Digest

This episode of Women in Crime delves into the tragic story of Diane Whipple, a competitive athlete and lacrosse coach who was fatally attacked by her neighbor's two Presa Canario dogs in San Francisco in 2001. The dogs, Bane and Hera, were owned by Paul Cornfed Schneider, a convicted murderer and leader of the Aryan Brotherhood, who was incarcerated at Pelican Bay State Prison. The dogs were adopted by Marjorie and Robert Noller, a lawyer couple who had a complex relationship with Paul, including adopting him as an adult. The attack sparked a public outcry and a lengthy legal battle, with Marjorie and Robert facing charges of involuntary manslaughter and ownership of a mischievous animal causing death. Marjorie was also charged with second-degree murder. The trial was highly publicized, with the defendants making controversial statements blaming the victim and denying any responsibility for the dogs' aggression. Despite the defense's attempts to portray Marjorie as heroic, the jury found her guilty of second-degree murder and Robert guilty of involuntary manslaughter. The judge initially granted Marjorie a new trial on the murder charge, but the appellate court reversed his decision, ultimately upholding her conviction. The case highlights the complexities of dog ownership, the legal ramifications of animal attacks, and the importance of holding individuals accountable for their actions, even when those actions are unintentional. The episode also explores the unusual circumstances surrounding the adoption of Paul by the Nollers, raising questions about the ethics of lawyers adopting their former clients and the potential for conflicts of interest. The case ultimately led to a landmark ruling in California, recognizing the rights of same-sex partners to sue for wrongful death, as Diane's partner, Sharon Smith, successfully sued the Nollers for damages. The episode concludes with a discussion of the sentences imposed on Marjorie and Robert, the ongoing legal battles, and the lasting impact of the case on the lives of those involved.

Outlines

00:00:00

Introduction

This Chapter introduces the podcast and its focus on criminology, advising listeners to use discretion as sensitive themes will be discussed. The episode will focus on the Diane Whipple story, a case involving a fatal dog attack.

00:00:40

Diane Whipple's Life and the Attack

This Chapter delves into the life of Diane Whipple, a competitive athlete and lacrosse coach who was tragically killed by her neighbor's dogs. The dogs, Bane and Hera, were Presa Canarios, a large breed known for their guarding instincts and potential for aggression. Diane was fearful of the dogs, having been previously snapped at by one of them. The attack occurred when Diane returned to her apartment and was confronted by the dogs, who viciously attacked her, resulting in severe injuries and ultimately her death.

00:01:00

The Nollers and Their Connection to Paul Cornfed Schneider

This Chapter introduces Marjorie and Robert Noller, the neighbors who owned the dogs that attacked Diane. The Nollers were lawyers who had a close relationship with Paul Cornfed Schneider, a convicted murderer and leader of the Aryan Brotherhood, who was incarcerated at Pelican Bay State Prison. The Nollers had adopted Paul as an adult, and it was revealed that they had a three-way relationship with him. Paul was the original owner of the dogs, Bane and Hera, who were allegedly bred for fighting and guarding criminal enterprises.

00:01:29

Adult Adoption and the Nollers' Motives

This Chapter explores the concept of adult adoption and its legal implications, particularly in California. The Nollers' adoption of Paul and another adult male, Dale Breches, was finalized shortly after the dog attack. The Nollers claimed they adopted Paul to make medical decisions on his behalf, but others suspected more nefarious motives, including a desire to be in a three-way marriage with him. The adoption is significant because it establishes Paul as the owner of the dogs, further connecting the Nollers to the Aryan Brotherhood's criminal activities.

00:19:25

The Legal Proceedings and the Nollers' Defense

This Chapter details the legal proceedings following Diane's death. Marjorie and Robert were charged with various offenses, including involuntary manslaughter and ownership of a mischievous animal causing death. Marjorie was also charged with second-degree murder. The Nollers pleaded not guilty and made numerous controversial statements blaming the victim and denying any responsibility for the dogs' aggression. The prosecution presented evidence that the Nollers were aware of the dogs' dangerous nature and had failed to take adequate precautions to protect others.

00:30:07

The Verdict and the Legal Battles

This Chapter discusses the jury's verdict and the subsequent legal battles. The jury found both Marjorie and Robert guilty of involuntary manslaughter and ownership of a mischievous animal causing death. Marjorie was also found guilty of second-degree murder. The judge initially granted Marjorie a new trial on the murder charge, but the appellate court reversed his decision, ultimately upholding her conviction. The case went through multiple appeals, with the California Supreme Court ultimately upholding the second-degree murder conviction.

00:35:58

Marjorie's Parole Hearings and the Nollers' Aftermath

This Chapter examines Marjorie's parole hearings and the aftermath of the case for the Nollers. Marjorie's first parole application was denied in 2019, and her second application was denied in 2023. The parole board cited her institutional record, including disciplinary actions for biting a prison guard, as evidence that she would be a danger to society if released. The episode also discusses the impact of the case on Robert, who died of heart failure in 2018. The Nollers' legal careers were destroyed, and Robert faced homelessness and health issues.

00:39:12

Sharon Smith's Lawsuit and the Legacy of the Case

This Chapter focuses on Sharon Smith, Diane's long-term partner, who sued the Nollers for wrongful death and won a landmark settlement. The case was groundbreaking because gay marriage was still illegal in California at the time, and Sharon's partnership was not initially recognized by the state. The judge ruled that Sharon had standing to sue under the equal protection clause, setting a precedent for the recognition of same-sex partnerships in wrongful death lawsuits. The episode concludes with a discussion of the ethical implications of the case, particularly the Nollers' relationship with Paul and their adoption of him. The episode also reflects on the tragic loss of Diane and the importance of holding individuals accountable for their actions, even when those actions are unintentional.

Keywords

Q&A

• What happened to Diane Whipple?

  Diane Whipple was tragically killed by her neighbor's two Presa Canario dogs in San Francisco in 2001. The dogs, Bane and Hera, viciously attacked her, resulting in severe injuries and ultimately her death.

• Who owned the dogs that attacked Diane Whipple?

  The dogs, Bane and Hera, were originally owned by Paul Cornfed Schneider, a convicted murderer and leader of the Aryan Brotherhood, who was incarcerated at Pelican Bay State Prison. The dogs were adopted by Marjorie and Robert Noller, a lawyer couple who had a complex relationship with Paul, including adopting him as an adult.

• What was the legal outcome of the case?

  Marjorie Noller was convicted of second-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter. Robert Noller was convicted of involuntary manslaughter and ownership of a mischievous animal causing death. The case went through multiple appeals, with the California Supreme Court ultimately upholding Marjorie's conviction.

• What was the significance of Sharon Smith's lawsuit?

  Sharon Smith, Diane Whipple's partner, sued the Nollers for wrongful death and won a landmark settlement. The case was groundbreaking because gay marriage was still illegal in California at the time, and Sharon's partnership was not initially recognized by the state. The judge ruled that Sharon had standing to sue under the equal protection clause, setting a precedent for the recognition of same-sex partnerships in wrongful death lawsuits.

• What were the ethical implications of the case?

  The case raised questions about the ethics of lawyers adopting their former clients, particularly when those clients are involved in criminal activities. The Nollers' relationship with Paul Cornfed Schneider and their adoption of him were unusual and raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest.

• What was the impact of the case on the Nollers?

  The Nollers' legal careers were destroyed, and Robert faced homelessness and health issues after the case. Marjorie remains incarcerated and has been denied parole multiple times.

• What was the public reaction to the case?

  The public was outraged by Diane Whipple's death and the Nollers' actions. The case was highly publicized, and the defendants faced intense scrutiny and criticism. The Nollers' controversial statements blaming the victim and denying responsibility for the dogs' aggression further fueled public anger.

• What was the legal standard for second-degree murder in this case?

  The legal standard for second-degree murder in this case involved implied malice, which means that the defendant acted with conscious disregard of the danger to human life, even if the killing was unintentional. The court ruled that Marjorie Noller met this standard because she was aware of the dogs' dangerous nature and had failed to take adequate precautions to protect others.

• What was the significance of the Nollers' adoption of Paul Cornfed Schneider?

  The Nollers' adoption of Paul was significant because it established him as the owner of the dogs that attacked Diane Whipple. It also raised questions about their motives, as they claimed they adopted him to make medical decisions on his behalf, but others suspected more nefarious motives, including a desire to be in a three-way marriage with him.

• What was the impact of the case on wrongful death laws in California?

  Sharon Smith's successful wrongful death lawsuit against the Nollers set a precedent for the recognition of same-sex partnerships in wrongful death lawsuits. The case helped to advance the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals in California and beyond.

Show Notes