commentary by Patrick H. Moore
Sometimes I want to pinch myself and say, “How did I end up in Southern California?” I had never even considered living here until I was hired to work as a criminal defense investigator 11 years ago. It’s been quite a ride and for the most part a memorable one. The fringe benefit I didn’t expect, however, was falling in love with SoCal and particularly Los Angeles County.
For the many decades I had lived previously in the Bay Area and Silicon Valley, whenever LA would come up, eyes would roll and smirks would appear on peoples’ faces. The phrase “armpit of the universe” was bandied about gleefully.
How wrong people can be! Generally speaking, the good folk of Los Angeles County are a good-hearted and conscientious bunch.
Of course like anywhere, there are exceptions. We have our share of the lowdown and the wicked and we have pockets that could justly be referred to as No Man’s Land.
One of those areas is the desert country around Palmdale and Lancaster, far to the north and east of LA proper. Whereas the power of the gangs has greatly diminished in most of LA County, the opposite is true in the Lancaster area. Bangers have left their former urban haunts and relocated in the hinterlands, bringing, to some degree, their bad habits with them.
The original residents of the area are country folks who have lived there for many generations. The economy has been depressed for a long time and hard drugs are plentiful. Where it gets really bad is out in the small country towns, places like Littlerock, Population 1,400. I know, it sounds like a Jim Thompson novel. In reality, however, it’s a real place that is currently in the news because for some time now, it’s been overrun by packs of wild dogs roaming the environs and striking fear into the hearts of the locals.
In Littlerock, an Antelope Valley town of about 1,400 people, residents told the Los Angeles Times that they were often cornered by packs of dogs. Some have forbid their children from playing outside and have taken to carrying sticks, rocks and guns for protection.
And indeed, a dog-related disaster has occurred in Littlerock. The culprits, however, are not wild or abandoned dogs, but rather dogs belonging to a local resident, Alex Donald Jackson, 31. Jackson had eight dogs living at the home he shared with his mother. At least four of them were pit bulls and Jackson was apparently very negligent in both training and controlling them.
Thus, the inevitable came to pass. On May 9, 2013, 63-year-old Pamela Devitt was out for her morning walk when she was attacked by Jackson’s four bit bulls who essentially tore her apart.
According to the coroner’s office, she was bitten 200 times with gashes so deep that her bones were exposed. Technically, she died of blood loss. I can assure you this was not a pleasant way to bid adieu to this fair earth.
As a result of Ms. Devitt’s awful death, Jackson was charged with second-degree-murder under the theory that based on previous incidents, he was well aware that his dogs were dangerous, which is the triggering element required for a second-degree-murder charge and conviction when one’s dogs take the life of a human.
Although Jackson pleaded not guilty on Wednesday, on Friday the jury found him guilty of second-degree-murder.
In keeping with the “knowledge of danger” requirement, the “prosecutors argued that Jackson was not just negligent but also knew that his animals could endanger someone’s life. They presented evidence that the dogs were involved in at least seven other altercations in the 18 months before the fatal attack.”
At the trial, the State trotted out plenty of witnesses who were more than willing to testify that they had been been placed in danger by Jackson’s overly aggressive animals.
- Several horseback riders testified they had been chased or bitten by Alex Jackson’s dogs.
- Neighbors said the dogs jumped a fence and made it difficult to retrieve mail.
- A mailman explained that he was unable to successfully make a delivery to Alex Jackson’s house because of a threatening dog that ultimately chased his vehicle for half a mile.
Testifying on his own behalf, Jackson claimed that he was unaware of most of the incidents, and stated further that “he would have gotten rid of the dogs if he had thought they were capable of killing someone.”
“I feel terrible about it. This isn’t anything that I orchestrated or planned, that I wanted to have happen.”
On the other hand, animal control officers testified that shortly after Ms. Devitt was mauled to death, an inebriated Jackson threatened them:
“If you mess with me, you’re coming into the lions’ den.”
Based on the conviction, Jackson faces 24 years to life. His sentencing is scheduled for Oct. 3 of this year.
* * * * *
Jackson’s brother Vincent defended him to some degree stating that Alex has accepted some responsibility for Ms. Devitt’s death and wrote a letter to her husband which he never sent. Still, Vincent Jackson believes the murder charge is an over-reaction reflecting the community’s negative animus toward pit bulls. (Note: I guess “animus” is negative by definition.)
“It feels like they’re trying to make an example of him.”
Jackson’s attorney Al Kim said essentially the same thing in somewhat different fashion, stating his client was taking the blame for the the rural community’s growing frustration over the threat posed by abandoned animals.
“At some point, something needs to be done about these stray dogs, and I think an unfair amount of responsibility is being directed at my client,” Kim said before the verdict was returned. “Does that mean he’s a murderer? Absolutely not.”
Attorney Kim seems to be overlooking the fact that the dogs that “murdered” Ms. Devitt were neither “strays” nor “abandoned” animals. Rather, they were Alex Jackson’s dogs and they had a home.
According to the National Canine Research Council, about 30 people are killed by dogs each year here in the U.S. Murder charges are rare because prosecutors must be able to prove that the defendant knew the dogs were dangerous before they killed the victim.
* * * * *
My take on this is that although Jackson appears to be guilty under the letter of the law, 24 years to life is too steep based on a reasonable analysis of his culpability. He is clearly guilty – the question is of what?
If I were the judge in this matter, and if I had the discretion under the law, I would probably sentence Jackson to anywhere from a nickel to a solid dime. Ten years would send a strong clear message that dog owners must control their pets and simply cannot let them run wild. On the other hand, it’s not as if Jackson wanted Ms. Devitt to die or, based on the evidence, had any real malevolent intent.
Of equal importance, I think, is the fact that based on the conditions in Littlerock, i.e., packs of wild and threatening dogs roaming the area and striking fear into the residents, it’s imperative that these animals be rounded up and dealt with in an appropriate manner. Does this mean euthanizing them? Not necessarily. But something definitely needs to be done to. We cannot allow the down-at-the-heels parts of our fair county to increasingly resemble post-apocalyptic war zones.