Sounds like this could have been a whole lot worse. It also sounds like Gator's owner might be prosecuted. I wonder how many times the dog's name is going to come up in closing argument. http://www.galvnews.com/story.lasso?ewcd=0cd82e30caa41b66

Having a small child myself I would be pissed if I found out a "crowd" of people stood by and watch my boy get chewed on. I just can't find the words to really describe how I feel about this one. I know we have alot of APBT owners on this board but something has to be done. I dont care what breed it is if a dog attacks my child that is gonna be dead dog even if it is my own.

**When he found her, the resident told him she had no adult dog on the premises,**

**Glenn was treated at a University of Texas Medical Branch hospital and released. He suffered bites to his neck, back, chest, right thigh, right wrist and the back of his head. Reeves said they were fortunate the puncture wounds were not deep or wide enough to require stitches.

Stewart was treated and released from the hospital, although doctors recommended he remain off-duty and off his leg for the next few days while his swollen knee healed.**

This is a very bad owner/handler and she should not be allowed to have the dog back. The dog does sound like it was or is young. But the owner lied and could not control the dog. APB are very powerful and in the wrong hands dangerous. This women not only didn't seem to care that a child had been hurt by her dog she also could keep it controled enough to keep it from biting the cop. She's not very bright and should be held accontable.

I'm also amazed at the croud that gathered no one helped but one women? What's up with that?

Not to long ago I saw something about 5 little dogs running out and biting someone. The dogs did the same actions, but this pit will most likely be killed for it owners stupity; and the other owner? Most likely nothing.

Kids/people need to be taught that all dogs are pack anamils and can and do bite.
People need to learn how to handle these powerful dogs BEFORE they try turning them into some kind of house pet/family member/or even guard dog.
It is BAD owners that cause this kind of stuff and it just plain makes me mad.
It's not the breeds, it's the people who don't care enough to learn what kind of animal they have.
Kind of like having a loaded gun and letting the kids play with it, and then learning that one of them have been shot, and trying to firgure out why and what happened. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

It seems that more and more people are walking away from or just standing watching when awful things are happening-I know Ed's warned us about trying to break up dog fights, but surely when you see a child being mauled by a dog you'd just go into auto-pilot? Well obviously not as the report says but I know I would being a mother.
Just a remark not a criticism as I don't know how things are in the U.S., but my 5 and 6 year olds would not be playing out unsupervised other than in their own garden <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

Although I'd likely react to save a life in this type of situation, I know d*mn well that any of the following could happen:

I shoot the dog to save the child and the dog's owner sues me.

I shoot the dog and the child's parents sue me as I probably make more money than the dog's owner.

I shoot the dog and the police arrest me - and I lose my expensive firearm, plus I have to hire legal aid for my day in court.


The only truly safe course in a terrible situation like this is to do *nothing*. And make sure to thank a slimy attorney and the legal system for making this the reality of today's world. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

Sad but true....My vote is Shot the dog.

As a slimy a attorney, no one would be sued but the dumbaxx dog owner who probably does not have a nickle's worth of insurance to her name. Despite what you read about in the papers' jurys are made up of twelve people who collectively are generally smarter than any one individual.

Further despite insurance company propaganda frivolus lawsuit are all but B.S. I mean I like most attorneys in the personal injury field who work on a contigency fee contract do not like making stupid bets. I mean who is going to drop 10s of thousands of dollars on a frivolous case ( you show me an attorney that does that and I will show you one that will not be in buisness very long).

I have yet to meet the person who was being sued that said "yep you got me I sure screwed up" no they all say that the lawsuit is frivolous. Likewise I never met a plaintiff who said their suit was frivolous.

Accordingly maybe just maybe they both have a disagreement which needs to be resolved by the best legal system in the world. I promise you there is not one better. I mean please we trust jurys to give the death penalty,they know a bs case when they see one wether it is from the defendant or the plaintiff.

There may be some slimy attorneys out there just like there are some slimy dog trainers but neither will be in buisness very long.

I am sorry for the rant but I am tired of my profession and the jury system getting slamed when 99.9 percent of us are just doing the best we can while insurance companies and lobbiest shade the truth ( where are all the frivolous lawsuits) and help pass laws that in the end hurt the ordinary citizen. Unfortunately, the average guy does not know he is being fed a line of bull until its to late.

I mean it sure does not make me feel real good when I have to tell someone hey I know their negligence killed ___________ but the law has changed and there is nothing I can do for you. You try doing that a few hundred times and you might start thinking sleazy lobbist not lawyer.

As for me I hope I would have the guts to do the right thing and get the dog off that child.

You must be a defense attorney.

Nope, I was a prosecutor for a few years before I started doing personal injury. The only criminal defense I do is the ocassional DWI for the errant, relative, friend or client.

The only truly safe course in a terrible situation like this is to do *nothing*. And make sure to thank a slimy attorney and the legal system for making this the reality of today's world.


I agree with Trent.

I'm also a lawyer, and let me tell you rarely do a take a contingency fee case unless liability is acknowledged or highly likely, and in each case I have been on tenter hooks until liability was established.

The personal injury cases I've been involved in: not once would I have traded the injury for the money. It never seems worth it.

And of course, we all want the irresponsible dog owner to be on the hook, don't we, especially if they have some applicable insurance?

As a lawyer I would point out that the absolute liability statutes concerning dog bites can and do result in injustice, and shake downs of dog owners when the other party (victim) would otherwise bear a proportion of the fault.

An example is the "Can I pet your dog?" - "NO" - pet - nip - bite scenario.

I would blame the legislatures and public sentiment for this, not the practicing lawyers who may be well into a case before the true position of their client becomes apparent and of course are more likely than almost anyone else to be sued if they do not advance the interests of the client...

On the "shoot the dog" scenario: as a citizen I would not want anyone shooting a rifle or pistol in this situation with a crowd of people, and a highly mobile dog attached to a kid, unless that person was highly qualified to pull that trigger: ie police training or equivalent.

And if they were not, and made an error, then they should pay. So to me there are advantages to the status quo.

rgds andrew may