The premier news source for Snohomish County

LYNNWOOD—Multiple Lynnwood residents shared their concerns with the Lynnwood Times of a dog in their neighborhood that, after multiple attacks, has yet to be classified as a Dangerous Animal.

The dog has bitten two people, leaving one unable to work, and has bitten at least three dogs, contributing to the death of one—all in less than a year. The survivors of these attacks told the Lynnwood Times that they believe the dog is a “public safety threat” to the neighborhood, and that the Lynnwood City Council is attempting a “cover-up” to protect one of their very own: the dog’s owner – Councilwoman Almaderica  “Derica” Escamilla who was appointed to the council on July 15, 2024.

The Lynnwood Times interviewed Jessaca Kalles, Thomas Skaggs, and Chona Castillo—three victims of Councilwoman Escamilla’s 109-pound, 2-year-old male Dogo Argentino/Boxer mix named Sumo. Over two and a half years of police reports, 911 calls and logs, police body cam footage, and two Hearing Examiner cases—including multiple Animal Control Officer reports and affected party testimonies—all tied to Escamilla’s home address were examined. In total, over 8 hours of body camera footage and appeal hearings, over 500 pages of documents, four 911 audio calls, and almost 60 images were related to Escamilla’s dog Sumo’s multiple attacks in her neighborhood.

The Lynnwood Times investigation not only uncovered multiple dog attacks but also warrant arrests, at least one police raid, and alleged drug use on her premises, all within the last two-and-a-half years.

The Lynnwood Times further interviewed Lynnwood City Council President Nick Coelho to address residents’ allegations of a “cover-up” and animal control concerns. Councilwoman Escamilla answered the Lynnwood Times’ questions on what she is doing to mitigate the public safety threat posed by Sumo in her neighborhood and the grievances of two victims in what they allege is her lack of communication with their attorney.

Sumo downgraded from Dangerous to Potentially Dangerous Animal

The Lynnwood Police Department (LPD) handled the initial investigations into the dog attacks. However, because Escamilla is a current Lynnwood City Councilmember, LPD arranged for Bothell Animal Control Officer Kristi Boucher to handle the remainder of both investigations and to submit recommendations to the LPD to ensure no conflicts of interest.

Following the attack against Castillo and his two Pomeranian-mixed dogs named Brandy and Margharita in October 2024 by Sumo that led to the death of Brandy, Animal Control Officer Boucher (ACO) recommended Sumo to be classified as a “Dangerous Animal.” After this recommendation, the LPD issued Escamilla a “Declaration of Dangerous Animal,” which Escamilla successfully appealed to Lynnwood Hearing Examiner John Galt downgrading the classification of Sumo to a “Potentially Dangerous Animal,” with no restrictions.

After the attack on Skaggs-Kalles and their 42-pound Labrador Retriever named Maverick in May 2025, seven months after the attack on Castillo, Boucher this time recommended Sumo to be classified as a “Potentially Dangerous Animal,” but with six restrictions. Escamilla successfully appealed three of the six restrictions which were: installing a six-foot tall fence, taking out a $50,000 surety bond or insurance liability policy for people hurt by Sumo, and neutering Sumo within 60 days of the notice.

Escamilla, in her appeal, claimed that the six-foot fence height requirement by the ACO was “an unreasonable and financially disproportionate burden… especially one where no lives were endangered.” She further argued that increasing the height of her fence, which Sumo allegedly jumped over according to victim statements, only has an appearance “to promote safety” and poses a “housing instability” risk.

Galt replied that “cost is not a basis in and of itself to invalidate the Restriction.” However, he did recommend a “no-financial expenditure” alternative to leash Sumo within Escamilla’s enclosed yard at all times. Escamilla, in her statements to the ACO, has admitted to not tethering Sumo at all times to the trolley-system in her back porch when letting him out in the past.

The Hearing Examiner declined to consider Escamilla’s argument that the required $50,000 surety bond imposed by the ACO was “inequitable, excessively burdensome, and socially unjust” and amounts to “economic exclusion.” Galt’s decision to remove this restriction was based on the intention that a surety bond should act “as a motivator to keep a Potentially Dangerous Animal from again offending and being elevated to Dangerous Animal status.” And therefore, to impose such a surety bond is counterproductive to the intent of the Dangerous Animal classification.

According to research by the Lynnwood Times, a surety bond of $50,000 would cost the owner of a dog between $250 to $5,000 annually depending on the perceived risk of the dog’s breed or history.

Sterilization, another proposed restriction removed, Galt stated, is not required for Dangerous Animals and therefore agreed with Escamilla’s argument that the ACO’s requirement “represents an overreach in both policy and fairness.”

Hearing Examiner’s Rulings: Why Sumo Avoided Stricter Classification

Sumo is now classified as a Potentially Dangerous Animal in Lynnwood with the following restrictions:

1. Must be on a leash of no more than eight feet within her enclosed yard at all times with the exception that, after Escamilla upgrades to a six-foot-tall fence and installs treatment at its base to prevent Sumo from digging out to escape, the restriction on Sumo being leashed in her enclosed yard is lifted.
2. Must be muzzled at all times when off Escamilla’s property.
3. Must wear animal tags with Escamilla’s contact information.
4. Must be microchipped and registered to Escamilla, with the microchip number given to LPD.

This is far from the Dangerous Animal classification that the victims are seeking. According to Lynnwood Municipal Code 6.02.025, the requirements for an owner of an animal classified as a “Dangerous Animal” are:

1. Must hold a certificate of registration for that animal.
2. Must pay a $100 annual registration fee and a licensing fee.
3. Must be microchipped and registered.
4. Must obtain a surety bond issued of at least $250,000 and a policy of liability insurance, such as homeowner’s insurance, issued by an insurer in the amount of $250,000. (According to research by the Lynnwood Times, these would cost the owner of a dog between $2,500 to $25,000 annually depending on the perceived risk of the dog’s breed or history.)
5. A proper enclosure to confine the dangerous animal and the posting of the premises with a clearly visible warning that there is a dangerous animal on the premises. 
6. Must keep the animal on a leash of no more than eight feet within an enclosure at all times.
7. Routine inspections of the enclosure by Animal Control or LPD.
8. Must keep the animal muzzled or utilize other devices that prevent the animal from biting or clawing any person or animal.

According to the Lynnwood Hearing Examiner, Sumo could not be classified as a Dangerous Animal because of the following reasons:

1. Lynnwood’s legislative officials have established a system where a Potentially Dangerous Animal must bite a human, not a domestic animal, to be elevated to a Dangerous Animal status. Bothell’s municipal code, which was used to originally classify Sumo as a Dangerous Animal are stricter than Lynnwood’s code, according to Galt.
2. The Lynnwood Municipal Code regarding Potentially Dangerous Animals authorizes the City to impose conditions on such animals and their owners but offers no guidance as to what would constitute fair conditions. The LMC does not list any restrictions for animals classified as a Potentially Dangerous Animal.
3. Sumo did not meet any of the following criteria to qualify him as a Dangerous Animal under any of the three grounds specified in LMC 6.02.015(F):
   1. Inflict a severe enough injury on Skaggs nor Kalles. According to the LMC, a “severe injury” means any physical injury that results in broken bones or lacerations requiring multiple sutures or cosmetic injury. Skaggs is currently unable to work due to his injury.
   1. Did not kill any other animal nor human during his latest attack on May 23, 2025.  The Hearing Examiner stated that the prior incident in October 2024 that led to the death of Castillo’s 13-year-old 9.5-pound Pomeranian named Brandy, was not a direct result of Sumo because Castillo chose to euthanize Brandy because Castillo was unable to afford the $11,000 downpayment for surgery to save Brandy’s life.
   1. The potentially dangerous status placed on Sumo in February of 2025, was a result of him inflicting injury on two dogs, not a human, as required by the LMC. For example, Sumo would have needed to inflict an injury on Castillo as well, contributing to Sumo being classified as a Potentially Dangerous Animal. However, the classification was only a result of Sumo inflicting injury to both of Castillo’s dogs, which contributed to the death of Brandy.

“I’m sorry for my word, but that is BS,” Castillo told the Lynnwood Times after learning about the judgement in the latest attack by Sumo. “Now we’re talking about someone’s life. Two people. Two people were bit, a husband and wife, and their little girl was right there with them five feet away.”

Kalles and Skaggs, whose ten-year-old daughter witnessed her parents and Emotional Support Animal, Maverick, be attacked by Sumo, were furious after learning Galt’s ruling.

“I think this dog should be put down, personally,” Kalles said. “I think it’s too dangerous.”

Skaggs was unaware that Sumo previously attacked other dogs and was concerned that the restrictions recommended by the ACO were dropped by the Hearing Examiner.

“That’s the reason why the dog attacked,” Skaggs said. “If she [Escamilla] had a six-foot fence, if she had had her dog on a leash, it wouldn’t have happened.”

Skaggs believes that Escamilla being on the Council “has a lot of factor” in why the system is dragging its feet on enforcing the law and wants the council to act to, “let’s not have this happen again.”

“I think they’ve been way too lenient through the whole process,” Skaggs told the Lynnwood Times. “Especially knowing that the dog’s attacked before and they’re still being lenient on it.”

The couple was horrified when they learned that Castillo was forced to euthanize Brandy because he couldn’t afford the over $11,000 downpayment on the $15,000 surgery to save Brandy’s life. Escamilla’s appeal argued that since Brandy died indirectly because of Sumo’s attack and didn’t directly die because of Sumo’s bite, that those three restrictions be dismissed.

“The dog [Brandy] wouldn’t have died if it didn’t get attacked,” Skaggs said. “So, to me, that is still a direct attack.”

Skaggs and Kalles believe that there might be negligence on the City. Skaggs believes that Escamilla is demonstrating a total lack of responsibility as a councilwoman for the City she represents by constantly filing appeals and deflecting responsibility from herself for Sumo’s attacks.

“Especially for a councilwoman, you’d think that if you were part of a city council or whatnot, that you would want to show that…. I can take care of this…. And to me, there’s a lot more going on than just it’s a dog that attacked,” Skaggs told the Lynnwood Times.

Victims Speak Out: Stories of Attacks and Loss

Councilwoman Escamilla wrote in her official statement regarding the attack on Maverick to LPD, that Sumo is “not vicious and has never aggressively attacked,” and didn’t “appreciate police telling witnesses that this wasn’t the first incident and that my dog had killed another dog already.”

“My dog did not kill another dog, my dog injured another dog, and due to human decision, the dog was put down,” Escamilla wrote in her statement to LPD on the incident involving Sumo’s attack on Maverick. The dog Escamilla was referring to in her statement was Brandy who Castillo was forced to euthanize after Sumo’s fatal attack.

On the night that Sumo attacked Brandy and Margarita in May 2025, Castillo called Councilwoman Escamilla to pay for the $11,000 downpayment on the surgery to save Brandy’s life. She claimed she didn’t have any money to give; Castillo told the Lynnwood Times.

“I don’t have anything,” Castillo alleged Escamilla told him and his partner on the phone. “She said she just lost her job, and she doesn’t work. And she has to pay for a mortgage.”

And when Castillo’s partner repeatedly asked Escamilla if she can help “pay for the damage that you’ve done, that your dog has done,” informing her that they will be left with “no choice other than to sue,” Lynnwood Councilwoman Escamilla allegedly replied, “you got to do, what you got to do.”

During the Hearing Examiner appeal hearing in February 2025 involving Castillo, Escamilla did confirm her phone conversation with Castillo and his partner in their attempt to have her pay for Brandy’s life-saving surgery. Just seconds after admitting she didn’t have the money to pay for the surgery, in her appeal hearing, Escamilla said, “they never asked me for money…I could’ve helped you, I could’ve pulled from my 401(k),” to pay for Brandy’s life-saving surgery.

When asked by the Lynnwood Times why she didn’t inform Castillo that she could pull funds from her 401(k) to pay for the surgery when repeatedly asked by Castillo’s partner when they were at the veterinarian, Escamilla answered, “she forgot” and that the banks were closed at the time.

“Brandy deserved to go in a better way,” Castillo said, adding that Escamilla led him to feel guilty about euthanizing Brandy.

“I feel that because she’s on the council, she’s getting away with stuff,” Castillo told the Lynnwood Times.

Escamilla’s appeal hearing process made Castillo and his partner have to relive the trauma of the experience, a period of six months. The reason he testified, Castillo told the Lynnwood Times, “so it [Sumo attacking another person or animal] wouldn’t happen again.”

“And that just makes me mad, the fact that it happened again,” Castillo said, adding that his “main goal,” was to classify Sumo as a Dangerous Animal to prevent him from doing “it again” to another victim.

A month after the appeal hearing, Margarita, Sumo’s second victim during October’s attack and Brandy’s life-long companion, died in March 2025.

“We believe that it’s due to depression,” Castillo told the Lynnwood Times, sobbing on the phone. “She’s so used to being with Brandy. She’s been with Brandy ever since Brandy was born.”

Castillo shared that ever since Brandy died, Margarita, every night, slept in Brandy’s igloo-shaped bed.

“And so, we felt that she did get depressed and lonely for sure,” Castillo said. “Just because when we do have to go work, now she’s by herself, instead of having Brandy with her.”

Castillo expressed that he misses Margarita’s “sassy” nature and that she would’ve been 16 years old this November. Just prior to her death, Margarita had a clean bill of health from the vet. Brandy’s “twirling” and “cuddly bear” nature and appearance died on that fateful night in October, Castillo added.

“They have a ton of clothes, especially during winter. That’s when I start dressing them up, putting them in shirts and stuff like that. And they have in the bathroom a little cabinet with all of their stuff: shampoo, conditioner, nails, just everything you can think of. And so, yes, they were very spoiled,” Castillo recalled to the Lynnwood Times about his beloved Brandy and Margarita.

“And it’s sad because the night of the incident, I was in the process of getting their costumes because it was Halloween the next day,” Castillo said. “But we didn’t get that far.”

Castillo shared how Brandy and Margarita loved people, kids, and other animals.

“They’re really, really, friendly. They don’t bite. They’re very gentle. It’s just the small things that we miss, because you don’t see that a lot, not unless you fully train your dogs, how to be gentle and caring,” Castillo said.

Escamilla did pay the over $4,600 in medical bills associated with Sumo’s fatal attack on Brandy and Margarita.

Councilwoman Escamilla’s Dog: A pattern of Incidents

In his decision to remove the restrictions from Sumo, Hearing Examiner Galt pointedly wrote that it was “Escamilla’s choice to make Sumo part of her family” and she “must now face the responsibility to control Sumo in such a fashion as to protect the safety of her neighborhood and the City’s citizens in general.” If Escamilla is unable to do this, Galt advised her to “give/sell Sumo to someone who can.”

ACO Boucher voiced similar concerns regarding Escamilla’s ability to “keep her [Councilwoman Escamilla] dog contained to her property” and subsequently Sumo being a “public safety issue” in the neighborhood.

In her June 4, 2025, report to the LPD, Boucher stated that Sumo had been involved in multiple incidents prior to the attacks involving Castillo and his dogs, Brandy and Margarita, and Skaggs and Kalles and their dog Maverick.

According to ACO Boucher’s reports, there was an incident involving a traffic collision resulting from Sumo’s escape from Escamilla’s premises. Another incident involved Sumo attacking a neighbor’s husky dog after digging a hole under Escamilla’s fence. The husky had to be taken to the veterinarian for examination, Boucher noted.

However, Escamilla told the Lynnwood Times that there were no other dog attack incidents, besides the two associated with her appellate cases. Yet according to 911 call logs obtained by the Lynnwood Times, there are at least two other reported animal control incidents related to dog bites linked to Escamilla’s home address—one in August 2023 and another in June 2024.

The June 2024 incident, four months prior to Brandy’s fatal encounter with Sumo, involved a Tabatha Sams who was living in a shed in Escamilla’s backyard. Sams and a Jonathan Williams co-owned a female labrador/pit bull mix named Hazel. Williams was in Snohomish County Jail at the time of the incident, according to the responding officer, who was following up on a dog bite incident on the premises. The reporting officer noted that Hazel growled and lunged toward the fence who, just 5 weeks earlier, gave birth to seven puppies, four of which were already sold.

Escamilla told the Lynnwood Times that this female dog bite incident, to the best of her knowledge, did not involve Sumo and that Sams and Williams were friends of her brother who were staying on the premises. From the report reviewed by the Lynnwood Times, this appears to confirm Escamilla’s statement. Escamilla informed the Lynnwood Times that she does not use Sumo for breeding purposes.

When asked about an August 2023 dog biting incident involving a mother and her young son at / near Escamilla’s address, Councilwoman Escamilla informed the Lynnwood Times that she was unaware of the incident. However, according to 911 call logs, Escamilla had multiple contacts with LPD involving this alleged dog biting incident. The 911 detail call report included several text messages from Escamilla to LPD Officer Jamell Carroll stating that “my son knows nothing. I’d like to see the evidence. He’s [Sumo] never bitten anyone. wonder if it was even my dog…He is a puppy still…odd.”

Officer Carroll received medical documentation and photos from the victim for this case. At the time of the incident, Sumo was eleven months old, Escamilla confirmed to Officer Carroll. After several requests, she eventually provided Sumo’s vaccination record to Officer Carroll.

Days before the May 2025 incident, while Escamilla was out of town, Sumo compromised the fence escaped her yard, according to ACO Boucher’s report. Sumo ran across the street to the Interurban Trail up to his birth mother and her owner, who is a dog breeder. The breeder then texted Escamilla about Sumo’s escape and returned Sumo to Escamilla’s son at their residence.

Galt further stated in his September 2025 appeal ruling that he is concerned that Escamilla is unable to constrain her animal because of Escamilla’s petite frame. Escamilla testified in the appeals hearing that she cannot control the 109-lb Sumo when he becomes agitated.

“She apparently could not physically keep Sumo from attacking an animal or human even if she tried her best,” Galt wrote in his decision, adding concern that “sumo is too strong for her.”

Given Sumo’s history, ACO Boucher agreed with Galt that Escamilla is “unable to control Sumo and she should be taking serious restraint measures” such as the ones provided in the Dangerous Animal declaration paperwork provided to her by the City of Lynnwood earlier this year.

This was further reinforced during the May 23 attack on Maverick, Skaggs, and Kalles by Sumo when Escamilla said, according to ACO Boucher’s report, “I was hoping someone would call the police. I called out for help because we cannot handle the situation.”

Victims’ Trauma: Medical Bills, PTSD, and Unanswered Calls

According to Skaggs and Kalles, Escamilla has neither contacted them nor their attorney in months, even though their attorney has been trying to get in contact with her.

Dealing with the legal system, obtaining paperwork, and getting doctors’ notes has been “a bit of a headache,” the couple told the Lynnwood Times. Since Escamilla does not have a surety bond, Skaggs said, their attorney is working on other avenues to ensure restitution for their suffering and the trauma to their family, especially their young daughter who witnessed Sumo attacking her parents and their ESA dog Maverick.

Escamilla told the Lynnwood Times that she saw the couple’s attorney once and he gave her his card. She also confirmed that the couple did come over a few days after the incident and were taking pictures of the fence.

In ACO Boucher’s report, Escamilla told her that it was ‘“clear” why they [Skaggs and Kalles] couldn’t help get the dogs apart, because they are thin and Kalles has no teeth.”’ Escamilla then allegedly told ACO Boucher that if Sumo really wanted to hurt Skaggs and Kalles “he could have because his head is so big.”

“I’m sorry, I don’t like her. She judged me based on my looks,” Kalles told the Lynnwood Times, recalling when they went to take pictures of Escamilla’s fence a few days after Sumo’s attack.

According to Boucher, Escamilla claimed that she did not know if Sumo went under or over the fence when he attacked Maverick. After the 2024 Castillo incident, Boucher walked the fence with Escamilla who “committed” to adequately fixing the issues to prevent Sumo from escaping under the fence. Over a year later, ACO Boucher wrote in her report that it’s “unclear” if Escamilla adequately repaired the fence.

According to pictures from the night of the attack on Maverick in May 2025, concrete cinder blocks are seen placed at the base of portions of the chain link fence. Boucher’s report did confirm that Escamilla installed anchors and concrete at the bottom of the fence where there were issues previously.

In recalling the incident on May 23, 2025, Skaggs told the Lynnwood Times that they were walking down 208th Street with Maverick taking their then-10-year-old daughter out for ice cream that night. They then heard a commotion looked up and noticed that Escamilla was having an issue with Sumo.

Escamilla asked, “if they had a dog” according to Skaggs, which he replied, “yes.”

As soon as Escamilla said that Sumo was about to jump, Skaggs recalled, Sumo then jumped the fence and “approached” the family. Skaggs attempted to intercept Sumo before he could reach his family by looking for a collar on Sumo.

“There really wasn’t any warning,” Skaggs said. “She [Escamilla] was trying to say that there was friendly banter, and there wasn’t any of that.”

According to Skaggs, he got a grip on Sumo and held him down while Kalles, his wife, bitten by Sumo in the leg, tried to restrain Maverick.

It was witnesses, who stopped their car earlier as Sumo was attacking, who called 911 upon Kalles’ pleas for help.

“I begged for them [the witnesses] to call the police. I couldn’t get my phone. I had my phone out,” Kalles told the Lynnwood Times. “I just personally couldn’t dial 911 because I was shaking and overwhelmed and afraid that dog was going to attack again.”

According to a 911 audio recording, Kalles can be heard screaming in agony.

Sumo dragged Kalles by her ankles with his teeth to the middle of the road. According to Dordulian Law Group, the bite force of a Dogo Argentino is 500 pounds per square inch (PSI), one of the strongest among dog breeds, allowing them to subdue large and dangerous prey. In comparison, a Dogo Argentino’s bite force is almost twice than that of other breeds like the Labrador Retriever (230 PSI) or German Shepherd (238 PSI).

“I got five puncture wounds. But only four of them actually really hurt,” Kalles said.

As a result of Sumo’s attack, Kalles has developed PTSD, she said, and is afraid of “big dogs and won’t go near them.” Her ankle is still swollen from Sumo’s attack, months later, and there’s still bruising around the injuries, and a burning sensation on a couple of her wounds, she added. Kalles said she cannot lay down comfortably and still needs an ice pack daily to her ankle for pain from Sumo’s bites.

Skaggs was bitten in his right wrist that has put him out of work, he told the Lynnwood Times. Part of his hand “goes numb and it hurts to use it.” He is still seeking medical attention for it.

“For somebody that is in the cooking industry and the building and remodeling industry, it takes a huge toll on me being able to work,” Skaggs said.

Their young daughter was five feet away from Sumo’s attack as it unfolded. According to Skaggs, she was crying and “in hysterics,” not knowing what to do as Sumo attacked her family.

Maverick cannot lay down on one side comfortably. He sustained two puncture wounds to his right front elbow and multiple puncture wounds to his rear left pelvic area. According to the couple, Maverick was sedated for x-rays with no broken bones detected. His injuries were clipped and cleaned and he was sent home with pain medication and antibiotics.

In total, the family has accrued almost $4,000 in medical bills for both Maverick and Skaggs. Kalles’ insurance covered her medical expenses. The couple shared with the Lynnwood Times that Escamilla has yet to reimburse them for these expenses and is allegedly avoiding their attorney’s calls.

Skaggs shared with the Lynnwood Times that when he, Kalles, and their lawyer spoke with Escamilla’s neighbors, “even the neighbors said that her dog got attacked by Sumo” but downplayed the incident to “just the dogs playing.”

“And I’m like, that’s not a dog playing. That’s a dog that wants to attack other dogs,” Skaggs said. “That’s not playful.”

Accusations and Disputed Claims: Escalating Tensions in the Sumo Case

During his interview with the Lynnwood Times, Skaggs also expressed his disappointment in Escamilla falsely accusing them in her appeal (page 4 in document) of poisoning her cat in some form of retaliation for Sumo attacking them.

Escamilla claims in her official appeal to the Hearing Examiner that, a week after the couple took photos of her house, “one of my inside/outside (fixed) cats ends up dead out of nowhere at the fence line.”

“I could clearly not afford a necropsy to confirm poisoning, but again I cannot help but wonder,” Escamilla wrote in her appeal implying the couple poisoned her cat.

Escamilla alleged that the vet “suspected poisoning or pneumonia” but alleges that the cat was “extremely healthy and had had absolutely no symptoms of being sick.”

“We were already not okay from the stress of having this incident even happen with Sumo,” Escamilla wrote, “then the fact that a gun was shot during the dog altercation, and lastly that my beautiful precious baby girl is gone now and we don’t have any answers.”

Skaggs also disputed Escamilla’s claim that he shot a gun into the air to separate the dogs, saying that he “doesn’t even own a weapon.”

Escamilla, in her appeal, stated that she was “convinced” that Skaggs “shot a gun off” to separate the animals during Sumo’s attack. However, there are two eyewitness statements provided to LPD, which Escamilla knew at the time of the appeal hearing, that it wasn’t Skaggs who “shot a gun off.”

In one of three 911 calls related to Sumo’s attack on Skaggs, Kalles, and Maverick, the caller opened with saying that someone just fired a gun.

As the caller, who was the driver in a vehicle, and his passenger drove east on 208th St SW, approaching the intersection of 52nd Ave W, they saw Skaggs and Kalles on the side of the road being attacked by “a big dog” [Sumo] and that the dog [Sumo] was dragging Escamilla as she struggled to restrain the dog.

While Escamilla, Skaggs, and Kalles were dealing with the dogs, a white male with dark hair wearing black pants and a t-shirt came walking around the corner allegedly with a black pistol in his left hand towards the dog attack. After the car passed the man, both witnesses heard what they described as a single gunshot.

According to Officer Muneeb Ahmad’s LPD report, Councilwoman Escamilla told him, “Somebody said there’s guns, and they’re looking for shell casings! It was literally a family and me, trying to split up our dogs! Who the heck made up a gun story?”

Escamilla’s neighbor Roxan[ne], according to police reports, stated that she was unaware of any gunshot. When the Lynnwood Times contacted a witness named Roxan[ne] to inquire about the incident, she denied over the phone that the dog attack involving Sumo and Maverick ever occurred.

Lynnwood Council Leadership Response: Delays and Denials

Since June 2025, Lynnwood City Councilman Patrick Decker has made multiple requests of council leadership to add the consideration of creating a task force focused on revising Lynnwood’s animal control code to the docket.

Councilman Decker had a friend‘s child who was attacked by a dog at Martha Lake in February 2025, who had to wait 30 days to determine if she was infected with rabies—an incurable and fatal condition.

“You cannot cure rabies once you have rabies, and because of the way the [Snohomish County] code was written, there was no way to determine whether that dog had rabies or not, except to wait the 30 days and see if it [the dog] showed up with symptoms or not,” Decker said during a June 9, 2025, City Council Business Meeting. “That is so completely unfair and unreasonable and unacceptable to me that, as a parent, she wasn’t my child…. Do not pattern after county code, the county code is horrendous. So, my ask is that this council create a task force to look at the code and improve it so that we are protecting the residents of Lynnwood and no parent in Lynnwood has to sit and wait and see if their child is going to die because they were bit by a dog or some other animal.”

Council President Nick Coelho, during the meeting, informed the Council that he was awaiting input from LPD Chief Cole Langdon on his thoughts of Lynnwood’s current animal control code. 

“I appreciate Councilmember Decker for bringing this topic up,” Council President Coelho said. “I say we pick this up next week once I’ve heard back from them. And if this is something that we need to really pursue, then we’ll look at making a task force.”

Councilman George Hurst, during the June meeting, emphasized that it is the sole authority of council leadership to approve the creation of a task force. Current Lynnwood City Council leadership are President Coelho and Council Vice President Josh Binda.

Councilman David Parshall, without objection, reminded everyone that because leadership—Council President Coelho—is willing to put the item to review Lynnwood’s current Animal Control Code as a future meeting agenda item, that Councilman Decker’s request to further discuss this during a work session does not need an official “proposal request.” Mayor Christine Frizzell then followed by asking the council if this is the consensus in which, again, no councilmember objected.

During the discussion about revisions to council rules at the July 16, 2025, Work Session, 37 days after his original request, Councilman Decker again brought up the topic of discussing the creation of an Animal Control Code Task Force to review and improve it.

“My request that the council re-examine the…animal control section of the code. I actually think I brought that up quite a while back and it hasn’t made it to council. We have gotten an email or a couple of emails where the council president is trying to set up with the chief [of police] to discuss this and get his views on it. But probably before long, we’re going to hit 45 days on this request,” said Councilman Decker.

A discussion regarding the Animal Control section of the Lynnwood Municipal Code is scheduled as a tentative (e.g. not certain) agenda item for November 17, 2025—the council was informed about this on or around September 30, 2025. This is 161 days after Decker’s original request date and two weeks after the 2025 General Election of which Councilwoman Escamilla is seeking to be elected.

After informing President Coelho of the allegations that the victims of Escamilla are alleging that the council is shielding the councilwoman by not addressing “public safety threats” within the Animal Control Code because she is up for election on November 4, he replied that it is not the case and “I’m sorry they feel that way.”

When asked why the delay in placing animal code revisions to the agenda by the Lynnwood Times during an October 1 interview, President Coelho stated that he was waiting to receive input from LPD and that Lynnwood currently doesn’t have an animal control officer. When asked if revision of the Animal Control section of the Lynnwood Municipal Code is predicated on law enforcement availability, he replied “no.”

The adoption of new and amendments to existing Lynnwood Municipal Codes (laws) is the authority of the Lynnwood City Council.

President Coelho also stated to the Lynnwood Times that he was aware of Councilwoman Escamilla’s dog attack. When asked if fellow member of the council leadership team, Vice President Josh Binda, also knew about Councilwoman’s Escamilla’s dog attack, he replied, “You will have to ask Councilman Binda if he were aware of it.”

Councilwoman Escamilla earlier this year on the dais of City Council admitted to giving car rides to Council Vice President Josh Binda (a member of the council leadership team) to his Everett residence after city council meetings—prior to him moving back to Lynnwood in mid-February 2025. Because Council Vice President Binda’s car was repossessed and he is without a vehicle, Councilwoman Escamilla still, as of September 29, 2025, offers and provides vehicle rides to Council Vice President Binda.

Councilwoman Escamilla motioned to appoint Binda as Vice President of the Lynnwood City Council back in January 2025—when she was giving him rides to his Everett residence—which was seconded by Councilman Coelho. The motion passed 4-2 with councilmembers Hurst and Decker dissenting.

“But it just sucks, because I tried to go through different lawyers, and because I didn’t get injured myself, and just my dog, no one wanted to pretty much fight for me,” Castillo told the Lynnwood Times. “I just don’t want this to happen again…could be anyone, even a child.”

Councilwoman Escamilla told the Lynnwood Times that Sumo is an emotional support animal (ESA) for her young son. When asked if Sumo is documented as an ESA she told the Lynnwood Times, “No.” She also told the Lynnwood Times that she hopes to upgrade her fence in Christmas when she gets the money.

The Lynnwood Times investigation into Sumo’s attacks in Escamilla’s neighborhood also uncovered multiple warrant arrests, at least one police raid, and alleged meth use on her premises, within the last two-and-a-half years alone.