with the fencing securely attached or anchored to the concrete perimeter to a depth of six inches;

C. On a chain-link leash that is not more than six feet in length which is held in the hand of a person who is of suitable age and discretion and is outside with the dog. In addition, the dog shall be muzzled unless it is on the land of the owner or of a person who has consented to the presence of the dog.

(4) Annually license the dog, if the dog is more than three months of age, with the County Auditor. Failure of any dog at any time to wear a valid license tag shall be prima facie evidence of lack of licensing.

(5) Vaccinate the dog against rabies by a licensed veterinarian at least once every three years; a tag indicating that said dog has been vaccinated against rabies must be worn by the dog at all times. Failure of any dog at any time to wear the rabies vaccination tag issued by the licensed veterinarian who administered the vaccine shall be prima facie evidence of the dog's lack of vaccination against rabies.

(6) Annually, between January 2 and January 20, and whenever a dog is newly obtained, register the dog with the Police Department and pay a fee of twenty-five dollars ($25.00), and at the time of registration, provide proof of liability insurance with an insurer authorized to write liability insurance in this State providing coverage in each occurrence, subject to a limit, exclusive of interest and cost, of not less than one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) because of damage or bodily injury to or death of a person caused by the vicious dog. A certificate of insurance shall be provided to the Police Department at the time the collar required by this section is obtained.

(7) Provide two color photographs of the dog to the Police Department at the time the collar required by this section is obtained.

(c) No person shall sell, permanently transfer or change the location of a dangerous animal without first notifying in writing any person who will become the owner, keeper or harborer of such animal that the animal is dangerous and also notifying the Humane Society in writing of the pending sale, transfer or change of location of that animal. Such notification to the Humane Society shall include the name, address and phone number of the person who will be the owner, keeper or harborer of that animal and the location where it will be kept.

(d) No owner, keeper or harborer of a dangerous animal shall allow it to run at large.

(e) No person shall possess, harbor or keep a vicious animal within the City.

(f) No person shall possess, harbor or keep an animal for the purpose of animal fighting, or train, torment, badger, bait or use any animal for the purpose of causing or encouraging the animal to attack human beings or domestic animals.

(g) Whoever violates division (b) or (c) of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree on a first offense and of a misdemeanor of the third degree on each subsequent offense. Additionally, the Court may order the dangerous animal to be removed from the City or be humanely destroyed by a licensed veterinarian.

(h) Whoever violates division (e) of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree. Additionally, the Court shall order the vicious animal to be removed from the City or to be humanely destroyed by a licensed veterinarian.

(i) Whoever violates division (d) and (f) of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree. Additionally, the Court may order the animal to be removed from the City or be humanely destroyed by a licensed veterinarian.

(Ord. 6165. Passed 9-25-89; Ord. 7128. Passed 10-22-01.)

Has the City and County this dog now resides in be notified by the Rescue and has the Rescue registered with both divisions? Have the conditions of having a vicious dog in this City and County been met? What are the conditions of his release to this rescue? Ohio also has a new law requiring all rescues to register with the Dept of Agriculture - has this Rescue registered?

After a some quick research from the information provided - how can someone who is only 36 years old run a successful rescue for the past 23 years & have 20 years of behavior modification experience? Do the math. Looking at the Petfinder site only recently have Presa Canario's been posted - so how has the rescue been dealing with Presa Canario's their whole life? After a quick county records search there is a court document for dog at large - this in it's self should be a concern to the surrounding community.

Posted by Wrong Laws
a resident of another community
on Jun 14, 2013 at 8:26 am

Hey "Check the Laws" - Note he wasn't evaluated and judged under Ohio Law so the criteria might be and are totally different under Pleasanton Law. Read the prior posting, "Sleeping Dogs Don't Lie" and learn a few facts and you might realize that he doesn't meet almost any of the criteria you've wasted the space to show other than the incidents described. He's never gone after anybody as shown in the actual police reports but he has reacted in a closed space to a perceived threat. Term it what you will...but get the facts not the two page law that mostly doesn't apply. Also, try to get the facts about all of the math...but get the right numbers....You can do it and maybe even a genius, you?, can "do the math"! As you rightfully stated, "After some quick (but obviously not thorough) research, you've drawn your conclusions as most, "without the facts"!

Posted by DisneyRuinedYou
a resident of another community
on Jun 23, 2013 at 6:55 am

Listen, folks. This is a dog. A large dog of a breed purposefully created for violence of one stripe or another. It has bitten a child multiple times and kicked out of its community. There are 1,000s of sweet mutts that will die this year due to lack of resources. In a sane world, this Presa would've been shot 15 minutes after it bit the child the first time. These animal rescuer types, and many others, are dealing with personal issues by saving these dogs or harboring under some other issue. This is obvious to see by merely reading their words here, and, noting among other things, that nearly all of their sentences contain 1 or more errors and that they have not heard of paragraph breaks.

Posted by DisneyRuinedYou
a resident of another community
on Jun 23, 2013 at 6:58 am

Also, it is rather obvious that the rescuer in question that is posting here is either posting under numerous names or has rallied "troops" to help her out here. Why? They are saying the same thing and in a similar (poor) writing style. They are either the same person, or people you could imagine flocking together.

Posted by DisneyRuinedYou
a resident of another community
on Jun 23, 2013 at 7:10 am

Maxwell "did facebook" prior to scrutiny being placed upon her. She is acting very recklessly. Here is a screen capture of her publicly viewable facebook page where she is letting others in on the tricks to make others think your dangerous dog is really a service dog.

Web Link

By the way, I think there is some wiggle room for "therapy dogs", but I believe it might be illegal to misrepresent your dog as a service dog.

Pit bull and the owners of other hard-to-insure breeds often pull a scam where they either 1. claim their dog is really something unrelated that happens to look just like a pit, etc. or 2. that there dog is a "therapy dog" to help with their made up condition.

Posted by Concerned For The Neighborhood
a resident of another community
on Jul 21, 2013 at 12:15 pm

Maxwell has now adopted Boston out. A TRUE behaviorist (She is claiming she is a trainer/behaviorist on her Facebook page) knows that a dog needs at least 2 weeks for it's personality to show. Instead she adopted him out without a second thought. Web Link

And you will note she is telling people to break federal law by having them dress their dog in Service Dog gear to take them wherever they want as well as not be discriminated against for breed.

The woman is a fraud. Plain and simple. Shame on your town officials for NOT sending people to do a home check, check the courts for records, NOTHING!

Posted by Intolerable
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 21, 2013 at 1:48 pm

I cannot believe Mother Myrvette (obviously, mother in name only)
would take her poor child back to that dog house for more abusive bites, nibbles, or ATTACKS !!!!
The child should be removed from Myrvette and put in a foster home, and Myrvette should be neutered and prevented from birthing again.
The poor child not only will be scarred emotionally from the tramas, his FACIAL scars will dramatically and tragically alter his life forever. Myrvette is a horribly unfit mother. She and the repeat guy were in 'another room'. Is she a hooker? Did police check sperm. She was obviously more interested in that guy than her 'little guy' she birthed and was responsible for. Don't allow her to torture him or ANY additional children ever again.
What's with the system. Everyone along the line should be fired...definitely not suited to their jobs, and taxpayers are NOT getting their money's worth or the services agreed to.

Posted by Concerned in Ohio
a resident of another community
on Aug 12, 2013 at 11:03 am

Google her name, people!!! Kristine is banned from pulling dogs in Northeast Ohio!! Why? GOOGLE IT. There are court cases (public record) against her. Her "rescue" dogs have gotten loose. Go to More complaints. She's as much a "rehabilitator" as I am. Or you are. Or your neighbors.

Posted by Lovesthedogies
a resident of Amador Estates
on Sep 21, 2013 at 10:28 am

I wish some of these people could spend some time w Boston. I was the former owners' roommate for almost three years on the East Coast. Boston is a great dog who is well trained. Given the opportunity, I would have adopted him. It's disappointing that he but a child, but just as disappointing is the fact the no one on any these message boards know how great a dog Boston is.

Posted by concerneddogowner
a resident of another community
on Mar 26, 2016 at 9:47 pm

Kristine Tanner as she goes by is a liar a thief and a scam artist. She claims herself as a training facility and multiple other things she got my dogs under false pretenses and now has had the never to claim cruelty on me when her very own kennel page is filled with multiple dogs of hers being emaciated she claims she will do one thing and then as soon as she has ur dog she will claim you mistreated the dog refused to keep to her own word and lies to others to try and cover her butt until she gets caught then when you start closing in on getting your animals back she either rehomes them or euthanizes them she is known to have at least 16 dogs at this very time along with multiple dogs with behavioral issues with an autistic child in the home she claims this and that but she is nothing but a liar and a thief and she needs to pay for the suffering she has caused multiple dogs just look up her new kennel name on facebook called Volfango working and sports dogs most of the dogs are emaciated and she still uses them to breed she tricks people into taking their dogs to her and then supposedly the dogs go missing she lives on a farm in Wadsworth Ohio she has multiple dog law violations she keeps half her dogs in her garage the other outside in kennels she cant afford to feed the dogs on her own so she uses the donations she gets for supposed rescues she takes in and then never uses the money on the rescues she is supposed to she is banned for multiple things and has continued her lies and theft this woman belongs in jail permanently

Posted by Ed
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Mar 27, 2016 at 10:23 am

Some breeds just don't need to be. Humans created them through breeding and humans should end some of the lines like this one through sterilization. It's not the critters fault that they were created but more should not be. To many babies have been killed and mauled, to many.

Posted by Name hidden
a resident of Ridgeview Commons

on Apr 26, 2017 at 6:17 pm

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

Tri-Valley Nonprofit Alliance grew from chance meeting
By Tim Hunt | 0 comments | 2,572 views

California must do a better job spending cap-and-trade revenue
By Sherry Listgarten | 5 comments | 2,511 views

Making wine for 140 years merits celebration
By Deborah Grossman | 0 comments | 634 views

Considerations for Balancing Cost and Reward
By Elizabeth LaScala | 0 comments | 245 views