Posted on April 23, 2013 by Colleen Lynn

2013 Dog Bite Fatality: 4-Year Old Mauled by Pit Bull Dies; Babysitter Arrested

Jordyn Arndt, 4-years old, was taken off life support Tuesday and died.

Trial Reset Again
UPDATE 08/26/14: For the second time, the criminal trial date for Jena Marie Wright, 26-years old, has been reset. Wright is charged with child endangerment causing death and neglect after her pit bull viciously attacked a little girl who was under her care. Jordyn Arndt, 4-years old, was airlifted to a hospital, but did not survive her injuries. She died on April 23, 2013. Court documents show that Wright's trial is expected to last five days. The trial was moved to December 8, 2014.

"Wright could potentially see up to 25 years in prison if convicted of child endangerment resulting in death, a Class B felony, and up to 10 years for a conviction of neglect or abandonment, a Class C felony.

The 26-year-old is also facing charges of assault on a peace officer causing bodily injury and interference with official acts in this case. Wright allegedly kicked the arresting officer — former Prairie City Police Chief Louis Modlin — in the chest during a struggle at 601 S. Norris St. in Prairie City." - The Newton Daily News

04/24/13: Parts of 911 Call Released
The Des Moines Register created a video of the 911 call; the news organization removed parts of the call. Gasping and sobbing between words, Jena Wright said, "My dog attacked the girl I was babysitting. I don't think --" Wright stayed on the phone for about 3 minutes, during which medics arrived. "She's not breathing. She has blood everywhere," Wright said. "My dog got her by the neck. Oh my God. I need an ambulance." Jordyn Arndt, 4-years old, did not survive her injuries.

"I'm trying to remain calm," Wright said on the call. "This has never happened before. I don't know what happened. Oh my God." - Jena Wright

On Monday, Jordyn was attacked by Wright's dog, a large pit bull named Brutus, in the backyard of Wright's Prairie City home. Wright, 24, was charged Tuesday with two felonies, child endangerment causing death and neglect or abandonment of a dependent person, along with several misdemeanors, including assault on a peace officer causing bodily injury. Combined, the felonies are punishable by up to 35 years in prison. Wright remains in the Jasper County Jail.

04/24/13: Previous Arrest of Babysitter
The Newton Daily News reports that Jena Marie Wright faces additional charges of interference with official acts and assault on a peace officer causing bodily injury; both charges are aggravated misdemeanors. Court documents also detail the felony charges pertaining to neglect or abandonment: "The defendant knowingly acts in a manner that created a substantial risk to the child’s physical safety by leaving her unattended with a large American Staffordshire dog."

The Daily News also reports that Wright, her husband Harmon Wright III and his father, Harmon Wesley Wright Jr., were arrested about a year ago on felony charges in connection with a marijuana growing operation. Wright was charged with neglect or abandonment of a child, possession of a controlled substance and three counts of failure to affix a drug tax stamp. The controlled substances were accessible to her 2-year old child who was removed from the home.

04/23/13: Babysitter Arrested
Prairie City, IA - On Monday, a 4-year old girl was attacked by a pit bull while under the care of her babysitter. Jordyn Arndt was airlifted to a hospital in Des Moines, but did not survive her injuries. On Tuesday, Prairie City Police arrested babysitter Jena Marie Wright, 24, of Prairie City in connection to the incident. Wright was charged with child endangerment resulting in death, and neglect or abandonment of dependent person. Wright was booked into the Jasper County Jail.

Buster Wright, who lives in the house where the girl was bitten, said the dog involved in the attack is an "American Staffordshire."

In 1936, the American Kennel Club (AKC) formally recognized pit bulls, but only under the name Staffordshire terrier in order to distance the breed from its use in dogfighting. In 1972, the AKC renamed the breed to American Staffordshire terrier. The legal definition of a pit bull, which is a class of dogs, includes the: American pit bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier, Staffordshire bull terrier and any other pure bred or mixed breed dog that is a combination of these dogs.1

View: Iowa breed-specific laws

1We strongly recommend that jurisdictions also include the American bulldog is this definition.

Photo: Des Moines Register

Posted on April 17, 2013 by Colleen Lynn

Compromise Bill Fails

Sign up: Support the Court Email Alerts | Follow: @Supportthecourt

Annapolis, MD - On April 8, the last day of the Maryland General Assembly's 2013 Legislative Session, after weeks of discussion, amendments and name calling from Delegate Luiz Simmons,1 the House killed the final negotiated bill that would have reversed the high court ruling and set forth a new dog bite liability standard. For months, the difference between the two chambers lay in reverting back to the pre-Solesky one bite rule or adopting a form of strict liability.

The last version of the bill, which was negotiated in a conference committee, created stronger protections for children 12-years old and younger. Under the bill, dog owners would have to provide "clear and convincing" evidence that they had no prior knowledge of their dog's propensity to bite for incidents involving this age group. For all other dog bite victims, dog owners would only have to prove lack of knowledge "by a preponderance" of the evidence, a reduced standard.

Essentially, persons 13 and older would be stuck with the one bite rule.2

DogsBite.org became involved in Tracey v. Solesky in the fall of 2011 after filing an amicus brief on behalf of the young mauling victim. On April 26, 2012 the Maryland Court of Appeals issued a ruling declaring pit bulls "inherently dangerous" and attached strict liability when a pit bull attacks a person. This liability extended to the landlord when a tenant's pit bull attacks, as was the case involving then 10-year old Dominic Solesky. This civil case is now resolved.

Since the ruling there have been two legislative attempts to undo the court's ruling, the August 2012 Special Session and the 2013 Session, which ended on April 8. We'll briefly discuss the highlights of the last session describing the bills and amendments, including the differences between the House and Senate chambers. These differences lasted into the closing hours of the session, causing the final negotiated bill to die and leaving the high court's ruling intact.

Defective Legislation Introduced

In January, Delegate Simmons and Senator Brian Frosh introduced matching "compromise" legislation into both chambers that alleged stronger protections for all dog bite victims. The Solesky family, their attorney, DogsBite.org and trial attorneys opposed the bills. Under the bills, once a dog owner proved "lack of knowledge" victims would still have to prove the owner knew or should have known of the vicious propensities of the dog, also known as the one bite rule.

The "compromise" bill, SB 160 (cross-filed as HB 78) became known as the "rebuttable presumption" bill and was defective from the start. The bill was little more than legal language that created the illusion of recourse for dog bite victims, while at the same time codifying the one bite rule into Maryland law. Specifically, SB 160 and its counterpart were silent on the proof a dog owner must establish to prove "lack of knowledge," thus by law it fell to the lowest level.3

To help clarify this, we've included a portion of the written testimony submitted by DogsBite.org to the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. (See: Full written testimony). Notably, both bills put forth since the Court of Appeals ruling fully abrogated the Court's ruling with little debate. The crux of the debate is whether to revert back to the pre-Solesky one bite rule or to advance the rights of all Maryland dog bite victims by adopting a form of strict liability for all dog breeds.

Summary

DogsBite.org strongly opposes "compromise" bill SB 160 and its House counterpart HB 78. We urge Senators to amend SB 160 by adopting strict liability.

The "compromise" legislation serves only to compromise the health and safety of all future Maryland dog bite victims. Instead of providing a remedy for these victims, the two bills carefully shield dog owners, landlords and insurance providers from financial responsibility after a damaging dog attack. The proposed legislation also appeases animal welfare groups. Not one of these groups in any way operates under a mission to protect the health and safety of human lives.

The very victims at the center of the high court's decision, sufferers of serious and deadly pit bull injuries, have been abandoned and silenced by this legislation, despite the fact that pit bull mauling deaths are up 556% since the Matthews ruling.

Under the "compromise" bills, a dog owner merely has to provide minimal evidence that he or she was unaware of any previous vicious acts by the animal. Afterward, the victim must still prove the dog owner knew or should have known of the dangerous or vicious propensities of the dog, effectively, the one bite rule.

Defective Legislation Advances

After the House unanimously passed HB 78, the only hope left was for the bill to be amended in the Senate. From the start, Senate members appointed to the Pit Bull Task Force in May 2012, and during the 2012 Special Session, when Senate members introduced a strict liability bill (which the House killed), the majority of Senate members favored strict liability for all dog breeds under the principal that dog owners should be responsible for the actions of their dogs.

Senator Bobby Zirkin stated it simply in March: "I love dogs but if my dog bites a little kid, I should be responsible for it -- not the kid and not the parents of the kids." Senator Zirkin made the statement after introducing an amendment to SB 160 that raised the level of proof required by a dog owner to establish "lack of knowledge." The former minimal rebuttable evidence required by the dog owner, "by a preponderance" of the evidence, was raised to "clear and convincing" proof.

The Senate adopted the amended version of SB 160 unanimously on March 14.

Predictably, the House unanimously rejected the amended bill and on March 27, the count down to the end of the session began in earnest. With just days remaining, a conference committee was created (3 members from each chamber) to iron out the differences between the two chambers. On the final day of the session, April 8, the conference committee negotiated a new compromise where only children 12-years old and younger qualified for the higher level of proof.

The Senate passed the negotiated bill unanimously. During the House debate, however, the bill was tabled -- House Speaker Michael Busch said the measure did not have enough votes to pass. The bill never made it back to the floor, and simply died as the clock for the session ran out. Delegate Benjamin Kramer, who helped kill the negotiated bill, had the gall to immediately request that a 2013 Special Session be called by Governor Martin O'Malley to resolve the impasse.4

What Happens Next?

Governor O'Malley has the power to call a special session. The legislature can also vote to approve one. "Anything can happen in politics," as they say, but Delegate Simmons is already signaling the 2014 Session. Simmons recently complained that his time spent last summer creating the "rebuttable presumption" bill went down the drain. Simmons plans on spending this summer drumming up a dog bite liability bill too, hopefully one not as defective as his last.

Until then, the Tracey Court ruling stands: Pit bulls are "inherently dangerous."

Sign up: Support the Court Email Alerts | Follow: @Supportthecourt

1Senate President Thomas Mike Miller later rebuked Simmons on the Senate floor, referring to him as, "one legislator in the House who has an extreme personality and is lashing out at the Senate."
2Children 12-years old and younger is the most vulnerable age group for dog bite injuries followed by the elderly. The House refused to even provide stronger protections for children who are injured by dogs.
3The lowest level of proof is "by a preponderance." During the January 30 House hearing (skip to 2:15), attorney Robert Zarbin, the legislative chair for the Maryland Association for Justice, explains how "rebuttable presumption" would work in a dog bite lawsuit and the ease in which a dog owner could rebut the presumption.

"This idea of a rebuttable presumption … really is going to amount to nothing. Because a rebuttable presumption is simply that. Once it's rebutted, the bubble bursts.

I hear various members worried somehow this is going get to a jury -- it won't get to the jury. I'll give you an easy example of rebuttable presumption. In a car crash, there's a rebuttable presumption of agency. The driver of the car is deemed to be the agent, server and or employee of the car owner. It happens all the time. A son's using his dad's car. So you sue both the father and the son because one's the owner and one's the operator; it's a rebuttable presumption.

You know how they get out of the rebuttable presumption? They file an affidavit that says, 'My son wasn't doing anything on my behalf, he was just using my car with my permission.' Goodbye. Motion for summary judgment granted. The case against the owner gone.

How is this any different than here? You know it's going happen. You're going to ask me to prove a fact that the dog owner will want to forget. Q. 'So did your dog ever bite anyone Mr. dog owner?' A. 'I don't remember him ever being vicious.' Okay. Puts that in an affidavit. Goodbye. Case dismissed by the judge. Because what proof will I have that the dog has ever done anything vicious or done anything aggressive or is negligent?"
4As noted in the New York Times article and by other news agencies, the 2013 Session was historic. Thus, complaints by pro-pit bulls groups that Maryland legislators "didn't do enough" this session are falling on deaf ears.

Posted on April 13, 2013 by Colleen Lynn

2013 Dog Bite Fatality: Stockton Woman Mauled to Death by Pit Bull; Owner Convicted of Manslaughter

Claudia Gallardo, 38, of Stockton was mauled to death by a pit bull.

Pit Bull Owner Guilty
UPDATE 03/25/15: Last week the criminal trial of Brian Hrenko was held and jurors began deliberating. On Tuesday, a San Joaquin County jury found Brian Hrenko guilty of involuntary manslaughter and keeping a mischievous animal that killed a person. In April 2013, Hrenko’s pit bull brutally killed 38-year old Claudia Gallardo, the mother of three children, when she visited his home to discuss her house cleaning services. Hrenko was not home when the attack occurred.

Deputy District Attorney Stephen Maier said that Hrenko knew of the dog’s propensity to be vicious and still failed to properly secure his backyard fence and post proper signage to warn visitors. The attack was horrific, inflicting massive face and neck injuries. Gallardo was declared dead on scene by first responders. During closing arguments Friday Maier said, "What a horrible way to go. To just be mutilated by a dog like this. To have your throat essentially ripped out."

The jury got it right and did the right thing. - Deputy District Attorney Stephen Maier

Brian Hrenko now faces up to 4-years and 8-months in prison; sentencing is scheduled for April 27. Prosecutors said that this was the first fatal dog mauling case prosecuted in San Joaquin County. After the verdict was read jurors shared their thoughts about the case with attorneys. "They felt that the evidence was pretty strong that Hrenko knew the dog was dangerous," Maier said, "He didn’t adequately maintain the property so the dog couldn’t get out," Maier said.

Pit bull owners in California should take special notice of this case. The jury convicted based on the owner’s knowledge of viciousness – testimony showed the pit bull had previous acts of aggression -- and the decision to keep the animal anyway without sufficient warning posted or a secure enclosure on the property to keep the dog from attacking a hapless visitor. Sources close to the case say that "Russia" the attacking pit bull was only finally put down in January 2015.

11/22/13: Victim's Family Interviewed
Family members of mauling victim Claudia Gallardo expressed relief at Brian Hrenko's arrest. Claudia's sister, Mireya said, "We all as a family just grouped together and, 'oh thank God, it's finally here. Her death is not going to be in vain." Mireya added, "I think about her every day. We were only one year apart. So we were very close." Claudia's grieving father, Juan Gallardo, spoke softly in the interview. Juan has faithfully maintained a memorial where Claudia's life ended.

Claudia's family intends to be present in court throughout the criminal proceedings. In October, the Gallardo family attended Kaylie's Candlelight Vigil for Victims of Dangerous Dogs in Sacramento. Family members brought photographs and writings by Claudia to hold during the vigil. Attorney Kenneth M. Phillips, who represents Claudia's three children in connection with her wrongful death, recently issued a statement on his website that provides additional details about Hrenko.

Of the 28 recorded dog bite fatalities so far this year, 6 resulted in criminal charges, 50% of which stem from California. 100% of dog bite fatalities resulting in charges this year involve pit bulls.

11/21/13: Involuntary Manslaughter
Seven months after a pit bull named "Russia" savagely attacked and killed 38-year old Claudia Gallardo in east Stockton, the dog's owner has been arrested and charged. Brian Michael Hrenko, 60-years old of Stockton, faces involuntary manslaughter and felony animal charges in connection to her April 11 death. Hrenko is being held at San Joaquin County Jail in lieu of $250,000 bail. Hrenko is scheduled to be arraigned in San Joaquin County Superior Court on Friday afternoon.

04/13/13: 'I Tried to Save Her Life'
Javier Sanchez Sr. told the Record.net that he and his family had just returned home that night when they heard someone screaming for help. They quickly realized a woman was being attacked by a dog in the front yard of a home across the street. Sanchez jumped the fence, ventured into the darkness and began beating the animal with a large piece of wood his wife grabbed from their backyard. The attacking pit bull, however, refused to release its jaws from the woman's throat.

I kept hitting the dog, but it wouldn't let go. I tried to save her life, but I couldn't. - Javier Sanchez Sr.

Sanchez told the Recordnet.com that he wishes he could have done more to save the woman's life, but the dog had already inflicted too much damage by the time he arrived. That night he only slept two hours. "I was thinking all night about the dog and the lady and what I saw," Sanchez said. "It was hard. I've never seen something like that." Gallardo's sister, Mireya Gallardo, said her sister didn't deserve this. "I don't think anybody deserves to die that way," Mireya said.

Olga Paez, the victim's aunt, said her niece's death has devastated and angered her family -- "It's just terrible. We want answers," Paez said. Detectives continue to investigate, but there are still many unanswered questions. It remains unclear why Gallardo was at Hrenko's home, whether she knew the man or if she climbed over a fence to get into his yard. Hrenko couldn't be reached for comment Friday, but his ex-wife, Gloria Hrenko, said he was "distraught" over what happened.

04/12/13: Mauling Victim Identified
Family members told CBS 13 News that the victim's name is Claudia Gallardo, 38, and is a mother of three. On Thursday, Gallardo was discovered dead in a man's front yard after being attacked by a pit bull named Russia. The owner of the dog, Brian Hrenko, said he didn't know the woman and alleged that she climbed over his fence when he was gone. A female friend of Hrenko, who was home at the time of the fatal dog mauling, said the victim claimed to be there to clean the house.

The San Joaquin County Sheriff’s Office has not confirmed the woman's identity, nor has it confirmed if the woman climbed over the fence. Hrenko was away for about 40 minutes. When he returned home, Hrenko said his female friend "was all hysterical, said Russia attacked (the woman)," said Hrenko. "She was all crying and stuff," said Hrenko. He didn't learn much more at the time because deputies quickly took him in for questioning. The investigation continues.

View Related video

04/11/13: Woman Mauled to Death
Stockton, CA - A woman was killed Thursday night after being attacked by a pit bull that has terrorized the neighborhood for months, according to authorities and residents. The San Joaquin County Sheriff’s Office received a report of a dog mauling at 8:19 pm in the 400 block of North Lillian Avenue, just east of Highway 99 and north of East Miner Avenue. When deputies arrived, they found a woman dead who appeared to have been attacked by a dog, Sgt. Tom Rees said.

Rees wouldn't describe the woman's injuries, but he said, "there's a lot of blood" and described the dog as a "big, nasty pit bull."

Neighbors were horrified and angered by the attack, but not surprised. Some said the dog has jumped fences to attack other animals in the area. Rita Vasquez said the pit bull attacked her dog and bit her late husband. She said the dog's owner has more pit bulls as well. Vasquez said her husband reported the attacks to the Sheriff’s Office, but authorities said there was little they could do at the time. She asked: "Why did somebody have to get hurt for something to happen?"1

View the DogsBite.org Google Map: California Fatal Pit Bull Maulings.

1What Vasquez possibly meant to ask was, "Why did somebody have to get killed for something to happen?

Posted on April 3, 2013 by Colleen Lynn

2013 Dog Bite Fatality: Callaway Boy Savagely Mauled by Two Dogs Dies; Owner Convicted of Manslaughter

Tyler Austin "Catfish" Jett, 7-years old, of Callaway, Florida.

Decade Behind Bars
UPDATE 10/11/13: On October 11, Circuit Judge James Fensom denied Edward Daniels a new trial and sentenced him to 10-years in prison and 5-years probation. Assistant State Attorney Larry Basford and Assistant Public Defender Doug White brought up witnesses to give brief statements on Daniels sentencing. Daniels then gave an apology to the Jett family for the first time. The condition of his probation includes that Daniels cannot own or live in a household with dogs.

08/30/13: Guilty of Manslaughter
On August 29, a Bay County jury found Edward Daniels II guilty of manslaughter in connection to the dog mauling death of 7-year old Tyler Jett after two hours of deliberating. During the two day trial, a half dozen of Daniel's neighbors testified that his dogs had threatened them prior to the April 2 attack, and that they had confronted Daniels about it as well. Stanlee Himbaugh testified that he even warned Daniels, "They're going to kill a kid." The jury agreed with the neighbors.

Daniels was found not guilty for the charge of tampering with evidence.

04/08/13: Manslaughter Charges
Manslaughter charges have been filed against Edward Daniels II of Callaway after his two dogs brutally attacked Tyler Jett on April 2, ultimately causing his death. Daniels was already charged with felony tampering of evidence and drug charges that arose during the investigation. Greg Wilson, Chief Assistant State Attorney for the 14th Judicial Circuit, said, "In any type of animal case where the death of another person occurred, [manslaughter] is the highest you could go."

Edward Daniels II, 21, faces up to 15-years if convicted of manslaughter. On March 28, just days before his dogs got loose (again) and attacked Tyler, Bay County Animal Control cited Daniels for allowing his dogs to run loose and terrorize neighbors. That citation put Daniels on notice that his dogs were dangerous and that he needed to properly secure his animals. Daniels failed to do so and as a result, a child was horribly mauled and died due to injuries inflicted by his dogs.

The WMBB video showed images of both attacking dogs.

04/07/13: Boy Dies After Attack
Callaway, FL - Tyler Jett, 7-years old, of Callaway has died. On April 2, Tyler was savagely attacked by two loose pit bull-mix dogs. Tyler was flown to Sacred Heart Hospital in Pensacola where he remained in intensive care until his death.1 The boy suffered a punctured carotid artery and his head, face and neck were badly bitten. The dogs' owner, Edward Daniels II, was charged with felony tampering of evidence after washing the blood off one of his dogs after the attack.2

Just before the attack, Tyler was riding his bike after returning from school.3 Witnesses said the two dogs, which escaped from their owner's fenced-in yard, had chased another neighborhood boy into Tyler's yard before turning their attention on Tyler. The boy's stepmother, Katy Phillips, Tyler's father and a neighbor rushed to help him after hearing his screams. "Tyler did not provoke these dogs," Phillips said. "These dogs (dragged) this 7-year-old across my front yard."4

"I was keeping him alive. I was applying pressure to his neck and his head and telling him to keep breathing for me," Phillips said.

Two days after the violent attack, friends of the boy's family planned a benefit to raise money to help cover the boy's medical costs. The benefit cookout was held Saturday morning at the Dam Bait Shop. An aunt of the boy said the event raised about $12,000. A new fundraising event will be held Monday at Bill Byrd Kia in Panama City. WPAP 92.5 FM will be broadcasting live. Collecting donations now broadens to include Tyler's funeral expenses along with his hospital stay costs.

Daniels is not a stranger to dog attacks. Last May, Daniels was walking a dog named Dude that belonged to his sister, Amber Daniels, when it bit a 9-year old boy in the face without provocation. That dog was surrendered to animal control to be destroyed after it was declared dangerous for a previous unprovoked attack in 2010. The two pit bull-mix dogs that attacked Tyler had not been previously declared dangerous, but had a history of getting loose and threatening behaviors.

04/03/13: BCSO Police Report

OFFICIAL BCSO REPORT – CALLAWAY DOG ATTACK

On 04-02-13 I Deputy Price responded to 6213 Kelly Ct. in reference to a seven year old child being mauled by two pittbull’s. Upon my arrival Fire Rescue were already on scene and administering CPR to the unconscious seven year old white male that was attacked by the pitt bull’s. The pittbull’s had already fled the scene and were believe to have went back to their home at 6228 Kelly Ct. (Mother) Katy Phillips explained to me that she was inside her house when she heard screaming and yelling outside by family members and neighbor’s who saw her son being attacked by two pittbull’s. Ms. Phillips said that neighbor Shannon Washington, herself and her husband attempted to scare off the two pittbull’s but were unsuccessful due to the pittbulls aggressive behavior towards them. Ms. Phillips said that she then covered her son beneath her as her husband went to retrieve a gun from out of the house to kill the dog’s.

Myself and responding Deputies went to the residence of 6228 Kelly Ct. where we made contact with the owner of the pittbull’s Edward Daniels Jr. II. Animal Control later arrived on scene and detained the two pittbull’s that were located in Mr. Daniel’s back yard. The two dogs were identified by the victim’s parents and neighbors as the two pittbull’s that attacked the seven year old child.

The child was later identified to be XXXXX Austin XXXXX. The pittbull’s are described as two mix breed pitt bull’s. One was a Brindle mix breed pitt bull that was a one year old. The second pittbull was identified as a mixed breed pittbull that was eight years old. Upon receiving the pittbull’s from Mr. Daniels, Animal Control personnel Matthew Bland said to me, that Mr. Daniels had a non caring attitude learning that the pittbulls attacked a seven year old child. Mr. Bland also said that Mr. Daniels said that he knew something was wrong when he saw blood on the eight year old pittbull’s mouth. Mr. Daniels said that both of the pittbull’s have gotten out of his back yard on several occassions by digging holes under the fence.

Read: BCSO report in full | Additional BCSO report

View the DogsBite.org Google Map: Florida Fatal Pit Bull Maulings.

1The boy did not regain consciousness after the mauling.
2Daniels is not the first Florida resident to "tamper with evidence" by washing away blood evidence after a fatal dog attack. After the mauling death of Carshena Benjamin in 2007, Linda Billie did the same thing then dumped the two pit bulls at undisclosed locations. Neither Billie nor the owner of the dogs, Linda Newell, were criminally charged.
3The News Herald describes one dog as an Alapaha blue-blood bulldog, one of several unofficial breeds achieved by crossing the "old southern white bulldog" and the
American pit bull terrier. The other dog is simply described as a "brindle bulldog." The Bay County Sheriff's Office report described both dogs as mixed-breed pit bulls. Notably, it was the owner of the dogs that altered the "breed type" while under police questioning on the day of the attack.
4Tyler's step-mother also told the News Herald that his family owns a pit bull that had been Tyler's "playmate all of his life," but after the mauling,
they planned to get rid of it.

DogsBite blog ::

2013 Dog Bite Fatality: 4-Year Old Mauled by Pit Bull Dies; Babysitter Arrested

Maryland High Court Ruling Stands: Pit Bulls are 'Inherently Dangerous'

Compromise Bill Fails

2013 Dog Bite Fatality: Stockton Woman Mauled to Death by Pit Bull; Owner Convicted of Manslaughter

2013 Dog Bite Fatality: Callaway Boy Savagely Mauled by Two Dogs Dies; Owner Convicted of Manslaughter