Comments for Murder conviction reinstated in S.F. dog mauling »

RSS Join the Discussion

Comments So Far: 2

- Display No Filter Fair Comments - 25% and above Good Comments - 50% and above Excellent Comments - 75% and above

• 100%

  berkeley1 year, 4 months ago

  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

  the pelican bay connection makes this case even stranger. that detail did not enter into the basis for decision, but it sure got the public's attention.
  
  look at the comments at the end of the story.

  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 100000) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 100000)

  Reply

  0 Replies

  loading ...
• Neutral

  DeadXXXManXXXTalkin1 year, 4 months ago

  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

  bizarre case
  
  especially the idea that if you know your dog is capable of killing someone and expose others to the danger you are liable for murder
  
  'capable', not 'likely'
  
  any dog past a certain size is capable of killing someone. The ramifications of that precedent are mind-blowing
  
  the fact that the woman said she didn't know her ONE HUNDRED FORTY POUND dog was capable of killing someone and a Judge believed her is patently ridiculous, an extension of the ridiculous legal idea.
  
  the firggin dog outweighs a large segment of the population
  
  stupidity and tragedy, common bedfellows
  
  God save me from the ignorant clutches of the law

  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 100000) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 100000)

  Reply

  0 Replies

  loading ...