Recently, an unlined black Rottweiler dog suddenly attacked and bit a two year old girl in Chongzhou City, Sichuan, causing more than 20 wounds on her body. She is still unconscious to this day. The owner of the black Rottweiler, Tang, has been criminally detained by Chongzhou police in accordance with the law.

The author watched the online video and found that the little girl walked out of the hallway door, and the injurious Rottweiler was swaying back and forth in the community, unattended, let alone with its owner leading the rope. The subsequent scene of biting was even more brutal, making it heartbreaking to watch.

Although the dog owner has been detained, on what charges will he be held criminally responsible? Through searching for keywords, the author found that there are mainly the following types of criminal accountability cases caused by dog injuries.

1、 Crime of causing death through negligence

Zunyi City (2014) Zunyi Fa Xing Yi Zhong Zi No. 80 Case

Zhou raised two Ducao dogs in a simple kennel and an empty house. The wooden doors of the vacant house, the iron railing doors of the simple kennel, and the red wooden doors of the fence are all in disrepair and unstable, and the fence is damaged. The defendant Zhou did not carry out maintenance and reinforcement. One morning, a male Dogo bit a hole in the lower end of the wooden door of an empty house and ran out. Along with the female Dogo who broke free from the simple kennel, they crossed the damaged wall and rushed to the back mountain of the Kanghai Garden community. They bit the victim Chen who had gone up the mountain for morning exercise and fell to the ground, repeatedly tearing him to death.

The court believes that due to poor management, Zhou caused his pet dog to bite victim Chen and cause his death. His behavior constitutes the crime of causing death through negligence and should be investigated for criminal responsibility in accordance with the law Due to Zhou's criminal behavior, one person has died, and the circumstances are relatively serious He was sentenced to two years in prison for the crime of causing death through negligence.

2. Shangzhi City (2015) Shang Xing Chu Zi No. 301 Case

The yellow dog raised by Liu is aggressive and has injured too many people. The victim, Sun (male, 13 years old), went to Liu Yushun's house to pick up a toy and clap it. Liu led Sun into the house to lock the courtyard door and continued to drink, causing him to fall asleep. When Liu woke up, he found that Sun Moujia had been bitten to death by a dog and was lying in his yard.

The court believes that the defendant Liu Mingming knew that the fierce dog he kept was aggressive and should have foreseen the serious consequences of his behavior that could lead to the victim Sun Moujia being harmed by the dog. Due to his negligent negligence, he did not foresee and caused Sun Moujia to die after being bitten by the dog. His behavior has constituted the crime of causing death through negligence. Due to other aggravating circumstances, he shall be sentenced to five years in prison for the crime of causing death through negligence.

3. Ningyang County (2018) Lu 0921 Xing Chu No. 128 Case

The Bitter Dog raised by Chen and others once bit others, and thereafter, the Bitter Dog was kept in a nursing house. One day, the two defendants released two Bitter Dogs from the house for feeding and did not promptly lock them into the house for care, resulting in the two dogs biting the passing victim Zhao, who died after being rescued by the hospital.

The court held that the two defendants, due to their negligent negligence, caused their pet dog to bite others and cause death, constituting the crime of negligent death. Considering that they had other lighter circumstances, they were sentenced to three years in prison and three years in probation.

2、 (Negligent) Crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means

1. Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps (2015) Bing Yi Xing Zhong Zi No. 00016 Case

Wu raised two wolf dogs and one Tibetan mastiff to take care of the jujube orchard. There is an east-west dirt road in front of the Zaoyuan Gate under its management, belonging to the company's public transportation road. From 2010 to 2013, two Tibetan mastiffs bitten and seven wolf dogs bitten, with one victim suffering from minor injuries (Cheng Duzhong) and stress-related disorders.

The court held that Wu raised a Tibetan mastiff and two wolf dogs to take care of Zaoyuan. He knew that the fierce dogs such as the Tibetan mastiff and wolf dogs were extremely aggressive and dangerous, but did not fulfill reasonable management and control obligations. Despite taking certain measures to restrain the Tibetan mastiff and wolf dogs after they injured people, he did not effectively control the wolf dogs and still failed to avoid them from hurting people It has caused practical harm to the safety of the unspecified majority of people, and its laissez faire attitude towards the harm to public safety caused by the breeding of fierce dogs is indirect intent. The crime of endangering public safety by dangerous means shall be sentenced to three years in prison.

2. Qiyang County (2017) Xiang 1121 Xing Chu No. 650 Case

Hu's two large dogs (a German Shepherd and a Castro) bit multiple people from December 2016 to August 2017 (with four clear victims), one of whom was seriously injured at level 2.

The court held that the defendant Hu, who was aware that he was raising a strong dog and had bitten multiple victims, did not wear a leash and failed to fulfill his duty of care when taking the strong dog out. He believed that he could stop the dog from injuring people and caused serious injuries to the victim, causing serious harm to the victim's body and mind. The defendant Hu Xiaowei should have foreseen that his behavior may have harmful consequences to society, but he believed that he could avoid it, To the extent that harmful consequences occur, it is a fault of overconfidence, and its behavior endangers the lives, health, and safety of an unspecified number of people Constituted the crime of endangering public safety through negligent means and was sentenced to one year and six months in prison.

Compared to other cases, the uniqueness of this case lies in the fact that the behavior of two dogs biting others occurred multiple times in the presence of the owner, and the defendant's wife was also bitten by them. The defendant stated that there were multiple paragraphs describing the two dogs not being under their control - "Shouting loudly to these two dogs, but they seemed to have red eyes and continued to bite, ignoring his commands." He believed that he could have stopped the biting behavior of these two dogs, so he did not put on a leash, but he did not expect these two dogs to have red eyes this time and could not stop it

From the above two types of cases, it can be seen that dogs that kill others or bite multiple people are generally strong dogs or dogs with a history of biting people. The owner has a high duty of care and management. If the owner negligently manages poorly and causes serious consequences, it is highly likely to be held criminally responsible.

3、 The dog owner has not been criminally punished, and the injured person refuses to accept other lawsuits

1. Case of Jin Mou being bitten to death by a dog in Pingdingshan, Henan

Jin was bitten to death by Li's Tibetan mastiff, and the People's Court of Lushan County, Henan Province issued a (2018) Yu 0423 Xing Chu No. 66 criminal judgment in the case of the defendant Li committing the crime of causing death due to negligence, ruling that the defendant Li Fangqi was not guilty. The People's Procuratorate of Lushan County, Henan Province filed a protest on the grounds that the original judgment determined the facts and applied the law incorrectly. The Intermediate People's Court of Pingdingshan City, Henan Province issued a (2018) Yu 04 Xing Zhong 327 criminal ruling, rejecting the protest and maintaining the original verdict of not guilty. These two judgments of acquittal for the defendant are both displayed as non-public on the judgment document website, with reasons for non disclosure being other circumstances that the people's court deems inappropriate for publication on the internet.

The daughter of victim Jin refused to accept the verdict, and since the acquittal verdict was made, she has continuously tried to find other remedies through administrative reconsideration and litigation to hold the dog owner criminally responsible. However, she was ultimately rejected by the court on the grounds of repeated prosecution and abuse of litigation rights.

2. Haikou City (2018) Qiong 0106 Xing Chu 785 Case

Chen was bitten by Zeng and his daughter's dog, but Zeng was not held criminally responsible by the prosecution. Chen filed a private prosecution with the court on suspicion of endangering public safety and intentional injury, which was rejected.

In the Hainan Provincial High People's Court's (2019) Qiongxingshen No. 79 Notice, the Hainan Provincial High Court clarified to Chen that multiple of its requests are not within the scope of court acceptance:

Regarding the fifteen requests you raised in your appeal, except for the first, second, and sixth requests that fall within the scope of the court's review and response, the other twelve requests require a judgment to impose a fine on the dog owner in accordance with the urban dog management regulations, a judgment to impose a fine on the dog owner for not being quarantined or immunized, and a judgment to send the dog to a dog shelter for rabies virus testing, The judgment that the dog owner has provided proof of quarantine of the dog before the incident, the judgment that the dog owner has obtained a dog registration certificate, and the judgment that Zeng has provided you with the identity information of his daughter for litigation... all involve the scope of authority of administrative management agencies, public security agencies, animal health supervision agencies, and other departments, and are not within the scope of the people's court's review and response.

The explanation made by the court precisely reflects the current reality, which is that there is no clear regulation on which agency unit bears the management obligation, making it difficult to effectively restrain dog owners.

In addition to directly injuring people, there are also numerous cases where dogs harm people's property and cause disputes between both parties. If a dog bites another person's pet, chickens, ducks, sheep, etc., and their property is damaged, further disputes arise with the dog owner, leading to intentional injury cases and provocation cases.

4、 Conclusion

The case of a girl being bitten in Chongzhou has attracted widespread attention. Currently, the girl's vital signs are stable, and the dog owner Tang did not intentionally use the dog to harm others, making it difficult to constitute the crime of intentional injury. To constitute the crime of endangering public safety through dangerous methods, judicial practice generally requires multiple victims and a comprehensive evaluation based on the breeding environment and conditions. I believe that this case may ultimately be closer to constituting the crime of causing serious injury through negligence, with a sentence of no more than three years.

In short, it is hoped that this case can promote the improvement of relevant laws and regulations regulating domestic dog ownership. If there is no legal basis or there are laws that are difficult to follow, even with many bloody precedents, it is difficult to warn dog owners to take precautions and take care of their dogs. The incidents of dog injuries or disputes arising from them will continue to occur, but the victims will find it difficult to receive effective relief.