From: "Mike Barkley" , email@example.com To: Assemblymember.Leno@assembly.ca.gov , Carole.Migden@boe.ca.gov Subject: Legislation to prevent recurrance of the San Francisco Dog Mauling homicide Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 04:56:45 -0700 Dear Assemblyman Leno, Last year I sent the following proposed legislation to Assemblywoman Midgen. While it is unusual legislation for a Democrat to sponsor, it did not deserve to go in her "drop dead" pile. Please consider sponsoring it and submitting it in the Assembly. I am adding this to my web site at http://www.mjbarkl.com/leno.htm . Thank you. - - - - - - - - From: "Mike Barkley" , firstname.lastname@example.org To: "Show -OnTheRecord" , ontherecord@FOXNEWS.COM Subject: Skinning the cat, and the Murder of Diane Whipple Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 20:00:10 -0800 People like Russ Hunt, Sr., Marjorie Knoeller, and Robert Noel lend credence to that old saying, "99% of the lawyers give the rest of us a bad name." Following is a suggested bill for the California legislature I sent to Diane Whipple's Assemblywoman, but of course there's been no response. The Catch 22 for the building owners is that if they had attempted to evict Noel & Knoeller to get rid of those dogs, they also would have risked prosecution by San Francisco District Attorney Terence Hallinan, who has been busy lately prosecuting landlords for unlawful evictions under the San Francisco Rent Control Ordinance. Sigh. If allowed to vote or influence or rule on the case, I would have voted with the Jury as they voted, as well as to convict everyone who was in upon the "conspiracy" to place those dogs in that inappropriate structure. But of course I always get kicked off of juries.... --Mike Barkley - - - - - - - - From: "Mike Barkley" , email@example.com To: Assemblymember.firstname.lastname@example.org Cc: Eric.Potashner@asm.ca.gov , Alan.LoFaso@asm.ca.gov Subject: Dog Mauling Trial and Verdict Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 23:42:03 -0800 Hello, My wife and I own and operate an apartment complex where we accept pets, within certain guidelines. From time to time people bring onto our property animals we would never wish to have here, such as pit bulls or rottweilers, and the legal procedure for removing the animal and/or the tenants is complex and time consuming, during which time my other tenants and the general public are at risk. Nevertheless, when I encounter such an animal on my property I begin legal proceedings to remove the tenants and their animal as applicable. It helps being a lawyer. The ultimate horror story would be if I were not a lawyer, and were in a jurisdiction such as San Francisco where evictions are nearly impossible, and the possessors of the dangerous animals were high-profile criminal lawyers with organized crime connections. Looking at the map, I assume the death of Diane Whipple occurred in what is now your District. Please forgive me if I am mistaken. It might be appropriate for the state legislature to consider a Bill along the lines of the following. Please consider having your analysts put it in good form and introduce it in the Assembly. Thank you for your attention. - - - - - - - - Upon belief by any lessor or any duly authorized agent of such lessor of any property being used or intended for use as residential property that a person has brought into that property an animal that is a danger to persons on that or neighboring that property or on public property in the general vicinity, notwithstanding any other provision of state or local law, such lessor or duly authorized agent may proceed to any sheriff's or marshal's (as applicable) office or substation within the county where the property is located and make known his belief, following which the sheriff or marshal or person authorized by such sheriff or marshal shall immediately escort the lessor or duly authorized agent to any judge within the jurisdiction and upon declaration under penalty of perjury by such lessor or duly authorized agent as to the belief that the animal in question is such a danger, the judge shall immediately issue an alternative order to vacate the premises or remove the animal in question. Thereafter the sheriff or marshal or person authorized by such sheriff or marshal shall immediately escort the lessor or duly authorized agent to the property in question and shall serve upon the person or persons in possession of the animal in question that either the animal must be removed from the property immediately and not ever be returned or that the sheriff or marshal will immediately escort all persons and the animal off of the property at which time any rental agreement or lease under which possession of the property was held shall be deemed forfeit, and the sheriff or marshal shall order them not to return until such time as they obtain a court order allowing them to return. If after 7 days following the time the sheriff or marshal escorted such persons off the property such persons have not made arrangements to recover their personal property from the property, the lessor or duly authorized agent shall dispose of such possessions in accordance with Section .... except that the .... day waiting period in Section .... shall not apply. - - - - - - - - Respectfully submitted, --Mike Barkley, 161 N. Sheridan Ave. #1, Manteca, CA 95336 (H) 209/823-4817 email@example.com - Cure Multiple Sclerosis Now!