Please donate to support our work is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity organization. Learn more »

19 thoughts on “Vicious and Dangerous Dog Hearing After Alleged 'Service' Pit Bull Attacks Security Officer in San Francisco Public Library

Please review our comment policy.

  1. This is the reason why pitbull aren’t service dog.they will and always attacked someone who tries to help the alleged disable person.some lady said they always refuse pitbull because of the dangers. That why most service dogs are either black labrador great danes .

    • I’m not trying to argue with you but actually service dogs are usually yellow labs because people are more likely to be afraid of black labs, next is the golden retriever and then a golden Labrador cross or labradoodles for people who have allergies to dogs, because poodles shed less and mixing then with a lab gives you an intelligent biddable dog, that’s easily trained yet causes less allergens. Great Danes are rarely used as service dogs because they are too large to comfortably fit under a table in a restaurant or under your feet while flying. They also have a short lifespan which significantly reduced the amount of time they have to preform their jobs. Sometimes, rarely now the German shepherd is still used as a service dog, more likely as a seeing eye dog, however the Labrador retriever and golden retriever has for the most part replaced them. As the owner of a Labrador retriever cross golden retriever real service dog, Thank goodness for one less vicious pit bull in the public library and streets of San Francisco, where there is now one less dangerous dog to worry about killing either my service dog or myself. From personal experience being in a wheelchair and having a pit bull running aggressively towards you is a terrifying experience. The owners idiotic statement that the security guard having the presence of mind to grab a hammer on his way to deal with this barking growling out of control dog being the reason for the attack was ludicrous! Even if the man would have carried the hammer in his hand instead of his pocket a dog has no concept of the danger it may pose! He could have had a gun or knife or any weapons and the dog still wouldn’t have recognized it as a weapon! Not only that but the dog barking was what alerted everyone who had to come to get the other patrons away from his vicious dog! Also to the fact that they allowed the dog near a baby after it had already viciously attacked someone, showed up at the shelter with the bloody remains of another victim was enough to justify euthanizing the dog, NOT proof that it was safe!

  2. I’m so effing sick of the fake service dogs. Truly disabled people feel the same. Disabled people have been a protected class that have been trumped by the pit bulls and pibble people.

  3. So the dog attacked before.

    And the owner claims it is a “service dog”. By whose standard? Because a dog that’s attacked before can’t be trained as any kind of service dog due to its unreliability under stress.

    THEN, instead of keeping it as a dangerous pet and muzzling this dog whenever its in public, the owner is so uncaring about the dangers to anybody else, they use their *service dog fakery* to have the dog out in public in situations that can be a challenge even to well-trained dogs.

    Not only should the dog be euthanized, the owner should be charged with something like “knowingly presenting a clear and present danger to the public” or whatever applies in their particular location.

    Pitbulls are not bred to be service dogs. They’re bred to fight. No amount of cookie waving and b_llshittery can change basic genetic facts.

    • The owner should be charged with service animal fraud, a dangerous dog at large as he did not have it under control, and assault by attack dog

      • The owners of pits have to be made responsible for the human (and other sentient beings) injuries and suffering their dogs cause. Just requiring pit owners & other bully breed owners to better control their dog after a mauling like this, is like telling a gun owner to make sure to lock the gun up after it harms someone without any other culpability involved. With all the data about how dangerous pits are, no pit owner should be allowed to claim that s(he) never knew the dog to be vicious as a defense to an attack. The breed as a whole is dangerous & the owners need to be charged with assault and battery/ mayhem/homicide on humans) and animal cruelty when their dog attacks.

  4. Dorje, like all pit bulls, is clearly a FAKE and a PET and needs to be euthanized in the name of public safety. Of course the numbskull will just go out and get another pit for ‘service’.

  5. Although he is prohibited from dog ownership, my understanding is that this does not prohibit or prevent him from having another “service animal” whether a dog or some other species. I base this on housing-specific laws and terminology. When tenants try to rent they deny having any pets on their application. Completely deny it when asked point-blank but then talk about how much their “service animal” will like the fenced in back yard, etc. And, yes, it is a pit bull.

  6. A great write-up, Colleen.

    How do we know he is banned from dog ownership for sure? Is it just for 3 years?

    This pitbull should have been euthanized after the first known attack when it bit a man in the head. This was the third known bite, with the sentence of euthanization. The second known incident was a bite of either a human or animal due to the blood found on its face by a shelter worker.

    Library patrons should never have to worry about dogs in library buildings.

    • OK, I listened to the hearing first. So I see here the ban is for 3 years.

      The pitbull owner said he lives on a 5-acre a”ranch.” Hopefully, it’s within SFO County. But I am guessing Animal Control does not make drop-by visits to check on whether he is complying w the law. I hope that next time this happens w this particular owner that the first strike will be an out.

  7. These hearings last too long.

    Show evidence that the thing is aggressive and bit. Clear cut case like this should take 5 minutes before signing the order to send the dog immediately off to a well deserved dirt nap.

    Followed by an order that states: If you are found in possession of a dog again, Mr. Greene, you’ll have wished that you were found in possession a kilo of coke or heroin, as you would be released from lock up much sooner if you had drugs on you instead of a dog.

    The way things are handled here, the only reason this idiot wont make the news again is that his future “bad situations” wont be reported.

  8. Something about this hearing troubled me. Note how the dog’s name was mentioned first, rather than the victim’s.

    And the defendant? The guy’s in a court of law and he can’t even be bothered to tuck in his shirt.

    • Just to clarify one detail: These are administrative hearings, not a true court, and the general atmosphere is relatively informal.

      And, of course, the most recent hearing on Dorje was a telephone conference. Decorum consists primarily of just not talking out of turn.

    • Greene is a troubled person. He sounds like he’s about to fall asleep amid sentence, which is a pretty good indicator of opioid use. At least {supposedly for the time being} he doesn’t have use of a vehicle. So NorCal is safe for now from him falling asleep behind the wheel while going the wrong way on Hwy 101.

      Time for him to pay a visit to one of those great Department of Correction facilities located out in the middle of nowhere. See if that works.

  9. This is the result of a variety of realities coming together:
    -Public libraries have become hangout spots for homeless citizens with nowhere else to go.
    -Pit bulls, because they are so readily available and also because of their fierce reputations, have become one of the most common dogs owned by the homeless.
    -Service dog fakery is epidemic among the homeless, so they can take their pets everywhere they go.
    I have encountered large muscle breeds in my own local library. Somehow some of the most indigent people are able to scrape the money together to buy a fake “service dog” vest…or maybe they share one vest amongst several dogs/owners.

    • People are able to get a pit bull instead of a Labrador because they are free. The local Labrador retriever rescue goes to all of the shelters in Northern and central California and collects any and all labs or labs mixed with anything EXCEPT pit bulls, they advertise in Craigslist in most cities of Northern and central California to get any other labs that are being re-homed for a reasonable fee and then they sell them for between $450 For a 10 year old dog up to $650 For a puppy under 1 year. So if you’re unable to buy a Labrador from a breeder for between $900 – $3,000 them you’re out of luck unless you own a home with large backyard and meet their income and other criteria which can be quite stringent. So if you are poor, homeless or even if your a middle income person in San Francisco you’re not going to qualify for a Labrador or find one at a reasonable priced shelter because they’ve already bought them before the dog is available to the public. If you don’t want a pit bull or Chihuahua then you can forget about the shelters and even Craigslist mutts are being sold for a few hundred dollars because you can’t adopt from a private rescues and people are seeing how outrageously priced a 10 year old dog is and making sure that they get a nice profit from the accidental litter of mutts too! Or they are just letting their dog have puppies because they don’t even need a pedigree to make breeding their unwanted puppies profitable!

  10. As a business owner, I would rather pay a fine than allow a bully breed service dog into my store. I would never put me, my customers, or any other animal in harm’s way. I think places like Pet Smart should be held liable if they allow these breeds in.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *