Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dangerous Dog Sheba topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
After conflicting accounts, commission finds Sheba dangerous and orders containment and checks
Summary
In an apartment‑complex dispute the commission found sufficient evidence that a dog named Sheba bit a resident, imposed containment and identification requirements, and concluded the wound did not meet the municipal code—s serious‑injury standard.
The commission declared a dog named Sheba a dangerous animal after hearing testimony from the complainant, Leticia Forrest, and the respondent, Sheila Graves, along with several neighbors. Forrest testified that Sheba bit her thigh, required staples and later developed an abscess; she submitted photographs and a neighbor—s written statement describing prior aggressive encounters.
Graves disputed parts of the account and said she was inside when Forrest approached; she denied encouraging the dog to bite and offered photographs and witnesses who said Sheba was typically friendly and had been socialized at a downtown dog event. Animal control presented two bite reports with inconsistent narratives but confirmed that Sheba had been quarantined and had no prior bite history in agency files.
Despite conflicting statements, commissioners concluded a significant bite had occurred and voted to declare Sheba dangerous. The commission ordered containment measures consistent with municipal code—locked fencing when unattended or leash/supervision off property, spay/neuter unless medically contraindicated, microchip/tattoo identification, veterinary exam, and fines for failure to comply. Commissioners found the recorded injury did not satisfy the code—s "serious bodily injury" definition.
Respondents and complainants were reminded they may appeal the decision within 10 days to Vanderburgh County court, and animal control will follow up to ensure owners comply with the imposed conditions.
