‘NAME AND SHAME’: Lost dog leads to major defamation claim

A missing dog has been the centre of a $250,000 defamation case where two women claim they were called “thieves” on social media by its owner and a “pet detective”.

EXCLUSIVE

Two women have failed in their bid for $250,000 in damages after they claimed they were defamed by a Facebook post about a missing dog.

Ainslee Munro and Lauren Marchant launched legal proceedings in the NSW District Court against dog owner and beautician Shannie Wheeler after her King Charles Cavalier “Teddy” went missing in Young NSW in June 2020.

Shannie Wheeler posted about the lost puppy on social media. Picture: Supplied

Ms Wheeler is a beauty therapist in the area. Picture: Supplied

The court heard how Ms Wheeler obtained CCTV footage of the women walking down the street with Teddy after they were spotted by a bystander.

The women argued they found Teddy but he later ran away.

“DO YOU KNOW THESE WOMEN??? WE URGENTLY NEED TO SPEAK TO THESE TWO BLONDE HAIRED WOMEN WHO FOUND TEDDY & WERE SEEN WITH HIM NOT FAR FROM HIS HOME,” Ms Wheeler wrote.

“We ask that they please CONTACT US ASAP to assist with our investigation OR ask that they ANONYMOUSLY DROP TEDDY TO A LOCAL VET OR POUND ASAP.”

Ms Wheeler also wrote a “Name and Shame” post about the two women.

Ms Munro – a local breeder and veterinarian with Greyhound Racing NSW – was quickly identified in the footage.

One of the posts by Ms Wheeler. Picture: Facebook

The women argued in the legal proceedings the posts made them look like “thieves”.

When questioned about their run-in with Teddy, Ms Munro told the court she and Ms Marchant had spotted Teddy on Lachlan Street during an “exercise walk”.

They got him off the road and “took him with them for the rest of the walk”.

They returned to their cars at Aldi and encountered two residents, telling them they were taking Teddy to the pound.

However, the court heard the women did not take Teddy to the pound and instead drove to a former colleague’s home who was a licensed microchipper and King Charles Cavalier breeder.

On arrival, Teddy jumped out of the car and escaped. He has never been found.

Ms Munro told the court she suffered and continues to suffer from depression, anxiety and mental anguish from the posts.

Posts about the missing dog were posted across multiple community pages. Picture: Facebook

Ms Wheeler also said multiple signs were made up and put in the town when Teddy went missing.

The women sued Ms Wheeler for $250,000 as well as a “pet detective” who runs a large-scale missing pets Facebook page, which also shared the posts and footage.

Judge Judith Gibson ruled in favour of defendants, stating that the women’s conduct in taking Teddy and failing to take him directly to a pound or vet was “unwise” in the circumstances.

She also said it showed “gross incompetence by a veterinarian” in regards to Ms Munro.

“I am comfortably satisfied … that [Ms Munro] took Teddy to [her former colleagues] home …. namely to put Teddy into his backyard,” Judge Gibson said.

“I am comfortably satisfied that she did so for the purpose of seeing if he would like to keep Teddy, and knowing that [her former colleague] had the expertise and equipment to remove and replace Teddy’s microchip if required.”

Judge Gibson said she was also “comfortably satisfied” they hid their conduct concerning Teddy because of “consciousness of guilt”.

“The first defendant’s little boy feared that Teddy had met a painful death and had gone out looking in puddles in the area in case he had drowned,” Judge Gibson said about Ms Wheeler.

“I am satisfied that it was reasonable to refer to “naming and shaming” the plaintiffs in circumstances where they withheld vital information until publicly named.

“I am satisfied that it was reasonable for the first defendant to suspect them of dog theft and to accuse them outright.”

Judge Gibson ruled in favour of the defendants with legal costs set to be determined at a later date.