Fred M. Kray Explains Why South Bend, Indiana, Dangerous Dog Law Is Unconstitutional
Pit Bulletin Legal News's Fred M. Kray, Esq., gave a Powerpoint presentation to the South Bend, Indiana, Animal Control Special Committee about the unconstitutionality of their dangerous dog law. The law singles out only the American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT) as a regulated breed by declaring it a dangerous dog. There is no statutory guidance on how APBT identifications take place, and the city attorney was unable to provide any specifics on the subject. The statute does not provide any due process safeguards, such a notice of hearing, right to counsel, burden of proof, burden of going forward, and has no appeal from the first tier fact finding.
Mr. Kray also shared that Breed Discriminatory Legislation (BDL) has never worked and that all mainstream professional and animal welfare groups are against BDL. He also pointed out that the United Kennel Club's breed standards were not created to determine whether a dog is a member of a particular breed (in fact the UKC is strenuously opposed to the use of its breed standards for visual identification).
The presentation was made over the phone, with the Powerpoint being run there. If you need help analysing your city or county ordinance and would like such a presentation, contact us. We can help!
Fred M. Kray, Laura Hayes, and Amy Conrad from Pit Bulletin Legal News all testified in a packed committee chamber room against a proposal for Pit Bull regulation. Several legislators on the committee expressed their opposition to the bill as well.
Last year Massachusetts enacted a comprehensive overhaul of animal control laws that, inter alia, banned breed-discriminatory legislation (BDL), including Boston's Pit Bull ordinance. This year, Senate Bill 969 (S. 969) was put forth. This bill--written and sponsored at the urging of Boston officials who had championed BDL in the past--would allow municipalities to get an exemption from the state prohibition of breed discrimination.
Says It Would Cost $23,855 to Produce Bite Data
Is This Any Way to Run Animal Control?
As we previously reported, PBLN sent a FOIA request to Boston Animal Control (BAC) which can be read in it's entirety here. The Director of Boston Animal Control, Mark Giannangelo, in his response to the FOIA request, required $308.00 to identify the materials responsive to the request, and objected to producing the name of the victims of dog bites due to privacy concerns.
Bite Data Had Been Requested One Year Earlier,
That Request Remains Unanswered
The interesting thing about the response of BAC, was that a similar request had been made a year before, as can be seen here, and at that time BAC demanded $476.80 to identify what amounted to the same data. As of the date of this article, the previous request by Donna Bishop has still not been fulfilled. You have to wonder how this bite data, which has allegedly already been sent to Ron Consalvo (as attested to in his radio interviews) needs any identification, and costs over $700.00 to identify.