|
22 Mar 02 - 11:39 AM (#674038) Subject: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: SharonA Excerpts from story on cnn.com California Couple Guilty in Dog Mauling Case LOS ANGELES, CA – The owners of two dogs that attacked and killed a neighbor in their San Francisco apartment building were found guilty Thursday of all charges against them, including involuntary manslaughter and having a mischievous animal that kills. One of the owners, Marjorie Knoller -- who was present during the January 2001 mauling -- was also found guilty of second-degree murder. Her husband, Robert Noel, 60, ...was not at home at the time of the attacks, but jurors apparently agreed with the prosecution's argument that he and his wife had ignored repeated warnings about their two large Presa Canarios -- Bane and Hera -- and knew they were a danger. The couple was charged in the January 26, 2001, mauling death of Diane Whipple, a 33-year-old San Francisco lacrosse coach. Whipple was killed in the hallway of the apartment building she shared with Knoller and Noel as she returned home from a trip to the grocery store. The prosecution laid out more than 30 incidents or warnings involving the 100-plus-pound dogs, which since have been destroyed. Knoller faces a sentence of 15 years to life in prison for second-degree murder. Noel and Knoller both face sentences of two to four years in prison on the involuntary manslaughter charges, while owning a mischievous animal that kills carries a sentence of 16 months to three years. Prosecutor Jim Hammer said the verdict should send a message to pet owners that they must be responsible. "For a muzzle, Diane Whipple would be alive, and they choose not to do it," he said. FULL STORY: http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/03/ 21/dog.mauling.trial/index.html This verdict didn't surprise or bother me in the least, but on the Andrea Yates thread someone made a comment about this case, which I reprint below: ---------------------------------------------------------------- From: GUEST Date: 21-Mar-02 - 11:15 PM
Sad, SAD...neither she, her husband, nor the animals should be guilty.....a coach is less than a lawyer and therefore less than a normal procreator in the society at large. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 11:50 AM (#674049) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: InOBU I still don't get the comment... am I thick (more than just the usual, ah that Larry is just thick...) thick in this instance???? Larry |
|
22 Mar 02 - 11:59 AM (#674052) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Sorcha I don't get the comment, either, but am glad of the verdict. I love dogs--like all dogs better than most people--but Presa's are nothing to fool around with. The sheer crassness of the owners really did me in. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 12:00 PM (#674054) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: SharonA Larry: I think (and this is just my own interpretation of the comment) that, because Whipple was lesbian, GUEST was taking a homophobic swipe at her, and was characterizing all sports coaches as homosexuals. Please correct me if I'm wrong, GUEST! |
|
22 Mar 02 - 12:04 PM (#674056) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: SharonA Sorcha: What's the full name of the breed that these dogs were? Do you have any information about them, or can you link us to some? |
|
22 Mar 02 - 12:08 PM (#674059) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: katlaughing Why even give a guest who makes those kinds of comments the time of day? Stirring the pot? Not worth it. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 12:11 PM (#674060) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: McGrath of Harlow Anyone posting as a GUEST (nameless variety) and saying something like that is clearly trolling, and should be ignored. (Whatever happened to Max's warning that he was clamping down on that stuff?)
From what I've read, it sounds a fair enough verdict. A terrible thing to happen to the poor woman who was killed. A sad thing for the dogs, for that matter.
But with that record, why the hell hadn't the police moved in earlier, and saved all three lives? It doesn't sound as if the rightly guilty owners are the only people who should carry some blame for this. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 12:12 PM (#674061) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: InOBU OH! I think you may be right about the comment. Stupid comment if that is what it is about. Genie, (me wife) and I were talking about the verdict this morning, and that we can see the lack of care possibly rising to what is refered to as a depraved heart killing, but on the other hand, the defendants where so unlovable, I hope that they were not convicted for being unsimpathetic defendants. That is the kind of shade of grey one has to really be in the court room, if not the jury room to tell. Cheers, Larry (PS Kat... check out the new song about Genie, on the & another wee song from InOBU post... not a lot of hits, I guess folks aren't big on my songs these days... cheers again, Larry) |
|
22 Mar 02 - 12:22 PM (#674066) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Sorcha The dogs were Presa (or Dogo)Canario--info here. Bred primarily for gaurding/attacking. Most dogs, esp. the herding/working groups were bred to Do Things, but most of them have been bred out far from their roots. There are some exceptions to this of course, but even the Rotts and Staffordshires are a long ways now from fighting and bull baiting. The Canario is NOT! I am not saying the dogs should be banned, but seriously controlled breeding and seriously screened owners are an absolute MUST with this dog. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 12:51 PM (#674091) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Amergin personally...they should have destroyed the owners....not the dogs....apartment buildings are no place for such big dogs.... |
|
22 Mar 02 - 01:06 PM (#674109) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Kim C The problem is that too many people don't educate themselves before taking on the responsibility of a pet. A pet is not a plaything. It's a living creature, and when you bring it into your home, You Are Responsible For It. You commit to feeding it, caring for it, and keeping it out of danger. I repeat - having a pet in your home is a Commitment for the lifetime of that animal. If you're not willing to commit, don't get a pet. Now. First of all, these people had no business keeping an animal of that type in the environment where they lived. Some large breeds are perfectly adaptable to small spaces - Presas are not. From what I understand these are dogs bred to live with cattle, etc., in large open spaces. Second, not all dog breeds are suitable to all people. Not everyone can own a powerful, energetic dog of any size and keep it out of trouble. These people were foolish to think they could handle 200+ pounds of dog. Their ignorance and negligence led directly to Sharon Whipple's death and they should be held accountable. Likewise the person(s) who agreed to let them keep said dogs in a city apartment building - the breeder and the building manager - must also be held accountable. The dogs should never have been allowed to go with Noel & Knoller in the first place. I think a life sentence would be too harsh, considering this was apparently not a premeditated act. However I do wholeheartedly agree with the verdict.
|
|
22 Mar 02 - 01:06 PM (#674110) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Grab Ain't that the way, Amergin? But ppl will insist on owning pets which are unsuitable either for their home or for the area. Common examples: keeping large pets in small houses, owning cats in urban areas, or letting pet rabbits dig their way out into other gardens. And then there's the next step up of ppl who keep dangerous pets like snakes and stuff, or who buy endangered species on the black market and help keep that trade going. Damn little you can do about it unfortunately, it's just down the ppl not giving a damn about their neighbours and thinking about the implications of having that pet. And you can't have a checkbox saying "Are you or have you ever been an unpleasant bastard who doesn't give a shit about other people?" Graham. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 01:13 PM (#674115) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Sorcha Copied from a breed L-list I am on. Names removed:
What made caveman ever think he could bring the ancient wolves into his cave as a companion and make them safe not to kill he or his family?
I agree with everyone that it was a good jury decision and that the *emphasis* has to be put on personal responsibility...not just in dogs but in all aspects of life. Deciding to buy a cup of hot coffee at McDonald's carries with it the obvious that if you spill it on yourself it will burn you. (DUH) so it is your responsibility not to tip hot coffee on yourself or others...not McDonald's for selling hot food.
I have met a lot of re-educated pit bulls in my area that have been re-trained and obedience trained to the highest level so that the dogs are very responsive on command. they have been brought into group obed.classes (including where I train our dogs) and I've never seen a problem arise with any of them. They have been rehabilitated from the "kill any dog" mentality to being socially acceptable dogs. The group who does this is low key but very adept at working with these seized dogs.
I don't believe that every dog, whether in the pit or at large, is able to be re-habilitated anymore than I believe every person convicted of 1st degree homicide is rehabilitatable. But I definitely do not believe that any breed bred for fighting needs to be banned based on breed propensity or history alone. As a breeder I know what a difference early rearing & socialization makes in a puppy of any breed. The operative word is *responsible*. For too long society has down played that word, to the point it has almost been removed from our vocabulary. Hopefully, this century will bring it back to the importance it deserves." Italics mine. I did not, of course, know these dogs, but IMO, I doubt they could have been rehabilitated. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 01:19 PM (#674116) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Jimmy C Dogs should be kept on a farm with lots of space, especially large dogs. Certain breeds like the Canario and Pit-Bulls etc are prone to attack. It's not their fault, that is how they are, they should only be owned by professional dog people who know how to train and handle them. If I were kept in an apartment for hours at a time day in and day out I would be ready to go ape as well. People have to be checked out when they attempt ot buy certain breeds of dogs, just as if they were buying a rifle. These poor animals were not suitable for apartments or city dwellings and only acted according to their upbringing. The owners did not help their case with their casual don't give a damn about the victim attitude. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 01:21 PM (#674118) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Raggytash What has this thread got to do with Mudcat, music or lyrics. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 01:26 PM (#674122) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: GUEST,Just Amy KimC - exactly! |
|
22 Mar 02 - 01:51 PM (#674147) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: SharonA Kevin and kat: Oops, you're right; I shouldn't have copied-and-pasted that trolling comment. Sorry. Raggytash: You're right, we need some music and lyrics here about responsible pet ownership. I'm performing next Saturday (a week from tomorrow) at a charity event to benefit an organization whose mission is to rescue and find permanent homes for unwanted animals in the "Four Corners" region of New Mexico, and to educate the public about the importance of proper pet care. I'd love to have some songs to sing about the subject. Has anyone got any song suggestions? Does someone here have a song about this case in particular? |
|
22 Mar 02 - 02:19 PM (#674169) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: lamarca NPR had a good story about the large dog breeds and the people who breed them and buy them when this story first broke last year. It basically showed that with dog breeders, as with every other profession, there will always be a minority of people who are quite willing to sell a product that is dangerous to an individual who doesn't care or actually revels in the danger of the product. The story is here - you can click and then select "listen to segment" to hear a RealAudio clip:
Big Dogs |
|
22 Mar 02 - 02:19 PM (#674171) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Kim C According to one site I visited, Presas were not originally bred to fight, and this is not a desirable characteristic in the breed. I don't doubt that's true - but unfortunately what happens with nearly every large, powerful dog, is that a few unscrupulous people get hold of them and breed them for the wrong reasons. Rottweilers are a good example of this; before that, it was Dobermans. My landlady's daughter had a Doberman, Alex, who just recently went to doggie heaven at the age of 15. We babysat him once. He would come sit in front of you and put his head in your lap. A sweet, friendly dog. However ----- Laura is a professional dog trainer, and Alex was protection trained. If you tried to hurt Laura, you'd be up shit creek. Under normal, everyday circumstances, though, Alex was a great family pet and got along with Laura's other dogs & cats, & other people as well. I have two mid-sized dogs who have access to a splendid large, fenced back yard. Do they want to go there? Nope. They would rather stay in the house with Mom & Pop & lay around. We have to MAKE them go out. 'Course, they are older now (7 & 12) and not as energetic as they once were. Go figure. Each one has been a joy and a trial. But we knew that when we brought them home. :-) Didn't James Taylor do a song about a dog? |
|
22 Mar 02 - 02:22 PM (#674174) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Kim C I forgot to mention, Baxter Black once said that Border Collies are so smart, people should have to pass an IQ test before they're allowed to own one. :-) They're not for everybody. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 02:34 PM (#674184) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Jon Freeman I agree whith the verdict but like McGrath, do question the authorities. Surely with the 30 plus other incidents or warnings, action should have been taken before anyone was killed. Jon |
|
22 Mar 02 - 02:35 PM (#674185) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: SeanM Something I am confused about in this case... The female primary defendant was found guilty of both 2nd degree murder AND involuntary manslaughter. I am moderately familiar with the definitions, and it would seem these would be rather mutually exclusive. Plus there's the entire issue that she's been convicted on two counts of THE SAME ACT. I fully believe she is guilty of the 2nd degree count - from trial comments and from her own confesses actions, she showed both horrible negligence and extremely suspect motives for keeping the dogs in the first place, the standard of 'wanton and callous disregard for human life' in my opinion were definitely met with such comments as "she should have just gone back in her apartment", and the fact that the dogs had full run of the victim for TEN minutes. I just can't get my head around the simultaneous counts for the same act. M
|
|
22 Mar 02 - 02:37 PM (#674186) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Richard Bridge There is a funny song about a psychotic chihuahua (that is very hard to spell) which copulates itself to death. Dogs take time and patience. We have a rescue great dane (I call her runty the small dane because she's only about 95 pounds)and a rescue border collie/lab cross and both can be absolute pains in the proverbial. But we take care not to let them be dangerous. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 02:43 PM (#674195) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: McGrath of Harlow "What has this thread got to do with Mudcat, music or lyrics."
Well, there are lots of songs about murder, and lots of songs about dogs. Maybe there'll be a few about this, bringing the two themes together. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 02:46 PM (#674197) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Steve in Idaho I'm not sure about dogs being kept to farms where they would have lots of room to run. Around here dogs that run tend to run horses, sheep, and cattle through fences and cause a lot of damage. I've had the misfortune to kill several of these dogs. Animals are the responsibility of their owners. It's why I killed our last dog - he got too territorial and became excessively aggressive. Why is this in a Mudcat thread? Because it can be. Steve
|
|
22 Mar 02 - 02:59 PM (#674206) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Sorcha My best guess about the 2 counts is that there were 2 dogs. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 03:02 PM (#674211) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: SharonA Richard Bridge says, "There is a funny song about a psychotic chihuahua [yes, that is hard to spell] which copulates itself to death." Is this a cautionary tale, warning folks to neuter their pets? *G* |
|
22 Mar 02 - 03:11 PM (#674217) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: lamarca The Chihuahua song is "Little Pepe", one of Eric Bogle's less serious works... |
|
22 Mar 02 - 03:16 PM (#674219) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Jon Freeman The Bogle song was "Little Gomez". Jon |
|
22 Mar 02 - 03:43 PM (#674242) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Kim C But see, Steve, if someone is going to keep a farm dog, the dog still has to be trained to do its job. That's the other problem..... people who live out in the middle of nowhere think they can just let their pets run loose, and they can't. That's how they get hit by cars, shot at, hurt by other dogs, etc. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 04:51 PM (#674281) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: katlaughing I cannot stand Baxter Black, but in this instance I have to agree with him (my McNab Border Collie said I had to!) It's a tough issue, esp. with dogs out in the country. Some are just family pets and run around with "their (human)kids" while others are let to run amok. Everyone needs to be as careful as I am sure Steve was when he had to take care of those dogs he mentioned. When we lived out on the Oregon Trail, my son had a friend who used to go tramping across his parent's property with his dog. Once in a while the dog would go astray, but always within sight and never harming any neighbour's livestock. There was one neighbour, though, who would not be happy until the dog was destroyed. A few years after we moved away, my mom called to tell us that neighbour took it upon himself to shoot it while it was on its own property and he killed the boy instead. Never even went to trial. I've picked up and taken care of so many strays of the so-called vicious breeds, that I try to give them the benefit of the doubt, within reason. We've had stray pit bulls, Dobies, rotts, etc. and, while I kept them separate from my own until I knew how they would be, we've never had a problem. Of course, the Border Collie will not allow rescues now, he's a tyrant when it comes to other dogs, except his "cousin" my sister's dog. Grab/Graham, did you mean cats running loose in urban areas? I agree with that, but not if you meant no one in a city should own a cat. If kept inside they can do quite well. In fact, I don't really agree with letting them loose regardless of where one lives. It's too dangerous. My cats have their very own *chicken coop* outside our bedroom window and they are very happy going out on their balcony, jumping down to roll in the dirt, etc. This is an horrific case of a lot of mistakes and abuse by the authorities and the owners. I feel so sorry for the woman killed and for the dogs. kat |
|
22 Mar 02 - 05:53 PM (#674335) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: McGrath of Harlow I can't imagine our cats being happy living indoors and on a balcony. There are some dogs who seem happy enough living in a city and being taken out for walks, but all the cats I've known need to wander, and get away from human beings a lot the time - the way the rest of us do.
Still, cat's vary as well I suppose.
Here's a gentle song I wrote about some cats who went walkabout, since this thread seems to be turning away from focusing too much on murder. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 06:17 PM (#674348) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: catspaw49 Right verdict and the right charges. I get a little concerned over comments like "dogs need to be out on a farm/country, etc." Some breeds are obviously bred to live in small spaces and some, even very large dogs, may need exercise but adapt well to the home. I have loved all my Weimaraners and each has needed their exercise, but all have been excellent house dogs and superior companion dogs. Got a good "bad dog" story...........My friend Ron was living with his parents (he was about 22 at the time) and they lived in a beautiful neighborhood with a next door neighbor who was a total jerk. Everyone around detested the guy and especially his attitude toward his dog, a German Shepherd, that ran loose a lot and destroyed property, got into garbage, and was thought to have killed another small dog down the street. Ron had a cat that was 23 and older than he was. He had literally grown up with the cat and now at age 23 it was still in pretty good shape. It only went out once a day and would go into the bushes just down from their door for about 5 minutes and come back in. One day after letting the cat out, Ron and his Mom heard a commotion outside and found the dog had killed the old cat. Obviously they were really upset and Ron, after a bit, called the guy on the phone and told him what the dog had done. The asshole replies, "Hey...No big deal.....It was just a cat." Now Ronnie was about ready to kill the guy but his Mom had better sense and called the police who couldn't really do anything. Ron decided to wait. Two days later Ron heard a noise out in their back yard and there was the dog ripping through some items around their brick barbeque in the center of the yard. Did I mention Ron liked guns? He got out his 8' barreled, .357 Colt Python, poked a hole in his bedroom window screen, took aim, and squeezed the trigger. The blast sound in a small bedroom damn near deafened him, the small hole in the screen became a 15" rip, and the dog lay dead out back! After regaining a bit of hearing, Ron called the jerk and told him his dog had been in their stuff and he had shot it....and please come remove the carcass. The neighbor shows up in about 10 seconds screaming and cussing and picking up the remains of his dog. When his ranting was over, Ronnie looked at him and said, "Hey....No big deal.....It was just a dog." Spaw |
|
22 Mar 02 - 06:44 PM (#674367) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: katlaughing Jaysus, Spaw, ya oughta label that one with a warning! Sorry, darlin', but I feel badly for the dog and wish someone had caught it and given it a chance in a new home. Of course, also sorry about the kitty; that's truly horrible, all the way round. Kevin, I don't mean this as any kind of judgement, but below are some of the reasons I keep my cats in, and mine went from roaming the prairie, freely, with an open door policy, to living inside in a house in New England and have been indoor cats every since. I love your songs and stories and I understand. My heart just cannot withstand such pain as finding one dead on the road, or lost to coyotes, etc. 15 REASONS TO KEEP YOUR CAT INDOORS Cats are less likely to be hit by a car when crossing the living room than when crossing the street. You're less likely to bite your cat than are free-roaming animals. Your cat is less likely to get rabies from you than from free-roaming animals. You are not as likely to have fleas, fungus or worms as are free-roaming animals. You won't transmit fatal, contagious diseases like Feline Leukemia and Feline Immunodeficiency Virus. There is little chance of your cat's leg getting caught in a steel-jaw trap in your living room. When it is ten o'clock at night, you'll know where your cat is. Birds will like your cat better. Crotchety neighbors will like your cat better. Cats sleep most of the time anyway. Your cat will never come home looking like something the cat dragged in. It will be more difficult for people to steal your cat. Your cat will not disappear as often. You will never have to bail your cat out of the local shelter. Cats live longer, happier lives. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 07:02 PM (#674376) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Hrothgar Do people own border collies, or do border collies own people? |
|
22 Mar 02 - 07:03 PM (#674378) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Celtic Soul Someone correct me if I am wrong here, but did they not convict them more or less on the TV commentary that she made wherein she said that it was not her fault, and that the victim should have gotten into her house faster? This is what the Washington Post claimed as of this morning. If so, is it not convicting her based on her being cold and callous, and not on her real culpability in the matter? Regardless of *how* she presented herself to the media, whether or not she showed any remorse at all or no, before all that, there were *facts*. What did she do *during* the actual attack? What did she do *prior* to it? Did she encourage the dogs? Did she plan it? If not, it's gross negligence and manslaughter. I think she deserves to have been found guilty, I just don't necessarily agree with it being for murder. Murder is pre-meditated. Did she *plan* for her dogs to kill this woman? The jury's still out for me on this one. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 07:05 PM (#674380) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: gnu ....Cats live longer, happier lives. Well, I don't know. To cage any animal is a sin to me. I get choked up when I pass the lobsters in the tank at the grocery store.... I mean, seriously, is there anything as cruel as that ? Having people walk by for days, perhaps weeks, and look at you as if maybe, today, they can afford to kill and eat you ? Yes, for those that know me, I hunt. But it ain't cruel like that. It ain't like hookin a fish on a line and takin an hour to drag his ass in the boat. Anyway, I suppose I should.... no, I would like to put my two cents into the topic... I would like to see the "owners" set upon and mauled to death by large dogs. |
|
22 Mar 02 - 07:17 PM (#674390) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: InOBU Hi Celtic Soul... Murder in one instance, depraved heart killing, does not have to be premeditiated, but rather, one has to do something so reckless that it shows no human reguard for the unforseen victem. I suppose it was a depraved heart killing theory which the prosicution was going on... Cheers, Larry |
|
22 Mar 02 - 08:16 PM (#674430) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Ebbie I don't understand why an easy fix wasn't used: a muzzle. Especially after getting cited for previous incidents. If those dogs were muzzled each time they were taken outside their own apartment, they would not have been a menace; they might knock someone down but they could even bite, much less kill. I think the police department and the city should also be cited- wherever I have lived, a citation carries penalties for non-compliance. When my daughter was four, playing in my brother's back yard, she was bitten by a collie that the owners were required to keep chained or in its own back yard under penalty of being destroyed. That evening, the father and son came over to see her stitches- they went home and shot the dog themselves. The whole thing was a sad business. Here I was, - a dog lover- there was my daughter- traumatized and in pain and in danger of fearing dogs forever after (She doesn't), the neighbors lost their pet... I don't see the murder verdict as being able to stand an appeal- but malicious mischief and gross negligence- oh, yes. Ebbie
|
|
23 Mar 02 - 08:09 AM (#674684) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: GUEST If they had been tried in San Francisco - it would have been first degree. |
|
23 Mar 02 - 09:44 AM (#674726) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Mrs Cobble I would like to have the breeder of the dogs in court too, they should'nt have sold these large dogs to people living in an apartment. I would bet they didn't do too good a job in vetting their capability to train and care for the dogs either!!! For many years I have been involved with the Kennel Club's (UK) Discover Dogs . This involves displaying all the breeds of dog registered with the KC. No one is allowed to advertise or sell at the exhibition, just information on each breed is given. Eduction is the main aim. I feel if one dog is prevented from going to the wrong home my time and effort has been well spent . Mrs C |
|
23 Mar 02 - 10:16 AM (#674743) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Celtic Soul Larry... Thanks for the info. No, I had not heard that before. I learn so much in this forum! :D |
|
23 Mar 02 - 12:43 PM (#674838) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Gypsy As a northern CA native......death by dog should be murder two. I have dogs, have had them all my life. And yes, it was the owners fault. However, these are not animals that were controllable. Consider just how many dogs are killed on a daily basis, that are already sweet loving potential companions. Shouldn't we work more on finding them homes than trying to rehab an animal that is already a problem? As for having them run in the country....anyone who knows me has heard about our livestock being killed by roaming dogs. So i won't even get started on that one. It is a multiplicity of errors: The owners for having uncontrolled dogs in a very small space, the landlord for allowing it, the tenants for not protesting it, the breeder for selling, etc, etc. But bottom line here: The victim(s) in this case at least deserve as much sympathy as the dogs and owners. The victims partner, her family and friends, students, will never have her company (on this side) again. Just don't feel that rehab is an option in this case. To really drift: It is REALLY unfortunate that responsible dog owners are paying for the idiocy of these two people. Already landlords are disallowing pets in SF |
|
23 Mar 02 - 02:34 PM (#674907) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: McGrath of Harlow We don't have First and Second Degree Murder in England. I suspect that here this would have been dealt with as manslaughter, unless there'd been evidence that the owner had set the dog on the poor woman.
But I imagine that's to do with different definitions, so that our definition of murder is more equivalent to the American First Degree Murder, and our manslaughter would overlap with your Second Degree Murder.
There is a certain mentality that likes having lethal dogs around, seeing them as weapons. Sometimes it's frightened people, sometimes it's bullies. A bit like guns I suppose - and that's not intended to stir up arguments about that issue, what I mean is that different attitudes can lies behind the same action.
Reading spaw's story my feeling was it's a shame that two animals had to die unpleasant deaths because of people like that neighbour.
I'm with katlaughing on the idea that you have to be willing to bend principles sometimes. I think the "dignity of risk" idea has to have real limitations sometimes. |
|
23 Mar 02 - 04:40 PM (#674975) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Peg A mean, out of control German Shepherd mauled my cousin when she was little; she had to get at least froty or fifty stitches in her leg. Damn dog bit me, once, too, when I went to the house where it lived (it belonged to my friend's parents). It took several incidents for the authorities to intervene. The owners never seemed to want to do jack-shit about it. I have met Dobermans, pit bulls and other so-called "vicious" breeds that were sweet as cherry pie. It's all in the training. And many people who buy these breeds only do so because evryone else in their neighborhood has one. This disgusts me, that certain problematic breeds become trendy and then get dumped when their are health or discipline problems (remember all those sharpeis that yuppies dumped off on shelters in the 80s when their genetically-expected eye problems cost more than they wanted to spend? And the Dalmations, that had to be given away when it turned out they werer not good with kids? And then there are the sweet golden retrievers bought for their docility that people fail to exercise sufficiently, so they grow huge, fat and die too young) To me, people in the city getting attack dogs is just as dumb as people in the city getting big huge SUVs; both are dangerous and useless if not used for their proper purpose. That said, I think a murder verdict is a bit heavy-handed; but these people do deserve to be punished.
|
|
23 Mar 02 - 06:07 PM (#675012) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: GUEST,Lyle Kat, please don't leave us hanging like that. What do you dislike about Baxter Black??? Curious Lyle |
|
23 Mar 02 - 07:20 PM (#675051) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Richard Bridge Personally, I don't see manslaughter sticking in UK. GOt any reasons, Magrath? I dont think even proving scienter would do it. Anyone thought why the owners had those dogs? Did they feel the needed defence from local dangers? I still feel sorry for the dogs though. THere was a pit bull down a pub we play in, the other night. Neutered, as UK law requires, but not muzzled as UK law also requires (for dogs on teh "Dangerous Dogs" list). Rescued via Battersea Dogs home from fighting. Ears reconstructed through surgery. Loved everyone. Sweetest dog I've seen in public for ages. Only two breeds specifed so far (I think) under our Act (the worst piece of draftsmanship I've seen in a long day!). Pit Bull and Toza. Candidates? |
|
23 Mar 02 - 07:27 PM (#675055) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Jackie Francis |
|
23 Mar 02 - 07:35 PM (#675063) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: katlaughing Oh, sorry, Lyle. Are you sure you wanna hear this?:-) I grew up with the real-deal, my dad, and the influences of his dad and granddad before him, so maybe I unfairly compare, but I find Black to be a supercilious, pompous wannabe. Cannot stand his delivery, nor his way of telling a story, for that matter, nor some of his stories! There are two famous people whose voices I really find hard to listen to, so I don't. Those two are Baxter Black and Dumbya Bush. Other than that, I am really quite friendly.**BG** Thanks for asking. Off the soapbox, now. kat |
|
23 Mar 02 - 08:03 PM (#675084) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Sorcha !@#$ %^&* &*(**)!! THERE IS NO SUCH BREED AS A "PIT BULL"!!!! |
|
23 Mar 02 - 08:11 PM (#675088) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Richard Bridge Kennel Club agrees. Dangerous Dogs Act disagrees. UK Pit Bull Association disagrees. Owner of this dog said it was a Pit Bull. I had asked him if it was a Staff Cross or American. I've taken other breeds to Crufts and I know a couple of dogs, and I've got eyes. I can spot most, and tell if they're good or not. Didn't like the Poodle that won Crufts this year. Not as good as Marita Gibbs' one, a few years back, and not as good as the Saluki this year, IMHO. The only one I ever missed really badly was a Chesapeake Bay retriever (out walking locally), that I thought was Weimar Cross, possibly Weimar/Flatcoat or Weimar/Goldie. Owner was (rightly) very insulted. |
|
23 Mar 02 - 08:25 PM (#675095) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Sorcha There are several kinds of bulldogs--American, English, French--then there are the Staffordshire Terriers, the American Staffordshire Terriers, the Bull Terriers, miniature Bull Terriers, and the Presa/Dogo Canario which looks a lot like a very large Am. Staff---but there in NO Pit Bull.
A "pit bull" was any dog that was game enough to fight bulls in a fighting pit. Sorry, one of my pet peeves. Rant over for now. |
|
23 Mar 02 - 09:09 PM (#675109) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Sorcha Thank you, Richard. Most courts/judges in the US seem to think there is a PitBull breed---they are banned in a lot of places. Sort of funny when you condsider that there really is no such thing according to either AKC or UKC breed standards. Not funny for owners of anything condsidered a Pit Bull though. |
|
23 Mar 02 - 09:34 PM (#675123) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: McGrath of Harlow I haven't followed this case too closely, and I'm not up in the legalities, so you could well be right Richard.
What I had in mind was that this sounds like a case where gross negligence which has caused death could justify a verdict of manslaughter. As happened recently in the case of that driver whose car caused a fatal train crash, when he fell asleep and went off the road onto a train track. There was no suggestion that he'd been planning to kill anyone.
I'd imagine murder could only be found if the owner had set the dog on the victim, and so far as I have heard this isn't alleged. |
|
23 Mar 02 - 09:39 PM (#675125) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: GUEST,Lyle Thanks, Kat. Now I'll tell you why I asked. Years ago I spent one summer sorta bumming out west, and got to know quite a few REAL "cowboys." I always appreciated their stories, their sense of humor and their sense of justice. Today, when I see someone like Mr. Black, or read their 'clever' stories,I can't help but think of what my dad used to call a substitute - a poor imitation of the real thing. And it appears now we have a substitute president, too. Lyle |
|
24 Mar 02 - 02:33 PM (#675452) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Tam the bam fraeSaltcoatsScotland I'm not a pet lover, I just can't stand other people's pets especially these ones with the attuide of 'love me love my pet'. Where are some people's priorities, where they would gave oraganition that saves animals and yet they don't give to an organition that saves children. Who do you care about most Animals or Children.
|
|
24 Mar 02 - 02:48 PM (#675459) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Herga Kitty Well, I hope you're all feeling better for that, but I agree with Raggytash. |
|
24 Mar 02 - 03:01 PM (#675467) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Tam the bam fraeSaltcoatsScotland I know, I also agree with Raggytash. However you get this all the time. |
|
24 Mar 02 - 03:23 PM (#675480) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: MichaelM From a CNN report at the time of the original charges. "Noel and Knoller, both of whom are attorneys, said they were caring for the dogs on behalf of a Pelican Bay Prison inmate, who allegedly ran an illegal attack-dog ring for drug dealers." This is why they are liable for murder charges. They were aware of the background/training of these animals. The previous attacks were warnings that these dogs were weapons beyond their control. |
|
24 Mar 02 - 08:58 PM (#675629) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Gypsy That's right. And the dogs have bitten other people, and the victim as recently as (i believe) 2 weeks before her death. This is not a case a of any kind of surprize, or first bite. These dogs have a history. Of course, so do Knoller and Noel. |
|
24 Mar 02 - 09:33 PM (#675645) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: InOBU Hi Richard... Is there a degree of neglect of care which rises to criminality in the UK, or would the only remidy be civil in such a case? Cheers, (and may your judges all be kind and your clients clever)... Larry |
|
24 Mar 02 - 11:52 PM (#675721) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: GUEST A lot of growling and snapping could be heard at dog parks today--but it was mainly from humans voicing strong opinions about the San Francisco decision. |
|
25 Mar 02 - 12:14 AM (#675725) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: katlaughing Thanks for explaining, Lyle, nice to know we're on the same page.:-)I heartily agree with your dad about substitutes and, with you, re' the "prez." |
|
25 Mar 02 - 01:08 AM (#675736) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Dicho (Frank Staplin) Sorcha, THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT YOU HAVE PUT OUT THE NONSENSE THAT "THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A PIT BULL" OR WORDS TO THAT EFFECT. I shout because you did. I was "raised" by a pit bull when I was small. They have remained a favorite of mine. The breed is properly called the American Staffordshire Terrier. It is larger than the British standard Staffordshire Terrier. IT IS NOT an imaginary breed and it has a STANDARD set by the AKC (American Kennel Club). Quoted from the standard: "Should give the impression of great strength for his size, a well put together dog, muscular but agile and graceful,...stocky..." In "Simon and Schuster's Guide to Dogs," it is called the "American Pit Bull Terrier." "It will fight an enemy to the death,"... but... "a minimum of training will produce a tranquil, good, obedient dog with the ability to distinguish immediately the good or evil intentions of strangers." Yes, they are powerful, but, like any other dog, can be easy-going if raised properly. Even small dogs can be loyal to a single master. One of our dogs is a Jack Russell Terrier. If I attempt in play to attack my wife, the dog attacks me! |
|
25 Mar 02 - 11:48 AM (#675949) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Grab Kat, I guess you can keep cats indoors in an urban area, but I'm not sure how fair it is on the cat. Depends on the cat, I guess. I would certainly say that no-one should be allowed to let a cat wander around in an urban area (if anyone disagrees - would you be happy if I took a dump on your doorstep and dug up your garden? if not, why should I be happy that you let your pet out with the certain knowledge that it will do this to me or to someone else? Flame on, but I'm anti-cat except in the areas they're designed for, ie. farms) Met a guy in Wales who owned an Akita - it was the size of an Alsatian and the owner said it was still only a puppy. He was planning on buying an SUV to transport this mammoth, simply bcos it wouldn't fit in his estate car (station wagon)! It was a lovely dog, really good-natured. His view was that pedigree dog owners raise their dogs so that the dogs never see other dogs or other humans, and so never learn how to interact with them. Accordingly when they do meet other dogs and other humans, the dog gets scared and so becomes aggressive. Equally, you go round a sheep farm and the border collies will go insane at you bcos they've been raised to consider a particular set of humans to be "friends", and other humans are not friends until the dogs have got to know them. They'd gladly attack you given half a chance. Graham. |
|
25 Mar 02 - 11:57 AM (#675954) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: katlaughing Fair enough, Grab, I don't believe in letting cats run loose in urban areas, either, but I don't think they were specifically *designed* just for farms. In ancient Tibet, for instance, there were trained temple Guard Cats, which were Siamese. And, sorry, but I guess it depends on the border collie. Mine is a McNab, which was developed by a fellow in California, from one sire out of Scotland. They are slightly shorter, with a short coat and freckles on their legs. While mine would certainly bite anyone who tried to harm me, he will not go after anyone just on his own. I have neighbours and others who come into the yard and he's never raised a fuss, unless it's another dog. He IS fierce when one first comes to the door of house or car, but once i tell him it's okay, he is fine, a little grumbly, but quite socialable with those who like dogs. Others he just ignores. kat |
|
25 Mar 02 - 01:42 PM (#675992) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: McGrath of Harlow All depends what you mean by an urban area. Basically, if an area isn't fit for a cat to live in, it's not really fit for a human being to live in. And there are plenty of urban area which fall into that category. (Like all rules there are probably some exceptions to that. I just can't think of many. Human beings are like rats - we can survive in situations which aren't at all good for man nor beast. And as with rats, the result isn't pretty.)
Cats don't crap on doorsteps. They've more sense of decorum than that. Not unless they are trying to tell you something. |
|
25 Mar 02 - 01:54 PM (#675999) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Kim C I have met Baxter Black on more than one occasion, and y'all, he is absolutely one heck of a nice guy. Wasn't Petey of the Little Rascals an American Staffordshire Terrier? |
|
25 Mar 02 - 03:06 PM (#676052) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Dicho (Frank Staplin) The Little Rascals dog star had at least some pit bull in him, but I don't think he would meet the standard. Too much white and the "O" on the eye made him look too cute. He would never have made it to the Westminister Dog Show. I don't know when the present AKC standard was adopted. The one that I had as a kid wouldn't meet the standard, either. Too large. It was from Ft. Riley. My father got it as a puppy while he was in Cavalry training there during WWI and after. Some of the staff raised them to fight, and size was a trait that they bred for. In those days, there was quite a bit of dog-fighting around the country. The Presa Canario has several relatives, all large work or guard dogs. The Fila brasileiro weighs around 110 pounds, now used as a herd and guard dog. It had a bad reputation in the past, having been used to find escaped slaves. It needs much exercise, and has an elastic gait like a large cat, so they say. There are other large Portuguese dogs used for herding and guarding. |
|
25 Mar 02 - 04:27 PM (#676112) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Steve in Idaho Hmmmmm - thread grew while I was away - Kat is correct about how I dispose of animals that are a threat. Very carefully and with consideration for my neighbors and any other property that could be impacted. I've followed animals home after catching them being destructive and requested law enforcement assistance in their removal. I must also state that I always, unless the animals are in the midst of an attack, inform the owners of the dog's actions and the possible consequences for those actions. I believe in giving folks, and dogs, a chance. Baxter Black was/is a veterinarian. He and my oldest friend are good friends so I know him in a third party way. He is bi-lingual, teaching his kids to be the same, a good parent, his word is good, and a good friend to those that are his friend. Out here your word is your life and that says it all for me about that. Now his sense of humor is one that has frustrated me for a long time. Kind of like the Cowboy Poetry movement. Bunch of nonsense for the most part. Cowboys are romantics - not poets. Big difference I think. But it puts several guys to work making the books and writing the stuff. Plus Elko has the big gathering each year that puts a few bucks in the locals pockets.
Well enough of that nonsense. Back to work - -
Steve |
|
25 Mar 02 - 04:40 PM (#676121) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: McGrath of Harlow Nothing strange about being a poet any more than being a singer or a musician or a dancer. We all of us are all those things at some level, if we don't crush it down. |
|
25 Mar 02 - 05:49 PM (#676157) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Kim C Some Dog History |
|
25 Mar 02 - 11:34 PM (#676317) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: katlaughing KimC, I am sure he is a nice person, thanks for that. I think Norton/Steve put his finger on it, though, it's his so-called "cowboy poetry" that really gets to me. What Steve said about Elko is a big reason why my dad never went there to compete when he was still able to travel about. Too many wannabes with good marketing etc. I've got some of my granddad's poems, and he was a cowboy/rancher. IMO, there's just nothing can compare with the authentic. enough of that, as Brother Steve says.:-) kat |
|
26 Mar 02 - 09:44 AM (#676551) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Grab Kat, sure, that's my point on collies - they can be lovely to everyone, or they can be aggressive. Depends on the dog, but more on the training. Graham. |
|
26 Mar 02 - 10:10 AM (#676569) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Kim C Dogs are funny, though. They decide who they like and don't like. (anyone who thinks animals aren't capable of making decisions obviously never shared a house with one.) Our old dog likes other people, but not other dogs. Our younger dog likes other dogs, but not always other people. She loves my father-in-law, but not my brother-in-law. She isn't mean or aggressive toward him, she just stays away from him. We had to convince her that he's really okay. We had a houseguest for a week one time, and I told her, Belle may not be real keen on you, that's just the way she is sometimes. Naturally Belle made a liar out of me, and would not leave our friend alone. Kids. (sigh) |
|
26 Mar 02 - 02:38 PM (#676757) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: SharonA MichaelM said, "From a CNN report at the time of the original charges: " 'Noel and Knoller, both of whom are attorneys, said they were caring for the dogs on behalf of a Pelican Bay Prison inmate, who allegedly ran an illegal attack-dog ring for drug dealers.' "This is why they are liable for murder charges. They were aware of the background/training of these animals. The previous attacks were warnings that these dogs were weapons beyond their control." Also, for those who do not know, Noel and Knoller actually legally adopted that prison inmate – as an adult – though I've never read any explanation for thatparticular action. They were definitely "thick as thieves" with some very bad bad-guys, and IMO "depraved heart" is a fair description of their character, not just of their actions with regard to the two dogs. |
|
26 Mar 02 - 05:30 PM (#676866) Subject: RE: BS: Dog owners guilty in mauling death From: Coyote Breath Howdy y'all. A bit slow on the uptake here but hasn't anyone noted the dogs' names? Bane and Hera? Maybe Hera is not specific to something unpleasant (but ask Zeus about that!) but BANE? As a bicyclist in Missouri (otherwise known as the "let your dogs run free" state) I have had MORE than my share of bad encounters. One dog, usually not so bad. Two or more dogs? they "pack up". Dumped strays abound, many more than kept domestics. After riding for a short while here in Missouri, coming from California, mind. I discovered an odd thing. There were very few dogs running loose in CA but lots of broken glass. In MO there wasn't as much broken glass but lots of strays. I decided that stray dogs eat glass. In my fourteen years riding in California I was chased by maybe five or six dogs, total. I had more than that number chase me in the fifteen miles to my place of work on my first ride. Good work out, though. I asked a sheriff's deputy what I could do about the chasing strays. He asked if I had been bitten or otherwise injured. I told him nope, I was seeking advice so I could keep that from happening. He suggested that I ride faster. CB :>) |