Remorseless Sociopathic Freak Paroled

[foreigncorrespondent]

Picture this -- and change gender-specific words as needed:

You live with your partner of seven years, a loving, well-liked, energetic blonde, in a nice apartment building in a highly desirable neighborhood. One day, your girlfriend gets off work, stops at the grocery store to pick up the makings for your dinner tonight, and goes home. Just as she's putting the key in the lock of the flat you share together, the next-door neighbor appears in the hallway with her two dogs -- a pair of Presa Canarios, each weighing more than 100 pounds -- one of which took a nip out of your girlfriend's hand not long ago.

Your girlfriend never makes it inside.

For reasons you will never know, the dogs make a dead run at your girlfriend, and attack. For the next twelve minutes -- which seem an eternity for your other half -- your girlfriend is mauled. Her clothes are ripped from her body; only the soles of her feet and the top of her head are spared, as the animals sink their fangs into her throat, her neck, her back...

The hallway leading to the door of your apartment looks like the handiwork of a maniacal Jackson Pollock fan. Your girlfriend's crimson handprints cover the walls, reaching no higher than four feet off the floor; that's as far as she could reach once the dogs got hold of her and pulled her down. The carpeting is saturated with your lover's blood.

When the paramedics get there, she's still alive, but barely. There is nothing they can do; she's lost a full third of all the blood in her body through the gaping hole where her larynx used to be.

You wonder if she had a chance to cry before her throat was torn out.

That smooth, tanned, athletic body, of which you knew every inch, intimately, is mutilated, like a badly butchered piece of meat.

Full article (and a must read for those who want more ammunition when dealing with people who simply have no sympathy for the dead Diane Whipple, or her partner in life): http://blogs.salon.com/0002551/2004/01/02.html#a670

I know there was a big discussion on this very issue, only a couple of days ago (see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=975367) but nevertheless this is an article that touched many of us in different ways. And I do feel that we need to address this a lot more, than we already have.

There are people here at DU that believe that Knoller is indeed innocent and didn't use her dogs as a weapon to murder. I ask all of you to please read this entire article, and then follow every single link that Sapphocrat has linked to. By doing so, you will begin to understand what most of us here at DU had been saying all along.

(Note to mods: I have full permission from the author, Sapphocrat, to post as much of this article in this thread, as I would like. So I am asking to please not remove any of it. If you have any questions, please PM Sapphocrat, to let you know, she has given me full permission. Thank you)

[REP]

1. What Does The Victim's Sexuality Have To Do With This?

Knoller and Noel are disgusting people. Knoller's conviction on the most serious charge was overturned by the judge. They should both be in jail until they rot, but the laws don't allow that. Even if the victim had been a child (the media's favorite victim), the ruling would have been the same. The sentences were far too lenient, but I cn't for the life of me see how this has anything to do with Whipple being gay. I live in the SF area, and like many others, don't want Knoller and Noel anywhere near me.

[foreigncorrespondent]

4. Her sexuality has nothing to do with it.

Whipple was a woman. This woman was loved deeply by another. What Sapphocrat wrote has nothing what so ever to do with the fact that Diane was a lesbian, and everything to do with the fact that those dogs were used as a weapon.

The reason homosexuality is brought up is because it was a well known fact that Diane was a lesbian, and that Knoller and Noel were infact very homophobic.

What Sapphocrat has done with her brilliant writing has been to put you in the position of Sharon (Diane's partner.) What Sharon must have been going through, etc.

And yes, the judge was far to lenient when he sentenced Knoller. The fact is, she was charged with second-degree murder. The jury found her guilty of second-degree murder, but the judge backed down.

[Piperay]

2. Knoller should never

see the light of day again, those dogs were used as weapons. :mad:

[opihimoimoi]

3. Bushes "Justice" he likes to talk about. I don't think so. Appalling decis

ion

Come, lemme pour you some Sanity

[kodi]

5. the jury was right, those two are murderers

they let those dogs kill that poor woman and had shown their hatred for homosexuals prior to the attack on the woman, and persisted even afterwards. they showed their own pure animal savagery.

the reasoning of the judge is disengenuous at best, outright mindboggling deceit in fact.

if i had a well decumented and established problem with a neighbor and i alowed my pack of 6 dogs to maul the neighbor and kill him/her, i would be liable for murder, not manslaughter.

the dog owners used the dogs as a murder weapon, and it was no mistake that it happened.

i think the homophobia of the dog owners is the point, it was merely the basis of the premeditation of the act of allowing/perpetrating the violence.

btw: at the age of 6 i was mauled by a pack of dogs and live today only because both my parents fought off with a baseball bat and clothes line prop a senile neighbor's 4 german sheperd dogs who came into our back yard . i recall no more terrifying incident in my life and i still have the scars on my head and back to show for it. and i had to take those rabies shots in the gut too. it was 30 years before i even wanted to be near a dog.

what about happened to that woman is painful to soul and what those dog owners have gotten away with hurts it even more.