Italian resident found guilty on all four charges after his unleashed pitbull fatally mauled a neighbour's dog in Swieqi, with video evidence disproving his 'accidental escape' defence.
Court of Magistrates (Malta) as a Court of Criminal Judicature · Magistrate Dr. Donatella M. Frendo Dimech LL.D., Mag.Jur. (Int.Law) · 5 May 2026
On the morning of 21 July 2025, at around 9:00am in Triq l-Istasija, Swieqi, Massimo Rizzoglio was walking his pitbull in a public road without a leash, holding the lead loosely in his hand while the dog roamed freely several metres ahead of him. The dog subsequently attacked and fatally mauled the pet dog of complainant Lucia Meloni, who had been walking her own dog nearby. Meloni described a harrowing scene in which the pitbull seized her dog and shook it violently for several minutes, crushing its ribs and puncturing its lung, before bystanders and police eventually intervened. The victim's dog, named Pablo, later died from its injuries. Rizzoglio's defence was that the dog had accidentally bolted from his residence and he had run out in pursuit without being prepared. However, this account was dismantled by multiple witnesses and, critically, by video footage collected by a neighbour. Witness Marthese Young testified she saw the defendant walking casually behind his unleashed dog, leash in hand, and confirmed he was fully dressed and wearing shoes — directly contradicting the claim that he had rushed out unprepared. Complainant Meloni also recounted that after the attack, the defendant reappeared having changed his clothes, seemingly unconcerned by the carnage his dog had caused. The Court viewed the video footage personally, including files labelled 'walking without a leash', 'dog leaving doorway', and 'Pablo being attacked 2'. The footage showed Rizzoglio fully clothed and walking 4–5 metres behind the dog at 06:53, eliminating any credible suggestion of an accidental escape. The Court found the defendant's negligence and recklessness to be beyond doubt, noting the dog's volatile temperament and the grave danger it posed to people and other animals in the area. The Court found Rizzoglio guilty on all four charges and imposed a fine of €6,000, applying the principle of concurrence of punishments between the first and fourth charges. In addition, the Court ordered the destruction of the pitbull at the defendant's expense under Article 14(1) of the Dogs Act. It was noted in mitigation that the defendant had reimbursed the complainant for veterinary costs incurred before the dog died.
Massimo Rizzoglio found guilty on all four charges (Reg.3(1) S.L.312.01; Reg.5(1)(a) S.L.439.21; Reg.5(1)(b) S.L.439.21; Art.14(1) Ch.312). Sentenced to a fine (multa) of €6,000. Court also ordered the destruction of the defendant's dog at the defendant's expense under Article 14(1) of the Dogs Act, Chapter 312.
Dogs Act Ch.312 Art.14(1); Control of Dogs Regulations S.L.312.01 Reg.3(1) and Reg.7; Keeping of Dogs Regulations S.L.439.21 Reg.5(1)(a) and Reg.5(1)(b); Criminal Code Arts.17 and 31