Closing statements were made in the trial of Angela Trauner and Nick Coppo on Oct. 10.
The mother and son are facing Provincial Offences Act charges in relation to an incident in January of this year, where it is alleged the pair failed to have proper control over their dogs Tank and Raz, a mastiff and a husky.
On Jan. 4, the pair of dogs allegedly attacked eight-year-old Norwegian elkhound Tonka in a nearby yard in Lively, injuring the animal to the point that it had to be euthanized later that day.
Trauner, who is acting as her own defence counsel, used her closing statement to attempt to poke holes in the testimony of Tonka's owner, Terry Matthews.
"There are numerous conflicting statements between Ms. Matthews' witness statement and her testimony," said Trauner. "In her witness statement she said she put Tonka out at 9:45 a.m. yet her testimony said that she called bylaw and her spouse at 9:45 a.m. after the attack."
Trauner also made note of Matthews identifying the dogs that allegedly attacked Tonka, stating that the husky, Raz, did not match the description that Matthews had provided.
"Ms. Matthews said the husky looked to be about 80 to 100 pounds, Raz is petite for his breed and is only about 55 pounds," said Trauner. "She also stated that she wasn't sure if Tank had a tail. If Ms. Matthews knew these dogs well and had seen them numerous times, she could identify them, and a tail, especially Tank's which is very long."
Assistant Crown Attorney Cecilia Martin interjected during Trauner's closing statement, saying that it was unfair to Matthews.
"I just want to note that I believe what Ms. Trauner is attempting to do is refer to previous statements that were made out of court and were not made to the witness during her examination," said Martin.
"I want to be clear that I'm addressing my concerns that any submissions made in closing need to be fair to the witness and that the evidence before the court is being considered and nothing else."
Trauner stuck to her guns however, saying that Matthews' testimony was unreliable.
"There's no solid proof or evidence to think it was Tank or Raz, and one eyewitness offers conflicting statements," said Trauner.
"Raz and Tank are our babies, they've been locked away and we haven't seen them in nine months. They're wondering and confused if they've been abandoned. They're not property, they're not items, they're family and they have feelings and they do love and are people to us, not dogs. They are hurting just as we are. Even incarcerated inmates are allowed visits be we haven't been able to see them."
Trauner did take a moment to acknowledge Matthews, and said that she knew she was hurting as a result of the death of her dog.
"Whatever your decision is, your honour, guilty or not guilty, based on your decision, me and Nicholas Coppo are willing to cover the vet costs, based on your decisions."
Martin used her closing statment to drive the point home that Trauner and Coppo did not fulfill their responsibility under section 5.1 of the Dog Owner's Liabitility Act to have their dogs properly secured and not pose a risk to the safety of the public.
"The Crown argument is not complicated, it's our view that having proven that the defendants were the owners of the dogs and that they were at large in the community and we submit that they were a menace to the safety of both persons, but more specifically domestic animals in Lively, and in this case on Jan. 4, 2017, they did attack Tonka," said Martin.
"It's the defendant's burden to prove on a balance of probabilities that they exercised reasonable precaution to secure their dogs and ensure that they didn't pose a risk to public safety. It is my submission that they have not done so and there is no evidence before the court to support their argument."
A decision in the trial is expected to be made when it returns to court on Dec. 13, at 9:30 a.m.
