The accused was charged under section 401(a) of the Criminal Code for injuring a police service dog named “Apollo,” owned by the City of Calgary Police Service. Facts indicate that the accused was intoxicated and involved in a break-in at a local school when Constable Marsh (canine division) spotted him and another youth running away. When Constable Marsh yelled “stop police”, the accused looked back but and continued to run prompting the constable to command Apollo to attack. The accused, while running, struck Apollo with a metal bar multiple times, causing the dog to bleed profusely and require veterinary attention. Police eventually subdued the accused after a second police dog, “Czar,” was engaged.
The Crown argued that the accused had wilfully injured a police service dog without lawful excuse, while defence counsel argued that their client had acted with legal justification or excuse and colour of right as self-defence, and that he was too intoxicated from alcohol and drugs to form intent to cause harm to the dog.
An interesting distinction in this case is that the dog was considered property of the Calgary Police (pp. 48, 52) as well as a weapon of the police officer (p. 55), and the Court compared the use of the dog in the same manner an officer would wield their revolver: “The police officer controls the timing of the dog’s attack in the same way as he controls the use of his revolver” (p. 57). The Court determined that accused fully appreciated the risk he was taking and exposed himself to it, and that his claim of being too intoxicated to form the necessary intent to commit the offence was not credible based on the evidence presented, including the accused’s ability to run and maintain possession of the crowbar.
The decision emphasized the lawful use of police service dogs in effecting arrests and the protection afforded to them by law when injured in situations where their handlers have acted appropriately. The judge commented that it’s “regrettable that dogs must be used like this because it is essential that they be taught to have no fear and in training are always triumphant” (p. 59).
The accused was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
https://canlii.ca/t/g97f9