Netizens questions reason given by Loki adopter of having explored all possible ways before euthanasia but not considering to return Loki to Exclusively Mongrels

The owner who performed euthanasia on his adopted mongrel called Loki “feel vindicated” after the Animal and Veterinary Services (AVS) ruled out animal cruelty in Loki’s euthanasia case and announced that the owner did not breach the Code of Ethics.

“We do of course feel vindicated, but have still lived through personal hell for four months, where we just had to sit and wait for the conclusions,” the owner, who named Christian said, noting that he and his family had received “crazy amount of negative comments and messages” since the incident, as reported in Channel News Asia (CNA).

Christian continued saying that they could of course have jumped online like others, however, “we wanted to respect AVS, the court and their processes.”

Earlier, it has been revealed that young Loki was being euthanised under the decision of his owners because they wanted to avoid the risk of Loki biting their newborn baby. Loki’s owners reasoned that their pet dog bit a girl previously, as well as the owner himself.

With the veterinary clinic’s agreement, Loki was euthanised on the same day as the owners contacted the vet, expressing wish to euthanise their dog.

The incident then sparked a public outcry on social media, with many calling out the responsible parties for Loki’s death.

According to the investigation by AVS, Loki was adopted by a couple back in December 2017 when it was “afraid of loud noises”, “averse to men” and “nervous around children”.

The AVS said that Loki had grown to be about 25kg in 2018 and 2019, and became “more confident and confrontational”, adding that the dog had panic attacks “with no known triggers”, as well as an increase of bite and attack incidents.

In the veterinary’s defence, the AVS expressed that the vet had worked with the owners over several weeks to rehome, train and use modification drugs on Loki.

It also mentioned that there was no evidence of animal cruelty due to the fact that Loki had been observed to get along with his owners “with no evidence of abuse or mistreatment”.

Noting that he and his wife went through over 10 hours of interviews with AVS, the owner claimed that they have presented “countless pieces of evidence” to show their efforts of training and rehoming Loki as well as biting documentation and medical reports.

He said that AVS has also interviewed several people who knew Loki and had “first-hand experienced” Loki’s behavioural issues.

“I am relieved that AVS has concluded the investigation after four months,” he added.

Owner and his family received death threat via Facebook messages and comments, had made police report

Christina also told CNA that his family had received death threats made via the Facebook’s messages and comments, while some contained multiple profanities which directed at his wife.

Noting that he had made a police report for the nasty comments, Christian shared what he went through, “This was extremely tough and it became so much that we had to close down our social media profiles and we feared going for a walk if we were recognised and attacked.”

In response to how some were disappointed with the AVS findings, he said that he was not surprised as some have “made up their minds already and cannot be convinced differently by all the facts in the world”.

It was said by AVS that Loki’s owners failed to find new owners for the dog despite “multiple efforts”.

AVS said that the process of searching for a new owner ended with an animal shelter in Malaysia, but due to the Movement Control Order (MCO) in the neighbouring country, it was not able to proceed.

However, it noted that the owners did not contact Exclusively Mongrels – the shelter where they adopted Loki – for help in rehoming Loki.

Why not seeking help from Exclusively Mongrels? Owner says he did not have faith in Exclusively Mongrels as a rehomer

When being asked why not seeking help from Exclusively Mongrels before the euthanasia, the owner explained that he “did not have faith in Exclusively Mongrels as a rehomer” because he felt that his request would not be “reacted constructively” by the group.

He went on to say that he only approached people whom he personally knew, which were familiar with Loki’s history and specific behavioural challenges, and did not have children.

“I needed a guarantee that potential rehomers were ready to continue the work needed with Loki and not confine or cage it, which is not animal welfare in my book,” he noted.

Christina also believed that the risk of Loki having more biting incidents will be very high if Loki was rehomed to “a family not 100 per cent aware of his issues”, as Loki gave “zero warning” before acting aggressive.

“Consequently, a high risk of Loki being rehomed yet again is that it would put further stress on him, leading to a vicious cycle of yet more biting incidents and a poor quality of life for Loki,” he added.

The owner then expressed regrets for not reaching out earlier to a number of animal welfare groups and an animal shelter in Malaysia during the rehoming process.

“If we had been able to get him to the sanctuary in Malaysia, he would have been running around with dog friends all day, which would have warmed my heart even though he would no longer be with me and my family,” he asserted.

However, Loki’s owner noted that he still believes “euthanasia at a respectable vet” is “the best option for both humans and the dog” if all other options were exploited and the dog poses danger to the family or the general public.

He also encouraged potential mongrel adopters to work with proper animal welfare groups as he “strongly supports” the mission of rehoming mongrel dogs though the Loki’s case might discourage the potential adopters who are afraid of being doxxed or sued.

Penning their comments on the Facebook page of CNA – which covered the interview with Loki’s owner, some netizens found that the reasons given by the owner “contradictory”, “frankly” and “hypocritical”. They felt that the obvious solutions was to return Loki to the original home shelter and not “prematurely terminate” the pet dog’s life.

Most of the netizens also doubted that if the owner has explored all the possible options, including the “most obvious choice” which return Loki to Exclusively Mongrels.

“Explore all possible ways as both of you have shamelessly claimed? So, did you ever consider the option to contact EM and return Loki back to them or chose the convenient way to end Loki’s life?!” a netizen wrote.

Sharing her experience of adopting pet, one of the netizens said that she can understand how the owner feel when training the “challenging” dogs. But she also mentioned that she will return the dog to the shelter and let them handle it instead of euthanising the dog.

Following the Loki’s euthanasia case, a few netizens expressed that people should think twice before adopting a dog as it also involved a life.

While majority condemned the behaviour of Loki’s owner, a netizen however voiced up against the hateful comments, asking the netizens to be nice to the people.

For just US$7.50 a month, sign up as a subscriber on Patreon (and enjoy ads-free experience on our site) to support our mission to transform TOC into an alternative mainstream press in Singapore.
Notify of