A fourth person has joined the list of people who are suing Kim Richards over a dog attack by Kingsley. Kelly Crossley has filed documents with the court, obtained by TamaraTattles.com that allege that on September 1, 2014 she visited Kim Richards house at the time of her visit Kim referred to Kingsley as “her dog”, however, after the attack, one of Kim’s lawyers sent a letter saying that the dog belonged to Monty Brinson.
The documents state that the plaintiffs were well aware the dog’s history of biting others unprovoked and that neither took any measures to keep the dog from biting again. She is suing for medical expenses including psychological expenses, general, specific and punitive damages. She is also suing for loss of income as well as future loss of income and seems to indicate she has been unable to work since the incident due to the severity of her injuries which the document refers to as “grave bodily injuries ” resulting in “great physical and nervous pain and suffering.” The suit is also asking for damages related to permanent physical disfigurement. They suit does not set a specific amount that they are seeking in damages. They are asking for a jury trial and estimate the trial will take about five days. I would think that a jury would be willing to award Crossley a lot more that Kay Rosario got from her trial by judge. So far in this motion I have not seen any graphic photos like these from Kay’s attack included in the paperwork. The motion also gives no specific details of how exactly the attack occurred or her relationship with Kim and/or Monty.
Do you think Kim or Monty will respond to the suit? I expect that a default judgment will be filed after 30 days of the filing on June 2,2015. Stay tuned.
When the dog bites her, or one of her own children/grandchildren maybe then she will put it down. My daughter was bit in the eye by a dog, while we were at a public PARK for children! I close my eyes in despair even thinking about it. She was just 4 years old. Driving 80 mph her through town to get her to the emergency room, and enduring her screaming in pain, watching the blood steam down her face, was torture.
Her niece was bit by the dog and Kim made it out that the bite was the girl’s fault.
Thats what I’m trripping on..both dog bites were prior to her neice’s bite? Is that right? Damn Kim..wow
The third one was as well, he bit the trainer and I believe that went to court too.
I think the trainer was first.
So yes the dog had bitten three people and she let him bite her niece.
Banjo had bitten ZERO people and I tell everyone not to pet him. I don’t want to test it. Though yesterday we left the driveway and this guy with a lovely female dog of nearly comparable size met us at the end of the driveway. I was hold Banjo back until they passed but he insisted. This is good for Banjo, he needs to socialize, so I held my breath. He licked her LADY GARDEN (so embarrassing) and they sniffed each other as I cringed in embarrassment and then he went in for a kiss, ON HER FACE and SHE snapped at HIM. LOL.
I was thrilled after I realized he was not going to go all Cujo on her. So Banjo has a bitch of a girlfriend. And the dude is getting some dog from Peru because he is one of those liberals who thinks there are not enough guys at the local pound who need a good home and wants to outsource and the new dog he is getting is named…..
BANJO!
Or else he is an FBI agent tracking me for the government as part of Jade Helm !!!!!!!!
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:51 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
What a traumatic nightmare for you both, I’m so sorry. I hope she’s fully recovered. 🙁 I can’t imagine how Kim thought this could continue happening and she could just sweep it under the rug each time. Why couldn’t she muzzle him when other people were around? Structured training would be ideal but I know that’s asking a lot of her. I do think it’s odd that this lawsuit is coming out now though, right as she is having a all-around crisis of epic proportions. Perhaps it was triggered by the incident with Alexia and it just took a while to pull the case together. :/
@hokiechick I’m wondering the same thing you are. Is this latest suit an ongoing one, or did this individual sue Kim just recently? I’m asking because if the incident happened in September of last year that seems like a long time to wait to take action.
So. Victim #3 of Kim’s negligent ass. That we know of. Jesus! No wonder she doesn’t want to come back to the US. Poor Monty too. How did she manage to get him involved in this. Did he know that Kim basically threw him under the bus.
Kim’s lucky that Kyle didn’t either sue her or go ballistic in the media after Alexia was attacked. Kim had some nerve complaining about an IG photo of Alexia in the hospital. Siblings and relatives sue each other over much less than that.
If you read the post, you will find all the information about how many previous suits there were and when the case was filed.
#Reading is fundamental.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
Her total lack of accepting any responsibility regarding Kingsley is bringing people out of the wood work. If Kim had given the dog away, she may not have been sued by anyon since they seem to be close family or friends. Of course, had she done that after the first attack, no one would have a case. Kim is probably drowning herself in alcohol and pills as a way of not dealing with the situations in her life. The addiction cycle. I wonder who this person is to Kim and how she came to be attacked. How many people has this dog bitten? Can she face criminal charges for knowingly exposing people to a vicious dog?
In CA you have one year from the date of the tort (incident/wrong/harm) to file a lawsuit.
That is civil law right? What about the state bringing criminal charges? Does California have any criminal laws regarding vicious dogs?
I think people are just astounded by her actions. Kay gets bitten and she is thrown out of the house in a pool og blood, begged not to call the police, and Kim refused a 911 call. Alexia, was responsible for her own injuries, and totally exaggerated. This dog is a menace, and I for the life of me, do not know why these victims have not reported it to the proper authorities. My feeling is that if somebody else gets mauled, it is partly their fault.
Monty has recently tweeted that Kingsley is doing so well that he hangs out in dog parks.
Monty is a lying liar who lies out his liar hole.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 7:17 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
Here in the NJ/NY area the dog would be euthanized after so many attacks, how is it not the same in Cali? The least that would happen after complaints would be that the dog had to be muzzled while in public at all times. this was on a law site- Under city, county and state laws, dog owners can do jail time after dog attacks: Throughout the USA, the owners of pit bulls and other high-risk dogs face criminal charges after significant attacks, and those charges range from criminal negligence all the way to second degree murder. For example, in October 2013 two of the owners of a pit bull that severely mauled one of Mr. Phillips’ 10-year-old clients were sentenced to 6 months in jail for criminal negligence, the maximum sentence under Louisiana law (read the articles, Woman sentenced 6 months after her dog attacks child, and Pit bull attack of girl leads to Roseland woman’s conviction.)
It would seem that after FOUR ATTACKS, that we know of, the dog would have been taken. According to witnesses Kingsley was removed from Kim’s house on ….I always blank at the name of the device, but it is the long stick with the noose that is used for violent dogs. While it could have been a new trainer (the last one was also bit and went to court) I still find it likely it was animal control and Kingsley is likely playing in dog parks……. IN DOGGIE HEAVEN.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
Remember that Hero cat, Tara, who saved the little boy from being killed by the neighbors’ dog? The dog bit the boy and dragged him in an unprovoked attack. Then the cat did a flying leap and body slammed the dog off of the boy like Chuck friggin Norris. The boy needed to get stitches. The cat is now a feline internet celebrity. My point with all of this is that the dog was immediately taken by Animal Control and euthanized. This happened in California. That is all.
I do remember that.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
Gemini, I so hope your child is okay. That is a horrific thing to go through. And, as a dog lover and owner, I get why they are not allowed in many areas.
And the Kim Richards saga continues. Shame on her for saying that Kingsley is Monty’s dog.
Maybe Monte will finally learn to stop enabling Kim. He tried to cover for her with using his pain meds as well. Who knows? Since he is dying, he could have offered to say that he was Kingsley’s owner to take the heat off Kim. Although, I wouldn’t put it past Kim to blame someone else either.
I really don’t want to think that any of this is Monty’s fault. He’s ill and probably smashed out on pain meds. Now we have a better idea of perhaps why Kim has been so nice to Monty. Relapse on poker night? Monty. Dog bites somebody? Monty. He’s not so much her enabler as he is her alibi.
Monty is at fault if he was living there even though he was not the owner of the dog (as Kim had her lawyers claim). Both knew he was vicious and both did nothing to secure the dog.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
I don’t think dying would absolve Monty ‘ s responsibility if he was the real owner. Not a lawyer but I think his estate would be held accountable for any court ordered damages. More likely is Kim’s deflecting or lying.
Even if it is Monty’s dog, it is in Kim’s house which makes it her liability.
Monty may respond. Due to the fact Kim didn’t show for the previous case, I doubt she will show for this one.
So wait this attack happened in September just two months before Alexia was attacked by the dog? If I were Kyle I would be one furious bitch right about now! The dog drew blood on at least three separate occasions in 2014, and this delusional woman is blaming the victims. Anyone know the current status of the dog? Is Kingsley still at her house?
I received a tweet from Monty a few weeks ago saying that Kingsley is happy and going to dog parks. He didn’t say where the dog is.
I don’t believe he would be allowed in dog parks. Whoever picked him up, picked him up with one of those nooses on a stick.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
Sure he is. These people are ridiculous.
She is a good person with horrible flaws. Every decision she has made is out of sync…until it dovetails into more trouble…it’s like watching her bleed to death and I wish I could put a tourniquet on her.
I think of her as more like an ostrich. The drugs and drink are the sand she buries her head into when she gets overwhelmed by the consequences of her own stupidity, that she hopes will somehow go away on their own. That seems to be the mantra she lives by. Outta sight, outta mind.
I think it’s more a case of Kim doesn’t give a shit, more than she can’t face reality. She’s plenty capable of going on the attack, whenever confronted about anything. That’s not the actions of some poor little shrinking violet. That’s the actions of someone who is operating without a concience. I cant imagine seeing those attacks by that dog and keeping him and more insanely letting it happen again and again. Just because someone has addictions doesn’t mean they are some poor fragile person.
Whatever happened with Kingsley being taken by animal control when Kim went to rehab? Whatever came of that?
TT, I don’t believe he’s going to dog parks either, that’s just what Monty said
Hopefully he’s in The Big Dog Park in the Sky!
Over the rainbow bridge?
I am just wondering about California law…do they allow this to continue until someone dies? I don’t know why Kingsley has not been removed and at least put somewhere that is not so heavily populated. I thought most communities had local law that had codes about how many of these “incidents” were tolerated before the law stepped in and took matters into their own hands.
I don’t know about the law, but I have seen cases where Animal Control drags ass. So I totally would not be surprised if their inaction was a factor. Not deliberately, but just the nature of how they do their work.
When the story first broke about Alexia being bitten some people were saying they thought the reason nothing was being done about the dog was because no one had officially reported the incidents to the authorities. Have people reported it since then? I’d sure hope so, but if they haven’t it could be the reason Kim/Monty still have custody of him.
Ok this is Kim ralated, but about 3 days before it was reported she was back in rehab, she was seen at her house. No idea if she got the dog back but after animal control took him away I can’t imagine that would even be a consideration. Only mentioning it because neighbors said when she would go get the mail the dog would lunge at the door in an attempt to go out and she was spotted going to mail box about a week ago now, maybe 6 days? This is third hand info but so far they’ve been spot on.
And I’ve personally heard dog barking from that house over a year ago, like Wild crazy I’m going after a bad guy barking.
Thx Lisa. Post more stuff, pls
And yet, you didn’t email this info 6 days ago or mention in any of your other emails in the interim?
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
I wonder if Monty knows he is Kingsley’s owner. He might respond, depending on how ill he is. I doubt Kim will. Kim is right out of a Stephen King novel.
Which one? Cujo?
LOL, Minky!
Cujo meets It 🙂
I’m pretty sure my Vet calls Banjo Cujo. At least the specialist at UGA I took him to.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
Yikes, Kim’s life is spiraling out of control. It makes it even more critical that she gets it together, but it also probably more difficult. I feel bad for her and the victims. This is just one sad mess.
I’ve heard the victim has to lodge a formal complaint with animal control before they can do much of anything. So, I guess that means that neither Kay Rozario or Alexia/Kyle filed a complaint??
I wonder if this new lawsuit is from the “unknown victim” who was attacked last summer? If so, she/he has stayed very quiet. Hopefully information on any attempts at demands for reimbursement, mediation, etc. will come out.
Now Kingsley belongs to Monty? But I thought he was like one of Kim’s kids? So if the dog is really Monty’s, was he living with Kim? Was Kim living with Monty? Will any of them ever own up to anything? So many questions!
I hope Kim is in a full rehab facility now. The huffing is really a scary development, especially if she has been doing it for awhile.
Five days for a jury trail for a dog bite case in California? Good luck with that. The courts were already horribly backlogged BEFORE drastic cuts were taken and lots of court houses closed/consolidated!
It crossed my mind that stating the dog is Monty’s may be an attempt to limit Kims liability especially given he’s not likely to live very much longer. Her insurance will probably cover her liability for one attack. Sounds like this one is going to cost a fortune.
Bingo.
Did I miss where TT informed us that Kim was back in rehab? Last I remember Kim was still MIA after the wedding…
You did not.
I have not source on that and have seen nothing to support it to my satisfaction. It doesn’t mean she is not, it just means, I’m not convinced. Thanks for asking.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 8:52 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
I think the rehab thing is another rumor spread by her enablers. She’s probably in hiding somewhere with Kingsley or at her favorite table at the Polo Lounge.
If they are treated at a hospital, they hospital will call if it is a child. I am very surprised that no one filed a complaint when Kyle’s daughter was bitten. In my state, it is automatic that the animal comes and questions the owner often take the dog.
Unless Kim moved or purchased the home she’s been renting I can’t understand why the landlord isn’t being held responsible for allowing her to keep this vicious dog at his property. Unless he’s a completely absent landlord & has no one checking on his property reporting back to him – he’s got to know! Even if Kim lied to him (which is probably what happened) saying the “dog lives with Monty” — I’d imagine he would have done some investigative work to cover his own ass.
I imagine by now that her lease was not renewed and she is no longer a tenant. This has been going on for almost a year, leases are generally renewed annually. I see if I can get someone to find out.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
Riiiight, Kingsley belongs to Monty so people will feel bad for suing Monty.
Where is Kingsley? For that matter where is Kim? I hope Kingsley didnt eat her. Fingers crossed Kim heads back to rehab.
Kim made it perfectly clear at the reunion that Kingsley was her dog, she considered him to be one of her children, so he was off limits to discuss. I would think that clip would prove she’s lying.
They can probably prove the time line that Kingsley preceded Monty living with Kim. Or even better Monty was only visiting but Kingsley lived there . Im sure not hard to trace where the dog came from and was registered to. Also vet bills and training. Kim is a compulsive liar but not that smart. She prbably told her bull shit story to her attorney who drafted that letter and he took her at her word. I find it hard to believe the landlord isnt liable somewhat. I know if I had a tenent with a pit bull that went after people I’d be calling animal control myself.
@janet Kim Richards is indeed very smart as most addicts are. It ain’t easy lying to everyone 24/7 decade after decade. It’s work to be addicted and it’s not for those on the short bus.
I just left a comment above re the landlord. I would imagine either directly or indirectly he knows what’s happening & whether he’s absent or not – he needs to cover his ass. After this being so public I can’t imagine getting away with the excuse “she told me she didn’t have a dog”.
Well; I guess Kim is smart in a way I just don’t respect at all. I can’t stomache shrewd, manipulative liars and fakers. Their bull shit comes back on them in the end too, so it doesn’t work forever.
Don’t forget, Kingsley is Monty’s best friend!
Thx, TT.
I would like to see a photo of Crossley.
and wonder what their (former) relationship was–Kim, Monty, Crossley?
How would a jury trial work with Monty being terminally ill and Kim being off the rails/back in rehab, whatever? I would guess both parties will ignore and there will be another summary judgment.
I think Kim lied to this woman, Kelly, thinking she would not sue Monty since he was dying. After Kim’s friend, Kay, sued her and was awarded money the neighbor decided to sue Kim. Kim is close to hitting rock bottom now.
Wow. ya think?
What is up with you guys today? Are you busy getting ready for your Olympic events tomorrow?
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
I’m sorry Tamara, won’t happen again 🙂
Probably the same result, but I wonder if her attorney took a different tactic and sued the homeowner as well, she might come out better than Kay did. Seems unfair that ignoring a summons rewards the person blowing it off. Seems to me that the homeowner has more responsabiluty than bravo. As a landlord youre supposed to have a policy for pets and usually have to grant permission to have one and see it has proper fencing. Unless the renter lies and sneaks it in, the landlord should be aware of the pet and the breed and size of it.
I don’t know about Ca. but here in Va. if you have any dog in what the state decides is a dangerous dog breed you have to insure your property in case said dog attacks someone. It is very costly and a lot of companies will not touch you with a ten foot pole. So my question is does Kim actually have to pay out for these bites or does it fall under home owners if Ca. makes you carry it for dangerous dogs. Cause then Kim will come out of this Scott free.
Someone that claimed knowledge of CA law said the homeowner was not liable when I asked about this in previous lawsuits.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
Your source may have knowledge of some CA law, but offhand I would say not too much about real estate law. If the homeowner knew Kim had a dog, and that it was a pit, there is liability. Kim may have moved in before she got Kingsley, and never updated the homeowner that she now had a dog. Frankly, I would be surprised if she HAD notified the owner. (I’m pretty sure you already know that certain breeds of dog are automatically excluded from most homeowner’s policies…and a pit is one of them.) If she had Kingsley when she moved in, she may have lied and not noted on her rental application that she had a dog. In that event, the homeowner might not have been liable, especially if he/she lives out of the area. Even if the homeowner used an agency to rent the property, they might not have known, either, unless she disclosed it in writing. I could imagine Kim removing the dog during any sort of inspection.
I rent out my childhood home now that my parents are gone. My first renter told me she had a dog that looked a lot like my Toby, who is a dachshund/terrier mix, 9 lbs. She listed her dog as a terrier mix on the application. I could tell she was hiding him from me on the day she moved in. I finally got a look at him and got a huge shock. Yea, he was a terrier mix. A PIT BULL terrier mix. (Until then I didn’t know pits were part of the terrier family. Lesson learned!) I called my insurance carrier, who told me they would not cover any injuries this dog might cause due to his breed. When the renter asked to be let out of her lease four months early, I replied with an very enthusiastic YES!!
BTW: I’ve been married to an attorney for thirty years, and he specializes in real estate. When he told me that I was financially screwed if that dog attacked anyone, since she did declare him a “terrier” and I had seen the dog, I knew I had to put in expensive security measures to ensure that stupid dog stayed put in the yard and house.
The new renter has a cat 🙂
I found it hard to believe myself. But it was someone who posted here, I forget who now. Who seemed to know what they were talking about. AND the landlord has not been a party to the suit in any of the four cases. Though they usually do list 1-50 John Does which is essentially boiler plate to let them add other parties later.
I seem to remember being given a link to CA LAW On Dog Bites… I normally don’t just take anyone’s word for it. But in GA the homeowner is liable.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
That’s why I have to doubt that the landlord knew there was a dangerous dog was on the premises terrorizing family, friends and neighbors. It certainly doesn’t sound like there was any negligence on the party of the landlord, i.e. lack of a proper fence or gate, which would definitely make him liable.
Kim had better fear a jury trial, if it goes that far. God only knows what they will do.
If they don’t respond, does the judge just doesn’t a summary judgment? I don’t know for sure but that just might be better. And with Monty dying, would it not just be taken from his “estate” which I don’t think is anything after battling cancer.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 12:49 AM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
Monty has likely put all of his money if he has any into a family trust once he got cancer. You can’t get money from him now. Which is probably what he told Kim, “just tell him you gave me Kingsley. They can’t touch me.”
These two are trouble.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 1:00 AM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
> If they don’t respond, does the judge just doesn’t a summary judgment? I > don’t know for sure but that just might be better. And with Monty dying, > would it not just be taken from his “estate” which I don’t think is > anything after battling cancer. > > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 12:49 AM, Tamara Tattles [email protected]> wrote: > >>
In California, it’s called a Default Judgment. The plaintiff still has to prove damages, though.
I peppered my husband with questions as soon as he walked in the front door (at 10 pm) He said “this isn’t about that stupid reality show again, is it?” Ummmm….no honey
Things have changed since I worked in a law firm. For a personal injury case, it’s standard to ask for a five-day trial, but it doesn’t mean you will get it. All P.I. cases are now heard in downtown LA, even if it was originally filed in Sherman Oaks. More consolidation, but you get to trial faster now. So, likely faster than the two-year estimate that used to hold true.
Yes, they can file a claim against Monty’s estate, but it’s going to make it a little difficult to prove just what Monty knew.
A judgment lasts for ten years, so he says Kim had better stay broke, or else file for bankruptcy.
yes dear. I have become extremely family with CA and NJ and GA and AZ law over the years. The last dog bite was a summary judgment. http://s17948.p858.sites.pressdns.com/2015/05/15/kay-razario-wins-default-judgment-against-kim-richards-in-dog-bite-case/
I’ve also managed to find all of these things out without a husband to ask to explain it to me.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 1:35 AM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
If his money is in a trust, they can only attach it if there are regular disbursements. Other than that, it’s up to the discretion of the trustee, who will just decline.
As I said, if he has money, and it is in a trust, he can’t be touched.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 1:40 AM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
The dog is registered to either Conrad Hilton or Kimberly. Doe 1-50 may include CONRAD. If he is the initial owner who gave the dog to Kim.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 1:42 AM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
> As I said, if he has money, and it is in a trust, he can’t be touched. > > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 1:40 AM, Tamara Tattles [email protected]> wrote: > >>
Conrad found Kingsley on Craig’s list. He gave the puppy (then named Kobe Bryan– no T on Bryan– which could have been a typo) to his cousin Kimberly Jackson. There are photos of puppy Kingsley on Conrad’s IG.
If my boyfriend shacks up with me to recover from cancer treatments and Banjo bites someone, he is not liable.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 1:43 AM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
> The dog is registered to either Conrad Hilton or Kimberly. Doe 1-50 may > include CONRAD. If he is the initial owner who gave the dog to Kim. > > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 1:42 AM, Tamara Tattles > wrote: > >> As I said, if he has money, and it is in a trust, he can’t be touched. >> >> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 1:40 AM, Tamara Tattles > [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>
You asked (quote) “If they don’t respond, does the judge just doesn’t a summary judgment?” No, in that case, the judge would file a default judgment. A summary judgment is different, and would mean that the defendant had filed an answer, and in the prior case Kim had not. She will have thirty days to file an answer in this case, and if she ignores it this time, too, she will have a second default judgment filed against her.
It was my understanding that Kim had a default judgment issued against her in the Rozario case. I just looked at your link, and your article does state “default judgment.”
Sure, I could have found most of this online. Why shouldn’t I ask my husband? He handles this stuff day in and day out, so I trust him a lot more than a website.
The trust can be attached if “regular” disbursements are being made, but only in that case. I guess HE could be getting money from his family’s trust. Can you have a trust tying up money from another trust? The thought makes my head hurt. Monty and his money seems to be a mystery. I don’t know which would surprise me more – Monty still having money, or being totally broke.
The dog is registered to CONRAD? Well, Kathy is probably going to be stuck with the tab one day, so I guess that makes some sort of odd sense.
I’m not sure how I managed to piss you off – I was trying to be helpful – so I will just say have a nice night.
This really makes me mad. Kim isn’t fit to own a goldfish, yet irresponsible dog owners like her give bully breeds a bad name.
Perhaps they should sue Conrad Hilton or Kathy for giving a known agressive dog to a helpless, irresponsible alcoholic and rolling the dice. That may be a stretch but theres your deep pocket! Works for me!
Seriously. Why are you giving animals to people who are already failing miserably at caring for themselves?
Makes me so fking angry that people label certain breeds as “dangerous” or high risk, when it’s all the fault of the damn owners. Do not get a dog of considerable size/strength who has serious exercise and training requirements if you don’t plan on MEETING the dog’s needs. The poor dogs suffer, the people they hurt suffer, and society develops prejudice against “breeds” which is absurd. the whole thing is nonsense.
TT, what breed of dog is Banjo? Just out of curiosity 🙂
Banjo has a lot of Sharpei in him, wrinkles mostly black tongue and all, but whatever else he has Golden Retriever? Lab? is bigger than a Sharpei. He’s very cute, doesn’t LOOK threatening, but will attack a vet with ZERO warning, no bark, no growl just attack. He only goes in for shots. The last rabies he got was from a friend who was a vet we went to visit out of state. It was a three year shot. My vet never mentioned those. (dumbasses) She did it at her house and he didn’t even notice.
He is very vocal about his disdain for children in large groups, bicyles and UPS trucks (FedEx doesn’t bother him much).
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
If her dog has been put down or will be put down, as much as she loves the dog, I would think his death and the damages her negligence has caused would be her absolute rock bottom. I hope that Kim stops drinking and drugging. There is also the matter of her acting out at her daughter’s wedding, and the possible loss of contact with her daughter forever.
I would agree with all of the Kingsley stuff being her rock bottom, but as you also pointed out she has no regard for her own family members any longer, so I really don’t know what it will take for Kim to hit rock bottom. It’s a sad situation for all involved.
I’m sure Kim’s delusional brain will find someone else to blame for Kingsley being taken away or possibly put down. She blamed the victims for being bit, blamed Kyle for putting her daughter’s picture on instagram, etc. It is truly sad that her failure to take responsibility for the dog has caused so much pain and was grossly unfair to all involved including Kingsley.
Sneaky sneaky trying to now say it’s Monty’s knowing you can’t get ahold of his money if sued. Very clever of someone to think of that I doubt it was Kim. I would assume all the print or video of Kim with the dog would be brought into evidence. Much of which proclaiming the dog as taking her thru hard times and her love for the dog. But I guess that doesn’t always mean you own the dog.
It would have taken so little for Kim to protect herself from law suits and her dog from likely death. All she had to do was to lock him in a room when she had company. That many attacks, and she still didn’t get it.
Thanks for the update, TT.
Just another example of Kim not taking responsibility – or those around her not letting her take responsibility – for her actions. We shouldn’t be surprised because this is her pattern and the reason she’s still an addict. I wish her well.
Is Kingsley is “MIA” just like Kim?…Like mother, like fur-baby…
My theory is that there is no Kingsley, it’s really Brandi with a mangy fur coat. She probably likes a noose on a stick.
I took my dachshund to bad dog school after I got him. Don’t underestimate the determination of those stumpy legs. He’s come a long way, but I can’t allow people around if he’s on my lap, he’s just too protective. Point is, no one who loves their dog doesn’t take steps to protect the animal and people or dogs around him.
I don’t understand why this dog has not been put down. We only heard of 4 people being bit but it’s probably more. And to all you animal lovers out there .Before you say he needs to be trained one of the people he bit was a trainer Kim called over to handle his aggresion. It would have been a lot worse if Kim did not grab the dog. They showed this on Bravo someone needs to put this dog down .
There would be no reason to put the dog down if he was taken out of that insane environment (with no training or supervision) and rehabilitated. It doesn’t matter that Kim brought in a trainer, dogs follow the lead of their owner, if their owner is not the alpha dog, in charge, and does not discipline and take control, they will. I’m not surprised at all at Kingsley’s behavior when you see what Kim is like, all she is is anxious, deluded, chaotic energy. She can’t care for herself let alone properly handle and care for a dog- nevermind a strong breed that requires special attention and diligence if only because they can be especially dangerous due to their strength. But a dog is only as dangerous as its owner is negligent.
The only reason Kingsley was out of control was because Kim was. You can’t fix that by inviting a trainer over, because the problem stemmed from her, not the dog- the dog’s behavior was a symptom of kim’s psychotic state. I bet if you were to put that dog in the hands of a stable trainer, in a stable environment, he could be retrained and could live a happy life in a home. (just look at how many of these dogs (pitbulls especially) cesar millan does exactly this with. The dog should not pay for his psycho owner 🙁
Really good point Shae, thank you
Shae, thanks again, I just found that with these types of dogs there is a 0% tolerance for owner error. So, while a dog may appear nice it takes a few errors for it to attack. They call it a perfect storm. I was asked to go to someone’s home while they weren’t there to feed and let dog out. I don’t think it’s a good idea to go on dog’s turf without owner there. Thanks again
Tamara, thank you so much for this information, thanks to all you that commented. It brought this type of dog to my attention. So…when I was recently asked if I would care for a pitbull I came back here. I found that they have a particularly vicious bite that can kill a person. Its called a kill bite. In some places they are called land sharks. I wonder where Kingsley is. One of the many trainers that worked with him said he was the most dangerous dog he had ever worked with. They can clamp down and shake a person til dead. Thank you all again
I would love to know where Kingsley is now.