A family member of mine had a Purebred Jack Russel Terrier...since it was 6 weeks old. When his neice had a baby he said that if the dog ever hurt the baby he would kill the dog himself. Well...the baby was playing in the living room at my brothers home and the dog attacked the baby for no reason. The baby never made any sudden moves nor made any noise, he just stood up at the coffee table. Now the baby has a scar on his face for life. The dogs owner said "Stan didn't bite the baby and I'm not going to put him down" To make a long story short....the dog ended up dying anyway....the vet said that someone poisoned the dog. I feel bad for the owner since Stan was like a child to him...but the dog (Stan) was really nasty to everyone but his owner. THe dr called it a pit bull because they didn't see the dog at any time after they were told it was a dog bite. ???? Where does a dr get off charging this attack on a Pit???? Why did the breed get blamed when it was a Jack Russell???? Could someone please explain to me how this is correct in any way, shape or form? I personally was around the dog and saw the papers from AKC that it was a Jack Russell so NO PIT BULL OR any other breed mix involved and don't understand this accusation by the Dr.????