A pregnant woman who sprinted down the street in her dressing gown after her XL Bullys unleashed a horror attack was told by a judge she "showed a complete lack of remorse” as her partner was left with a bloodied arm.
Jessica Campbell's partner was mauled on the arm as the pair tried to regain control of her dogs Reggie and Rui. Reggie went on to bite Campbell's dad after being rehomed with him, while the 30-year-old had a previous brush with the law due to the bad behaviour of Rui. A judge today scathingly remarked she was "insulting" the courts by suggesting she felt remorse over the incident.
Liverpool Crown Court heard on Wednesday that the dogs managed to flee Campbell's address on Netherfield, Widnes, Cheshire, on the evening of June 28 last year. Campbell and her boyfriend David Smith chased the canines in an attempt to restrain. She was eventually able to grab hold of Rui as her partner attempted to control Reggie.
In CCTV footage played to the court, the pets were seen roaming around a neighbour's front garden before Mr Smith was seen wrestling with one of the dogs, which bit him on the right forearm. He suffered "significant" puncture wounds as a result and required hospital treatment, having answered the door to the police with his arm covered by a towel. Campbell was said to have been "uncooperative", telling officers she had four dogs in her property, and then closing the door on them.
Joanne Maxwell, prosecuting, detailed how Reggie was given over to the defendant's dad but had bitten him on the arm after slipping its lead and attacking another person on July 23. The dog was put down as a result of this second incident. Campbell has one previous conviction from August 2022 for being in charge of a dangerously out of control dog, relating to an incident concerning Rui in December 2021.
Carmel Wilde, defending, said on Campbell's behalf: "She accepts that it was a terrible incident. It has hurt her partner, who she loves the most. She says she feels terrible about what happened."
But Judge Driver said Campbell had sent text messages in the aftermath of the incident which "showed a complete lack of remorse", adding: "It is quite clear that she did not feel terrible about what happened. Rather than do the sensible thing and have it destroyed, she put it in the custody of her father. It was only when it attacked him that she had it destroyed. Do not insult the court by saying there is remorse, because there clearly is not."
Ms Wilde also told the court that her client suffers from epilepsy, and added: "It was the defendant's actions that ensured that the dog released its grip. There had not been any complaints against this dog previously. A further factor is, the defendant was pregnant at the time. It is hard when a dog is well loved from a puppy and is a family pet. She should have taken the decision to take the dog to be euthanised earlier, but she did eventually do that."
When asked whether Rui was still being kept in the same house as Campbell's six-month-old baby, Ms Wilde replied: "Yes, there have not been any issues. The dog is good for her mental wellbeing. She has been a dog lover for her entire life. It is classed as one of the family. There has not been any incident since the dog was subjected to that control order, and she has demonstrated that she can be a good dog owner in terms of Rui.
"She is a bright young lady who has family responsibilities. The dog lives in the family home and is under control. She was assessed as a fit and proper person to look after that dog. While this is a serious offence, the complainant has recovered from his injuries. They are still in a relationship."
Campbell admitted being the owner of a dog which caused injury while dangerously out of control in a public place on the day she was due to stand trial. She was handed a five-month imprisonment suspended for 18 months and banned from owning dogs for five years.
Sentencing, Judge Driver said: "They were completely out of control. They were so big and strong that you and your partner could hardly contain them. The potential for serious injury was high.
"The first obvious aggravating feature is that you have a previous conviction for a section three offence, in which one of the two dogs who were out of control on this day attacked another dog. You were sentenced for that only 10 months before this incident. The other aggravating feature is your conduct after this incident.
"In mitigation, you are in poor physical health. You are the mother to a six-month-old baby, and so immediate custody would have a significant harmful impact on the child. After he had been injured, you showed no remorse. You did not have the animal euthanised. You instead chose to put it in the care of your father. Only when the dog inevitably attacked somebody else and injured you father while he intervened did you consent to the destruction of the animal.
"You were recklessly irresponsible. I am troubled to hear that you still have possession and custody of the dog that was involved in the 2022 case and was one of the animals I have seen out of control on this video, in the home which you share with a baby."
