On March 28, 2008, 38 year old Amy Rice of Minneapolis, MN, saw the neighbor's pit bull jump the fence and savagely attack her Labrador retriever. "I was sure that my dog was dying in my arms; it was horrible," Rice said.

To save her dog, she began fighting off the pit bull, and biting it. "I didn't plan it, that's what happened. I broke the skin and had pit bull blood in my mouth," said Rice. (To read the story, click here.)

My first reaction to this story was amusement. However, on further thought I am struck by several things. First, Amy Rice is a very courageous woman. Second, the bond between dog owners and their dogs is amazingly strong. When a pet is under attack, people will jump in for the purpose of making a rescue. This is why pit bulls are particularly dangerous to people. A large percentage of my cases involve people who were bitten in an incident that started as a dog-on-dog attack.

On May 26, 2007, 71-year-old Carshena Benjamin of Collier County, Florida, was killed by put bulls. The death was not attributed to dogs, however, because the criminal investigation was quietly terminated later in the year. (For the interesting and disheartening story, click here.)

This news brings the 2007 death count to 32 for the USA. The main page of Dog Bite Law and several other pages will be updated with this information in mid-April. I am currently out of state for a dog bite trial.

Zachary King Sr., is on trial for second-degree manslaughter following his son's death. The family pit bull killed 7-year-old Zachary King Jr. in the basement of his home on August 16, 2007. This was a dog that many would say was abused and dangerous. The defendant admits that he warned people to stay away from it, but did not keep his own kids from it.

An article entitled Beloved pet, fearsome dog: dueling images of a child's killer on Twincities.com provides important details. I recommend reading the article and then thinking about this incident from the point of view of the defendant and, after that, the point of view of the prosecutor.

Because this dog previously had bitten many people, including 7-year-old Zachery, it clearly was vicious and dangerous as a matter of law. If the defense plans on offering nothing more than what was indicated in the article, Mr. King deserves to be convicted and banned from owning dogs in the future. The more interesting issue, in my opinion, is how we can educate people like him so that they can judge when a dog is too dangerous to keep.

Last year, the California Supreme Court ordered the Superior Court (California's trial court) to re-think its decision to order a re-trial for Marjorie Knoller on her conviction of second degree murder in the famous San Francisco dog mauling case. (For details, see The Diane Whipple Case.)

This week, the presiding judge of San Francisco Superior Court halted an effort to bring back retired Judge James Warren, who presided over the infamous dog-mauling case. The glitch has something to do with the fact that Warren (the grandson of Earl Warren, former governor of California and former Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court) is now a professional mediator with JAMS. As Warren himself puts it, "my JAMS clients come first." (Click here to read the article.)

A new judge will have to hear the case if Warren cannot. Already this is raising eyebrows because Warren, as the trial judge, is the most suitable bench officer to re-evaluate the new trial motion. Knoller will have yet another ground for appeal if a different judge arrives at a decision contrary to Warren's in 2001.

Adding insult to injury, a Toledo woman who was mauled by her own pit bulls has been criminally charged because of owning them. Natalie Rosas, 21, of Toledo, Ohio, was charged with failure to confine and restrain a vicious dog, a fourth-degree felony. If convicted, she faces up to 18 months in prison and a $5,000 fine. (Click here to read the article.)

It also should be noted that Toledo forbids any household from possessing more than one pit bull. She and her husband are reported to have had 7. Furthermore, when police arrived at the house after her mauling, the dogs appeared to be fighting each other and trying to bite people. Therefore it is not hard to understand why these charges have been filed.

The horror of a major dog attack is something we can only imagine. A particularly descriptive article, not for the squeamish, appeared this week in News of the World. It is a story that you should read if you can stomach it.

West Grimstead, Wiltshire, is a peaceful English village within commuting distance of London. In December 2007, Mandy Peynado, 48 (pictured), suffered more than 100 bites from a Rottweiler that she was helping to care for, at a kennel in the village. Among other things, he chewed off her arm and was eating away her flesh, during an attack that lasted many minutes. Fortunately she was rescued, but spent three days in a coma, had three blood transfusions and spent two weeks battling for her life in intensive care.

She is quoted in News of the World as saying that this "was a large dog but he had never shown any signs of aggression. There was no snarling, no barking, no noise." (Click on her photo to read the article, which contains very gruesome details not recommended for those who may be sensitive.)

This is one of the most graphic articles ever written about a dog mauling. Do not think, however, that her experience was unique. The details of other major dog attacks are just as horrific. I feel that people should read articles like the one about Ms. Peynado in order to understand the importance of laws that will adequately and fairly eliminate dangerous dogs.