2013 Dog Bite Fatality: Union City Boy, 6, Killed by Uncle's Pet Pit Bull

Union City boy killed by family pit bull
Nephi Selu pictured with Kava, the family pit bull that killed the child.

Mother Speaks Out
UPDATE 06/20/13: The 2-year old male pit bull named Kava that killed a 6-year old boy was euthanized on Tuesday. On Wednesday, the dog owner was identified as Kelala Keanaaina, a San Mateo police officer, and the boy's uncle. Now the boy's mother is speaking out for the first time. Tilema Selu said Nephi was her only child. She said that Nephi was very close to the dog, which is why this comes as a shock. She described it as "one best friend turning on the other."

"All of this is definitely a shock because it's almost like two best friends that turned on... like one best friend turned on the other," she said.

Selu added, "we felt confident that it was a protector of our children," showing that she entrusted the false Nanny Dog myth. During Dog Bite Prevention Week this year, even Donna Reynolds of Bad Rap admitted the Nanny Dog myth was fabricated. Reynolds may have made the admission because pit bulls continue to maul and kill children at an escalating pace. Unfortunately, once a myth gets rooted, it's difficult to stamp out, resulting in more dead children like Selu's son.

Kelala Keanaaina acquired the dog two years ago. According to SFGate.com, the dog was not neutered. The boy's uncle bought into the Nanny Dog myth too. Keanaaina said, "We brought the dog into our home as a pet to help protect life [Nanny Dog myth] and to help watch over [Beware of Dog sign], and by no means did we know that he was going to take life." [Pit bulls kill more human beings than all dog breeds combined.] - Bracketed, italic text added by DogsBite.org.

The ABC 7 article also said that at the time of the attack, Nephi was playing with his young cousins in the backyard. It was his cousins who said the boy had been "riding the dog like a horse" when it suddenly threw the boy to the ground and latched onto his head. One tried to pull the dog's stomach to get it off the boy and another grabbed his leash, trying to yank it away. When his uncle was alerted, he came outside and shoved his hand into the dog's mouth and the dog released.

Another Defense Attorney

Back at the SFGate article by Henry Lee that continues to be updated, we learned that attorney Harry Stern was also present at the boy's home on Tuesday with Michael Rains. Both work for a law firm that represents police officers in the Bay Area. Stern described the boy's injuries as needing "a couple of stitches," -- everybody, according to Stern, assumed he would be fine "after a couple of stitches." Stern said it was an "unfortunate tragedy" and the breed was irrelevant.


06/19/13: Relationship Clarifications
New information provides additional clarification on family members living in the home. The attack happened at the boy's grandparents' Union City home. The owner of the dog was the boy's uncle -- still the unnamed San Mateo police officer. The officer's wife and the boy's aunt, Iona Keanaaina, both also live at the Union City home. Defense attorney Michael Rains, now being called the family spokesman, said that Nephi Selu's mother lived at the residence as well.

A variety of "may" or "was" statements regarding whether the boy did or did not attempt to climb on the dog's back have been confusing in the flood of news articles as well. "May have attempted" is complete speculation and stems from the original statement from police Cmdr. Ben Horner. No evidence has arisen thus far that there was an eyewitness to this alleged behavior. So "was attempting" is hogwash and a horrible device used to blame this 6-year old boy for his own death.

Also included in this Associated Press article (published late Tuesday) is a quote from Keanaaina. She told KGO-TV, "[The male dog] played with kids, very obedient, he was never allowed in the house, stayed right at the door, so we never had any problems with him at all." Furthermore, to eliminate the severity of the head injury that killed this boy, Rains stated that the dog's owner "believed the boy's injuries were not very serious and went to work before learning he had died."1

06/18/13: Defense Attorney Appears
NBC Bay Area reported earlier that the pit bull that fatally attacked a 6-year old boy is owned by a San Mateo police officer. The information came from a relative and high-profile defense attorney Michael Rains,2 who represents police officers throughout the Bay Area. Rains was seen Tuesday walking into the home where Nephi Selu was attacked. The young boy was attacked on Monday at 11:30 am. He died several hours later at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital in Palo Alto.

"I feel like all of this is a dream, like a bad dream," said the boy's aunt, Iona Keanaaina. "I wish I could just wake up."

The wife of the San Mateo police officer, Iona Keanaaina,3 said her family is so upset that they do not care what happens to the pit bull-mix named "Gava." She said that Nephi was an only child who just graduated from kindergarten in Union City. He lived with his extended family -- including her eight children -- at the same home. Keanaaina said her husband has been a police officer for nine years. The family pit bull was impounded and is being held for a 10-day quarantine.

06/18/13: Visiting Grandparents' Home
News about the latest pit bull fatality continues to unfold. Nephi Selu of Dixon was staying at his grandparents' home in Union City when the dog attacked. "According to family members, the boy was actively playing with the dog and may have attempted to climb onto the dog's back," said police Cmdr. Ben Horner. "The dog attacked the boy and bit him on top of his head." The owner said the dog "had never been involved in a biting incident in the past," Horner added.

Nephi lived in Dixon, but had been on an "extended visit" at his grandparents' home, according to police. Neighbors said the boy seemed to be living there and had been attending school in Union City. Arthur Kouns, a neighbor, said the family keeps two pit bull-mix dogs in the backyard. He said the dogs have not been a problem in the past and he only heard the animals barking "once in a blue moon." A Beware of Dog sign, however, is posted on the fence of the grandparents' home.

06/18/13: Boy Killed by Dog
Union City, CA - In a developing story, a 6-year old boy was killed by a dog on Monday. The attack happened at a home on Elizabeth Way about 11:00 am. A neighbor said the boy lived with his grandparents at the home along with several of his cousins. The fire department confirmed to ABC 7 News that the attacking dog was a pit bull or pit bull-mix. Neighbors told the news station that two pit bulls lived at the home. At least one of the dogs was taken away by animal control.

The SFGate reported that the boy died at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital in Palo Alto. The boy has been identified as Nephi Selu. Police are expected to provide more information on Tuesday. The boy's death is not the first in the Bay Area to be attributed to a family pit bull. In 2011, Darla Napora, 32-years old, was killed by her pet pit bull in Pacifica. She was pregnant at the time. In 2010, Jacob Bisbee, 2-years old, was killed by three pit bulls at a relative's home in Concord.

map iconView the DogsBite.org Google Map: California Fatal Pit Bull Maulings.
1Such a nice touch Rains!
2Raines is painful to listen to "[The attack] is almost inexplicable" and "the dog was not vicious" even though it latched onto a boy's head killing him. It is his job, however, to defend the police officer dog owner.
3In the video the aunt said, "This is the first time they ever took a dog in." Her police officer husband was clearly aware of the miserable safety record of this breed. Why not our first dog be a pit bull (in a house with eight kids)?

Related articles:
08/15/11: 2011 Dog Bite Fatality: Pregnant Pacifica Woman Killed by Family Pit Bull
08/05/10: 2010 Dog Bite Fatality: Concord Child Killed by Step-Grandfather's Pit Bulls

2013 Dog Bite Fatality: Child Temporarily Staying with Aunt Killed by Neighbor's Dog

Ayden Evans, killed by bullmastiff in Arkansas
Ayden Evans, 5-years old, was killed by a bullmastiff while visiting a neighbor's home.

Victim Identified
UPDATE 06/13/13: The parents of a 5-year old boy mauled to death by a bullmastiff spoke out late Wednesday. Mica Evans, the boy's mother, said that her son Ayden Evans liked spaghetti and playing with Ninja Turtles. His mother said Ayden was staying with her sister for the summer, when he was allowed to go to a neighbor's home. That neighbor had a bullmastiff that attacked and killed her son. "I don't know the people he was with. Never met them. I don't want to," Evans said.

The boy's family is from Oklahoma. After learning about his death, Ayden's parents drove from Oklahoma to Arkansas to bring their son back home. The boy's father, Greg Moore, said they still don't know the extent of their son's injuries. The funeral director told them that Ayden cannot be seen -- It has to be a closed casket funeral. The parents are still awaiting the autopsy report. They had their son cremated. A memorial service is being planned for Ayden in Oklahoma.

"He should be home. I should not be taking him home in an urn." - Mica Evans

His parents clarified reports about Ayden being in Oklahoma during the recent tornados. The boy's family was affected by the storms, but Ayden was not there. He went to Arkansas for summer vacation before the storms hit, Evans said. His mother also cleared up rumors about her sister taking custody of Ayden prior to the attack. She said that is just not true. Evans hopes charges are filed against the dog's owner. She added, "I am upset with everyone, including myself."

06/12/13: Victim Still Unnamed
Garland County authorities have still not released the name of the 5-year old boy killed by a dog on Sunday. The child suffered "major lacerations to the head and neck," according to a police report. New ownership information about the dog, however, has been revealed. Mary Bournival, one of the 13 Justices of the Peace for Garland County and heads the committee for animal control, said, "The Geilings were taking care of the dog for their son, who is serving overseas."

"This is a situation where vulnerable people were unprepared and unable to ward off such a dangerous breed," she added. Bournival's committee has been discussing a new dog ordinance for months. The boy's death is a tragedy she feared would happen. "Our county does not have any regulations for dangerous dog breeds. All they need are rabies vaccinations. They don't need licenses, they don't need registration, they do not even need to be on a leash," Bournival said.

06/10/13: Killer Dog Located
Authorities in Garland County have located the bullmastiff that attacked and killed a 5-year old boy on Sunday.1 Authorities said the boy became upset and was crying. While a family friend was trying to calm him down, the dog came in from another room and attacked the boy -- it does not appear thus far the child was left unattended with the large animal. Details about how or why the dog fled after attacking the boy were not provided. The child's name has not been released.

06/10/13: Killer Dog AWOL
Over the last 12 hours, we learned that 50-year old Lynne Geiling of Jessieville owns the dog with her husband, according to Garland County Deputy Scott Hinojosa. Geiling told police she tried to pull the animal off the boy, but by the time she got them separated, the child had sustained serious injuries to his head and neck. The couple's dog, described as bullmastiff, allegedly ran away after the attack.2 As of late Sunday night, animal control was still searching for the attacking dog.

Deputies said the boy and his 2-year old sister are from Moore, Oklahoma. The two children had been staying with the Jessieville couple for about two weeks while their parents try to rebuild -- their home was destroyed in the EF5 Moore tornado. "You can't imagine, you know, what this family and friends are going through right now," Hinojosa said. Geiling and her husband are described as family friends. Authorities continue to investigate; charges remain possible.

06/09/13: Boy Killed by Dog
Jessieville, AR - A Garland County Sheriff's Office spokesperson confirmed that a dog killed a 5-year old boy on Sunday. The child was bitten by a bullmastiff in Jessieville off Highway 298, according to deputies. The child was transported to Mercy Hospital in Hot Springs were he was pronounced dead. Tragically, the boy's family was in town staying with loved ones after their home was hit by one of the two EF5 tornadoes in Oklahoma last month. Updates are expected shortly.

View Related video

1A separate article reported that Hot Springs Animal Control said the dog was killed by a resident on Monday.
2A "missing" family dog after a fatal dog attack is suspicious. Further, it appears no authorities have even seen the dog, calling into question whether the dog is a bullmastiff or not. The very people who likely offered the breed description, the dog's owners, are being investigated in connection to this boy's death.

Related articles:
09/11/12: 2012 Dog Bite Fatality: Jefferson County Woman Attacked by Own Pit Bulls Dies
08/13/11: 2011 Dog Bite Fatality: 4-Year Old Boy Killed by Grandfather's Rottweiler in Ozark
10/29/09: 2009 Dog Bite Fatality: Toddler Wanders from Babysitter's Home; Killed by Pit Bull

Photo: Fox16.com

How Germany Regulates Dangerous Dog Breeds -- Reader Provides Translation

Laws Target Criminals and Owners Pay Special Taxes

DogsBite.org - Every now and again, a surprising email arrives at DogsBite.org from a foreign country. This one is sure to inspire new ideas about regulating dangerous dog breeds. In May, a reader from Germany sent in a description of breed-specific legislation in Germany. We used Google Translate to convert the German Wikipedia page mentioned in the description, which also describes breed-specific laws in Austria, Switzerland, Lichtenstein, Denmark and France.

To briefly summarize, in Germany it is difficult for non-law abiding citizens to own pit bulls. Jurisdictions can also create a special tax for pit bulls and other dangerous dogs. Nürnberg, for instance, charges pit bull owners an annual tax of over $1,300 U.S. dollars. In Germany, a combination of federal, state and local laws restricts the importation, trading and breeding of pit bulls and often prohibits ownership by individuals with perilous (criminal, addiction) backgrounds.

Despite staggering observed evidence in the U.S. that pit bulls are the "breed of choice" for criminals, particularly drug-related criminals,1 and have been since the 1980s,2 and that police officers are routinely forced to shoot dangerous pit bulls during the line of duty, DogsBite.org has not run across one jurisdiction in the U.S. since the launch of this website that prohibits these types of criminals from owning this dog breed. Germany's approach directly tackles this problem.

The attack that sparked public outcry in Germany to ban "combat" dogs involved a pit bull and a Staffordshire terrier brutally killing a 6-year old boy on a school playing field in Hamburg in 2000. "We can't allow children to be put in danger simply because of the quirks of a few dog owners," Interior Minister Otto Schily said in response. "You cannot avoid coming to the conclusion that these dogs are dangerous." Hundreds took to the streets demanding government action.

It is a fascinating read. Comments are open to anonymous commenters.


Dear Dogsbite.org members,

As I appreciate your efforts to increase the safety of American citizens, I would like to report some efficent examples of breed-specific legislation in Germany.

1. Executive summary
Pit bulls owners in Germany are subject to multiple restrictions:

  • Breeding, selling and trading of pit bulls is prohibited. Only adopting is allowed.
  • They must get a written permission from the Animal Control Officer before adopting a pit bull under the following restrictions:
    a.) They must prove their ability to handle the dog
    b.) They must not have a criminal record nor a drug addiction
    c.) They often have to pay a special tax

2. General overview
Since the 1990s, when some fatal pit bull attacks occurred on public streets, the ownership of dangerous dogs in Germany has been gradually regulated by dog laws.

  • The importing and trading of pit bulls is prohibited by German federal law unless the owner provides a local permission to have a pit bull.
  • Animal breeding is subject to state legislation, so each of the 16 states in Germany has its own dog law that prohibits the breeding of dangerous dogs.
  • Of the 16 German states, 15 have breed-specific legislation. 15 states restrict pit bulls, 5 states restrict rottweilers and 1 state restricts dobermans. (just count the red and green cells)
  • In Austria, 3 of 9 states have breed-specific legislation and in Switzerland, 12 of 25 states have breed-specific legislation. In Geneva, for example, 15 breeds are prohibited, with an exception for pre-ban animals.

3. One example of a state-specific dog law
The state of Saxony has one of the shortest dog laws, so I will translate the most important restrictions:

Article 1

Dangerous dogs are those that
  1. Belong to a dangerous breed (American Staffordshire Terrier, Bull Terrier and Pit Bull Terrier) unless a certified veterinarian has proven their good character
  2. Have ever attacked humans or other animals

Article 2

Breeding of dangerous dogs is prohibited

Article 3

Buying and selling of dangerous dogs is prohibited

Article 4

Training dogs to attack humans is prohibited

Article 5

Keeping dangerous dogs requires a license which is only granted to adults who fit the legal conditions
  1. Must be over 18 years old, must prove knowledge of how to handle a dog, must have insurance and must keep the dog on a fenced property
  2. Dogs bought in 2000 or earlier may be kept without a written license if the other conditions are met
  3. County officers may prevent individuals from keeping or breeding a dangerous dog
  4. Dangerous dogs may not annoy other people
  5. Dog owner's property must be labelled "Beware of the dog"
  6. County officers may check dog owner's property

Article 6

Dangerous dogs must be leashed and muzzled when in public

Article 7

The dog owner must notify the officer when he abandons his dog

Article 8

The owner of a dangerous dog must pass a written exam in order to prove theoretical knowledge of how to handle his dog

Article 9

People
  1. Who have once been convicted to more than 60 days in prison with or without probation (= or an equal fine which is calculated according to days in prison) or
  2. Who have twice been convicted to less than 60 days in prison with or without probation within in the last five years, not including the time in prison itself
  3. Who are addicted to alcohol or drugs
  4. Who are mentally or physically disabled may not own a dangerous dog

Article 10

Cities may impose a special dog tax for dangerous dogs (= about 600 EUR per year)

Article 11

Breeding of dangerous dogs and ordering the dog to attack may be punished with two years in prison

Article 12

Keeping a dangerous dog without permission, without proper fence or without leash, allowing them to run on playgrounds or owning more than one dangeous dog may be punished with up to 25,000 EUR fine.

Article 13

Officers may enter private houses in order to check the dogs (= a modest infringement of constitutional rights for reasons of public safety)

Article 14

Local dog restrictions (= e.g. in parks) may be added according to legal authorization

Article 15

This law is valid on August 25th, 2000

4. Other dog laws
Other German states have similar conditions for owning a dangerous dog. These dog laws may impose a written request for owning a pit bull.

  • More restricted breeds
  • Another definition of criminal record
  • Restrictions for homeless people who cannot have a pit bull in Thuringia, for example.

5. Taxation3
German cities may impose a dog tax for the purpose of restricting the number of dogs. Several courts have approved higher taxes for pit bulls and other dangerous breeds. Of the 15 largest cities, 9 have a special pit bull tax while 6 do not.

"Dangerous dog tax" for pit bulls and other vicious dogs - Annual4
Nürnberg 1,056.00 EUR 1354.64 US
Frankfurt am Main 900.00 EUR 1154.52 US
Essen 852.00 EUR 1092.95 US
München 800.00 EUR 1026.24 US
Stuttgart 612.00 EUR 785.07 US
Düsseldorf 600.00 EUR 769.68 US
Hamburg 600.00 EUR 769.68 US
Hannover 600.00 EUR 769.68 US
Dortmund 432.00 EUR 554.17 US
General dog tax for all breeds - Annual
Köln 156.00 EUR 200.12 US
Bremen 122.64 EUR 157.32 US
Berlin 120.00 EUR 153.94 US
Duisburg 114.00 EUR 146.24 US
Dresden 108.00 EUR 138.54 US
Leipzig 96.00 EUR 123.15 US


6. Impact on dog bites

Since the introduction of dangerous dog laws, which faced much opposition by dog owners, many pit bulls have been confiscated because the owner did not fit the legal requirements. After drug consumption or driving while drunk, pit bull owners automatically lose their license to own a dangerous dog. (A small group is trying to abolish the pit bull restrictions).

As a consequence of strict pit bull regulation, the number of pit bull attacks has decreased. The following spreadsheets shows the number of reported dog attacks in Berlin between 2001 and 2011 according to Claudia Hämmerling, State House of Representatives (she is not in favor of BSL).

This spreadsheet includes all reported cases where humans (=Menschen) have been charged (=angesprungen) or injured (=verletzt) by dogs.


1Not to leave out the painfully obvious animal fighting + drug trafficking combination, 2013 and 2010 examples here.
2Page 4, recall this was published in 1987:

"I just saw a surprising statistic from a Los Angeles study," Steve Blackwood, a sergeant in the San Diego Sheriff's Department, said recently. "In two out of three narcotics raids, pit bulls were used as the guard dogs." San Diego investigators also were told that local members of motorcycle gangs were stashing their drugs beneath the doghouses of their pit bulls. "Street dope dealers and street gangs have gone to pit bulls," says Budd Johnson, an inspector for the U.S. Marshals Service who is based in San Diego. Law enforcement officials are seeing the same thing all over the country, and the pit bull populations in urban areas..."


3The author provided additional notes on dog taxes and Breed-Specific Taxation (BST) in a follow up email.
  • Bad Kohlgrub, a small town in Bavaria, has the highest "dangerous dog tax" in Germany: 2000 EUR per year (however with grandfathering). I have focused on the 15 largest cities, because their suburbs and many small cities have a similar taxation system. Taxation in small towns and villages is usually lower. However, it's not my intention to disclose the village with the lowest tax rate.
  • Concerning the general dog tax, there is usually a 50% tax discount for service dogs, rescue dogs, farm dogs, welfare beneficiaries etc, and a temporary tax discount for shelter adoptions. However, vicious dogs are explicitly excluded from any discount.
  • There is a logical contradiction between my explanations of Art. 10 and the dog tax rates:
    Art. 10 - Cities may impose a special dog tax for dangerous dogs (= about 600 EUR per year)
    Art. 10 - Cities may impose a special dog tax for dangerous dogs (= usually between 200 EUR and 2000 EUR per year)

4Exchange rate calculations of US dollars was performed on May 25, 2013.

Related articles:
08/29/11: Victoria Signals End to Unregistered Pit Bulls After Fatal Attack
02/06/10: Ecuador Joins International Trend: Bans Pit Bulls and Rottweilers as Pets

DogsBite.org Publishes Rebuttal Letter in Defense of Texas Medical Study

Mortality, Mauling and Maiming by Vicious Dogs

DogsBite.org - In April 2011, the Annals of Surgery published a study about severe and fatal injuries inflicted by pit bulls, Mortality, Mauling and Maiming by Vicious Dogs, produced by Texas doctors. The study concluded: "Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges, and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs. Strict regulation of pit bulls may substantially reduce the US mortality rates related to dog bites."

The study enraged pro-pit bull advocacy groups.

On April 26, 2012 the Maryland Court of Appeals issued its landmark ruling Tracey v. Solesky that declared pit bulls inherently dangerous and attached strict liability when a pit bull attacks a person. This liability is extended to the landlord when a tenant's pit bull attacks, as was the case in Solesky. The Court cited the entire abstract of the Texas medical study in its opinion. This further enraged pit bull advocates and animal welfare groups that opposed the Court's decision.

In May 2012, Karen Delise of the National Canine Research Council, an entity that produces pro-pit bull propaganda ad nauseum, sent an e-letter of complaint to the Annals of Surgery about the study, berating the doctors. Delise's letter was recently posted to a forum board (scroll to read E-kul's comments). In July 2012, a board member of DogsBite.org wrote a rebuttal to Delise's e-letter. Due to submission technology difficulties, the journal did not receive this response.

DogsBite.org is publishing it now for the record.

RE: Imprudent use of Unreliable Dog Bite Tabulations and Unpublished Sources by Karen Delise
by Carol Miller | July 17, 2012

Carol Miller RN Disclosure: Board Member of DogsBite.org, a national dog bite victims’ group dedicated to reducing serious dog attacks.

Regarding the recent e-letter to the editor of the Annals of Surgery written by Karen Delise, Licensed Vet Tech (LVT) with her thoughts on the April 2011 publication of, Mortality, Mauling, and Maiming by Vicious Dogs by Doctors Bini, Cohen et al.
Full disclosure by Ms. Delise would have shown that the National Canine Research Council, LLC is owned by the same individual that owns Animal Farm Foundation whose mission statement is: “Securing equal treatment and opportunity for ‘Pit Bull’ dogs.” I believe that this breed-specific advocacy viewpoint may color Ms. Delise’s remarks.
I find significant errors in Ms. Delise’s arguments. First, she takes issue with a case presentation. She states that there is “no documented evidence from any authority that either dog involved in the incident were pit bulls.” The mauling death of an 11 month old baby is hardly an occurrence I would classify as an “incident.” Ms. Delise fails to recognize that the dogs involved were owned by the baby’s grandmother, who was present during the attack that occurred in her own home. The grandmother would presumably know what kind of dogs she owned. Furthermore, the grandmother was later charged with a first-degree felony because it was not the first or second time her two “pit bulls” had shown aggressive behavior.
Ms. Delise discusses the death of James Chapple Jr. She states that “Mr. Chapple received severe injuries but fully recovered and was discharged from the hospital.” Mr. Chapple’s left arm was amputated, his right arm was badly mauled. A full recovery is impossible in this circumstance. Mr. Chapple’s injuries were so severe that a bill changing Tennessee law regarding vicious dogs was introduced. Video equipment was set up in Mr. Chapple’s hospital room so he could testify to legislators. Mr. Chapple lived long enough to see the bill signed into law. As a hospital nurse, I recognize that there are several reasons for discharge from the hospital, one is recovery, and another is that there is no further treatment that can be offered to the patient, they are discharged home with family care and Home Health nursing care. The listing of cardiovascular complications on the death certificate would not be unexpected. As a Cardiac Rehab nurse, I would expect cardiovascular deterioration in a newly disabled person with underlying coronary artery disease.
Another area of discrepancy is Ms. Delise’s “Unresolvable disagreement as to breed descriptor.” That case involved a two month old infant residing in Waianae, Hawaii, killed in the family home by a dog that Ms. Delise claims was a “Sharpei mix” and “not a pit bull.” A review of police records obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, shows the Honolulu Police Department Scientific Investigation Section report of a buccal swab sample “recovered from the mouth of a “pit-bull/shar-pei mixed dog.” The location named in the report was the Honolulu City and County Morgue. Page 5 of 6 of the Police Incident report names the dog as a “Sharpei/pitbull mix” as does a Follow Up report dated 10-5-08, and the CID Closing report dated 1/05/09, page 3 of 4. In the complete police report the dog is never identified as simply a “Sharpei mix.”
Ms. Delise ends her letter with her advice. “Dr. Bini and his colleagues would have been well advised to consult animal professionals on a subject matter that was clearly outside their area of expertise.” I would suggest that a scientific medical injury study pertaining to the public health and safety of human beings is only suited for human medical professionals.

Sincerely,
Carol Miller RN

DogsBite.org Incorporated is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity organization.


Noteworthy:

Delise's e-letter was never published in the physical journal. It was strictly an e-letter of complaint. Only medical professionals who are subscribers to the Annals of Surgery were able to read it. The number of medical professionals with an interest in her letter would be minimal. At last count, the e-letter had less than 30 views, according to the journal publication software system. Frankly, the only sunshine Delise's e-letter ever received was through promotion by Delise herself.

Related articles:
08/21/12: Maryland Court of Appeals Narrows Decision to Pit Bulls; Removes Cross-Bred Pit Bulls
04/30/12: Maryland Court of Appeals Holds Pit Bull Owners and Landlords Accountable...
05/21/11: Texas Doctors Produce Study: Mortality, Mauling and Maiming by Vicious Dogs