News
Criminal
Feb. 19, 2002
Dog-Mauling Jury Will Hear Opening Statements
LOS ANGELES - A Los Angeles jury today will hear opening statements in the closely watched trial of husband-and-wife attorneys whose dogs mauled a woman to death in one of San Francisco's toniest districts.
The jury of seven men and five women will decide whether attorneys Marjorie Knoller, 46, and Robert Noel, 60, are culpable in the death of their 33-year-old neighbor, college lacrosse coach Diane Whipple. People v Knoller, 181813 (San Francisco Super. Ct., filed March 27, 2001).
San Francisco Superior Court Judge James Warren admonished the jurors and alternates not to discuss the case or speak with members of the media. Taking it a step further, Warren warned even jurors who were rejected from the panel not to speak to reporters. His action raises significant First Amendment issues, according to a constitutional law expert.
The jurors and six alternates, four women and two men, were seated Friday morning after more than two weeks of jury selection. More than 500 people were called as potential jurors in the case that has transfixed Northern California.
A San Francisco grand jury last year indicted Knoller and Noel on charges of involuntary manslaughter and having a mischievous animal who killed a human being. The grand jury upped the ante on Knoller, adding a charge of second-degree murder after she made odd comments about the 33-year-old victim, apparently blaming the dead woman for the fatal attack.
Knoller was walking the Presa Canario dogs on Jan. 26, 2001, when Bane attacked, ripping her throat. Hera, the other dog, chewed at Whipple's clothing, according to police.
San Francisco Animal Care and Control workers destroyed Bane the day of the attack and Hera last month.
Warren, who moved the trial to Los Angeles because of a glut of publicity in the Bay Area, promised to release answers to juror questionnaires Friday, but he balked. He relented after being pressured by members of the media and made the documents available for eight hours.
First Amendment expert Terry Francke, a Sacramento lawyer, said that those questionnaires and answers are public documents and must be made available for viewing.
The unusual move of gagging jurors who did not make the cut was puzzling, said Robert Pugsley, a professor at Southwestern University College of Law.
While Warren was correct in admonishing the panel not to discuss the case, he erred in gagging potential jurors who were not selected to be on the panel, Pugsley said.
Warren's gag of rejected jurors raises serious First Amendment issues and would not be sustained on appeal, the professor added.
"Enforcement is going to be very difficult," Pugsley said. "If a [rejected] juror chooses to assert free speech and talk to a reporter, I'm not aware of any law that would preclude the person from speaking or the reporter from doing a story."
#337692
Anne La Jeunesse
Daily Journal Staff Writer
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424
Send a letter to the editor:
Email: letters@dailyjournal.com