K9 Perspective

The magazine your dog would want you to read

Editorial March-April 2010:

Killing frenzy: punishment
must protect district safety

WELL, once again we have heard some horrific news from New Zealand, a country that unfortunately seems to appear regularly in our columns of shame. Last month two men, one armed with a rifle and the other with a shotgun, went onto a neighbour’s property in Wellsford near Auckland and killed 33 of his 39 dogs in a killing frenzy that would rival a pack of hungry sharks.

It seems that one of the men, Russell Mendoza – a neighbour of the dog owner, had lost his fox terrier when it was mauled by an unknown animal. Suspicion immediately fell on his neighbour because of the number of dogs he had, even though there had been no complaints to either dog control or the SPCA about the dogs and they were all well fed and healthy.

But here the story becomes more bizarre and unbelievable. Mendoza stated that the neighbour had asked him to kill the dogs and had signed a paper to free him from any liability in the action. The fact that these two took a paper with them and had the obvious intention of menacing the dogs’ guardian/owner until he signed it means the paper was signed under duress and is completely valueless - and act of terrorism in all senses of the word! Not many of us would resist if confronted with two men, two guns, and a ready-worded invitation to a massacre.

There were no witnesses to the attack on the fox terrier and no proof that any one of the 33 slaughtered dogs actually had anything to do with the attack. Those killed included 23 puppies, some only days old (these ones were certainly not guilty and neither were their nursing mothers). Witnesses said the scene was like something in a horror movie. Neighbours reported that the screams from wounded, panicked and dying dogs were awful to hear.

After a scene such as this, one must consider what sort of people are capable of such a killing frenzy that reportedly went on for over 20 minutes - and whether such people are a threat to the community? The only answer is that this pair, together or individually, is a definite danger to everyone who has the misfortune to have dealings with them. This was a premeditated crime where not only the crime itself was planned but the criminals arrived with a premeditated cover-up note that their over-active egos actually thought would clear them of responsibility.

Mendoza and fellow shooter, Tony Campbell, should not be walking around free in the community, as anyone who can do that to dogs and innocent puppies is very capable of moving on to include humans in their next frenzy. Tony Campbell is apparently from a neighbouring farm and owns his own “rifle range” – alarm bells ring with that fact too - what type of person has a private rifle range on his farm? Words that immediately spring to mind are “gun-crazy yob”. To a person like that the situation must have been thrilling – like going on safari in a zoo where the hunted animals couldn’t run or attack, as all the dogs were in cages or kennels. He must feel as if his hunting and shooting skills have paid off – especially as he couldn’t even shoot straight enough to kill them cleanly when they were unable to get out of his way!

Another strange string to this story is that Mendoza is the manager of a home and garden shop at Wellsford, selling pet supplies and advice (that has to be the joke of the century) - not someone at the bottom of the employable ladder as one would logically have expected. He must have been capable of anticipating the consequences to everyone concerned, including his own family. Maybe shop owners have dropped the intelligence standards expected of their managers? Either that or the Mendoza owns the shop - one must assume that he either inherited it or became its owner via the same route as he took when organising his killing day out!

The final saddening fact to this whole sorry episode is that the dog that actually killed the fox terrier is probably a hungry stray and still out there, waiting for its next victim. The two-man lynch mob that took it upon themselves to enter someone else’s property, armed, and demand under menace that the owner of the dogs sign a paper vindicating them from responsibility in their planned blood bath, should be prosecuted to the fullest degree that the law allows.

This case will be one that is followed with interest world-wide and these imbeciles will be safer off the street. Hopefully in a jail cell they may receive some education and assistance with their mental deficiencies, but whenever they are back in the community will be the day that the citizens of the town must be vigilant, I am hoping that New Zealand will take a tougher stance than usual to make sure that nobody else who feels like killing something after a few beers too many is encouraged by previous light sentences. - Liz