A 69-year-old man was attacked by dogs on Christmas Eve in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin. He had a gun — the report doesn’t say whether it was a pistol or a rifle — and he fired several shots trying to save his own life. Even so, he suffered multiple bites.
The official statement from the police says the victim “was taken into protective custody. . . the dogs were not harmed . . . The dogs’ owner was located, and there is no ongoing threat to public safety.”
That’s it. That’s the story.
One of the most bizarre press releases from the cops I have ever seen.
Let’s start with the victim. The police took him into “protective custody.” From what, exactly? The dogs? The dog owner? The freezing weather? He was the one who got mauled — why is he the one who ends up in custody?
Was he hospitalized? Did he need surgery? Is he recovering somewhere safe, or sitting in a holding cell for the crime of getting attacked?
Now the dogs. Notice anything missing? The article never says the dogs were located. It only says the owner was found — and apparently that’s enough to declare there is “no threat to public safety.”
No description of the dogs. No number of dogs. No comment on their behavior. No clue where they are now.
Were they rounded up? Are they still roaming the neighborhood looking for their next Christmas snack? Have they been quarantined for rabies, as required by Wisconsin law and common sense? Apparently none of that is worth mentioning.
In any other dog attack case, the steps are straightforward: treat the victim, secure the dogs, quarantine them for ten days, and then hold a dangerous dog hearing. In this case, the only one securely in custody is the man who got bitten.
It is December. Wisconsin is cold. But nothing chills me more than a police report where the victim is locked up, the dogs vanish from the narrative, and the public is told not to worry.
Because clearly there’s “no threat to public safety.” Just loose dogs that attack elderly men on Christmas Eve.