Upon reading the title of the article in today's Leader, one would think that it was the expected ending to a long and frustrating legal battle. Quite the contrary: it was a conclusion that left a void in many of the hearts and souls of the people that have been following the events as they unfolded.

Two dogs are destined to die because of their actions. Because deemed vicious they will not get a third chance to kill again. Is this what the people expected to hear after a week of deliberation? It is not what people who continue to frequent our business are saying. That was a handicapped form of justice because even though it was the two dogs that directly caused the death of two other dogs and the wounding of a third, it was the owner who failed to secure his pets and refrain them from causing public damage. Why then the public is asking did Gary who was the irresponsible one in this situation get away with a $2,500 fine under D.O.L.A.  and $300 fines per charge unde the Port Colborne dog owners bylaw? Is this what someone who fails to control his dogs gets after they have killed not one but two dogs gets in lieu of punishment?

The article went on to say that Justice Donna Cowan could not give the maximum under D.O.L.A. because a human was not involved in the incident. So basically, the life of Freddi the Pomeranian and Gnocchi the mini Yorkshire Terrier meant nothing to our judicial system. The two dogs that gave us so much happiness by their mere existence were merely animals in the eyes of Justice Cowan. Because Freddie and Gnocchi had four legs instead of two, the judicial system basically overlooked their value and slapped Gary on the wrist with a pathetic fine. He won't be able to own dogs for 5 years instead of 10 according to D.O.L.A. because that would have been two harsh a punishment for someone who allowed his dogs to take the lives of two other dogs in two separate occasions over the past two years. "Three previous attacks warranted a higher level of responsibility over the animals" but not a higher level of punishment according to the Justice. I, along with so many others that expected stiffer punishment are left in disbelief. What is banning a person for 5 years from owning a dog going to do to deter a future dog owner from thinking twice before he allows his dog from running wild and hurting other animals or even people. Who is expected to police this?  How does the law intend on enforcing this form of punishment? Will they follow Gary around from day to day to see if he makes an unexpected trip to a breeder to pick up a dog or two? The system failed to monitor Gary's dogs when they issued fines for being unleashed or unmuzzled, how is enforcing  his ban on dog ownership going to be any different?

I guess we will just have to wait and see how this all plays out, but the moral of the story here so far is Gnocchi was killed and taken away from us by two dogs and the Justice who had a perfect opportunity to send out a strong message to any future irresponsible owners that if you break the law you go to jail but didn't.

Yesterday a friend stopped by my office to visit, who’s name shall remain anonymous because of his public profile in the community. He stops by periodically to see what’s happening and also to get any update on the Gnocchi Trial which he has taken an interest in from the beginning. When I told him what the Justice gave Gary as punishment, I was not surprised to his reaction because it was the same reaction that everyone else has had upon hearing about it. Anyhow as our conversation developed he at one point uttered the words “stay focused”. This was to imply that he had sensed a feeling of defeat in the tone of my voice by the way I was talking. He pointed out to me that on August 26 when Gnocchi was attacked and killed that I began a crusade that attracted the attention of so many people along with the media which covered the story in great detail. It was the power of the media in fact and the determination of the Municipality of Port Colborne that was able to bring Gary and the dogs to Justice. He also pointed out that if the same media hype had been created two years ago when Freddie the Pomeranian was killed, things may have been different but nonetheless the laws this time were in force to make a case. Where the system failed was in the degree of punishment that Gary received.

I asked my friend in his opinion if he were in my shoes what his next move would be and he responded by telling me that it isn’t the laws that need to be changed but rather the mandatory sentences. D.O.L.A (Dog Owners Liability Act) states that if convicted an offender may be charged with a 10,000 dollar fine or six months imprisonment or both. The Justice did not come anywhere near the maximum and issued a 5000 dollar fine to someone who in the past two years has failed to pay outstanding fines issued by the SPCA. What makes the Justice think that the fine she imposed will be paid?

The question that came up also in conversation was what if it had been a child that Gary’s dogs had attacked and injured rather than a little dog; would her sentence have been the same? We won’t know until it happens and I hope it never does because then we’ll look back at her punishment and ask ourselves “was the punishment strong enough to send a message out to dog owners who continue to allow their animals to run unleashed”

I guess I will have to stay focused and continue to fight so that one day we will look back at this tragedy and be grateful that the crusade continued. Thank you my friend for the strength you have given me because the battle will go on. We will continue to fight in any way possible so that one day mandatory punishments will be issued for crimes committed. We will also fight for mandatory leash laws on all dogs that owners allow outside of their house or pen.

Hi Mario

I know we have not spoken in the last little while, but I just heard about Gnocchi. And I would like to pass on my deepest condolences to you Danny and Silvi. I know how close you where Gnocchi, the little bugger even left a long lasting impression with me.

Take Care
Lino

Hello Mario & Danny,

I hope my email is able to help you in your case, please remember chapter 349, as this was crucial in my case and definitely swung the judge my way after introducing it in my testimony. Luckily I had the print out of it with me to show the judge as well.

Your right about it not always being about money, but when you have an ignorant neighbour that taunts you everyday about it up until the trial, I cant tell you the gratification it gave me to see him get pay back for what he caused me and my dog. It only eased the pain slightly, but you cant help but feel that justice was served for your beloved pet. I hope the two dogs that were stolen from the shelter in Port Colborne are not the two attacking dogs in your case, I just read about it...the description of the two dogs sounds the same. I have no problem with you posting my email, I hope it helps others...by the way where is your store, maybe I will pass by to see you...
By the way, there are a lot of cases like this in Toronto that have occurred in the last few years, CTV news broadcasted quite a few, perhaps if you have time, you or your lawyer can pull them up in research for comparibles for your case.

I know you will win your case, just be prepared to be scrutinized by the judge who is not supposed to pick sides, and show your emotions, bring lots of pictures of Gnocci and do not hold back-crying, the judge will feel your pain too, and have to side with you. Good luck at court...Enjoy your two new babies!
 
All the best...God bless
J. 

Like any trial, nothing in particular was that different than the one for Gary and his black dogs. There was a justice of the peace, a prosecuting lawyer and an assistant, the accused and an apparent friend of his who wasn't a lawyer but was there to offer whatever help he could. I would say that everything proceeded fairly smoothly and without much theatrics like the old Perry Mason shows that we used to watch on tv. The microphone system was not on, so hearing what some of the witnesses said was a little difficult but the important things were evident enough.

The prosecution brought forward a total of nine people to make its case and the accused had only one person that attempted to defend the black dogs by saying that she visited Gary's house on a regular basis and she would be greeted by the two black labs referred to as Jasper and JJ with wagging tales.

During most of the trial, we listened to how the black labs on many repeated occasions ran at large due to the irresponsibility of the many borders that Gary had to take in due to financial difficulties to help pay for expenses. These so-called boarders would not take precautions in assuring that the dogs would not escape the confines of Gary's home while he was either not there or asleep. Asked by the prosecution why this occurred so many times in the last few years, Gary was quick to respond that the boarders that he had were not as responsible as he had wished.

We also heard how on so many occasions Jasper and JJ escaped the pen that the OSPCA had ordered Gary to build for the dogs as part of their release on one occasion when the dogs were brought in to the pound due to an incident. When asked how the dogs escaped from their pen, Gary could not explain why, but did say that was the reason why he kept them chained so they could not escape. It was difficult to sit there and listen to all of this and deep down inside ask myself....if the dogs were chained and could not escape, then how did they manage to attack Freddy (a little pomeranian) on two separate occasions..the second being fatal enough to cause Freddy's death. If the dogs were chained, then how did they manage to attack Gnocchi and tug on him until his intestines left his little body. If a dog or dogs were chained, would that not mean they could not run at large and cause damage to other people's belongings? At one point when the prosecution drilled Gary on the various charges of failing to keep vicious dogs confined or failure to muzzle and leash the dogs, Gary lowered his head and said that he was sorry for the grief that his dogs had caused everyone. A little too late Gary in my opinion, but then again maybe the justice felt for you. Those of us that attended at one point were also made aware of all the outstanding fines that Gary had failed to pay due to the irrisponsiblity of confining and muzzling and leashing his dogs and fines due to not licensing his dogs and fines due to not posting signs saying "beware of vicious dogs".

When asked how the trial went by close friends, I wasn't really certain how to respond. I know that the prosecution presented a very concrete case against the actions of the dogs and the irrisponsiblity of the owner, but when it was all over I was a little confused by the Justice's one week deliberation. The case appeared to be well presented and it was more than obvious after hearing all the testimony that there was not a doubt in anyone's mind that Gary did fail to restrain his dogs on many ocassions therefore causing the death of two dogs and the injury to a third dog's leg. I'm not sure why the justice required a week to review the case, but then again I am not a justice of the peace or a lawyer. During the trial there was talk about destroying the dogs and talk about Gary not being able to own dogs for a minimum of ten years but the one thing that I did not hear any mention of was a prison term. I'm curious as to what punishement awaits Gary and in what form the punishment will be carried out. Will huge fines affect a person who has failed to pay the fines he has already been served with. Does the fact that he will not be able to own dogs in the next ten years really do anything for justice? Can he not just have a friend purchase a dog or dogs under a different name and bypass the punishment altoghter. I along with my friends who knew little Gnocchi for the last three and a half years are all asking the same question. Was does justice in this country actually mean, and will justice actually be served when it is all over. We will have to wait and see.

We were forced to make some changes to the format of this webpage because certain individuals repeatedly commented on issues not pertaining to what this crusade represents. People find it very easy to hide behind a name and throw rocks at people who have something viable to say. It is even more disturbing when the names of the people posting keep changing but the person remains the same.

Because of this, we chose to remove the comment page where access to the public was possible. We still believe that people will always have something to say, so therefore we shall continue to post the comments, but only the ones that are received through e-mails. Thank you all for your co-operation and we hope to see you at 3 Cross Street in Welland, Ontario on October 29th. For everyone's sake, I hope justice will be served. May Gnocchi's spirit rest in peace.

Yesterday morning I received a phone call from City Hall in Port Colborne, and was told of an incident where someone broke into the Animal Shelter in Port Colborne on Elm Street, and took both black labs. The person that I spoke to told me that the story was still at that time unconfirmed but that I should speak to Ted at the Welland Humane Society. When I called , Ted was not in his office.

Later on in the day, I received another phone call confirming the break in at the shelter and the dissappearance of both dogs. I had always been under the impression that the black dogs were being held at the Welland shelter but today was told that the break in occured at the Port Colborne shelter. I ask myself this; why in the name of God would the authorities keep two dogs that are so vital to a trial in such an unsecured location as Port Colborne? The shelter is in a remote part of the city where there happens to be very little traffic at night and such an easy place to break into without being noticed.

I am asking anyone who may have any information regarding the break in and theft of the two black labs to e-mail me. I will keep your name anonymous. Gary and the dogs must be brought to trial and dealt with in a legal manner. Thank you.

The day that eveyone has been awaiting has finally arrived. On September 30, 2008, Gary and his two infamous black dogs stand trial. We all get to see what punishment awaits an owner who has no respect for his dogs or the people that live around him. A day that will finally bring tranquility to the people that have arisen each morning and asked themselves.."when will this all come to an end; when will the terror and the killing of our pets stop". September 30 is that day...a day long awaited by the citizens of Port Colborne primarily the owners of little "Gnocchi" who lost him in such a brutal manner. One thing that lifts the pain from our hearts is the thought of maybe Gary facing the four walls of a jail cell for whatever time at all...so that he will have time to reflect on what he caused the people in this city. He will never feel the loss of his dogs once they are destroyed because they were not pets to him but rather tools of destruction. Let us all hope that he shall never be the owner of another dog in his lifetime. Dogs give you back the love you invest with them and it is more than obvious that Gary didn't know the meaning of love for his dogs.

Let us all remember September 30th as Gnocchi Day...the little Yorkie that brought to justice three elements of society that will no longer control the fear of the people around them.

To the shock of my brother Danny and myself, Mark came to the office today with something in hand that he said was for us. He said he saw it and just had to buy it. When we opened up the box both Danny and I were all choked up. It was a head stone for little "Gnocchi". That was a very sweet thing for you to do Mark and we will remember it forever. God bless you Mark. We are going to have it set with a little ceremony on Gnocchi's grave as soon as it is prepared for the stone.

Danny, Mario and Silvia

Danny, Silvia and I would like to thank all of the people that have offered their condolences for the passing away of our little pooch "Gnocchi". We will all miss him. I would also like to thank all the customers of Warehouse Foods also for all their sweet words and support. Most of them had the opportunity to meet him  as they came shopping at our Retail Outlet.

Mario P. De Luca

After submitting his report to the Humane Society today, both my brother and I were told by Ted (the District Manager) that the dogs that took Gnocchi's life will not be returning home. They will be impounded until the judge orders them to be put down.

Although my brother and I were somewhat relieved with the decision, it really wasn't something to be joyous about. Dogs are dogs and they do things differently that humans. They don't think like we do, they just act on instinct and unfortunately many times what they do either hurts or kills other things or people.

This coming Wednesday under D.O.L.A. (Dog Owners Liability Act) I will be filing charges against the owner of the black Labs in Provincial Court in Welland. We are confident that when we appear in court, the judge will request the dogs to be put down. Ted assured me that until that time the dogs will not be free to return home regardless of possible attempts of the owner to free them. They will not be able to hurt anyone or anything anymore. Being that next week school commences, Jennifer (who's statement helped seal the dogs fate) feared that if the dogs returned to Port Colborne, everyone would have to live in fear. In a phone call to her this afternoon, I assured her that Ted had given us his word, that the black Labs would not hurt again. This is not the end, but rather the beginning because now we have to fight for laws to stop other tragic situations like this happening again. Like I said to Ted this afternoon, my goal here is for The Gnocchi Law to be created so that dog owners that do not confine their dogs when there is a danger of them being aggressive towards others end up facing jail terms. This is a dream today but hopefully it will be reality tomorrow.