Public outcry grows over deadly Santa Rosa dog attack as officials withhold case details

A growing number of Santa Rosa residents concerned about a fatal dog-on-dog attack last weekend on a city sidewalk are calling on Sonoma County authorities to come forward with more of what they know about the animal suspected in the incident and other details about their investigation into its owner and the attack.

A 12-year-old Maltese mix named Baby Ruth was on a walk Saturday afternoon on Summerfield Road with her owner, Susan Standen, when a large dog leapt from the window of a nearby SUV stopped at a traffic light and attacked. Though the dog’s owner eventually wrestled it off Baby Ruth, Standen and witnesses said he immediately got back in his vehicle with the dog and left the scene — though not before bystanders took pictures of his vehicle with its license plate.

Because no people were injured in the attack, officers with Sonoma County Animal Services are the lone investigators on the case. But the agency has declined to confirm even basic information about the attack or detail what actions officers have taken, other than to interview witnesses and gather undisclosed evidence.

Standen has said that she was told by an animal control officer that investigators visited the driver’s Santa Rosa home on Sunday, when he reportedly denied any involvement.

But Brian Whipple, operations manager for Animal Services, would not confirm what happened during the visit or say whether authorities know the whereabouts of the dog involved.

Standen and witnesses said that the dog appeared to be a large, golden-colored pit bull.

The tight-lipped approach by officials is leaving the public in the dark about an animal that could pose a danger to pets and people, Standen and other residents say.

“I’m really concerned that this dog … does not have an owner who understands his needs,” Standen said. “And I’m in a lot of grief about my little dog who did not deserve to die this way.”

Whipple has defended his decision to withhold information from the public, saying further disclosures could risk violating the suspected dog owner’s right to due process. He declined to say if officers had found the dog or would take possession of it if its owner didn’t cooperate.

Supervisor Susan Gorin, who represents the area where the attack occurred, is one in a number of county and city officials contacted by residents concerned about the county’s heavy lid on the case.

She did not signal she would do anything to encourage the agency to be more forthcoming.

“Animal control is in charge of the investigation and they will decide how to handle it,” she said Thursday.

“They’re very close-mouthed while in the middle of investigating the situation,” Gorin added. “And I appreciate that. They need to make sure of exactly the circumstances before they comment publicly.”

But community members are demanding swift action and more transparency from county animal control authorities.

Todd Farris is one of several neighborhood residents keeping tabs on the follow-up to Baby Ruth’s death. He came across the scene at the corner of Summerfield Road and Hoen Avenue shortly after the attacking dog and its owner left.

Standen was surrounded by others, waiting for her friend, a vet technician, to arrive. But Baby Ruth, bleeding and badly injured, stopped breathing and died on the sidewalk.

Farris, a retired police officer, said the sight brought back memories of homicide scenes he responded to in Oakland.

“It was heartbreaking to see that dog laying in a large pool of blood that flowed into the gutter as the owner laid next to it weeping,” he said.

Santa Rosa city code states that a dog that kills another dog can be declared “potentially dangerous.” Willing owners can voluntarily agree to designate their animal as such, or animal control officers can present evidence to city attorneys that they should bring a civil case to compel the owner to do so.

Potentially dangerous dogs must be kept on leashes no longer than 6 feet and wear a muzzle when away from their owner’s property. The owner may be required to post signs on his or her property visible to the street that a dangerous dog lives there.

“That’s the case and remedy that we have through the (city) ordinances,” Whipple said.

Fatal dog-on-dog attacks in public settings happen somewhat regularly, he said. “It is something that’s more common than people realize.”

A Press Democrat request this week for data on numbers of fatal dog attacks in the past year went unreturned Thursday.

But specific elements of Saturday’s attack have sparked outcry and concern among residents. An aggressive, unrestrained dog jumped out the window of a running vehicle and raced up the sidewalk to latch onto Standen’s dog. It held on for a few minutes, Standen said, shaking her dog “like a rat.”

The owner then shrugged off any responsibility by leaving the scene, according to Standen and witnesses.

And the driver may have given false information to investigators, reportedly telling them that the vehicle said by witnesses to have been involved had long been inoperable, according to Standen. An officer told her it was up on blocks when they visited Sunday and had not been driven for some time.

“I don’t know how you could leave somebody there after something was your fault,” said Danielle Gardner, one of several people stopped at the same traffic light as the older red SUV from which the dog jumped.

“He’s at fault for what happened,” she said of the owner. “I think there should be a punishment for that.”

Law enforcement officials maintain that they have no criminal recourse based on available information.

The Santa Rosa Police Department has no plans to become involved with the case, said Sgt. Chris Mahurin, an agency spokesman. Dog-versus-dog incidents, even deadly ones, are civil matters that fall solely under the purview of animal control, he said. Even in criminal circumstances, such as suspected animal abuse, animal control officers conduct the investigations that supplement Santa Rosa police’s eventual report to the district attorney’s office.

“If they discover something criminal, they would contact us,” Mahurin said. So far, animal control has not reached out, he said.

If the man did place his car up on concrete blocks and lie to officers about his involvement during their visit to his home, Mahurin said he still wouldn’t have incurred criminal charges on that basis. Initiating a false report of a crime is illegal in California, as is providing false identification to peace officers. But unlike in federal cases, simply giving false information to local law enforcement would not be a criminal matter on its own, he said.

“When it comes to animals, folks are a lot more amped up,” he said. “The only difference is if animal control investigates, and found that (the owner) was intentionally trying to have the dog kill other dogs.”

No evidence has emerged to suggest that, however, he said.

Donna Smith, a Bennett Valley resident, was one of those who wrote to Gorin’s office this week urging that action be taken to protect residents and their pets from the involved on dog.

“This is a very disturbing event and the dangerous dog and negligent owner are still out and about,” Smith wrote to Gorin two days after the attack. “I am writing in hopes that there will be follow up and appropriate actions taken for the protection of us all.”

A staff member who responded from Gorin’s office reached out to Animal Services and thanked Smith for her message.

“I know it’s very difficult, and this is just a terrible situation,” the staff member, Arielle Kubu-Jones, said in a later reply. “But we all need to be patient and let the investigation take its course.”

Gorin expressed dismay over Baby Ruth’s death.

“No one would want to see this kind of animal attack happen on the streets,” she said. “It’s abhorrent and my heart goes out to the owner of this beautiful little dog.”

Whipple would not explain how he had determined that he risked violating the dog owner’s legal rights if he divulged basic details about the case. Law enforcement agencies routinely give preliminary updates on investigations where public safety is in question.

“I’m not going to go down that road,” he said.

“Obviously, we want everything to come to a conclusion as soon as possible,” he said.

Standen, 54, a graduate student in transformative leadership, said she’s been kept up by nightmares that replay Baby Ruth’s death. The public exposure of the case and sharing her experience has been uncomfortable for her, but a number of well-wishers have reached out in support. A memorial has also been set up on the corner where Baby Ruth died.

After sending in her sworn statement to animal control this week, Standen has had little to do except wait for an update. In the meantime, she wrote out her thoughts for the owner of the other dog — things she would say if they could sit down for a conversation.

“I know this was an accident,” Standen wrote. “You may be feeling very alone, not knowing where to get support. You may fear having your dog taken away, or even having it put to death.

“I do not want to bring any pain to you,” her letter continued. “What I mostly want is simply to be reassured that from now on your dog will be doubly secured at all times so that it can never cause an event like this again. I'd like to know that you care about the safety of our shared community and accept responsibility for the moment in which you forgot to keep full control of your dog.”

The man had acted quickly to pry Baby Ruth from his dog’s mouth, but even that took several minutes. And leaving immediately left her alone and victimized. Sharing her story brought her a “measure of relief,” and coming clean could do the same for him, Standen said.

“We could heal from this together,” she said.

You can reach Staff Writer Kaylee Tornay at 707-521-5250 or kaylee.tornay@pressdemocrat.com. On Twitter @ka_tornay.