'No Real Joy' In Dog Maul Verdict

The foreman of the jury that convicted two San Francisco lawyers in the dog mauling death of a neighbor says jurors struggled over the verdict and cried after reaching their decision.

But Don Newton, a machinist for the city of Los Angeles, says the panel had to convict Marjorie Knoller and her husband, Robert Noel, in the January 2001 death of 33-year-old Diane Whipple, because they failed to heed repeated warnings about their vicious dogs.

"It wasn't the dogs' fault. It was the way they had been put into this apartment building, the way they were never trained, never properly conditioned to be around people," said Newton, adding that Knoller and Noel had shown a "complete disregard for human life."

More than 30 witnesses at the trial testified that they were terrorized by the Presa Canarios dogs the prosecution said were "time bombs" whose danger was a "power trip" for their owners.

Knoller, 46, faces 15 years to life after becoming only the third person in recent U.S. history to be convicted of murder of a death caused by a dog. She was also found guilty of manslaughter and owning a mischievous dog, charges on which Noel, 60, was also convicted.

He could get four years in jail.

"Virtually everything worked against the defendants in this case," says CBSNews.com Legal Analyst Andrew Cohen. "The animals brutally killed Diane Whipple. The animals looked ferocious. Neighbors came forward to say that they, too, were scared by the dogs before the killing. Knoller and Noel were not particularly sympathetic defendants. When you add all these things up, these verdicts - even the second-degree murder conviction against Knoller - aren't particularly shocking."

Knoller and Noel have had their law licenses suspended as a result of the convictions and they face a wrongful death lawsuit filed on behalf of the victim, filed by her lesbian partner, Sharon Smith.

The lawsuit in its earliest stages has already set a new precedent, in that Smith was allowed to sue for wrongful death as a same sex partner.

"There's no real joy in this, but certainly some measure of justice was done for Diane today," said Smith after the verdict, speaking to reporters along with Whipple's mother, Penny Whipple-Kelly.

"I feel that justice was done here, and that was what I was hoping for," said Whipple-Kelly. "They tried all along to blame my daughter and anybody else that they possibly could, instead of looking at themselves."

Both Smith and prosecutor Jim Hammer wound up going directly from the trial to a previously planned gay lawyers' awards dinner in San Francisco that just happened to coincide with the day of the verdict.

Smith, who is not an attorney and works in financial services, was honored at the Bay Area Lawyers for Individual Freedom's annual dinner for her fight for same-sex partner rights.

"It seems almost ironic that I would be recognized with any community service award, when it is I who wants to recognize the community, for the support they have given me," said Smith, receiving a standing ovation.

Another sensitive issue was brought up by Hammer, who said he resented implications made by the defense that he prosecuted the case differently because he is gay.

"I prosecuted this case just like I would prosecute any other case," said Hammer. "Nothing will bring Diane Whipple back, but hopefully this will send a message across the country, across the world, about how people should regard other people. Ninety-nine percent of people are responsible dog owners, but a very small number fail to heed warnings and because of that, at least one woman is dead. Hopefully Diane Whipple's death will prevent other people from dying."

The conviction is not the end of the line for those who knew Whipple and are waiting to see what will happen at the sentencing.

Ed Nahigian, a cobber who works a few blocks away from the San Francisco building where Whipple was killed, says he prays that the judge gives Knoller and Noel "the maximum sentence because in my opinion, and I knew everybody involved here, they deserve it. They really deserve it."

Both the jury foreman and Shawn Antonio, a member of the panel, said that evidence from the defendants themselves damaged their case. Antonio in particular points to a television news interview in which Knoller said the attack was not her fault and that Whipple had "ample opportunity" to get away from the dogs.

"There was no kind of sympathy, no kind of apologies. It helped us a lot," said Antonio.

At one point after the attack, Noel suggested Whipple might have attracted the dogs' attention with her perfume or even steroids. And in a letter he wrote after her death - read into evidence at the trial - Noel complained about those who wanted the dogs killed, saying: "Neighbors be damned. If they don't like living in the building with her (one of the dogs), they can move."

The gruesome nature of Whipple's injuries - 77 bites and scratches on every surface of her body except the soles of her feet and the top of her head - preyed on the minds of the jurors throughout the trial, according to the foreman.

"The pictures of the autopsy showing the effect of the bites on Diane Whipple were really horrifying," said Newton. "All of us felt tremendous stress because of it. I couldn't sleep."

The case was also traumatic for the city of San Francisco, which tightened its leash laws, considered enacting a muzzle law, and eventually moved the trial to Los Angeles to compensate for the effects of pre-trial publicity.