By Tara Shaskey, Open Justice reporter of 
A man was attacked by a dog when he went to Natasha Kahu's house in New Plymouth to fix her car. Photo: NZ Herald/Supplied
WARNING: This story contains graphic details of a dog attack injury.
A man visiting a property to fix a car was left with a gaping wound in his leg and facing possible amputation after being attacked by a dog that had previously bitten another person and been impounded several times.
The 62-year-old was at Natasha Raedine Kahu's house in New Plymouth when her dog Boogi, a bull mastiff-boxer cross, wandered into the front yard dragging a chain around his neck.
At the same time, the man walked towards a vehicle in the driveway, intending to inspect it, New Plymouth District Court heard on Wednesday.
But Boogi rushed at him and although the man was able to fend him off initially, the dog took a few steps back and lunged at him, biting his left leg.
The man fought Boogi off, at which point Kahu's partner came outside, dragged the dog away and secured him inside.
The man went back to his car and used a towel to wrap his leg, which was bleeding heavily.
He drove to the hospital, where he underwent surgery to repair his left tibialis anterior tendon.
The man spent three days in hospital after the surgery and had to be readmitted the next month because of issues with the wound.
Animal Control was later advised of the attack and Boogi was seized.
After the March 27 incident last year, Kahu, 54, was charged with owning a dog that attacked and caused serious injury, which she admitted.
At her sentencing on Wednesday, Judge Gregory Hikaka said the man recalled the dog "ripped" a chunk from his shin "and ate it in front of me".
"I got him away but he came back. The only way I got away was that he was eating the flesh from my leg," the man said in a statement read by the judge.
The man said he was immobile for three months and in a lot of pain.
He had to undergo follow-up surgery, the injury became infected twice and he was warned that if he did not rest his leg it would be amputated at the knee.
The judge said the man was unhappy that Kahu's inability to restrain Boogi had caused him so many issues, which were ongoing.
In her affidavit, Kahu claimed the dog had not been aggressive before and children often visited the property and were safe around Boogi.
She believed there were exceptional circumstances in the attack, including that Boogi had been on a chain and she thought he was secure.
However, she had not realised the chain had become detached from the house and he was roaming the yard.
Kahu said Boogi was protecting her and the property when he attacked the man.
Defence lawyer Susan Hurley argued Kahu should be discharged without conviction on the basis that if convicted, it would risk her current employment.
However, Hurley submitted that if a conviction was entered, Boogi should not be destroyed given there were exceptional circumstances involved.
According to the Dog Control Act 1996, if an owner is convicted, the court must make a destruction order unless it can be proven the circumstances of the attack were exceptional.
Prosecutor Jacob Bourke, appearing on behalf of the New Plymouth District Council, opposed the application for a discharge without conviction.
He said the injury caused by Boogi was serious.
"This isn't just a bite that had a little bit of antiseptic applied to it and away we go.
"There were reasonably involved medical requirements for the injury as well as the ongoing psychological impact."
Bourke submitted the consequences of a conviction were not out of proportion to the gravity of the offending and a conviction was warranted.
He also argued there were no exceptional circumstances involved and a destruction order should follow.
"This is a dog that has bitten people at the address before and has gotten loose off his chain before."
Bourke told the court Boogi had previously bitten a Kāinga Ora property manager who had visited the property, and had a history of being impounded.
He referenced Kahu's affidavit and her belief the dog was not dangerous.
"I don't really understand how that can be her position given it's bitten people before and it's got loose, and the council has been involved with her a number of times and have given her chances, warnings and educational opportunities."
Hurley confirmed Boogi had attacked the Kāinga Ora worker but said it did not result in a prosecution.
She said the worker was at Kahu's home to assist other parties in ensuring the property was fenced.
Judge Hikaka said Boogi had previously been impounded several times.
Detailing Kahu's history of non-compliance, he said she had been given every opportunity to address concerns raised about the dog's behaviour.
He found the injury Boogi caused was serious and Kahu had not met the test for a discharge without conviction.
Upon convicting her, Judge Hikaka also found there were no exceptional circumstances involved in the attack and ordered that Boogi be put down.
Hurley indicated Kahu would appeal the outcome and asked that the dog not be destroyed in the meantime.
Kahu was also sentenced to 60 hours of community work.
This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald.
