Janette, that's why they're used as the bait dogs.

Lisa, could you email me? I'd love to hear more about y'all's program. I have contacts with therapy dog groups up here and would love to see something grow.

You'd think any bias issues the NYTimes article reported about could be taken care of in voir dire. As for cross-examination, call in the Dog Whisperer to translate!

If the combined IQs of the judges on the court of appeals who hears this case equals 100 or better, it shouldn't take them more than half a nano-second to decide this Big Issue for the State.

As for the def. atty. complaining, "I can't cross examine a dog,"--anyone stupid enough to say something like that should be glad he can't cross examine a dog, because most dogs would chew them up and spit them out on cross.

How would a defense atty. live that down? All the attorneys in town would be talking about him. "Did you hear what happened to Bob in trial yesterday?"

"Yeah, I heard he tried to cross examine a black mouth cur witness support dog, and the dog handed him his head."

"That's what I heard. The whole courtroom was laughing at him. When is Bob going to learn to leave sleeping dogs lie?"

As long as I can try the defendant in the same physical condition as when he was arrested (drugged out, stinky, stained clothes, etc.) and not in the courtroom persona (fitted suit, haircut, shaved, deodorized), I woould not object to the defndant having an animal such as a weasel or a snake.

Is there any caselaw on this issue?

Check out Courthouse Dogs website Web Site. It's has a lot of good information, sample brief, etc.

Janette A