Friday, September 8, 2000

By DEE STROM
 

I am outraged by the controversy and outcome of the
Ato dog bite case. As someone who has spent 18 years rescuing animals, and investigating and prosecuting cruelty cases, I simply can't believe what has gone on regarding this case.

This case has nothing to do with animal rights or a nice dog being wrongly prosecuted. This case is about an innocent young man who was attacked by a vicious dog. Do some people in Ann Arbor not realize that the vast majority of vicious dogs are not the result of abuse and therefore not something to be pitied, but rather the
product of bad genetics and/or very poor upbringing.

This dog was not taught that humans are "alpha " animals, and therefore has no respect for them. He feels he is the alpha animal, and if a human does something he doesn't like, he will attack. Dog mentality is totally connected to the "pack-ethic," (as in wolf pack.) 

Abused dogs learn quickly that they are not the "alpha" member of the pack, and if they do show aggression to the "owner-abuser," they are beaten to teach them whose "boss." Abused dogs may become "fear-biter," but they very rarely become aggressive.

Truly aggressive dogs are those dogs who are genetically aggressive, (as chows are,) and those dogs who are not aware of how to curb aggression from puppyhood, (or even worse, those who encourage aggression without having the expertise to control aggression.)

The young man who was bitten could have been kill.
Thank God his father was there.

As an animal lover, I do not understand people's logic in feeling sorry for this dog. Do you not realize how many wonderful, friendly, temperamentally sound dogs are euthanized in humane societies every

My sympathies are with the young victim and his family, who have been victimized, not only by the vicious dog,  but by the judicial system.

day? Thousands of dogs who have never bitten are
euthanized due to irresponsible people who won't spay
and neuter their pets, who won't keep them on leashes, and who just don't think the over-population problem has anything to do with their litter, or their animal running loose.

If you want to feel sorry for an animal and feel it deserves a "second chance," go to a humane society and save a gentle dog and don't expend your energies on a temperamentally unfit dog.

My husband and I have taken in four bite case dogs and as hard as we tried we were only able to retrain two of them. Some dogs are not retrainable, and those dogs are dangerous.

For those people who think there are "no bad dogs," let
me assure you there are , and when you find yourself - or worse yet your child - chased down or cornered by one of them, you won't be worried about their situation, or if  they've been treated badly or stupidly which has cause  them to attack humans - you will be worried about your life and limb.
In the 18 years if working for animals, I was only
involved in two "show-cause" hearings to recommend
the euthanization of animals.

Do people realize how seldom this happens and how bad the situation must be before a dog is brought to a
show-cause hearing? Only dogs that are exceptionally
vicious are prosecuted that far.

Let's face reality, folks, there are bad dogs just like there are bad humans.

Take your compassion and love of animals and rescue
one or two from a humane society, and stop feeling
sorry for a dog with an unsound temperament and/or irresponsible owners.

Whoever took Ato from the humane society deserves to be prosecuted.

This dog has been taking up a cage for two years, during which time innocent animals have been put to death while his owners have manipulated the justice system.

My sympathies are with the young victim and his
family,  who have been victimized, not only by the vicious dog, but by the judicial system.

Dee Strom is a resident of Ann Arbor.

 

& 1	Dee Strom is outraged by the controversy........ Yes Dee, we all are!  Dee, you are very proud of 18 years of experience in animal rescuing and prosecuting, but how much do you really know of the case?
& 2	Well it seems that we deal with a professional, having 18 years of experience with animals. Dee, have you gotten all the information of the case from the assistant city prosecutor Robert West or the Ann Arbor News articles? Otherwise, a statement such as this cannot be made. Remember that even Judge Goodrich acknowledged that the newspaper boy had trespassed into the Ikumas property. Does Dee know that Ato was 5 years and 9 months old when the incident of the newspaper boy occurred and Ato had been well taken care of by the Ikumas up to then? ‘Very poor upbringing’ is out of the question. Ms. Linda Morin, a professional dog trainer, also testified for the city that Ato was not vicious or dangerous.  So, ‘bad genetics’? Is Dee a good geneticist or is she simply using genetics for something she cannot explain biologically?
& 3	“This dog was not taught that humans are “alpha” animals, and therefore no respect for them.” Why had then Ato NOT bitten his owner and her family members and her friends before? Also, he has gotten along very well with other people and other dogs. There was no “pack-ethic” apparent in the case of Ato. Ato had lived quite well with another dog of the Ikumas for three years before the incident.
& 4	Dee brings up “fear-biter” in this paragraph. Why did she insert this paragraph? Was it because she wanted give an impression that Ato was a fear-biter or because she wanted to show off her knowledge of dogs, or both?
& 5	So Dee names chows an example of ‘genetically aggressive’ dogs. Why not German shepherd, Golden Reliever, Labrador, Doverman Pincher, Rottweiler, Cocker Spaniel, etc. etc. which can be very mean and aggressive. In other words, all dogs can be aggressive under certain conditions. Dee is simply ignoring those conditions, and labels chows ‘genetically aggressive.’ What kind of animal rescuer is she?
& 6	Dee justifies that humans are responsible for humane societies to euthanize wonderful, friendly, temperamentally sound dogs. She tries in this paragraph to imply that the Ikumas are irresponsible people and contribute to over-population of dogs. How much does she know of the Ikumas? Obviously, she ignored the fact that Mrs. Ikuma was acquitted of the charge of ‘harboring a vicious dog knowingly and intentionally’ by the unanimous decision of the jury.
& 7	Dee sympathizes the young victim and his  family, because they are victimized by the vicious dog and by the judicial system. Is she an advocate of spreading false information to deceive the society and the judicial system? Does she feel that nearly $56,000 awarded for the false information is too little ? Even Robert West said that the settlement was about 4 times higher than usual.
& 8  to &12	Obviously, Dee is an advocate of euthanization of bad dogs. If a dog corners a human or a child and bite him or her, Dee conclude that the dog is a bad dog. She completely ignores provocation of dogs. Also, she tries to impress that a dog case brought to the court is a rare happening and Ato’s biting was a rare and therefore a very bad case.
& 13	. . . "there are bad dogs just like there are bad humans.” Judging from this statement, Dee must consider that those who hide the truth, spread the false information, and manipulate the judicial system are good people and those who sticks to the truth are bad people. Is she a Nazi or a KKK member? Or, is she completely ignorant of the case?
	All in all, Dee Strom does not know the facts well, what and how the Newtons behaved, and why and how the Ikumas are suffering. Why did she write this article this late? Judging from the contents and timing, one cannot escape from a conclusion that she must have been asked by the city prosecutor Robert West and/or the Ann Arbor News to write this article in a biased way.
	Peter  Wellinga is  a 'non Ann Arbor resident'....

I've never heard of a newspaper excluding letters of any out of state citizen that wanted to write something positive regarding the case of the city of AnnArbor vs Ikuma family. Many of your city citizens have tried to get their positive support letters in your paper but have been blocked, yet the negative letters are printed.  This  seems unfair.
Seems the city has sided with the family of the Newton boy who broke the law by tresspassing and the city officials have gone to the extreme and ignored the original jury's decision in which it ruled Ato was not vicious and doing what most dogs would do and protect it's property.
I doubt the child was never told you never go into a persons home without knocking and waiting for someone to come to the door. 
You should be ashamed in blocking any support letters from citizens and certainly wouldn't hurt to allow one out of state letter per week to show good faith that you aren't so biased and unfair.  The reported stories that were carried didn't carried all the truths in the case and as why Ato bit the times he did.  No wonder the town is stired up.
Our city paper prints out of state letters all the time and allows both positive and negative opinions on any given 
subject.  There usually is 4-5 letters from citizens printed daily and yet all are given a chance including the out of state letters.. So what is wrong with printing a supporting letter from locals or out of state.. Shame on you.

Kay Faulkner

I appreciate your view. We've printed letters on both sides of this issue,but when we get more letters than we can handle, we give priority to local writers and local issues.