You are wrong.
From the link in post #72
The trial judge reduced Knoller's conviction to involuntary manslaughter, saying the defendant hadn't known her 140-pound Presa Canario was likely to kill someone. A state appeals court overruled the judge and said a defendant who knows he or she is subjecting someone to a danger of serious injury can be guilty of murder if the victim dies.On Thursday, the state's high court rejected both the lower-court standards and said Knoller, or any other defendant responsible for unintentional but fatal injuries, can be convicted of murder if they acted with "conscious disregard of the danger to human life.''
It would appear that although the breed is legal, their known dangerous properites would constititute "conscious disregard" I personally hope the b**ch (appropriate pejorative) goes back to jail.
Not at all. That just proves my point:
“conscious disregard of the danger to human life.”
That’s very difficult to prove. The Knoller case was a very good case for the prosecutor, and they needed a CA jury to get the conviction. I suspect that if they’d tried the case in GA, or here in FL, there would have been an acquittal. If you remember, that was a very high profile case. The put a lot of effort into it, and it made national headlines. The reason why it was so high profile is that such prosecutions are so unusual.
>It would appear that although the breed is legal, their known dangerous properites would constititute “conscious disregard” I personally hope the b**ch (appropriate pejorative) goes back to jail.<
The dogs’ dangerous propensities existed because they had been attack trained, by a convicted criminal. Had these dogs been spayed and neutered, and had they been socialized and obedience trained for control, not for mauling human beings, that woman would still be alive.