APD Shot and killed buddy's dog

[grettlerj]

If that officer is so startled by that small dog that he shoots it because it runs up to him, he should be in another line of work. Luckily the owner of the dog didn't get too close to him either or he might be laying next to his dog.

[philip964]

Very sad situation. My sympathy goes out to your friend. Not able to see exactly where the dog was in relation to the officer, but that shot definitely was taken awfully quickly. My gut says he overreacted big time to the dog coming to investigate and then tried to cover it with his blaming your friend for not getting his dog, when in reality your friend had not even had time to process what was going on and react himself. This is one time when the dash cam audio will be an asset for your friend to prove liability on the city.

In the one video, at second 45, the officer says "Hey Wh??? SHOW ME YOUR HANDS, SHOW ME YOUR HANDS, GET YOUR DOG" and then BANG! at second 49, and then shortly thereafter he can be heard whining "Why didn't you get your dog?" as if he had actually given the owner time to react to the first "SHOW ME YOUR HANDS" much less to anything else.

So if he didn't show his hands and went for his dog, would he have been shot for failing to follow instructions.

My shih tzu likes to greet everyone in his front yard, barking usually at people in uniform, so I guess I would have been shot.

[Keith B]

Very sad situation. My sympathy goes out to your friend. Not able to see exactly where the dog was in relation to the officer, but that shot definitely was taken awfully quickly. My gut says he overreacted big time to the dog coming to investigate and then tried to cover it with his blaming your friend for not getting his dog, when in reality your friend had not even had time to process what was going on and react himself. This is one time when the dash cam audio will be an asset for your friend to prove liability on the city.

In the one video, at second 45, the officer says "Hey Wh??? SHOW ME YOUR HANDS, SHOW ME YOUR HANDS, GET YOUR DOG" and then BANG! at second 49, and then shortly thereafter he can be heard whining "Why didn't you get your dog?" as if he had actually given the owner time to react to the first "SHOW ME YOUR HANDS" much less to anything else.

So if he didn't show his hands and went for his dog, would he have been shot for failing to follow instructions.

We can all speculate what might or might not have happened. No one knows what was going through the LEO's head when he shot the dog. Until the investigation is complete, then we will not know what he had to say. We need to give it time to settle.

[mamabearCali]

Curious on an incident like this how much is there to investigate? There is the dashcam--then the officer says what he was feeling....how much more is there to it?

One the plus side. I heard he apologized to the owner (or the Chief did, or something like that), now if he replaces the dog I will be satisfied. None of it brings back Cisco of course, but it would be doing the best you could to make something right.

[Beiruty]

The Chief did apologize and go on a rant about how sorry he is and how he feels for him. Blah blah. It's his job to try and make peace. I only take it with a grain of salt.

This just happens to dang often. Officers dispatch loved companions like they're nothing of importance.

Retraining for the edgy officer should be in order.

[C-dub]

... Let's say someone with a CHL is replying to an ad for the sale of an item and owner's dog comes at them.

Gotta modify that a little. How about replying to an ad from a neighbor, and going to the wrong house.

With gun drawn...

Part in red is your biggest problem. The officer thought he was going into a bad situation and even then there was no reason to have already had his gun out. A CHL has even less of a reason to already have their gun out in your scenario.

It could be the wrong address in a newspaper ad or even someone approching the property to invite someone to come to a church Sunday service. I don't know that being at the wrong address would be pertinent or not so assuming there's not a no tresspassing sign or similar posting, I'll pose the question differently. Are LEO's under a different standard reacting to a perceived threat such as the barking dog coming toward them than a CHL? redundancy here: would both be protected under a case of defending themselves?

I'm not sure I understand your question. I am not a lawyer or LEO, so I'm not aware of a situation that would allow for an officer to approach a residence with their gun drawn where there was no known threat. Also, I cannot conceive of a situation where I would approach anyone's house, right or wrong address, with my gun drawn for any reason other than to prevent one of those crimes we are able to use deadly force to prevent. I also don't believe the officer just had his hand on his holstered gun before the dog came out and barked ONCE before he was killed. Once is all I could hear. Did he get more than one bark out? Anyway, ...

Keith B. is absolutely correct in that even a relatively small dog, 20-50 pounds, can cause severe damage. It probably won't be bone crushing, but tendon, ligament, or muscle damage is very possible and if they happen to get one of those sensitive areas they might hit an artery.

[Beiruty]

Interview and apology from the APD Chief. : http://www.klbjfm.com/podcasts/Episodes.aspx?PID=100" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

BTW, I am not afraid from 40-50 lbs dog. If I can, why a police officer shouldn't be able to restrain or shouldn't fend off said dog.

[puma guy]

... Let's say someone with a CHL is replying to an ad for the sale of an item and owner's dog comes at them.

Gotta modify that a little. How about replying to an ad from a neighbor, and going to the wrong house.

With gun drawn...

Part in red is your biggest problem. The officer thought he was going into a bad situation and even then there was no reason to have already had his gun out. A CHL has even less of a reason to already have their gun out in your scenario.

It could be the wrong address in a newspaper ad or even someone approching the property to invite someone to come to a church Sunday service. I don't know that being at the wrong address would be pertinent or not so assuming there's not a no tresspassing sign or similar posting, I'll pose the question differently. Are LEO's under a different standard reacting to a perceived threat such as the barking dog coming toward them than a CHL? redundancy here: would both be protected under a case of defending themselves?

I'm not sure I understand your question. I am not a lawyer or LEO, so I'm not aware of a situation that would allow for an officer to approach a residence with their gun drawn where there was no known threat. Also, I cannot conceive of a situation where I would approach anyone's house, right or wrong address, with my gun drawn for any reason other than to prevent one of those crimes we are able to use deadly force to prevent. I also don't believe the officer just had his hand on his holstered gun before the dog came out and barked ONCE before he was killed. Once is all I could hear. Did he get more than one bark out? Anyway, ...

Keith B. is absolutely correct in that even a relatively small dog, 20-50 pounds, can cause severe damage. It probably won't be bone crushing, but tendon, ligament, or muscle damage is very possible and if they happen to get one of those sensitive areas they might hit an artery.

Sorry C-dub, I didn't realize I included your quote in my post and the question was not directed specifically to you. Whether or not weapon is drawn or not is not relevant to my question only the shooting the dog. A CHL would be in violation to approach with weapon drawn so that would be moot. I just wondered if both the LEO and CHL would be treated the same under similar circumstances regarding shooting a barking dog approaching them on private property.

[SRH78]

I just wondered if both the LEO and CHL would be treated the same under similar circumstances regarding shooting a barking dog approaching them on private property.

I highly doubt it.

[flintknapper]

Keith B. is absolutely correct in that even a relatively small dog, 20-50 pounds, can cause severe damage. It probably won't be bone crushing, but tendon, ligament, or muscle damage is very possible and if they happen to get one of those sensitive areas they might hit an artery.

Not very likely. So...are LEO now able to use "deadly force" to avoid minor injuries (if that)?

Honestly, there seems to be a mind set among today's LEO that they WILL go home (completely unscathed) each day, no matter what it takes. These dog shooting things happen WAY too often!

I can cite several instances (posted here over the past few years) that were just ridiculous (the miniature dachshund for one). One of the criteria for hiring new LEO should be they are NOT "overly" afraid of dogs, for crying out loud, mailmen, meter readers, door to door salesmen...manage it every day.

[nyj]

We've gotten a lot of messages from other people who have had their dogs killed by police. One from just 20 minutes ago was a lady in OK. She said while she was away from home, her burglar alarm was tripped (false alarm), and police responded through her backyard, killing her Labrador Retriever. It just happens a lot more than we know, and I'm glad to be getting the word out.

[puma guy]

This is ironic but I almost got to test the "dog shoot" theory in reverse just a few minutes ago. My dogs alerted to something outside so I went out the front door to see what they were sensing. I saw someone running in the street that "T's" my street on the right side(my house is on a corner) . I was about 10 feet from my front door and had just turned to the left when I heard a dog barking and then saw my neighbor's pitt bull charging me across my yard. I stood my ground but I was reaching for my Kahr when he stopped just short. The owner came down the sidewalk and as he did I gave him a warning to get his dog away from me. I didn't actually hear him call out, but the dog retreated. I won't go into a lot of detail but he's got 5 or 6 dogs and at least three are pitt bulls. They already attacked one neighbor woman on her yard and for some reason she didn't report him. I spoke with her husband and he said since he and his wife were new to the neighborhood they didn't want to make trouble She did have to get treated for the dog bite. I had to give him an ultimatum about walking his dogs past my home allowing them to defecate on the yard. It worked and I haven't had any problems since. I've seen animal control at his house several times and why nothing is done about the number of dogs is a mystery to me. I don't think this will have a happy ending but I can always hope he gets a brain.

[Wienerdogtroy]

And officers responding to the wrong address seem to be the most dangerous calls for innocent people.
The LEO community can circle the wagons all they want but this officer made several mistakes and needs to pay for them with his badge.

Agreed. Pulling his firearm was uncalled for, absent some other factor. Its incidents like this that give otherwise good police officers a very bad name.

[C-dub]

Keith B. is absolutely correct in that even a relatively small dog, 20-50 pounds, can cause severe damage. It probably won't be bone crushing, but tendon, ligament, or muscle damage is very possible and if they happen to get one of those sensitive areas they might hit an artery.

Not very likely. So...are LEO now able to use "deadly force" to avoid minor injuries (if that)?

Honestly, there seems to be a mind set among today's LEO that they WILL go home (completely unscathed) each day, no matter what it takes. These dog shooting things happen WAY too often!

I can cite several instances (posted here over the past few years) that were just ridiculous (the miniature dachshund for one). One of the criteria for hiring new LEO should be they are NOT "overly" afraid of dogs, for crying out loud, mailmen, meter readers, door to door salesmen...manage it every day.

They do happen too often. I think it is because LEO's are trained to read a person's body language and not a dog's and many have their own personal fears about being bitten by a dog. Just look at how many criminals react when they think the police might send a dog for them. A LEO doesn't much like the idea of being bitten by a dog either.

Just like a gun, when you stop respecting it is when it will reach up and bite you. This can also apply to a dog. Underestimating your opponent can lead to bad results. Most bites like this will be in the lower leg or hand area and they can do some damage there.

[Wienerdogtroy]

An officer or any other person who appears to be acting aggressively toward a dog owner will elicit an aggressive response from a dog. That's what dogs do out of loyalty to their masters. Once again, a competent officer understands and respects this, and takes it into account. Dealing with people in the presence of their dogs is a very common occurrence, and an officer should be able to handle it easily and successfully.

In over 20 years of police work, I recall one instance where an officer was compelled to shoot an attacking doberman. That's it - one case in a department of 200 officers who responded to over 50,000 calls a year. We dealt with lots of dogs, but didn't use gunfire as our primary go to tactic. There are lots of alternatives. Many officers kept small bags of dog treats in their briefcases for those times when a little canine bribery was needed to accomplish the mission.

We didn't point guns at people without clear justification either. Our officers were intensively trained in the proper use of force. Whenever a firearm was pointed at a person, our procedures required that the officer complete a Use of Force report that detailed the legal justification and practical necessity for doing so. Some would say this is an unnecessary administrative burden, but we did it deliberately to guide officers to think about what they were doing with deadly weapons and to make good use of force decisions. With this in place, it was a rarity to find firearms deployed when they shouldn't be, and our officers were very sharp on using them only when they should. When the gun was the right choice, it was brought into play without hesitation and with confidence because the officers knew for sure they were acting properly and that the command staff would back them when they acted within the bounds of the law and good judgment.

If one of my officers had behaved as the one in the Austin instance reportedly did, my agency would have been doing a serious review of his ability to handle his responsibilities. If the reports we have are true and complete, the officer's behavior indicates inordinate fear and reactions that border on hysterical. When these characteristics show up in a person who is sent to calls where conflict is common, courage is routinely called for and life and death decisions must be made correctly every time, it's a disaster just searching for its time and place.

All I can say is I applaud you and whatever department you either work for, or used to work for. You are exactly the kind of police officer I want responding if I ever have an issue and your department is the kind of department I want to be dealing with. Sounds like cool heads all around.

Seconded.