Saturday, February 6, 2010


Donate to DogsBite.org
Please donate to support our work

DogsBite.org is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity organization. Learn more »


posted by   |  permalink  |  11 comments  | email  |icon blog rss  |icon comment rss 

11 comments:

Anonymous Dude I Bagged Ur Pit  |  2/06/2010 2:37 PM  |  Flag  
I'm trying not to laugh. Seriously. But her it is again; a pit bull behaving like a pit bull, and the idiots that would own one behaving like the idiots they are.

Bwaaaaaa-hahahahaha!!!

Anonymous Anonymous  |  2/06/2010 4:32 PM  |  Flag  
Details in the Zupf video indicate that both loose pits were owned by the male victim, but initial reports claimed one pit belonged to the younger female victim, and the owner of the other pit was MIA. I wonder, is this a case of the male owner lying and trying to throw his roommates under the bus? If so, I hope he has criminal charges pressed against him for filing a false police report and obstruction, in addition to any animal code violations.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  2/06/2010 5:43 PM  |  Flag  
Are we sure these were Pit Bulls without a DNA test?!?...That apartment scene looks like a Chimpanzee could have done that!

Anonymous Trigger  |  2/06/2010 8:05 PM  |  Flag  
I can't believe that the apartment complex allowed pit bulls -- typically, such properties have breed-specific laws.

The Independence is Hoboken's most luxurious new waterfront residence at The Shipyard, the Gold Coast's most coveted community.
---
http://www.appliedco.com/properties/rentals/independence.shtml

What's interesting in this case is who is going to get sued? New Jersey is a strict liability state.

The owner of any dog which shall bite a person while such person is on or in a public place, or lawfully on or in a private place, including the property of the owner of the dog, shall be liable for such damages as may be suffered by the person bitten, regardless of the former viciousness of such dog or the owner's knowledge of such viciousness.
---
http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/New_Jersey.html

I foresee a nasty, nasty battle and all amongst pit bull advocates.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  2/07/2010 5:07 AM  |  Flag  
I too cannot believe that a landlord would be CRAZY enough to allow pit bulls on his/her property.

Landlords are afflicted with enough lawsuits without begging for them, which is what allowing pit bulls is.

If they had the pit bulls there against the rules, the neighbors needed to report them and fast, or their own children will be the victims.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  2/07/2010 9:55 AM  |  Flag  
Another Joisey Darwin attack here:

http://www.nj.com/news/local/index.ssf/2010/02/somerville_cops_shoot_dog.html



Glad no law enforcement personnel were hurt!

Anonymous Anonymous  |  2/07/2010 10:57 AM  |  Flag  
At least one report showed a woman talking about the dogs (or other pit bulls in the complex) and that there had been some "situations" in the elevator. So management likely knew about the dogs.

Gee, it seems poor people and poor communities aren't to blame for the pit bull problem as many pit nutters would like for us to believe. The maulers attack in luxury apartments as well!

(Same deal in the case of Whipple! You gotta wonder what happened to those property owners. The criminal side of the case was SO HUGE, one never heard about the civil side.)

Anonymous Anonymous  |  2/07/2010 11:29 AM  |  Flag  
It appears that the apartment was a "dog friendly" apartment building; however, its possible the landlord was lied to about the breed, (perhaps they were called "terriers" or "boxer mixes".) The landlord may have dodged a bullet this time, because it appears that the owners/harborers of the dogs were the ones injured, not a neighbor.

This just emphasizes the importance of reporting other tenants who own pit bulls, via registered letter, to a landlord. If the landlord can claim they had no knowledge of the dogs living there, they can avoid legal liability. But once they are notified of the other tenants concerns, and are made aware of the exsistence of dangerous dogs, they can often be held liable for any damages to other tenants of guests. Most likely the landlords insurer will not allow it.

Blogger P.  |  2/07/2010 3:57 PM  |  Flag  
The Whipple civil case set a precedent in CA. The landlord lost and previously landlords had the upper hand in these types of suits. It put landlords in CA in a hurry to change their policies. Most stopped taking dogs period or at the least certain weight limits. It's difficult at best to find a rental in CA that allows bigger dogs and almost none that allow pits or pit types.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  2/08/2010 6:10 AM  |  Flag  
An assembly line of idiots!
After being told not to enter the apartment, they kept marching in, one after the other!

Anonymous Anonymous  |  2/08/2010 6:25 PM  |  Flag  
She must have be watching too much of the Tia Torres show...

Nice to see these maulers out of circulation.

Post a Comment »

archives: