CA appeals court reinstates conviction for woman whose dog killed a person.

Some of you might remember this story. It’s been discussed right here on the Boards, when the woman’s conviction was overturned.

Well, a state appeals court today overruled that decision and reinstated Marjorie Knoller’s murder conviction, which could apparently send her to jail for 15 years to life.

Next stop in the appeals process seems to be the State Supreme Court.

I’m not really pitting anything here, i guess. I would have simply added on to the original thread, but i know that the board admin prefers that we start new threads rather than reopen old ones. The original was in the Pit, and this sort of thing tends to stir up emotions, so i figured i’d put it here.

Dunno anything about the legal intricacies of CA law but from a purely visceral reaction I would be very happy if the bitch and her husband rotted in jail forever.

I’m very glad to see this turn of events myself. I think the husband should have been convicted as well, because he helped train the dogs and make them dangerous. Even though he wasn’t there as the dogs attacked, he was a big part of why those dogs killed, by his contributions towards making them “attack dogs”.

Yes, firstly training dogs in that fashion IMO is animal neglect and abuse and a crime in itself. Secondly if you’ve created something so dangerous you’re fully responsible for what happens with it, IMO.

I mean, no I don’t think parents should be responsible if their 15 year old goes insane and shoots up the school. But dogs are different, they can be trained to do things much more directly.

I also find it interesting that as a life long fan of dogs I’ve never heard of the Presa Canario breed.

As far as the legal intricacies go I thought I think the owners of these dogs put society at a grave risk very recklessly. But I thought when you killed someone by putting them at risk recklessly that was some form of manslaughter, and murder was only when you killed someone deliberately or incidentally in the commission of a felony (like spraying bullets around the room during a bank robbery, for example.)

GOOD.

I was still living in the Bay Area when Diane Whipple was killed and we were all horrified not only at her death, but at the callousness displayed by these fuckheads with the dogs. You get a couple of huge dogs, train them to attack people, put them in an apartment building, and then blame the victim (because she was wearing perfume) when they attack and kill her?

I’m usually not a vindictive person, but I’d like nothing better than for both of these nuts to spend a long time in jail.

I’m another one applauding this. Both those nuts were, at the very least, criminally negligent - and I do believe, based on the reports I’d read at the time, that murder had been planned.

I’m glad to see this.

Like OtakuLoki said, I’m glad to see this and for the same reasons. Their defense is “Well, we trained these dogs to kill, but the victim was wearing perfume that made them kill.” The scum also tried to use the victim’s lesbianism against her before the videotape of the scum and the dogs was found.

If a killer acts with extreme recklessness indicative of complete indifference to human life, it can qualify as something called “depraved heart murder,” which is a form of murder. It is sometimes subcategorized as second-degree murder, but it’s still more severe than manslaughter.

I remember the case but I don’t recall it being overturned.

What was the deal about them adopting the adult man in prison?

The verdict was set aside for “lack of evidence,” the trial judge having found that there was no evidence presented that distinguished the case from manslaughter.

The defendants were the attorneys for the imprisoned “Cornfed,” and apparently adopted him to get certain visiting privileges that lawyers don’t get. ( conjugal visits with Marjorie? ::shudder:: )

I think she was doing those dogs, too, if you believe everything you read. :eek:

I’ve heard the rumors, but did any reputable source ever state that evidence of bestiality had been found?

Just going by faulty memory, I recall reading in Rolling Stone some testimony, if not in actual trial perhaps preliminary, some refrences to the dog being trained to lick box.

Thats just nasty!

Is the man in jail?

Did anyone see the Law & Order episode based on this one? Did they bring the dogs into court in the actual case, like they did on tv?

At least one of the dogs had been put down by the time the case had reached trial. I found it horrifying to read Robert Noel’s (the husband) writings about the “timorous blonde” and how he reveled in the violence his dogs were capable of. Aren’t they also white supremecists?

Here is a link to Court TV’s page on the case, it has links to various documents that were used as evidence.

This page says that in a pretrial hearing, the judge wouldn’t let the prosecution introduce evidence of sex between the owners and their dogs. He didn’t say anything about why, and sealed the hearing record. It also confirms ties to the Aryan Brotherhood

Well that’s one way to classify a Presa Canario as a pit bull. :slight_smile: