LEESBURG, Va. (Jan. 9) - When Loudoun County officials dropped the case of Lucky the dog killing Cody the cat, Cody's owner took a cue from television's legal dramas: she hired a laboratory to analyze DNA evidence she collected from her neighbors' pet to proved he was the killer.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles?id=n20060109161009990012&cid=936

How did the dog get access to the cat? Was the cat allowed to roam outside routinely or did the dog come into her house to get the cat? If owner allow her cat to roam free, this is a risk she needs to accept. If the cat was in the street and was hit by a car, should the driver pay for the cat? What about if the cat gets injured on another person's property, is the property owner responsible? If it's public land, is the government responsible? A wild animal could have just as easily killed the cat.
Even if this dog is responsible, what would returning him to the shelter do? Make the neighborhood safe to let her next cat roam free?
It sounds like the dog owners did take reasonable responsibility, by paying fines and making it less likely for the dog to get out again. Labeling the dog as dangerous is inappropriate, this is for animals that will injure humans.

This woman is ridiculous. She is absolutely responsible. If she hadn't let her cat outdoors, then it wouldn't have been killed by the dog. Period.