Posted on 05/31/2007 12:32:45 PM PDT by SmithL
SAN FRANCISCO -- The woman convicted in the 2001 dog-mauling death of a neighbor in their San Francisco apartment building could once again face a murder sentence because of a state Supreme Court ruling today.
In a unanimous decision, the court said a trial judge had used an overly lenient standard when he reduced a jury's second-degree murder conviction to involuntary manslaughter for Marjorie Knoller in the January 2001 death of Diane Whipple. But the justices also said an appellate court used criteria that were too harsh when it reinstated Knoller's murder conviction in 2005.
The court ordered a new judge to reconsider the case and decide whether there was evidence that Knoller "acted with conscious disregard of the danger to human life'' when she took a 140-pound, unmuzzled Presa Canario on a leash into a hallway of the Pacific Heights apartment building. The animal charged at Whipple, a 33-year-old lacrosse coach, who suffered 77 wounds including a fatal puncture to the neck.
A second dog being cared for by Knoller and her husband, Robert Noel, charged out of the couple's apartment during the attack and may have also taken part in the mauling.
Knoller was paroled in 2004 after serving most of a four-year sentence for involuntary manslaughter. If her murder conviction is reinstated, she would be returned to prison for 15 years to life. Noel, who was not present during the attack, was also convicted of manslaughter and has been paroled.
Both were lawyers, but Noel has been disbarred, and Knoller, now a Florida resident, relinquished her California law license earlier this year.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
She deserves the penalty the jury originally decided upon.
Either she or her husband was a lawyer. At the time I was convinced that there was a little ‘professional courtesy’ going on between the trial judge & the defense.
I think our judicial system allows judges to override juries far too often. The principle of trial by jury is written into the Constitution. It should be treated with great deference.
The judgment of twelve individuals is wrong far less often than the judgment of one, in the long run.
Well now, thanks for your “thoughts”. I simply don’t care what you think.
Signed,
A dog lover
I knew someone would get their panties in a bunch over that statement. But, it’s true, no one cares about your dog.
I’ve accepted that same concept as it relates to my kids. No one else cares that my kids may be cute, smart or funny.
I can’t see what comment #4 was, but you can always count on an animal story to receive at least one anti-animal reply at Free Republic.
I didn’t know conservatism means thinking animals are worthless.
Glad you set him straight.
Actually, it wasn’t anti-animal. It was anti-those people who foist their dogs on other people. Bringing their huge slobbery dog to other people’ homes. Allowing their yelpy dog to bark all night while neighbors try to get sleep. Allowing their dogs to jump all over people when they enter their home...
By the way, the moderator was wrong to take down my comment, it wasn’t racist or contain foul language. It’s a bit Hitler-esque to take down posts merely because you don’t agree with them.
There's a saying that "not all pit bull owners are drug dealers, but all drug dealers own pit bulls."
So upscale left coast type drug dealers go with Presa Canarios...
And these restaurants that allow people to bring their dogs in...yeah, that’s healthy and appealing.
Like I need to see-and hear-some dog licking his scrotum while I’m trying to eat my California wrap and drink my green tea.
Unfortunately there are plenty of dog owners like her and it seems as if the number is growing. Too many people like her own too many dogs. A well trained, well behaved animal is wonderful. But these morons who are too stupid or too indifferent to train a dog have no business owning one and should be punished severely for any harm done by their out of control beast.
I agree, I wish they would have left it up.
I don’t know what you said. But I do notice that whenever an animal related story appears on Free Republic, some here come across as if they dislike animals.
It’s funny when it is tongue in cheek, but that is not always the case.
But I agree that comments should not be taken down so often.
I completely agree. She blamed the chew toy victim who was mauled to death by her two vicious dogs who had a bite history. She got off far to easy given the horrific manner in which that woman died.
I had to watch a Presa one weekend while some friends were away at a wedding.
Great dog. Fawn colored female, was 100-110lbs iirc.
Wasn’t quite as big as a Mastiff, and not as long a a Wolfhould... but when walking it, people would look as if I had a Raptor on the leash. You don’t get that look from any other dog. I got a guy near me that owns what looks like a Husky/Wolf mix with white/blusih eyes... that isn’t nearly as intimidaing as the Presa.
With that said... I can’t imagnine keeping two 140lb ones in a house, much less an apartment. EVEN if you magically trained them to use the toilet themselves.
My parents still have 10 acres and a farm house out in rural VA. That’s the minumum I’d want if I owned one of those dogs.
You left out one key point. The lawyers who were in the dog business with the Nazi were Jewish. (And, of course, the victim was a lesbian).
I knew she was a lesbian but I didn’t know they were Jewish. Thanks for the info, its a strange story....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.