re: He did have his dog under control
Did he? Looks to me like he let go of the leash and was doing something when the dog bolted. “Under control” means having hold of the leash in such a way that the dog can not run away and chase something or attack something. It’s obvious he did not have the dog under control since he couldn’t catch up to it until the dog got busy attacking the guide dog.
He was holding the leash. Dog was relatively calm — not pulling. He put the dog in a downstay while he fiddled with keys (?). He corrected the dog once and put him into another downstay, and the dog seemed to accept it. In Basic Obedience that is consided “having your dog under (voice) control”.
Of course, if your dog is unpredictable and liable to bolt, that is NOT under control. If your dog is a Golden, or a Lab that will stay put when told, that IS under control.
The key here is that we do not know the owner’s past history with that dog. And the other key is that the lady and her Guide dog were nowhere in sight throughout most of this video. The incident looked like it took everyone by surprise. If the owner has had his dog run off on him and attack another animal previously, he should have never let go of the leash.
My Golden, for instance, is more dependable off leash than on leash. He responds to voice and whistle commands. When he’s on leash and meets another dog, he likes to pull and has yanked free of his leash in the past. He’s a gentle and friendly soul, but he’s big and people who don’t like dogs are (understandably) frightened of him. If I have to walk him in public in a strange area, not only is he on leash, he is wearing a prong collar too for better control. But, without the distraction of new animals to meet, he’s very dependable with just voice control.
One thing that has not been discussed here is why the owner seems to have disappeared after the attack. That seems like guilt to me. Or, not wanting to have his dog put down which is what surely would happen in England.