2 year old dead after dog attack - shots fired

[texanjoker]

I wonder if this was a CHL holder or off duty leo that stepped up and stopped this vicious attack? Good for whoever it was having the courage to do so. Tragic for the family to loose their child in such a violent manner.

Witnesses told officers that an 18 year old male, an 8 year old female and a 2 year old male were walking home from the playground when a Bull Mastiff ran out from the garage at 4108 Pennington Drive and began attacking the 8 year old female. Witnesses were able to get the dog away from the female but he turned and began to attack the 2 year old male. The dog dragged the child down the roadway when shots were fired from an unknown person. The dog let go of the child and ran back to the residence he came from

http://www.statesman.com/weblogs/the-bl ... k-killeen/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[jmra]

Very sad.
Obviously the dog will need to be put down, but the owner needs to be held responsible. What's your take? How should the owner be charged?

[Oldgringo]

Very sad.
Obviously the dog will need to be put down, but the owner needs to be held responsible. What's your take? How should the owner be charged?

2nd degree murder?

[texanjoker]

Very sad.
Obviously the dog will need to be put down, but the owner needs to be held responsible. What's your take? How should the owner be charged?

Honestly those are tough calls. I know if that were my dog I would put him down myself. I know they often charge a felony when the dog gets loose. Sometimes dog owners really do take good precautions and the dogs still get out. Sometimes they don't and it makes it easier to make the call. I would be curious to know the facts in this case about just that. Also were there prior incidents, how were the dogs housed, who owned the dogs, where were they, ect? I know I live on a corner lot and some people just love to bang on the fence to get my GS to bark. Could that be a case here where the dog was after a particular person that would agitate it? I know my police dogs would have never harmed a child, but some dogs don't make that distinction. No legal excuse, but they need to look at all facts before they reach a conclusion and having worked k9's for years, people just love to agitate dogs .

[hillfighter]

Very sad.
Obviously the dog will need to be put down, but the owner needs to be held responsible. What's your take? How should the owner be charged?

2nd degree murder?

Send him to North Korea and say he's related to Kim Jong-un.

[A-R]

Texas Health & Safety Code

Sec. 822.005. ATTACK BY DOG. (a) A person commits an offense if the person is the owner of a dog and the person:
(1) with criminal negligence, as defined by Section 6.03, Penal Code, fails to secure the dog and the dog makes an unprovoked attack on another person that occurs at a location other than the owner's real property or in or on the owner's motor vehicle or boat and that causes serious bodily injury, as defined by Section 1.07, Penal Code, or death to the other person; or
(2) knows the dog is a dangerous dog by learning in a manner described by Section 822.042(g) that the person is the owner of a dangerous dog, and the dangerous dog makes an unprovoked attack on another person that occurs at a location other than a secure enclosure in which the dog is restrained in accordance with Subchapter D and that causes serious bodily injury, as defined by Section 822.001, or death to the other person.
(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree unless the attack causes death, in which event the offense is a felony of the second degree.
(c) If a person is found guilty of an offense under this section, the court may order the dog destroyed by a person listed in Section 822.004.
(d) A person who is subject to prosecution under this section and under any other law may be prosecuted under this section, the other law, or both.

Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 678, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1989. Renumbered from Health & Safety Code Sec. 822.004 and amended by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 99, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1997.
Amended by:
Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 669, Sec. 5, eff. September 1, 2007.


Sec. 822.006. DEFENSES. (a) It is a defense to prosecution under Section 822.005(a) that the person is a veterinarian, a veterinary clinic employee, a peace officer, a person employed by a recognized animal shelter, or a person employed by this state or a political subdivision of this state to deal with stray animals and has temporary ownership, custody, or control of the dog in connection with that position.
(b) It is a defense to prosecution under Section 822.005(a) that the person is an employee of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice or a law enforcement agency and trains or uses dogs for law enforcement or corrections purposes and is training or using the dog in connection with the person's official capacity.
(c) It is a defense to prosecution under Section 822.005(a) that the person is a dog trainer or an employee of a guard dog company under Chapter 1702, Occupations Code, and has temporary ownership, custody, or control of the dog in connection with that position.
(d) It is a defense to prosecution under Section 822.005(a) that the person is disabled and uses the dog to provide assistance, the dog is trained to provide assistance to a person with a disability, and the person is using the dog to provide assistance in connection with the person's disability.
(e) It is a defense to prosecution under Section 822.005(a) that the person attacked by the dog was at the time of the attack engaged in conduct prohibited by Chapters 19, 20, 21, 22, 28, 29, and 30, Penal Code.
(f) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under Section 822.005(a) that, at the time of the conduct charged, the person and the dog are participating in an organized search and rescue effort at the request of law enforcement.
(g) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under Section 822.005(a) that, at the time of the conduct charged, the person and the dog are participating in an organized dog show or event sponsored by a nationally recognized or state-recognized kennel club.
(h) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under Section 822.005(a) that, at the time of the conduct charged, the person and the dog are engaged in:
(1) a lawful hunting activity; or
(2) a farming or ranching activity, including herding livestock, typically performed by a working dog on a farm or ranch.
(i) It is a defense to prosecution under Section 822.005(a) that, at the time of the conduct charged, the person's dog was on a leash and the person:
(1) was in immediate control of the dog; or
(2) if the person was not in control of the dog, the person was making immediate and reasonable attempts to regain control of the dog.

[The Annoyed Man]

Very sad.
Obviously the dog will need to be put down, but the owner needs to be held responsible. What's your take? How should the owner be charged?

2nd degree murder?

Negligent homicide.

[WildBill]

Very sad.
Obviously the dog will need to be put down, but the owner needs to be held responsible. What's your take? How should the owner be charged?

2nd degree murder?

Negligent homicide.

[Oldgringo]

Very sad.
Obviously the dog will need to be put down, but the owner needs to be held responsible. What's your take? How should the owner be charged?

2nd degree murder?

Negligent homicide.

You are probably more right than I. Inasmuch as IANAL, I tend to steer away from the numerous "legal debates" that pop up from time to time rather than argue and confirm my ignorance.

ITMT, an unrestained dog has apparently killed a kid.

[Right2Carry]

I wonder if this was a CHL holder or off duty leo that stepped up and stopped this vicious attack? Good for whoever it was having the courage to do so. Tragic for the family to loose their child in such a violent manner.

Witnesses told officers that an 18 year old male, an 8 year old female and a 2 year old male were walking home from the playground when a Bull Mastiff ran out from the garage at 4108 Pennington Drive and began attacking the 8 year old female. Witnesses were able to get the dog away from the female but he turned and began to attack the 2 year old male. The dog dragged the child down the roadway when shots were fired from an unknown person. The dog let go of the child and ran back to the residence he came from

http://www.statesman.com/weblogs/the-bl ... k-killeen/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is the exact reason a person who faces a charging dog should not assume the dog is friendly. I bet these dog owners would state their dog had never bitten anyone and only wanted to play.

My family members life is worth more than any animal on the planet and as such I will defend them against any and all threats human or not.

[jbarn]

The elements of murder do not fit this case.

I do not believe negligent homicide does either.

[Divided Attention]

I would love to know the full story. Not that ANY child deserves to be attacked, but a bull mastiff is usually a laid back breed. I feel like there is more to the story. Prayers for all parties involved.

[texanjoker]

The elements of murder do not fit this case.

I do not believe negligent homicide does either.

I don't believe there is enough to form an opinion about charges. The article is very limited without any real facts.

[Oldgringo]

The elements of murder do not fit this case.

I do not believe negligent homicide does either.

I don't believe there is enough to form an opinion about charges. The article is very limited without any real facts.

Something is missing from this story.

[puma guy]

At first I thought the headline was wrong about the age and this was the same story, but it's another different case.
http://www.aol.com/article/2014/03/02/n ... d%3D449487