(A) It is a defense to prosecution under § 90.075 that the person is a veterinarian, a peace officer, a person employed by a recognized animal services center, or a person employed by the state or a political subdivision of the state to deal with stray animals and has temporary ownership, custody, or control of the animal in connection with that position.
(B) It is a defense to prosecution under § 90.075 that the person is an employee of the institutional division of the State Department of Criminal Justice or a law enforcement agency and trains or uses dogs for law enforcement or corrections purposes.
(C) It is a defense to prosecution under § 90.075 that the person is a dog trainer or an employee of a guard dog company under the Private Investigators and Private Security Agencies Act (Tex. Occupations Code, § 1702.109), and is not the actual owner of the dog.
(D) It is a defense to prosecution under § 90.075 that the person injured was teasing, tormenting, abusing, or assaulting the dog or has, in the past, been reported to have teased, tormented, abused, or assaulted the dog.
(E) It is a defense to prosecution under § 90.075 that the person injured was committing or attempting to commit a crime.
(F) It is a defense to prosecution under § 90.075 that the dog was protecting or defending a person while in the person's control, from an unjustified attack or assault.
(Ord. 09-1013, passed 10-13-2009)