Saving Heidi when she doesn't need to be saved?

I don't know, the second article says it refutes the VICTIMS claims,

"The animal control officer's observation seems to vary from the "victim's" recount of an attack.

Small lacerations and "scratches" definitely are not the same as a purposeful bite."

I couldn't get the first article to load so I can't see what it says.

It definetly sounds just from the second article like she was blowing stuff way out of proportion.

However, I know cases where stuff like this has been legit. The case of Rolo. A german shepherd got loose, injured a woman walking. The woman claims she received a severe bite on her behind, claiming nerve damage and everything. She demanded the dog be euthanized, the city ordered the dog euthanized. However, it was the dogs first act of "aggression" even though Arvada had a 3 bite law. Numerous "experts" stepped in on behalf of the dog. The responding paramedics and animal control officers who stated it was NOT a severe bite mark, they couldn't even label it more then a mild scratch (and knowing the breeds habit of swatting with their paws, this is what I believe it was). Numerous behavior experts claiming the dog could be helped with some training. The owner agreeing to do everything the city wanted, training and muzzles and new fencing. Finally, after a 4 month battle (and a 4 month stay in a local shelter), the dog was released on strict conditions. That, IMHO, was a case where a petition was very much needed and was supplied. Because honestly, sh*t happens. Personally knowing the shelter and knowing friends and close workers who were there at the time and interacted with Rolo, I know this was NOT a problem dog. If anything this was a dog that got excited and wanted to "play" with someone making funny sounds and running away. I very much believe it was a swat and not a bite. I very much think the "victim" was milking it for all she could. And I believe, living in the area, laws need to be upheld. We have a 3 bite law unless it is a severe attack, that should be followed. Because what happens when someone elses dog gets out and excitement or fear causes a very minor incident (as I strongly believe this was), and someone elses dog gets unfairly euthanized and a long legal battle ensues because of a stupid case like Rolos?

Sad how people will sign things willy nilly without getting facts. Judges don't even look at online petitions.

Now you're just spanning.

You put the same amount of questions up as I did. Thank you for your opinion but that is just hypocritical.