Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Whether it was a pit bull puppy or another animal that gnawed off a baby's toes is insignificant to proving the alleged negligence of the child's parents, a Bossier City police spokesman said Tuesday.
Mary Shannon Hansche, 22, and Christopher Wayne Hansche, 26, told Bossier City police they awoke Sunday morning to find their month-old daughter crying and her toes gnawed off.
Police believe the couple's six-week-old pit bull puppy did it -- although veterinarians have questioned whether a dog that small was capable. A ferret was also in the house but the couple said that animal was in a cage, police said.
The Hansches this afternoon were jailed under $50,000 bond each on misdemeanor charges of child desertion. They were scheduled to make their initial court appearances via closed-circuit Tuesday.
The child underwent surgery at Sutton Children's Hospital in Shreveport. Doctors could not reattach her toes, police said.
Officials at animal control said Tuesday they have received about 15 calls and half a dozen e-mails from people wanting to adopt the dog. Police Department spokesman Mark Natale said officials will meet after the 10-day quarantine period and decide whether the dog should be offered for adoption, euthanized or returned to its owners.
Police Department spokesman Mark Natale said police have concluded their investigation. He said they believe the puppy attacked the child, although the actions of the parents -- not the animal -- are the central part of the case.
Police said the Hansches have told several different stories about what happened. Natale said the couple is charged with child desertion for allegedly putting their baby in a dangerous situation.
Police said the couple told investigators they slept as the six-week-old puppy chewed off four of their month-old daughter's toes and did not wake up in time. The couple was asleep on a mattress on the living room floor and the baby was nearby in an child seat. They said they woke to the sound of their baby crying and took her to the hospital.
Police also seized a ferret in the house. The couple told investigators the ferret was in a cage, and police said they don't believe it attacked the child.
Natale said the negligence charges apply because the child was under the age of 10 and was exposed to a danger from which she could not protect herself.
Teresa Miller, who sold the puppy to the Hansches, was skeptical the dog did it.
"He didn't chew on anything while he was with me. Out of all of them (in the litter), he was the least chewy."
Local veterinarian Dr. Valri Brown said if the puppy chewed off the infant's toes, it would not have happened quickly.
"It would have to be a period of time -- maybe at least an hour," she said.
The child will be placed in a foster home when she is released from the hospital
The dog should be put down. So should the parents.
It's a 6-week old puppy...it wasn't an attack. As for the parents...yep!
From my understanding, though, once a dog tastes blood, it's not 'salvagable.'
Baby's injuries indicate 'ongoing pattern' of abuse
By KIRK SWAUGER
The Tribune-Democrat
SOMERSET A Somerset man accused of brutally stun-gunning and breaking the leg of his 7-week-old daughter was escorted into a closed court Thursday as authorities began determining custody for the child.
Wearing a bright-orange prison jumpsuit, 21-year-old Brandon Alan Austill declined to comment as he was taken by a sheriffs deputy to the dependency hearing.
Judge David Klementik refused to allow The Tribune-Democrat to make a motion for the hearing traditionally closed to the public to be open based on a 3-year-old state Superior Court decision in a Westmoreland County case.
The hearing was postponed to allow Austill to get an attorney, a source close to the investigation said.
The child has been released from Childrens Hospital in Pittsburgh and is in foster care, authorities said.
Psychological experts and police consider the allegations against Austill among the most malicious theyve ever seen.
This is highly unusual, said Somerset psychiatrist Dr. Glenn Kashurba.
If you look at even some of the more sensational cases that result in a childs death, theyre usually shaken baby syndrome by somebody who does it impulsively, he said.
What youre describing is an ongoing pattern. That puts it out of the realm of what you normally see.
Borough police said Austill has admitted to smashing the babys head onto a bathroom sink and dining-room table, bending her leg over his shoulder until he heard it break, and twice using a handheld, Power-Mite electric prod on her.[/B]
Authorities said Austill conceded he treated the child improperly, adding he routinely could not get his daughter to stop crying.
The incidents reportedly happened between Sept. 11 four days after the girl was born and Oct. 31.
Austill and the childs mother, Briana Dawn Clark, took the child to Somerset Hospital on Halloween.
The infant had a broken left tibia, broke left ulna, broken left femur, facial injuries and two skull fractures, police sad in a criminal complaint. She later was transported to Childrens Hospital.
You hear about a lot of cases where, for whatever reasons, parents snap and act out against the children, borough police Chief Randy Cox said. But they dont seem to carry the malice that this case does.
Medical records, police said, show the injuries were at various stages of healing and had occurred at separate times.
On Aug. 23, Austill was cited by the borough police with disorderly conduct for openly carrying a BB gun while walking on West Union Street.
He was fined $269.50.
Now, Austill is being housed in the county jail on $75,000 bond for eight counts each of child endangerment and reckless endangerment; six counts each of aggravated assault and simple assault; and two counts each of carrying a prohibited offensive weapon and possessing an instrument of crime.
Sitting on a bench outside the courtroom Thursday, Clark declined to comment.
On the door to Clark and Austills third-floor apartment at 800 E. Main St., a sign read, Shoes off at the door. A cartoonish Frankenstein proclaimed, Trick or treat.
Neighbors said they didnt know the family well, or were unwilling to talk.
In a 2003 case filed by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Superior Court determined that a constitutional presumption of openness for court cases applies to juvenile proceedings.
But access may be denied, the court said, if the parties seeking closure demonstrate it serves a compelling government interest that cannot be achieved through less-restrictive measures. While authorities may argue they want to protect the identity of Austills daughter, her name was included in the criminal complaint.
The Tribune-Democrat does not publish the identities of juvenile abuse victims.
With it being a pit bull, you're probably right.
I would add that it would be appropriate to give the pup a shot at mom and dad before putting it down though.
There has to be something more to this story... why the parents didnt wake up if the child was "nearby". As a mother of a new baby, you have an "instinct"... my daugther never cries for more than a couple minutes in the middle of the night before I'm awake and right beside her. Id be willing to bet there was some kind of substance abuse involved on the part of the parents.
There has to be something more to this story... why the parents didnt wake up if the child was "nearby". As a mother of a new baby, you have an "instinct"... my daugther never cries for more than a couple minutes in the middle of the night before I'm awake and right beside her. Id be willing to bet there was some kind of substance abuse involved on the part of the parents.
In a related "child abuse" story... I dont know if this made national news or not.. but this makes me sick to my stomach.
At least the kid's still alive. The worst is the parents that leave the kid in a hot car.
.....
As a mother, I don't understand how one could, in good conscience, have their children around a pit bull to begin with. .....
The breed is not the problem- its the people who raise them. I knew a guy in Upstate New York that bred them and they were fine animals that I would want to have around my kids, as protection. He would not let me buy one because I had a cat. When I was a kid we had a German Shepard that wouldn't let anyone close to us kids.
Not a word here.Anyone else hear about this?
It's all about instinct and breeding. Many dog breeds have an instict to hunt and kill smaller, furry animals. I have the same problem with my current dog, a Rat Terrier mix. She's great cleaning the yard of moles and such, but we've had her for 3 years and she still chases the cat. The only thing that keeps that cat alive is that there the dog is 19#, the cat is about 14#.I disagree to a point. I think the breed IS a problem. No matter how you raise them, there is still something questionable. Why else would he not let you adopt one because of your cat?
.... .
Dogs also have an instict to protect their owner's children.
