Alguazas Dog Owner: 'Just Puppies, Two Bites' After Fatal Attack

One owner, four dogs, and a 96-year-old woman dead in Alguazas

Two four-month-old puppies, a 24-year-old owner, and an investigation into manslaughter by negligence. The defense of Jesús M. fits in one sentence: “the teeth they have are puppy teeth.” Josefa Bravo was 96 years old and died at Sarracena Meseguer Hospital in Murcia four days after being admitted with bite marks and a torn arm. The Civil Guard has summoned him to testify regarding the death of his neighbor in the hamlet of El Paraje, in Alguazas, and the case may end up in court for alleged manslaughter by negligence or serious injury resulting in death.

The issue pits two narratives that share almost no facts. In between, there are four dogs: two puppies, Puma and Loba, and two adult specimens of potentially dangerous breeds that remain in the house.

What the City Hall claims and what the owner answers

The municipal version is that of escape and surprise attack. Puma and Loba left Jesús M.’s plot and jumped on the elderly woman when she stepped out of her house to feed a colony of cats. Local Police and an ambulance went to the scene but could not assist her immediately because the dogs remained aggressive; according to the City Hall, it was the owner’s father who had to go and take them away. A relative of the victim states that the doctor waited half an hour in the street. “They are ruining my life,” says the young man, claiming he cannot even shop without being confronted.

His reconstruction takes another path. He maintains that the woman came out secretly, that she is blind, and that she pushes large cats away with her cane so the small ones can eat: “it seems she saw the bitches and hit one of them a couple of times.” Then, the slip, the blow to the head, and the broken elbow. And an alibi he repeats: at the hospital, he claims, they told him the bites were not of animal origin and that the wounds were superficial, without stitches or dressing. Death, he concludes, resulted from oxygen and blood pressure dysregulation typical of age.

Can a four-month-old puppy break a metal tensioner?

Here the narrative bites its own tail. If the teeth are those of a puppy, they should not be able to destroy a tensioner. But the escape is precisely attributed to the animals breaking the fence tensioner with their teeth and opening a gap under the neighbor’s rusted wire mesh. The owner describes a reinforced steel fence, more than €100 in materials and over thirty hours of work, with two lines of blocks to prevent digging. “I couldn’t do more,” he insists.

The questions are more uncomfortable on the economic side. The person involved admits he could have kept the dogs better organized, but money didn’t stretch far enough. The most repeated objection is the reverse: if there isn’t money for microchipping, neutering, and insurance, how is there money for four animals of this size and breed?

Cause of death and manslaughter by negligence

The knot lies in causality. Superficial bites don’t kill anyone, and that is where the owner’s defenders cling; the problem is that the victim was admitted with injuries from the attack and died four days later. Some recall acquittal rulings in cases of punches trinc by death from falling, while others respond that what was missing in those rulings was authorship, not the causal link. The figure hovering over the case is preterintentional homicide, with jurisprudence consulted via the Cendoj search engine and references to rulings such as the 2019 Zaragoza decision.

Without a forensic report, there is no way to close the circle. If the death was triggered by the attack, the responsibility of the dog owner is hard to evade. If an unrelated cause is proven, the scenario changes completely. No one wants to move from there.

Zero sacrifice, microchip, and cat colonies

The fate of the animals is also debated. Current animal welfare legislation establishes zero sacrifice, pushing shelters and adoptions; some see this as shifting costs to taxpayers, while others directly demand sterilization and control of these breeds. It is also noted that the dogs were not neutered nor registered, a point the person involved does not confirm.

A lateral detail remains that sums up administrative absurdity: if feeding feline colonies requires municipal authorization, will the deceased’s family face a sanction for feeding the cats? Processing continues, and the question, for now, has no answer.

The other two dogs and the town climate

In the house remain Fuerte and Joker, a female and a male of potentially dangerous breeds, while media focus concentrates on the puppies and their owner. The young man describes a municipality where he cannot even leave his home, and media outlets from across the country have arrived in the area. Neighbors and relatives hold opposing views on whether the animals had escaped before, a claim made without visible documentation and denied by the owner.

Four animals, two puppies, a €100 fence, and a 96-year-old woman. How much of this is negligence and how much is simply the worst possible age to suffer a scare?