Do you know about the Dog Mauling Case in San Francisco?

[Siren]

 

[freakygirl]

Siren

Can you answer a question that has been bothering me for a few hours now?

Why do we have juries if judges can just throw these kinds of verdicts out?

 

[mistressastra]

A good question there. I would be furious as a jury member, knowing the judge thought our decision an incompetent one.
That's also why I quit voting. Seemed everytime something I had voted for had passed, some group would challenge it and a court would suspend its enactment or toss it altogether. Phooey!

 

[Nora]

For the *most* part I don't think that's a bad thing, FG. Juries are heavily (NOT entirely, people...I'm sure YOU are the exception!) comprised of the people who're too stupid to get outta jury duty.

It's the same rational that allows for the lifetime appointments of justices to the supreme court. It allows for the judiciary to be a steady and stable influence as opposed to the more...emotional decisions the average joe can and does make.

I'm not familiar enough with this case to express outrage or issue an "atta boy, judgiepoo!" though.

 

[Private Vasquez]

So are they gonna charge the dog?

 

[Azwed]

I saw it this afternoon in the paper. I don't know what to say about it I am shocked.

What was his reasoning exactly?

I am guessing he is appointed for life because the public outcry on this is going to be nasty.

 

[Starfish]

The fucking dog is dead.

 

[freakygirl]

http://msnbc.com/news/768293.asp?pne=msn



Nora, why have jury trials at all? Why not just let judges make the decision?

 

[Siren]

good question Freakygal

 

[cybergirly]

I want to know what this is going to do to many other cases that are coming up involving similar circumstances. For example there is a case in Northern California, near Tahoe, where a child was killed by his neighbors dog. The local DA has been pushing for 2nd degree murder charges, publically stating the SanFran case as an example. What ramifications will this judges actions have on other cases?

 

[RhumbRunner13]

To be convicted of second degree murder the woman needed to walk out the door saying " I think this dog is going to kill someone today." It is a terrible case, but the judge is there to interpret the law when it goes beyond the ability of a jury to do so. Had the defendants been remorseful and the victim not a lesbian in San Francisco I doubt that any charges would have been brought except possibly failure to control a dangerous animal.

Rhumb

 

[freakygirl]

Siren,

Thank you for explaining that. I almost understand

I have never understood our justice system. I probably never will. It's probably best that I just stay out of trouble.. so I don't have to deal with it personaly.

 

[Azwed]

To be convicted of second degree murder the woman needed to walk out the door saying " I think this dog is going to kill someone today." It is a terrible case, but the judge is there to interpret the law when it goes beyond the ability of a jury to do so. Had the defendants been remorseful and the victim not a lesbian in San Francisco I doubt that any charges would have been brought except possibly failure to control a dangerous animal.

Rhumb

I don't see what her being a lesbian has anything to do with it. So what she is a lesbian in San Fransisco aren't there a lot of lesbian/gays there? If she was where I was no charges would have been filed because she was a lesbian and she obvioulsy had it coming to her.

 

[seXieleXie]

Had the defendants been remorseful and the victim not a lesbian in San Francisco I doubt that any charges would have been brought except possibly failure to control a dangerous animal.

Rhumb

that is absolute bullshit. it has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the victim. for the love of god, the woman was brutally mauled to death by the animal.

 

[Azwed]

that is absolute bullshit. it has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the victim. for the love of god, the woman was brutally mauled to death by the animal.

Yes i agree and I think it was terribly callous of you to even suggest anything like that. I think you should appoligize.

 

[Nora]

thanks for the link, FG...I'm reading it *while* i type this! LOL

I think it's all about checks and balances. If we only had jury trials emotional verdicts would run rampant. If we only had bench trials the judges would be up for sale (which they are anyway, of course! LOL).

Siren, I do believe that there are many people who serve on juries who give thoughtful deliberation to the trial. I don't think I've actually met any of them, although I'm certain they exist.

I will say that if I were accused of a crime that I did NOT commit, I would opt for a bench trial. If I were accused of a crime that I did commit and felt that I would look sympathetic to my peers, I'd opt for a jury trial.

*reading the story now*

 

[Siren]

good point

 

[freakygirl]

here is more information

from the court tv website.

http://www.courttv.com/trials/dogmaul/061702_ctv.html

 

[Siren]

 

[Azwed]

Azwed he has a valid point,

In order to appease the gay community, the DA in San Francisco pushed this case for 2nd degree murder.
And if the Defendants had not gone on talk shows acting arrogant, they probably wouldnt have hurt their cases and thus not inflamed the gay community but calling the victim a dyke that was strong and should have been able to fight off the dogs.

So, since the Defendants brought in her sexual orientation, it became an issue, which made the gay community push for justice for one of their own, much like a black man getting killed would inflame a black community for justice in charging a murder with a hate crime........

correlation exists.

He wasnt being callous, just stating the facts.

Fine then he should have been a little more clear about it instead of just dropping it in like he did. Sounded more like an insult then anything else.

 

[Siren]

 

[seXieleXie]

siren, you of all people should understand that correlation isn't causation. the jury didn't award murder 2 because she was a lesbian. the jurt awarded murder 2 because of the way the defendents conducted themselves. there was an outcry from her community but just because it happened to be the gay community did not make it any more powerful that the community that would be behind a victim of a different demographic.

 

[Azwed]

ah, dont be all sensitive , you sound like a PM'sing woman.

bah men have mood swings too you know.

And I thought women liked sensative men as long as they weren't pansies.

 

[KillerMuffin]

Lex, the jury didn't have anything to do with DA deciding to prosecute them for second degree murder. They have nothing to lose or gain by what they do. The DA's career as made and broken on cases like these. They get elected in most places and they tend (not all of them) to do things with elections in mind.

 

[Siren]