Posted on March 17, 2022 by Colleen Lynn

Opinion: Humane Groups are Misusing Race Issues to Force Pit Bull Agenda on Insurance Commissioners by Lucy Muir

Misleading White Paper Crafted to Ban Breed Restrictions in Housing

Depicted is a sampling of people in leadership roles, disproportionately white and female, at the humane groups that endorsed the white paper, along with authors of works cited in the paper.

A misleading white paper was crafted to bully state legislatures into banning insurance companies from using actuarial data to deny housing coverage or charge more for dangerous dog breeds.

The white paper is based on the false narrative of the "universally loved pet bulldog" at the turn of the 20th Century and that pit bulls have a bad reputation only because white people are racist.

Once the full history of the pit bull is revealed, the actual reasons for regulating pit bulls in housing or cities also emerge: they are dangerous no matter who owns them and need to be regulated.

Introduction

For decades, Pit Bull Advocates have been trying to shut down any opposition to unregulated pit bull ownership with cries of racism. Right now, there is a brand-new fake racism campaign aimed at state legislatures. Pit Bull Advocates (PBAs) want to bully them into banning insurance companies from using actuarial data to determine the need for housing insurance restrictions. PBA lobbyists were recently successful in passing state laws in Nevada and New York banning breed restrictions by homeowners insurance companies. This fake racism campaign is currently being waged in Arizona and Minnesota, as well as Canada.

Best Friends Animal Society and five other agencies have produced a white paper entitled, "Breed Discrimination in the Homeowners Insurance Industry". The paper is addressed to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) and contends current actuarial charts are not based on evidence. This is patently false. PBAs also contend the insurance industry discriminates against three groups of people 1.) The uninformed 2.) People of Color, and 3.) People of moderate or low means when they either deny home insurance coverage or charge higher premiums to cover pit bulls and other dangerous breeds.

"This is a bill that addresses a problem that does not exist in the insurance industry," Marcus Osborn, a public affairs specialist for Allstate, told Arizona legislators while speaking in opposition to HB 2323. "Just to be clear, Allstate does not have any limitations for our insurance policies on the type of breed. I know at least 55 other insurers with a similar policy."

The white paper is the foundation for a lobbying initiative to scare the insurance industry into abandoning actuarial data which clearly show that pit bulls inflict the most numerous serious attacks and the most costly attacks. Pit bull lobbyists allege that because pit bulls are disproportionately owned by Black people, insurance companies can effectively redline Black people by restricting coverage to pit bulls. PBAs assert that banning insurance companies from restricting pit bulls is protecting civil rights.

These fake racism claims are based on weak suppositions and 30-year-old stereotypes. One author cited in "Breed Discrimination in the Homeowners Insurance Industry" admits that there is no way to know if Black people are more likely to own pit bulls because no one is compiling those statistics. PBAs are relying on a 30-year-old, 90s era pit-bull-as-gangsta-accessory stereotype as proof of their assertion. Here is comedian Damien Lemon's take on that stereotype, "White People Have Taken Over the Pit Bull."

Damien Lemon talks about seeing white women with pit bulls and what a "rescue dog" is.

That's right, everyone but the pit bull lobby now identifies pit bulls as the darling of white female rescue angels. And young, wine-drinking, middle-class rescue angels even poke fun at themselves about this very fact. What's more, pit bulls, now associated with young middle-class white women, currently kill far more people per year than they did when pit bulls were viewed as the dog-of-choice of urban Black youths. Given all that, it is extremely odd that the pit bull lobby is hurling fake accusations of racism as a tactic to get legislation passed that bans insurance companies from implementing breed restrictions. It is even more odd that those tactics worked in Nevada and New York.

In their white paper, PBAs trot out many tired, already debunked arguments defending pit bulls. They deny the pit bull's dangerousness using old lobbyist techniques to mislead. These arguments sound silly to anyone familiar with the abundance of evidence that pit bulls are genuinely far more dangerous than all other kinds of dogs. They are just as silly as arguments made by the Big Tobacco lobby that cigarette smoking doesn't cause cancer. Today, everyone knows that smoking does cause cancer. It is easy to see how flimsy and self-serving the Big Tobacco lobby's arguments actually were. This editorial explains how the PBA lobby uses techniques that are identical to those used by the tobacco lobby for half a century to deny that smoking tobacco causes cancer despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

However, for the purpose of this white paper, those tired arguments are merely window dressing. PBA's real weapon in this current attack is the accusation of racist housing restrictions by the insurance industry. They are targeting insurance companies knowing that the industry did use racist housing policies in the past. They know insurance companies are still under scrutiny from civil rights organizations like the NAACP. The Insurance industry's history of genuine racism renders them especially vulnerable to fake allegations of racism. It does not really matter how silly the PBA's arguments are if they can scare state legislatures and the insurance industry into believing that regulating pit bulls is racist.

A Sea of White Faces

As strange as that claim may be, it becomes even more bizarre when you look at who is and who is not leveling these specific charges of racism against the homeowners insurance industry.

The white paper is authored or endorsed by The American Dog Breeders Association, The American Kennel Club, the Animal Legal Defense Fund, The Association for Animal Welfare Advancement, Best Friends Animal Society, Humane Rescue Alliance, And the Humane Society of the United States. In addition, there has been a blitz of opinion pieces recently by members of these organizations as well as Animal Farm Foundation that push the same false and outdated narrative that regulating pit bulls is racist.

The faces of leadership roles in all of these organizations are starkly white and predominantly female. A sea of white faces in the upper and middle ranks of humane groups has been true for decades as well. The "very white" humane movement has mostly ignored its own lack of diversity since the 1990s, according to researchers. Blacks made up only 4% of employees at animal welfare organizations when surveyed in 2005 (less than half of the 32 organizations responded to the survey at all).1 Fast forward 15 years, when two surveys conducted by separate groups showed no progress since 2005 either. Today, Blacks account for less than 2% of workers and volunteers within the animal welfare industry.2

These organizations who decry racism in the home insurance industry have made little effort to recruit for diversity in the ranks of their own organizations for over 15 years. They didn't feel the need to have diverse voices informing their initiatives in the 1990s and they barely do today either.

Could these Pit Bull Advocates be white allies to people of color? Could they be amplifying the voices of Black activists and academics in their calls for racial justice while uniting anti-discrimination initiatives to pit bull initiatives? No. When you look at the authors cited by the PBAs to accuse the insurance companies of racist housing discrimination tactics, the sea of white only grows.

Fake Racism - Animal Welfare demographics

Less than 2% of people working in the animal welfare industry are Black and 84% are female.

The Authors:

Erin Tarver, The Dangerous Individual('s) Dog: Race Criminality and the Pit Bull Culture, 55 Culture Theory and Critique 273, 281 (2013)
Ann L. Schiavone, Real Bite: Legal Realism and Meaningful Rational Basis in Dog Law and Beyond, 25 WM. & MARY BILL OF RIGHTS J. 65, 111 – 12 (2016)
Ann Linder, The Black Man's Dog: The Social Context of Breed Specific Legislation, 25 Animal Law 51 (2018)
Colin Dayan, "Dead Dogs: Breed bans, euthanasia, and preemptive justice", Boston Review, 26-28 (2010)
Karen Delise, The Pit Bull Placebo: The Media, Myths, and Politics of Canine Aggression, Anubis Publishing, (2007)
Bronwen Dickey, Pit Bull: The Battle over an American Icon, Vintage Books (2016)

Together, these authors have created a false history of the pit bull in America to support the proposition that pit bulls were once beloved, "All American" dogs at the turn of the 20th century when white people owned them. These authors assert that pit bulls only became vilified when Black people began owning them in the 1970s. The false history in turn allows these authors to contend that Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) banning or regulating pit bulls only was implemented when pit bulls were associated with Black owners. Both of these assertions are false. Pit bulls have always been regarded as dangerous. Breed Specific Legislation was in fact called for and enacted at the turn of the 20th century.

The PBA's version of history is demonstrably false. News archive searches turn up opinion pieces calling for bulldogs to be banned in the late 19th and early 20th centuries when the dogs were associated with white owners and white dogfighters. The first BSL was implemented in the late 19th century, with several cities adopting some form of BSL in the early 20th century, the period that was supposedly the heyday of the pit bull as "America's Dog."

Karen Delise created the first version of the pit bull's fake history as an "All American" pet in her 2007 self-published book, The Pit Bull Placebo. She maintains that pit bulls of the 19th and early 20th centuries were loyal farm dogs and universally beloved pets. She claims that by the late 19th century pit bulls were no longer used for dogfighting, which is ridiculously false. News archives of the era are full of features praising the ferocity of the bulldog as a fighting machine and condemning bulldog attacks on innocent people. Check out what turns up in news archives from Baltimore, just one city from that time period.

Delise blames the pit bull's negative image on modern media bias, politicians, and ignorance, but she does not blame racism in The Pit Bull Placebo. She likens the change in the 70s through the 90s to the Salem Witch Hunts and McCarthyism. She references race by saying that when people say pit bulls were different than other kinds of dogs, they were "removing their canineness". Without mentioning race directly, she compares recognition of the pit bulls' inbred dangerousness to race, but she does not assert that racism was a motivation for the supposed change in public regard for the pit bull.

Erin Tarver accepts Delise's false history of the pit bull's glory days and subsequent fall from grace without question in her 2013 paper, "The Dangerous Individual('s) Dog." And, she adds a new motivation for the changed attitude towards pit bulls: racism. According to Tarver, pit bulls were beloved pets in the early 20th century because white people owned them, but became reviled when pit bulls became associated with Black owners. Tarver suggests that the pit bull only became "pathologised and criminalized" once they became associated with Black people in the late 20th century, as if the original function of pit bulls -- dogfighting -- was not always considered criminal and pathological by the vast majority of people in the 19th an early 20th century.

Bronwen Dickey's 2016 book, Pit Bull: Battle over an American Icon, shares all kinds of evidence that pit bulls were beloved in the early 20th century to expand on Delise's false history of the pit bull. The problem is that when pit bulls became popular in the late 1800s and early 1900s, they were just as controversial then as they are today. Dickey's "research" into the history of the pit bull consists of cherry picking tidbits that reveal that there was indeed a fad for pit bulls in the late 19th and the very early years of the 20th century. She presents the evidence of the pit bull fad without showing the inevitable and immediate consequences -- the news reports describing attacks on people and pets, the surge in casual dogfighting for entertainment, the opinion pieces about the bulldogs' dangerousness, and calls for breed bans.

Just one example of her one-sided "history" is her treatment of college fraternity mascots from the chapter "America's Dog." She shows that fighting pit bulls became very popular as college athletics team and fraternity mascots for a short period of time in the early 20th century. She doesn't mention that those mascots began to be banned from colleges because they attacked people and the fraternity boys used them for dogfighting.

Most importantly, she neglects to mention that the first BSL regarding pit bulldogs was enacted during the period that Dickey hails as the heyday of the universally beloved pit bull. If she bothered to include these facts, she would have to conclude that then as now, when pit bulls become more popular as pets, pit bull attacks skyrocket, draw a tremendous amount of controversy, and cities move to regulate them. It was then, as it is now about the dangerousness of the pit bull breed.

As background for her study, Ann Linder retells the same false history of the pit bull in, "The Black Man's Dog: The Social context of Breed Specific Legislation" to assert that pit bulls are viewed as great pets or dangerous depending on who owns them. In a study about "the social context of BSL", it is odd that Linder seems to be completely unaware that BSL regulating "bulldogs" (pit bulls) can be found as early as 1893 and throughout the early 1900s when they were "the white man's dog." She seems to mistakenly believe that BSL only began being enacted in the late 20th century. In addition, Linder fails to mention that many opinion pieces and editorials can be found advocating for bans and regulation of bulldogs in the late 19th century and early 20th century when pit bulls were associated with white people. That is a tremendous amount of "context" that was left out of her study of "context."

Linder's study looks at scant evidence from a single, small-scale examination that she administered to reach very weak conclusions. Linder claims that people believe pit bulls are more likely to be owned by Black people. She then claims this "might" mean that pit bull bans and home insurance policies excluding pit bulls could possibly also disproportionately restrict Black people from housing. She says this "possible" racial discrimination "might" be intentional, but she has no evidence of any of these suppositions.

Linder's study concludes merely by saying, "At this time, more research is needed…" and "…such findings would not be sufficient to challenge legislation legally…" Linder admits that "at the present time, actual ownership (of pit bulls by race) data is not available, (but) if true ownership resembles the perceived distribution measured here" they might be able to prove her claim. So, Linder cannot establish if pit bulls are more often owned by Black people. And, she established that the insurance companies and city councils have no way of knowing that either.

In 2020, the white population remained the largest demographic group in the US, with 204.3 million people, according to US Census data. The Black population (41.1 million) accounted for 12.4% of all people living in the US.3 A 2017-2018 survey by the American Medical Veterinary Association showed that the highest rate of pet ownership was seen among white households, 64.7%. The lowest rate was found among Black households, 36.9%.4

This false narrative about the once universally loved pet bulldog is the foundation for the claim that pit bulls have a bad reputation only because white people are racist. All that follows depends on this false narrative and premise. Once the full history of the pit bull is revealed, the actual reasons for breed restrictions in housing also emerge. Pit bulls are dangerous no matter who owns them and need to be regulated. There is nothing racist about wanting to remove the danger we see in these videos from our neighborhoods.

Activist groups such as the NAACP are currently seeking reform in the insurance industry to assure racial equity. However, it seems pretty strange that only white people are leading this particular charge of discrimination and racism against the housing insurance industry. That is, until you remember that these people are not anti-racism advocates. They are pit bull ownership advocates using the contrived claim of "possible" racism as a hammer to ban insurance companies from implementing breed restrictions. PBAs know that the insurance industry is vulnerable to this particular attack because the insurance industry participated in devastating racist policies like redlining in the past.

"Sea of White" Not Unnoticed

Essentially, "the sea of White," are PBAs and humane groups disproportionately represented by white women who are co-opting diversity, equity and inclusion messaging in order to advocate for dogs generally and pit bulls specifically. This phenomenon is not exclusive to PBAs and humane groups, though.

In 2018, Travis Wood was looking for a job in the field of video production, advertising, and design. While checking out the "Who We Are" pages of companies he was considering, he noticed the sea of white faces. And more than that. Those white people seem to be more willing to include dogs in their work space than to hire Black people. Since he works in video production, he used his skills to create a rather compelling illustration of what he found. Don't miss the pit bulls, bully breeds and pit bull-mixes in the video. Owned, of course, by white people.

Affurmative Action, a Short Film about workplace diversity told through "Meet The Team" pages.

Misusing Race Comparisons

Dr. Benedicte Boisseron, author of the book, Afro-Dog: Blackness and the Animal Question, discussed the way white people tend to misuse race comparisons to promote animal rights with fellow academic Brigitte Fielder, associate professor of US & African American Studies. Afro-dog explores the relationship "between race and the animal in the history and culture of the Americas and the Black Atlantic, exposing a hegemonic system that compulsively links and opposes Blackness and animality to measure the value of life." Boisseron notes that white people have associated Black people with animals from slavery times up to the present day.

From the discussion:

Fielder: Using histories and theories of racism in service to animals, many animal studies scholars and advocates have failed to show similar investments in the critical study of race, histories of racist oppression, and the nonwhite people who still experience racism in the present. In their use of racist oppression as a metaphor, they fail to address its historical complexity and continued resonance. They sometimes also repeat racist tropes of human-animal comparison.

Dr. Boisseron: One of the biggest challenges is misunderstandings. Those are very sensitive topics and people have different agendas. I've encountered a lot of misunderstandings, particularly when it comes to the question of comparison, when I try to explain that the comparison, the way it's been done in animal studies, can be demeaning or very problematic for Black studies...

Fake Racism - Comparing Dog Breeds to Racial Profiling

Pit Bull Advocates, humane groups, misusing race comparisons to promote "Pit Bull Rights."

Rights activist Yasmin Nair also notices this unhappy relationship. Yasmin Nair reviewed Bronwen Dickey's book, Pit Bull: Battle over an American Icon. She agrees with Dickey's assertion that pit bulls have faced discrimination because they were associated with Black people. However, Nair, looking at the issue from the perspective of a right's activist, comes to a very different conclusion than Dickey did. In her view, pit bulls and apes, another animal likened to Black people, already have been redeemed while Black people still face discrimination.

"Harambe's death and the outrage that surrounded it also reflected a difference between the value placed on animal lives versus Black lives. Once, apes were seen as contiguous to Africans and other non-white people, hence the placement of the orangutan next to Ota Benga. But apes are now anthropomorphized, and many would rather have seen the child die than the gorilla.

Contrary to previous mythology, apes are no longer signifiers of blackness. They are treated with compassion and dignity, recognized for their intelligence and sophistication. Yet no such transformation has occurred in the treatment of race for humans. Black bodies are still shot at will and caged by the hundreds of thousands. Black people continue to be treated as animals even as animals have become human.

The redemption of the pit bull shows that animals have finally transcended race. It is only Black humans who must continue to bear its burden."

Concluding Thoughts

Yasmin Nair is favorable to pit bulls themselves, but she also sees what Black comedians commenting on their own communities have seen. Pit bulls were once associated with a certain type of Black person, but are now associated with middle class white women. Certainly, pit bulls have not and cannot be redeemed, and it has nothing to do with who owns them. The number of fatal attacks pit bulls commit each year has skyrocketed far beyond the rates of carnage they committed in the 80s and 90s when they were a fad accessory for rappers. Years and years of pit bull advocacy have polished the image of pit bulls without changing their propensity for attacking one bit.

Now people of all races and income brackets coo over pit bulls festooned with flower crowns and tutus. Worse, they ignore or laugh at the mention of a growing number of maiming and fatal pit bull attacks. No one is more enthusiastic about this than white middle class women. Here is another comedian, SNL's Michael Che, doing a bit about white women's known proclivity for putting cute clothes on fighting dogs. White rescue angels heard Che's bit and they owned it. Proudly. Here are 1,997 videos of white women and their rescue pit bulls that a white woman gathered in response to Che's comedy bit.

These pit bull advocacy groups are helmed by white women. And white women presuming to write about Black men's dogs are the only ones who haven't yet heard that the 90s are over. Rescue and advocacy groups have pushed pit bulls into neighborhoods of all demographics. And their advocacy has helped yearly average fatality rates skyrocket.

In 2005, a survey of 32 animal welfare organizations was conducted. Only 13 groups responded. Of the nearly 1,600 employees in the 13 organizations, only 4% were Black, and 62% (8) of the groups had no Black employees at all.1 In 2020, two surveys conducted by separate groups showed no progress since 2005 either. Blacks currently account for less than 2% of workers and volunteers within the animal welfare industry.2

It is important to note that there are people of all races who do like pit bulls. There are theorists and researchers of color who do support pit bull ownership. It isn't that the sea of white women couldn't have consulted with Black voices. It's that they didn't. If these pit bull advocacy groups were genuinely concerned about issues of racism, discrimination and social justice, they would have made some small effort to recruit people from varied backgrounds years ago. And not just for appearances, but because they believed that listening to the voices of people of color is necessary for any intelligent campaign about racism and animal advocacy.

The coalition of Pit Bull Advocates that produced "Breed Discrimination in the Homeowners Insurance Industry" have invoked fake racism charges to ban insurance companies from implementing breed restrictions in housing. These charges are baseless, but they hit as hard as a hammer. Fake racism leveraged to protect unregulated pit bull ownership does injustice to people of color by hijacking important discussions on civil rights. And these charges do an injustice to all people by promoting unregulated dangerous dog ownership when regulation would protect us all.

40 years of U.S. fatal pit bull attacks in 5-year periods (1980 through 2019) by DogsBite.org.

1The Under-representation of African American Employees in Animal Welfare Organizations in the United States, by Sue-Ellen Brown, Society & Animals 13:2, 2005 (animalsandsociety.org).
2Animal Welfare Demographics, CARE/Harvard Project Implicit Results, Winter 2020 | The State of Animal Advocacy in the U.S. & Canada: Experiences & Turnover, Faunalytics report authored by Jo Anderson, PhD, July 2020 (faunalytics.org) and the Faunalytics related Encompass Essays.
32020 Census Illuminates Racial and Ethnic Composition of the Country, United States Census Bureau, August 12, 2021 (census.gov).
4AVMA Pet Ownership and Demographics Sourcebook, 2017-2018 Edition, American Medical Veterinary Association (avma.org).

Posted on February 26, 2022 by Colleen Lynn

Vicious and Dangerous Dog Hearing After Alleged 'Service' Pit Bull Attacks Security Officer in San Francisco Public Library

Findings: 'Disproportionate' Response; Dog Ordered Euthanized

Dangerous dog hearing of the San Francisco public library attack by an alleged "service" pit bull.

San Francisco, CA - On January 16, 2022, Fidel Joshua, a Buildings and Ground Patrol Officer at the San Francisco Public Library was viciously attacked by an alleged “service” pit bull while attempting to check on the welfare of the dog's owner, who was unresponsive and slumped over a desk. During the attack, a co-worker strikes the dog with a ball pein hammer several times, breaking the hammer. Part of the attack was captured on camera and posted to Reddit.

On February 1, a Vicious and Dangerous Dog hearing was held regarding the pit bull “Dorje.” This was the second hearing for Dorje. In January of 2019, the dog attacked a man, biting him on the head, who was approaching a recycling bin where Dorje's owner, Brendan Greene, was sleeping. Greene never woke up during the attack. During that hearing, Greene agreed to never leave Dorje unattended in a public place again. Dorje was deemed not vicious or dangerous at that time.

Download: Statement of Decision After Dorje's 2022 Vicious and Dangerous Dog Hearing

San Francisco Public Library Attack: Findings

1. This is Dorje’s second “Vicious and Dangerous Dog” hearing. On January 31, 2019, a prior hearing was held. Hearing Officer Vicky Guldbech issued a Statement of Decision dated February 4, 2019, in which she found that the evidence presented was sufficient to find that Dorje bit and caused injury to Eric Hartwell because Dorje was frightened and protective of Greene. Hearing Officer Guldbech also found that the evidence presented was sufficient to show that Greene was no longer homeless. In conclusion, she found, “Since this incident, Mr. Green [sic] is now aware of this behavior and will not put Dorje in a situation like this again. I do believe this incident was an accident, but Mr. Green [sic] can never leave Dorje unattended in a public place again.” (Ex. 6: Statement of Decision, p. 2.) Dorje was deemed not vicious and dangerous.

2. On January 16, 2022, Brendan Greene was found unresponsive on the third floor of the San Francisco Public Library. His Pit Bull dog, Dorje, was not on leash or under his control. Dorje barked aggressively, for approximately 10 minutes. Adairell Roberson, a library security officer, grabbed a hammer for protection and responded to the third floor to wait for SFSO deputies with other library personnel. Concerned Greene had overdosed, security officer Fidel Joshua grabbed a can of Narcan and responded to the third floor. Joshua slowly approached Greene with his arms to his side to do a welfare check and to see if Dorje was leashed. Dorje went underneath the table and lunged at Joshua’s neck. Joshua put his arm up to protect himself. Dorje bit his arm and pulled Joshua to the ground biting him multiple times on both arms. Roberson sprayed pepper spray on the dog, but it had no effect. Dorje continued his sustained attack on Joshua while Joshua screamed. Roberson struck Dorje on the head multiple times to protect Joshua. The hammer broke on Dorje’s head. Dorje stopped the attack. Joshua was transported to the hospital with severe puncture wounds on both arms. Dorje’s attack was unprovoked.

3. Greene was twice found unresponsive in public settings with Dorje at which time Dorje viciously attacked two adult men. Therefore, Greene cannot adequately control his dog within the meaning of Article 1, Section 42.3(c)(ii) of the San Francisco Health Code. - Hearing Officer Janelle Caywood , Statement of Decision, February 16, 2022

On February 16, 2022, Hearing Officer Janelle Caywood issued her Statement of Decision, which found that Dorje meets the vicious and dangerous criteria set forth in the San Francisco Health Code. Caywood ordered the dog to be humanely euthanized. She also banned Greene from owning or possessing any dogs in the City and County of San Francisco for a period of three years. Our video depicts the audio of the Vicious and Dangerous Dog hearing held February 1.

At (10:58) Fidel Joshua begins his testimony. Fidel is in the hospital while he is speaking. At (16:33) he describes the attack. "I tried to get the dog off me by hitting him with punches with my right hand. The dog yanked me down to the ground. As I fell, I continued to throw punches to try to get him off me … I see that officer Roberson had come over. He was hitting the dog with a pin hammer. I saw the hammer when it broke. I think he hit it like two or three times before it broke."

Still struggling with the dog, "I remember putting my right thumb in the dog's right eye," he said. Once the attack had concluded, and while still on the ground, Fidel said, "I realized I couldn't move my right leg," and there was blood on my hands. Fidel received emergency medical treatment for puncture wounds to both hands, nerve damage on his left hand, a torn meniscus, completely torn rotator cuffs, tears on his right shoulder and "completely detached" right quadricep muscles.

Adairell Roberson, a Buildings and Ground Patrol Officer at the San Francisco Public Library, provides testimony next (21:02). As he was responding to the call about an aggressively barking dog on the third floor, "I grabbed the hammer for protection. Because we don't have no clubs or anything. We just have pepper spray," he said. "So I said, 'I'm going to go ahead and grab something just in case this situation gets out of hand.'" He then dashed up to the third floor.

Roberson and his co-worker, Rita Masina, developed a perimeter so that other patrons in the library could not get close to the dog that was erratically "going back and forth" unleashed. He said he saw a blue rope, but it was unclear if it was attached to anything. Roberson and Masina shouted at the owner to wake up, but "the guy never buzzed, he never woke up," Roberson said. Meanwhile, fearing the owner had overdosed, Fidel approached the man with a can of Narcan.

"That is when the dog went underneath the table and jumped up toward Fidel's neck. And that is when Fidel started to defend himself…As soon as he started hitting the dog, that is when I deployed my OC spray…I'm trying to spray the dog and it has zero effect. That is when I went in my pocket, grabbed the hammer and started to hit the dog. I broke the hammer over the dog's head." (28:20) - Officer Adairell Roberson

Officer Rita Masina speaks next (31:41). She gives her account. At (37:02) she describes the chaotic scene. "The dog seemed to be shaking while he was biting, and jumping while he was biting. The hits were not affecting the dog," she said. "Then, all I recall is the hammer hitting him one time when it breaks. That is when I just noticed the dog let go. As Officer Roberson said, the dog was kind of unresponsive, like dazed. Then the dog ran over to its owner," Masina said.

At (44:32), Doreen Horstin, a librarian, provides interesting testimony. She thought the dog's owner was dead. "The owner Brandon Greene had his face on the computer keyboard. He was completely unresponsive. I was kind of wondering if he was dead actually. Because it was so loud, and he wasn't responding," Horstin said. When Greene did finally wake up, he started "yelling at our guards, telling them that it was their fault that the dog attacked them," she said (50:22).

Highly observant Horstin testified that Greene "said something really interesting" to the animal control officer, who was holding a catchpole. He said, "Don't use those. They've used those on my dog before. He doesn't like it. He'll freak out, or something like that," she said. "So, I thought, hmmm. That's interesting that he has had this experience before." Horstin also noted the size of the pit bull. The dog was "a little on the small side for a pit bull. I'd say 50 or 60 pounds," she said.

That even a California librarian recognizes that 50 to 60 pounds is small for a pit bull today indicates a substantial shift in the conformation of pit bulls from 15 years ago.1 Due to breeding for a "bullier" pit bull -- a thicker, heavier pit bull like the Gotti and Razor Edge bloodlines, which spun off into the American bully -- broader, stockier pit bulls are more common today than the lighter, athletic "game dog" conformation as depicted in the American Dog Breeders Association's logo.

Dog Owner's Testimony

At (1:08:08) Greene provides his testimony, which does him no favors, including the riveting story that his "truck was stolen" a few days before the attack, along with it, his "telephone, wallet, money, cards, clothes." Thus, Dorje and I were stuck in an "unfamiliar situation," he said. Prior to falling asleep in the library, Greene had stayed up all night walking around. "I was using the library" to make phone calls. "There were no drugs involved. It was just exhaustion," he said.

At (1:15:03) Hearing Officer Caywood asks the dog owner: "Mr. Greene, your dog had a prior Vicious and Dangerous Dog hearing almost three years to the day in 2019. Is that correct? I do have that file and I read it. In that incident, isn't it true that Dorje bit a man in the head while you were sleeping?" Greene responds: "Yes ma'am. I was at a very different point in my life." He added, "I was not in a good place with substance abuse," and "I had fallen asleep in an alley."

"Looks like you dodged a bullet here. The hearing officer found that your dog didn't meet the vicious and dangerous criteria. She noted that you were no longer homeless … This is what she wrote at the end of her decision, quote: 'Since this incident, Mr. Greene is now aware of his behaviors and will not put Dorje in a situation like this again.' And later in the decision, she wrote, 'Mr. Greene can never leave Dorje unattended in a public place ever again.'

The hearing officer gave you a break. Had compassion for the situation you were in. But the same thing happened. You fell asleep and your dog bit someone, rather severely. So, I am concerned about releasing this dog to the public." - Hearing Officer Janelle Caywood

In addition to the first attack that occurred in January 2019, Caywood noted that in January 2020 (yet another January) a woman at Grass Valley Animal Control called San Francisco Animal Care and Control asking for Greene's contact info. Dorje had come in as a stray. The woman from Grass Valley reported that "Dorje had blood on him." Grass Valley is about 145 miles northeast of San Francisco. Greene blamed that incident on a dog-sitter allowing his dog to get loose.

Closing Arguments

At (1:42:01), Officer Fidel Joshua is given three additional minutes to speak. "I just want to reiterate that the dog's owner was unresponsive in a public facility with a dangerous animal," Fidel said. "He has no control of his dog when he’s unconscious. And, it appears to have happened twice," he said. "That's very risky. Regardless of his excuses, what happened to him, there's still some responsibility that comes with owning a dog, especially a pit bull," Officer Joshua said.

At (1:46:02) Captain Amy Corso of San Francisco Animal Care and Control (SFACC) provides a recommendation for the outcome for Dorje. Due to the "disproportionate, protracted response" by the dog "resulting in severe injuries" to a grown adult -- injuries that included "complete avulsion" and "tearing and gaping wounds," a Level 5 bite -- "SFACC recommends humane euthanasia to protect public safety," Corso said. This was also not the dog's first serious bite, Corso said.

"While the protection of the owner is in line with resource guarding, the severity of the attack was beyond the context of a dog working properly. It was a disproportionate, protracted response, resulting in severe injuries to a grown adult. On the bite scale, this would register as a Level 5. And this was not the first serious bite. So, due to a poor prognosis, and a likelihood of repeat offenses, SFACC recommends humane euthanasia to protect public safety."

Hearing Officer Caywood then asks if Captain Corso can explain to people in attendance what a Level 5 bite is.

"Sure, I'll do it in relation to the injuries in this case," Corso said. "There was complete avulsion. Complete removal of tissue and skin. There was another one that was partial removal of tissue, which is where you see that flap of skin or flesh. And there were tearing and gaping wounds. Like I said, this is a mauling. That is the Level 5 bite size level." - Captain Amy Corso of San Francisco Animal Care and Control

San Francisco Public Library Attack: Conclusion

Based on the testimony at the hearing, the documents, photographs, videos, and the above Findings, Dorje meets the vicious and dangerous criteria under subdivisions (1) of Section 42. Credible evidence was presented establishing that Dorje attacked and bit Joshua multiple times on January 16, 2022. In determining whether a dog bite is provoked, the alleged victim’s behavior prior to the incident is examined. We look to whether the person bitten was either provoking or teasing the dog without cause. (See, e.g., SF Health Code, Art. 1, section 41.5.1) Here, Fidel Joshua did not provoke, strike, tease, or antagonize Dorje. He simply walked slowly toward Greene with Narcan to do a welfare check.

In response to Joshua’s slow approach to help Greene, Dorje lunged and tried to bite Joshua in the neck. The ensuing attack was nothing short of a mauling. The harrowing video depicted in Exhibit 4, which captured part of the attack, speaks for itself. Had Roberson not had the presence of mind to grab a hammer for protection before he responded to the third floor, Joshua could have been maimed or killed. Even with two adult males fighting with all their might to stop the attack, Joshua was still severely injured. In fact, he testified from the hospital following surgery weeks later. Believing Greene had overdosed, Joshua put his life on the line to attempt to care for Greene. In response to this good deed, Joshua was mauled by Greene’s vicious dog.

Greene’s assertion that Dorje’s attack on Joshua is justified on grounds that the dog was merely protecting Greene, is without merit. The critical inquiry is whether the attack was provoked. Even if Dorje attacked to “protect” Greene, the attack was still unprovoked. Not only did Joshua do nothing to antagonize the dog, but the severity of the attack was also completely disproportionate to Joshua’s slow, non-threatening approach with his arms at his side. As Captain Corso aptly stated, Dorje’s so-called protective behavior is not within a normal range. - Hearing Officer Janelle Caywood, Statement of Decision, February 16, 2022

Discussion

This was a well-run hearing conducted via a conference call that included about a dozen witnesses in a high-profile case. The still graphic used for the hearing's audio overlay shows Greene during his 2019 hearing. Officer Caywood did not preside over that hearing. She is seen in the overlay from the 2019 Chinatown hearing. Both hearings were captured by Black Summers Productions, LLC, which created a three-part video documentary series critical of SFACC.

We continue to be haunted by the words of Officer Roberson, who grabbed a ball pein hammer before dashing up to the third floor to face a vicious dog. "I grabbed the hammer for protection. Because we don't have no clubs or anything. We just have pepper spray," he said. Roberson and the other San Francisco Public Library security officers had been waiting on a sheriff's deputy to arrive, who was armed with the tools and equipment necessary to respond to a vicious animal.

Officer Roberson's actions were also included in the Statement of Decision. "Had Roberson not had the presence of mind to grab a hammer for protection before he responded to the third floor, Joshua could have been maimed or killed. Even with two adult males fighting with all their might to stop the attack, Joshua was still severely injured," Caywood wrote. This is especially true since Roberson first deployed a can of pepper spray on the attacking pit bull, which had "zero effect."

The soft-spoken victim, Fidel Joshua, who called in from the hospital, is also unforgettable. At one point during his testimony, he states the obvious about Green's "service dog" claim too. "My personal opinion is that I think they need these dogs for protection because they are homeless. They bring them into the facility and they are a danger to others." This is yet another loophole in the ADA that can allow fake service dogs to inflict a first and second attack in a public space.

Greene in part "dodged a bullet" during the 2019 hearing because the victim did not attend. Officer Ryan Crockett of the SFPD's Vicious and Dangerous Dog Unit did play a recorded statement by the victim, but that does not carry the same weight as attending and speaking to the hearing officer. What did the first victim think when the Reddit video went viral? The outcome of the first hearing should have been declaring Dorje vicious and dangerous with mandatory muzzling.

Since this incident, Mr. Greene is now aware of this behavior and will not put Dorje in a situation like this again. I do believe this incident was an accident, but Mr. Greene can never leave Dorje unattended in a public place ever again. I was also disappointed that I could not speak to Mr. Hartwell. I did accept his statement, but Officer Crockett indicated he just did not want to appear at the hearing. - Hearing Officer Vicky Guldbech, Statement of Decision, February 2, 2019

Dorje was 9.5-years old when he attacked Fidel, according to Greene. The dog had been with Greene since the age of 1. Greene claimed his dog was a "service dog for PTSD" and had been "professionally trained." Dorje was neutered at the age of 2, Greene testified. All three incidents, including two resulting in a Vicious and Dangerous Dog hearing, occurred years after the dog had been neutered. The only upshot of Dorje being neutered is that this dog could not reproduce.

Finally, we asked Mike Black, who has since closed Black Summers Productions, how often a hearing results in the owner being banned from owning dogs in the City and County for 3-years. Black has audited roughly 250 of these hearings between March 2017 and today. From May 2017 to March 2020, when the pandemic forced the City to switch to telephone conferences, Black video recorded every single hearing. Black said the 3-year ownership ban is rarely invoked.

"I would describe the 3-year ban as a measure that is rarely invoked -- maybe a half dozen times in my period of monitoring the hearings. As you would expect, the owner has to have demonstrated on more than one occasion a marked inability or unwillingness to control a dangerous dog. In many ways, it's a more extreme measure than a euthanasia order. It's not about just one bad dog, but about an owner who has shown a serious disregard for the safety of others. I think the hearing officers understand that this restriction deprives a human being of a real benefit, the companionship of an affectionate pet, and so it's reserved for that person who simply can't be trusted to do the right thing with any dog." - Mike Black

San Francisco Public Library attack - dangerous dog hearing

From left: The San Francisco Public Library attack video; Brendan Greene in the January 2019 hearing; and Hearing Officer Janelle Caywood in the August 2019 Chinatown attack hearing.

1Then of course since the fatal attack of Diane Whipple in 2001 in San Francisco by two presa canarios, which unleashed an onslaught of California breeders crossing pit bulls with mastiffs to achieve a similar appearing breed (which often equates to "larger sized" pit bulls), larger, heavier pit bulls became a staple in the state of California.

Posted on February 23, 2022 by Colleen Lynn

2022 Dog Bite Fatality: 4-Year Old Boy Killed, Relative Injured in Violent Dog Attack in Baytown, Texas

Pit bulls killed Drué Parker and injured a family member in a violent dog attack in Baytown.

Child Identified
UPDATE 03/22/22: One month after a 4-year old boy was killed by pit bulls while visiting his aunt's home, his mother identified him and spoke publicly to the media. Daijah McClay said her son, Drué Parker, had stayed with his aunt for the night at her home in the Bramor Subdivision. He was supposed to return home the next day. But just after waking up that morning, he encountered the pack of pit bulls living at the residence. Daijah said the dogs belonged to the aunt's husband.

"He just woke up," McClay said. "He was looking for my little cousin. She wasn't in the room. He opened the door. She was feeding the dogs as soon as you open the door. They said she told him to go back in the room," McClay said. That is where the attack began, before moving outside. Surveillance cameras from a neighbor captured the horrific mauling. "One jumped on him. Another one, and another one," McClay said. Animal control euthanized all four dogs after the attack.

The attack occurred around 7:40 am on February 23. Drué was rushed to Baytown Hospital, where he later died. Yahir Martinez witnessed part of the attack and called 911. "The kid was in the dog’s mouth," Martinez stated at the time. "That’s what those dogs are meant to do. Lock their jaw. They bite and they lock their jaw. Once they do its difficult for you to get them to unlock their jaw." Another neighbor said the pit bulls could not be removed until the little boy stopped moving.

02/23/22: Child Killed by Pit Bulls
Baytown, TX - A 4-year-old child is dead after being attacked by dogs at a residence this morning, Baytown police said. First responders were dispatched to a home in the 2700 block of Massey Tompkins Road at about 7:40 am for reports of a dog fight. Arriving officers found that a 4-year old boy had been attacked by the dogs. Emergency medical care was administered at the scene before the child was transported to Baytown Hospital, where he was later pronounced dead.

“Today, Baytown police officers worked a call that every officer dreads, the death of a child. We are heartbroken for the loss of this child. Our thoughts and prayers are with everyone in the community who has been impacted by this tragedy,” said Baytown Police Chief John Stringer. A relative, who intervened to help the child, was also injured. The child that was killed by the dogs had been staying at the residence, police said. Animal control seized the multiple dogs involved.

Baytown Police and Fire audio archives at Broadcastify.com indicate the attack occurred at a home in the Bramor Subdivision. The dispatcher tells Fire and Police, "Pretty hysterical caller [saying] pit bulls killing each other," she said. "There is supposed to be five of them," she said. "They are concerned about the children going to the bus stop soon." Also, "It sounds like possibly one of the neighbor's stabbed one of the dogs." No other information has been released.

Evening Updates

KPRC spoke to Yahir Martinez who witnessed part of the attack and called 911. Martinez was shaken by the attack. "Being a baby and having pampers on, it was jaw-dropping," he said. "I guess part of his face was missing, that’s what really got me." Neighbors described the four dogs -- two adults and two puppies -- as pit bulls that were known to be friendly. KPRC also showed home surveillance video that captured one of the pit bulls two minutes before the fatal attack.

KTRK also spoke to Martinez. He had just arrived at his boss' house when he heard a woman scream next door. "I did not hear the baby. The baby was totally unconscious. All you hear is the dogs growling and like biting. She was really upset," he said. "She did not know what to do." The child was the woman's nephew, who had been staying at the residence. KTRK also reported that the vicious attack was captured on the surveillance camera but was "too troubling to air."

Home surveillance video captured one of the pit bulls two minutes before the fatal attack.

KHOU reports that four dogs, two adults and two puppies, were confiscated by animal control.

Join Texas Dog Bite Victims' Advocacy - Join our Texas email list to stay informed

View the DogsBite.org Google State Map: Texas Fatal Pit Bull Attacks.

Baseline reporting requirements:
Law enforcement departments across the United States should release consistent "baseline" information to the media and the public after each fatal dog mauling, including these items.

Posted on February 17, 2022 by Colleen Lynn

2022 Dog Bite Fatality: Hulking Pit Bull-Type Dog Kills Woman, Injures Another at Rescue Dog Facility in Florida

A hulking pit bull-type dog killed Pam Robb at a rescue dog facility in Oakland Park.

Civil Lawsuit Filed
UPDATE 12/08/22: In early December, we became aware of a civil lawsuit that was filed against 100+ Abandoned Dogs of Everglades Florida in connection to the mauling death of 71-year old Pam Robb, who had been volunteering at the rescue. On February 17, Robb was violently attacked by a 125-pound pit bull-mastiff type dog that the rescue had "saved" from the Everglades on January 18. The lawsuit was filed in July by Angela Anobile, the surviving spouse of Robb.

The legal name of the defendant is 100 Plus Animal Rescue, Inc. The wrongful death lawsuit alleges that under statute 767.04 of Florida code, the defendant is strictly liable for the damages caused by the subject dog to Robb. The lawsuit seeks damages in excess of $30,000 and demands a jury trial. The lawsuit, unsurprisingly, focuses on the rescue’s lack of safety protocols and safety equipment on the premises and the lack of training for when a dog attacks.

Pages 4-6 itemize the alleged breaches of duty and safety failures, including: failing to euthanize the dog “immediately upon learning of its dangerous propensities,” failing to train employees for dog attacks on the premises, “luring members of the general public,” including Robb, onto the premises by stating that the subject dog "needs your love and support," and failing to provide Robb with the “proper protective equipment.” Also, for failing to call 911 in a timely manner.

Since apparently no one on the premises had any training for when a dog attacks, much less for a hulking 125 pound dog, they resorted to “throwing food” at the dog, “splashing water” on it and “placing a bone in its mouth.” The lawsuit alleges the rescue had no equipment on the premises to separate the attacking dog from Robb. The lawsuit also alleges that 100 Plus Animal Rescue breached their duty of care for Robb by failing to “render first aid” to her after the brutal attack.

02/18/22: Outside When Attacked
Local news station WPLG watched additional videos of "Gladys from the Glades," a hulking pit bull-type dog that was rescued from the Everglades on January 18 by 100+ Abandoned Dogs of Everglades Florida. On February 17, the dog attacked and killed 71-year old Pam Robb who was volunteering at the facility on Commercial Boulevard. In a February 5 video, WPLG noted that an employee admits that the dog's fear issues "might be out of our hands, a little over our heads."

"It has been slow and steady with Gladys (5:43) … Since we have had her in the house, she is good with certain people. She is not good with others (6:00) ... She has got tremendous, tremendous fear ... She is afraid to leave this room. It is a battle to get her out of this room every single day. If we can get her out in the yard, she's terrified out there. She does not want to be out there. She paces, tail is tucked. She's just a nervous wreck (6:27) She's got so much anxiety and fear. We are trying to manage it (7:06) As I said, there are only a few of us that can work with Gladys right now, because she's got some fear issues of our other volunteers … We are doing the best that we can [to get her over her anxiety]. It might be out of our hands, a little over our heads. (13:38)” - Gladys Update, slow and steady

The Sun-Sentinel reports that Robb had volunteered at the rescue for the last six years after she retired from teaching at a high school. According to her wife, Angie Anobile, Robb was outside with the dog when the attack happened. Gladys first latched onto Robb's arm before taking Robb to the ground. Despite this violent act, Anobile said, Robb "was one of the few that the dog resonated with. She was just starting to build trust with the dog." (See February 14 video of dog outside.)

Clearly, the dog did not "resonate" with Robb or possibly any human being. Though, it appears the dog "tolerated" some people. Confusing the two cost Robb her life. The dog was also outside at the time of the attack, a place where Tiffany explained, "She's terrified out there. She does not want to be out there." Certainly, all of the signs were apparent that this dog posed a safety threat to staffers and volunteers while outside and inside. "Wishful thinking" did not remove this threat.

The Sun-Sentinel also spoke to Ana Campos, a private investigator and animal activist. Campos was critical of the rescue for not enough people wearing bite sleeves or other safety equipment during the "Divine Intervention" rescue of the dog on January 18, along with people who visited the dog after the Everglades rescue. “I’ve got to tell you when I watched the video of the rescue along with everybody else, I had concerns about basic safety protocols being ignored,” Campos said.

Finally, as predicted by our own commenters, the claim that Robb "died doing what she loved," has manifested, as it has after other female rescuers were fatally attacked by dangerous dogs they were trying to rehab. “Pam loved what she was doing and died loving what she was doing,” Anobile told WPLG. Indeed, love would have been throbbing from her heart as the 125 pound "Gladys from the Glades" latched onto her arm, took her to the ground, and fatally mauled her.

02/17/22: Rescue Dog Kills
Oakland Park, FL - One woman is dead and another injured after being mauled by a dog at a rescue facility. The multi-victim attack occurred at 100+ Abandoned Dogs of Everglades Florida, located at 345 East Commercial Boulevard. The female dog, a pit bull-mastiff combination, was rescued from the Everglades on January 18. She was named "Gladys of the Glades" by her rescuers, which is recorded in a January 18 rescue video on the group's Facebook page.

At 1:24, the woman who is filming tells the rescue story. She calls it a "Divine Intervention," and that a group of women prayed together, "and one of the members of her prayer group, gave her my number. She called me. And here we are." Just under one month later, after multiple fundraising videos were posted for the dog, Gladys inflicted a fatal attack. "Our Hearts are Broken for our Dear Friend Pam. Our deepest condolences to her family & friends," states a recent post.

"We are here with Tammy and Tiffany and Jan and a couple that reached out to me last night. The couple's two boys were out here fishing -- talk about Divine Intervention. They were out here fishing and came home and told their parents that they saw a dog in the middle of the Everglades -- I am telling you there is absolutely nothing around. She is a big girl. She's a big girl. She's got nipples. We don't know if she's pregnant. We don’t know if she recently had a litter. We don't know if she was dumped out here. There is not a house anywhere in sight … The couple came out here all day yesterday, she would not come with them. She said she reached out to her prayer group and prayed with her prayer group and one of the members of her prayer group, gave her my number. She called me. And here we are." - PLEASE DONATE FOR GLADYS & OUR ONGOING MISSION

Oakland Park Fire Rescue crews and Broward Sheriff’s Office deputies responded to the scene at the rescue dog facility on East Commercial Boulevard just before 11:00 am, reports WSVN. The 71-year old female victim, identified as Pam Robb, was transported to Broward Health Medical Center with serious bite injuries. Shortly thereafter, she succumbed to her injuries. The other female victim, who intervened to help, suffered minor injuries and was taken to Holy Cross Health.

WSVN captured footage of the dog being removed from the facility by animal control officers. Broward Sheriff’s Office spokesperson Claudinne Caro shared the results of the preliminary investigation. "The preliminary investigation reveals that the two adult females are workers, and one of them was working with the dog when apparently the dog suddenly snapped,” Caro said. “The second adult female tried to aid that first worker, and in the process she herself got injured.”

Oakland Park is located 100 miles south of Fort Pierce, where a volunteer of the Humane Society of St. Lucie County was discovered "mutilated and dead" after being attacked by a pit bull-mix named "Amos" in 2019. That dog had been found wandering the streets a month earlier and was available for adoption prior to killing 52-year old Christine Liquori. David Robertson, who was the Executive Director at that time, said that Amos had never shown any signs of aggression before.

The most recent video of Gladys posted on the rescue's Facebook page, was published February 14. The 16 minute video shows Gladys outside with little interest in the woman who is filming. Gladys is yet another XL pit bull designer breed/American Bully involved in a fatal dog mauling. The most recent being the pit bull-cane corso mix that killed Tiffany Frangione, 48, in November and the massive pit bull-American bulldog mix that killed Amber LaBelle, 42, in September.

In a January 25 video, one commenter inquires about adopting Gladys. Terry Kemp replied, "make sure you can have the breed she is at your home also, she is a American bully" [sic]. The American bully XL is an "extension" of the pit bull terrier and is interchangeable with XL pit bulls, which are typically crossed with mastiffs, cane corsos, American bulldogs or a combination thereof. Calling this dog a "large mixed-breed" is an omission of up to four bully breeds.

The hulking pit bull-type dog, named "Gladys from the Glades," was rescued on January 18.

The hulking pit bull-type dog seen being removed from the rescue facility by animal control.

"Gladys" seen at the 100+ Abandoned Dogs of Everglades Florida facility in Oakland Park.

The rescue tagged this dog with hashtags #bullmastiff #pit bull #rescue on their Tiktok page.

DogsBite blog ::