I am confused about the accusation. Did he tie the dog up so he couldn’t follow? Or hide from him and ditch in some way?
If not, I don’t understand how he “abandoned” him. The dog could follow, and chose not to, right? Was he supposed to catch and carry the dog?
From what I read in the article, the dog was injured and could no longer walk. Her paws were cut up from the rocks.
The guy is not the brightest bulb on the tree by imposing such a jaunt on the dog without the proper equipment. He had to have noticed she was having difficulty walking before she went down and perhaps turned back before that happened.
Given the fact the guy isn’t too bright, it doesn’t excuse him not going back to try to find her. Since she was immobile, she probably wasn’t to far from where he left her.