~~~~~
He stands guilty by virtue of the fact that company policy prohibits their delivery persons from carrying firearms........
~~~~~
Yes, the company has the right to discipline their employee, but not because of anything he did to the dog. None of that has anything to do with legal guilt.
~~~~~
And considering the facts that there were no bite marks nor torn pants, it’s strictly his personal testimony that has no evidence of his claim.
~~~~~
Morality and the law do not require victims to submit to having the cr@p beaten out of them before they have a right to defend themselves from eminent credible threat.
Was the delivery man being threatened by the dog? AGAIN, prove that he wasn’t. Otherwise he stands innocent.
Prove that he was other than his heresay, otherwise he stands guilty.
But that's now irrelevant. Prove that he wasn't in violation of company edict that prohibits their employees from carrying firearms.........
As an employee and representative of Instacart, they are ultimately responsible for the actions of their employees when on the job.