Classified Sign In
Dog attack leaves boy scarred, family feeling frustrated
Jul 01, 2010 | 5106 views | 5 
| 40 
| 
| 
| 40 | |
Cody Stanworth shows where he was bit by a dog last Monday while jogging near his home in Grantsville. The same dog bit another individual last year.
- photography / Maegan Burr
- photography / Maegan Burr
On June 21, the 16-year-old was jogging the mile and a half from his Grantsville home on Old Lincoln Highway to a friend’s party when he heard barking and growling from a neighbor’s dog, a German shepherd. He turned and faced the animal just as it lunged, biting his right underarm and shoulder. When the dog wouldn’t stop attacking, Stanworth tried to fight it off.
“I just kept hitting it and kicking it, trying to get it off of me,” he said.
Stanworth was taken to Mountain West Medical Center by ambulance. He spent eight hours in the hospital and had two surgeries to repair damaged skin and muscle. Twenty-four stitches later, he was able to go home.
Now Stanworth’s family are asking questions about the way Grantsville City police handled the incident, and why the German shepherd, which had attacked another boy last year, was allowed to attack their son.
“It should have been taken care of the first time,” Cody’s mother, Karen, said. “And then to have it happen again and still not have anything done — had we not said anything it could have happened a third time.”
Cody said the dog’s owner, Richard Dillard, called the dog off after the attack. Then Cody called Karen, who called Grantsville City Animal Control. But Cody’s father, Wayne, said when the animal control officer came, she allowed the dog to stay at the home because it was current on its shots and had a proper kennel.
“A proper kennel has nothing to do with it,” Wayne said. “First of all, that dog never stays in a kennel, ever. It’s a house dog.”
Wayne, a police officer for the West Valley Police Department, said in his experience it is standard procedure to take a dog that has attacked into custody until either the owner surrenders it or a legal hearing is held to determine if there is cause for the animal to be put down — neither of which happened in this case.
In October 2009, the dog bit another local teen, who also had to go to the hospital for puncture wounds below his left eye and elbow, according to a Grantsville City Police report. The Dillards paid for the 13-year-old boy’s medical expenses, the report stated. No charges were filed against Dillard.
Last Friday, however, Grantsville City Attorney Ron Elton said a court order was filed for the dog to be put down, which it was on the same day. Charges were also filed against Dillard for the dog running at large and attacking a person — both Class C misdemeanors.
The Dillards pled not guilty this morning to both counts in Grantsville Justice Court.
Dillard declined to comment on the charges.
Grantsville Police Chief Dan Johnson would not comment on why the dog wasn’t impounded following its first attack, or why it wasn’t taken from the home following the attack on Cody.
Wayne said he believes if Cody had been much shorter the dog’s bite would have easily been to his son’s neck, and any of his three younger children would have been killed by the same attack.
Wayne said he’s glad the dog was destroyed, but is still frustrated by the time that response took.
“They did handle it, and maybe they just drug their feet, but I just don’t appreciate that,” he said.
Lisa Christensen: lchristensen@tooeletranscript.com
Comments will be posted after review. Please allow up to 24 hours for comment approval.
Readers are solely responsible for the content of the comments they post here. Comments do not necessarily reflect the opinion or approval of the Tooele Transcript-Bulletin. Abusive comments and users are subject to rejection or removal without notification.
We will reject and remove comments that contain any of the following: Potentially libelous statements; personal attacks, insults or threats; profanity or obscene references; copyrighted articles or information used without permission; promotional messages of a commercial nature; links to other Web sites; comments unrelated to the topic of the article.
By posting a comment, you are agreeing to abide by these guidelines. Violation of these guidelines may result in a user being barred from posting on the Web site.
All that aside I do actually agree with you that people have the right to seek legal action. But I also believe that there are times and situations where things can be resolved and should be resolved between people without getting the legal system involved.
Well unfortunately this article is leaving out a lot of info and is a tad misleading. I am not going to say that this is not an awful accident because it is. But financially crippling an elderly couple just so you can make a point is hardly the way to go about something like this.
It's amazing how someone can stand up in church and bear their testimony on this and how blessed they are.. And then turn around and go after an elderly neighbor financially and some how think they are getting what they deserve.. Wow can we say hypocrite..
I think there would be a better way to go about this. As human beings we are obligated to also take care of one another in times like this and not just point fingers and throw stones. Your child was hurt and I would have been very upset as well. But the Stanworth family would not even come to the door when the Dillards came by just to see if their son was ok. That kind of behavior I do not understand. Even if the Dillards are at fault how can you not talk and at least hear an apology.. It says a lot about the Stanworth family.. Forgiveness is a beautiful thing and something people in this country have seem to forget how to do. It is much easier to make a buck and say "that will teach em!"
The Dillards are wonderful people who would take the clothes off their own backs for a friend or neighbor in need. They do more for the community then most people. And it breaks my heart to see them being treated and portrayed this way.