Archive date follows the original topic. Independently written and reviewed by idoghome on October 29, 2026.
In March 2015, photographs of dogs biting a parked car in Chongqing, China, circulated with a memorable explanation: the animals were taking revenge after a driver kicked a stray dog.
The Independent’s Rose Troup Buchanan reported the account, attributing the alleged kicking to an onlooker. The driver was unnamed. The accompanying photographs were credited to Rex, and the story described damage around the vehicle’s bodywork and windscreen wipers.
What the pictures can and cannot show
Photographs can document dogs interacting with a car. They cannot, by themselves, demonstrate that the animals formed a plan, recruited companions or intended to punish a particular person. “Revenge” made an effective headline, but it remains an interpretation of their behaviour.
The alleged earlier mistreatment likewise comes from the reported account, not from the car photographs. Keeping those two kinds of evidence separate makes the story more accurate without excusing cruelty. An accusation does not become independently proven because the supposed outcome feels satisfying.
This is also an old report. A reposted clip or a fresh headline may hide the years between the original publication and a viewer’s first encounter with it. The relevant date is March 2015, rather than the date on the latest social-media share.
The images are unusual enough to explain why people still notice them. Readers can take an interest in what was photographed while leaving the dogs’ private motives unresolved. That is a more honest ending than giving the animals a human conversation or claiming to know precisely why they returned to the vehicle.
Illustrative photo · Amin · CC BY-SA 4.0
