A BID to make legal history by producing a Rottweiler in court as evidence was turned down by a sheriff in Perth yesterday.

Solicitor John McLaughlin was bidding to bring the dog into court to prove it did not respond to commands such as “seize” and “get them.”

It is alleged the dog’s owner, Hazel Burns, shouted the instructions to the animal, causing it to become agitated, growl, bark and snarl at police officers in Kingswell Terrace on July 31.

Burns (44), of Kingswell Terrace, denies assaulting the officers by setting the dog on them.

Mr McLaughlin said he had found no cases in which live animals were produced as evidence in court, although he remembered hearing about an archaic case in which a flock of sheep was brought to court.

However Sheriff Lindsay Foulis ruled his “over-riding duty as far as the appropriate running of the court” prevented him allowing the dog, named Snatch, to be brought to court.

He also cast doubt on the validity of such an action, stating that circumstances which led to the dog’s alleged actions on the night in question could not be replicated.

The trial of Burns heard on an earlier occasion that police had been summoned to a garden in Kingswell Terrace at 3.30 am to investigate windows being smashed.

As they sought to apprehend a pair of youths, Burns is said to have let the dog into the garden and “stood and laughed” as it menaced the officers, one of whom was rolling around on the ground trying to handcuff a youth.

Sheriff Foulis said without recreating these exact circumstances—something he was unwilling to do—it would be doubtful whether the dog’s true nature could be ascertained.

Mr McLaughlin conceded, “I don’t think we need to go as far as having a youth and police officer rolling about on the floor— that may be a step too far.”

He said expert evidence may be led to determine the dog’s normal behaviour.

Depute fiscal Nicola Gillespie said she would have opposed a motion to bring the dog into court and agreed expert evidence would be a better resolution.