Dog-Maul Death Couple Seeks New Trial

June 7, 2002 -- Lawyers for the San Francisco woman awaiting sentencing for murder in the dog-mauling death of her neighbor asked for a new trial today, arguing that the verdict was improper.

Marjorie Knoller, 46, was expected to be sentenced today, but San Francisco Superior Court Judge James L. Warren said he did not want to rush his ruling on the defense motion for a new trial and would continue hearing arguments on Monday, June 17. He will not sentence Knoller and her husband Robert Noel until after he rules on the motion.

Knoller faces 15 years to life in prison for her second-degree murder conviction in the death of Diane Whipple, who was ripped to pieces by Knoller's giant dogs outside her apartment.

Both Knoller and Noel were convicted of involuntary manslaughter and owning a mischievous animal that caused a death.

Attorneys for both Knoller and Noel argued today that prosecutors failed to prove the malice implied in both murder and manslaughter charges. There was no evidence, the lawyers argued, that they trained their dogs to harm human beings. Whipple's fatal mauling was an accident, they said.

"Good people kill people, accidentally," Marjorie Knoller's lawyer Dennis Riordan told Warren.

Noel, 60, did not face a second-degree murder charge because he was not present at the time of the Jan. 26, 2001, attack. He faces up to four years in prison for involuntary manslaughter when sentenced today. Ownership of a mischievous animal carries a penalty of up to three years in prison.

Prosecutors have said they will ask Warren to impose the maximum sentences for each charge. Prosecutor Jim Hammer said he was confident the judge would reject the defense's motion for a new trial.

Alleged Incompetence

In court papers filed before today's hearing, attorneys argued that the clashes between Warren and Knoller's trial attorney, Nedra Ruiz, compromised the defendant's right to a fair trial and showed that she did not receive competent legal representation. Warren, they maintained, restricted Knoller's right to a fair trial by constantly reprimanding Ruiz and preventing her from presenting her case.

During the trial, Ruiz clashed repeatedly with the judge over her often theatrical litigation style. During opening statements and sometimes during the trial — despite Warren's admonitions — she crawled on the floor in front of jurors as she tried to illustrate how Knoller allegedly tried to shield Whipple from the dogs.

Ruiz accused prosecutors and Warren of bowing to political pressure from the gay community in San Francisco. She suggested that charges would have never been brought against Noel and Knoller if the gay community had not pressured prosecutors. Whipple, 33, was gay.

Knoller dismissed Ruiz after her conviction in March.

‘Improper’ Association With White Supremacists

Judge Warren, Knoller's new attorneys argued in court papers, improperly allowed prosecutors to associate Knoller and Noel with a reputed white supremacist prison gang that allegedly trained attack dogs.

There was never proof, defense attorneys argued, that Bane and Hera, the Presa Canario dogs that attacked Whipple, were trained to harm humans.

Before trial, Warren barred testimony about allegations of sexual conduct between Knoller and Noel and their dogs. However, he allowed prosecutors to present evidence of the couple's relationship with members of the white supremacist prison gang Aryan Brotherhood.

Noel and Knoller, who are both lawyers, said they got the dogs from one of the gang members, a Pelican Bay State Prison inmate named Paul "Cornfed" Schneider, whom they had represented and legally adopted as their son. Schneider and fellow Aryan Brotherhood member Dale Bretches, who are both serving life without parole, were allegedly trying to operate a business from behind bars, raising attack dogs to guard illegal drug labs.

In addition, defense attorneys argued that Knoller cannot be legally convicted of both murder and involuntary manslaughter.

Civil Suit to Follow

During the trial — which had been moved to Los Angeles because of pretrial publicity — prosecutors argued that Knoller and Noel were responsible for Whipple's death because they knew their dogs were vicious and dangerous. The couple, prosecutors argued, could have foreseen — and prevented — the fatal attack.

More than 30 witnesses testified about previous encounters in which they recalled seeing Bane and Hera lunging and snapping at neighbors in the building or passers-by.

Sharon Smith, Whipple's domestic partner, testified that her girlfriend was bitten by one of the dogs six weeks before the fatal attack and that Whipple warned Knoller and Noel to keep their dogs under control.

Defense attorneys called the mauling death a tragic accident that no one could have foreseen. Several defense witnesses recalled Bane and Hera as gentle, nice dogs that showed no signs of aggression. The defense also noted that no one filed complaints about the dogs before the attacks and argued that Bane and Hera were not trained to be vicious.

Knoller's conviction was the first murder in a dog-mauling case in California and was believed to be only the third of its kind in recent U.S. history.

Knoller and Noel also face a civil lawsuit filed by Smith and Whipple's family. That case could go to trial later this year.

Bane and Hera have both been destroyed. ABCNEWS affiliate KGO in San Francisco contributed to this report.