California dog mauling trial goes to jury

AP Special CorrespondentLOS ANGELES (AP) -- The trial of two San Francisco attorneys in the dog mauling death of a neighbor went to the jury Tuesday after the judge threatened to jail a defense attorney for an improper objection.

In his final rebuttal, prosecutor Jim Hammer attacked defense attorney Nedra Ruiz for calling victim Diane Whipple's domestic partner a liar. But he said he wouldn't respond to Ruiz's allegation that he was trying to curry favor with San Francisco's homosexual community.

"I am not going to give Ms. Ruiz the dignity of a response to her charge. ... I think it's all a diversionary tactic," Hammer said.

The panel received the case at midmorning after final instructions from the judge.

Marjorie Knoller, 46, was charged with second-degree murder, involuntary manslaughter and owning a mischievous dog that killed a person. She could receive 15 years in prison if convicted. Her husband, Robert Noel, 60, faces the latter two charges and could face up to four years. He wasn't home when Whipple was fatally mauled in January 2001.

The defense said the attack was a tragic accident and could not have been foreseen, but prosecutors said the couple's dogs were well known to be dangerous.

At one point Ruiz stood and objected to Hammer's recounting of evidence about whether a dog was on a leash. Superior Court Judge James L. Warren chastised her in front of the jury and warned her that another improper objection could put her in "a holding cell."

Whipple, 33, was attacked by Bane, one of her neighbors' two presa canario dogs, in the hallway of her San Francisco apartment building on Jan. 26, 2001. A second dog, Hera, was present but its role remained unclear. Both dogs were put to death.

On Monday, Knoller's attorney hauled out bags of evidence she claimed were not adequately displayed, suggesting Hammer was hiding things.

"Maybe he wants to curry favor with the homosexual and gay folks who are picketing ... and demanding justice for Diane Whipple," Ruiz said.

But Hammer argued that the dogs were "time bombs" waiting to go off. He said there were plenty of warnings that the dogs were violent, including incidents in which the animals lunged at people on the street and at the couple's apartment building.

"It was perfectly foreseeable and they didn't stop it," he said of Knoller and Noel. "They got off on it some way -- power trips."

"Do not let them get away with their lies and don't let Marjorie Knoller get away with murder," Hammer said.

The prosecutor also showed photos of Knoller's cut hands after Whipple's death. The defendant claimed the injuries were sustained when Knoller tried to save Whipple by jumping on her during the assault.

"My mother gets worse wounds gardening," the prosecutor said. "Compare those to what happened to Diane Whipple."

Ruiz, in her closing arguments, said her client didn't know the dogs could become killers. Ruiz also accused the victim's domestic partner, Sharon Smith, of lying when she testified that Whipple suffered a previous bite by one of the dogs and feared them.

"Sharon Smith has every right to sue for the wrongful death of her girlfriend," Ruiz said. "But she has no right to come here with false testimony and try to frame Marjorie Knoller for murder."

Bruce Hotchkiss, Noel's lawyer, took a more measured approach. Showing jurors a virtual family album of the dogs' life with the couple, he portrayed them as beloved pets whose behavior would not have triggered warnings of trouble ahead.