Manitoba’s highest court has upheld convictions for a woman who was found guilty of assaulting two people with a weapon — her pet bulldog.
Tannis Lyn Park, 55, stood trial for the 2022 assaults and was sentenced to 18 months in custody and two years of probation.
Park took her case to the Manitoba Court of Appeal, where she argued, in part, there was only evidence she had sicced the animal on the first victim and that she should not be held responsible for the attack on the second one.
The Manitoba Law Courts building in Winnipeg (John Woods / The Canadian Press files)
The court dismissed Park’s appeal in a written ruling released Thursday.
“The evidence that (provincial court Judge Ryan Rolston) accepted overwhelmingly supported the conclusion that the accused either knew or was substantially certain that the dog would attack (the second victim),” Justice Diana Cameron wrote on behalf of the appeal court. “Alternatively, she exhibited a high degree of recklessness. Either way, a conviction for assault with a weapon would be inevitable.”
Court heard evidence at trial that Park was temporarily living with the male victim and had known him and the female victim for several years. On the evening of the assaults, Park and the woman had been using cocaine and the man, who was suffering from throat cancer and could not speak, was drinking.
The male victim died before trial. The only direct evidence as to how the attacks occurred came from Park and the female victim.
Court heard tension erupted between the man and Park over unpaid rent, Park’s refusal to turn down her music, and her use of cocaine. The female victim testified the man banged on a table and clapped his hands during a confrontation, at which point Park ordered the dog to “sic ’em.”
Rolston found that Park sat on the man’s chest as the dog bit him on the arm and ankle.
The judge rejected Park’s claim she never issued the attack order, finding that the animal would have been used to the man’s hand gestures and that they would not have been sufficient cause for the dog to attack him.
The female victim testified she was calling 911 as the man was still being attacked, causing Park to turn her attention to the woman and pin her to the floor while yelling out a wrong address to the 911 operator.
The dog “followed suit” and mauled the woman, tearing off parts of her lip and biting into her shoulder, chest, and arm.
Rolston rejected Park’s testimony the dog attacked the woman only after she had twice attacked her.
Court heard Park was also bitten during the attack and that she only gained control of the dog after grabbing his testicles.
Court heard no evidence Park commanded the dog to attack the female victim. In finding Park guilty of that assault, Rolston cited the rarely applied legal doctrine of “transferred intent,” which holds that if a person’s attempt to use force against one person results in an assault on another, the accused can be found guilty of the second assault.
The appeal court rejected Park’s claim Rolston did not properly assess evidence supporting her testimony she did not command her dog to attack the male victim.
In a second ground for appeal, Park said Rolston erred in his application of transferred intent, arguing the dog was out of her control when it attacked the female victim and that it occurred separate in time from the attack on the male victim and were thus separate events.
The appeal court agreed the attacks constituted separate acts and that transferred intent did not apply, but found Park was reckless as to whether the dog would attack the female victim.
“If the accused did not have sufficient knowledge of the result, she was certainly aware of the significant risk that the dog would attack (the victim), but nevertheless proceeded to assault (her),” Cameron said.
dean.pritchard@freepress.mb.ca
Dean Pritchard
Courts reporter
Dean Pritchard is courts reporter for the Free Press. He has covered the justice system since 1999, working for the Brandon Sun and Winnipeg Sun before joining the Free Press in 2019. Read more about Dean.
Every piece of reporting Dean produces is reviewed by an editing team before it is posted online or published in print — part of the Free Press‘s tradition, since 1872, of producing reliable independent journalism. Read more about Free Press’s history and mandate, and learn how our newsroom operates.
Our newsroom depends on a growing audience of readers to power our journalism. If you are not a paid reader, please consider becoming a subscriber.
Our newsroom depends on its audience of readers to power our journalism. Thank you for your support.
