After April 12, 2009, the Dog Bite Victim Log will be replaced by the Dog Bite Law Blog.

The new version of this Dog Bite Victim Log will enable users to add their thoughts and comments, and will be more tightly integrated into Dog Bite Law.

Please visit us at the Dog Bite Law Blog very soon!

On April 10, 2009, Michael Landry, a 4-year-old boy, was attacked by a neighbor's three boxers. The child was in the back yard of his parents' home in Louisiana. He later died of his injuries.

Police stated that a man "acting as caretaker" for one or more of the dogs was cleaning out the dogs' kennel at the time of the attack. The dogs went into the Landry back yard and savaged the young child. (Click here to read more.)

Only one of the six factors on the Dog Attack Danger Scale was present here: the pack mentality. Three dogs are worse than 2, 4 are worse than 3, etc. Docile dogs often become uncharacteristically violent and vicious when they are in a pack. In 2008, 39% of the fatalities involved multiple dogs.

Seventeen-year-old Kayla Diane Nowlin of Panama City, Florida, was arrested this week on a charge of child neglect causing great bodily harm. She was babysitting a 2-year-old child which was mauled by her boxer. The teenager put the toddler on the ground, walked away, and when she turned around she saw the dog savagely attacking the child. She did this with full awareness that her dog previously had bitten another child in the neighborhood. (Read the article.)

The death count for the USA has reached 11 as of this date. Details about them can be found here at the Dog Bite Victim Log in addition to the home page of Dog Bite Law (www.dogbitelaw.com) and the section of Dog Bite Law entitled Dangerous and Vicious Dogs.

Many of the dangerous dog laws currently in effect in our cities and counties need provisions that will protect the privacy and rights of dog bite victims.

Victims of dog bites have had their privacy violated when their personal medical files have been handed to dog owners without any limitations as to what they could see or how they could use the information. I have personally been threatened by animal control officers who did not want me to even ask questions at dangerous dog hearings. In the message I received, below, the victim relates how the animal control officer induced her to inadvertently waive her right to compensation.

The dog in my attack had a record. Here is the "deal" I made with AC about my attack. It involved dropping criminal charges -- this "DEAL" was presented to me just after I left my 2-day hospital stay and had not yet acquired an attorney -- in exchange for getting the dog owner to put the dog down. Only much later do I learn that "dropping criminal charges" eliminated my chances of being eligible for the WA Felony Victim Fund.

I do NOT know if my attack would have qualified for a felony in my state. My injury did qualify as "severe" under state law because my arm was broken. I never followed this up because I was too angry, and I am still too angry.

How many victims are being offered this "deal" while lying in a hospital room without an attorney present? This is what makes me angry.

Throughout the USA, there are statutes and ordinances that are intended to keep the streets safe from dangerous dogs and their equally dangerous owners, but it is well known that certain police departments and animal control authorities are not enforcing them.

If you are being prevented from giving details, there might be a reason for it. For example, the authorities might be withholding a dog owner's name because the dog was known to be vicious and the local animal control department deliberately failed to take the dog off the streets. By withholding the dog owner's name, the authorities ensure that witnesses will not come forward because they do not realize that the same dog was involved in a new attack.

There are a number of people such as I who study the details of dog attacks for the purpose of educating the public about avoiding them. There are other people who feel that this information should be suppressed because it could result in the passage of laws which would negatively impact dogs and their owners.

If you have a chance to report more details on these terrible accidents, please do so. While it is not your role to side with one group or another, it is your duty to report the truth and let the chips fall where they will.