officer shoots dog a different prospective - Page 9

Emotions aside - The officer put himself in harms way for no reason. Knocking on that 3rd door just to see if someone will open it, does not warrant risking having to shoot the home owners  dog. This is the crucial point. The reasonable thing to do would hgave been to stay away from this dog. Im sure this deputy makes other equally poor judgement calls dealing with other situations, next time will it be a 10yr old with a squirt gun? To my fellow officers reading this, you know exactly what I mean here. If you had been asked this question during your oral board, do you think you would have been hired if you said, "well, i would go knock on the door anyways,, if i have to shoot the dog, its worth it if someone answer it."  GET REAL. You all know he CREATED a volitle situation, not defuse one. The think blue line doesnt cover vigilante assholes.

-

Do right, I guess I asked for it didn't I LOL.  You have to admit that is a stretch though as he admitted that he knew the dog was there.  And, allabout, as far as adrenalin goes he took the time to reload and fire again.  As they say,"That dog don't hunt"

 How about this one.  He caught his leg in the car door getting out (accounting for the pinch) and was so P.O.'d that when the dog challenged him he shot it amd is now lying to CHA.  Just another theory.

I am just beating my head agains a wall here.

Funk,

I have question for you. How do you know this officer saw the dog? Please tell me how you know this? I took the time to go back over some things (investigation). I encourage you and everyone else to re-read the letter to the editor.

She says that the deputy acknowleged the dog. Then go down three paragraphs. It says when she got there, the deputy was in the ambulance. So if she did not talk to the deputy, how does she know this? 

Throughout the letter she uses the words allegedly, why do people use this word? Because it has not been proven.

Have you ever been involved in an internal investigation? If so, did you talk about it with anyone outside your department, especially the people who are about to lodge a complaint against you? I don't know of one department that allows an officer to discuss the circumstances of an internal investigation. Every cop in the US knows if they discharge their weapon in the field there will be an investigation. Does your department allow this? Of course they don't. You and I both know that. 

For the sake of argument, we have the person who supposedly the deputy told he saw the dog, tell the owner of the dog, who then relayed this information to us. What do we have? 3rd person hearsay.

Funk--My girlfriends daugher told her baby sitter that you molested her. The babysitter told my girlfriend. My girlfriend told me. I told your seargent.

Better slap the cuffs on and fire you, huh?

Well I can see there can be many stories, but if a cop dog got shot that would be officer down, big trouble for the one that done it. When a cop shoots your family member it's just a dog. I know all about caring for your own, where was the second cop if it was an arrest warrent, that proves it was a miner matter and no need to go to every door, did he try the windows. If someone's not home and a warrent is being surved we can expect our dogs shot. Which the reason we have them is because cops can't protect us all, and this way we can help to protect ourselves. Now what if there was a child next door on the other side of the fence, you mean to say cops are taught to shoot every round they have,lol. YES.

I am sorry I know not all cops are bad, but I've seen cops cover up what cops do wrong and you like me know the cop will get away with it. You always do.

Ok I just took a real hard look at the pictures with this story. From what I am seeing I am confident the situation is very different from what most here believes happened.

Funk--- I am sure you have been trained to some extent on crime scene investigation. Please take a real hard look at those pictures and tell me you don't see something very wrong with the story as it has been presented.

Look at the blood trail. That dog was not shot on the porch. This dog was shot a good distance away from the porch. With that, the officer very well may not have seen the dog before entering his space.  I am very confident this dog was activley running toward the officer when it was shot.  The fact that the officer was bit to some extent means more than likely the dog contacted him before being shot, again indicating the officer may not have seen the dog prior to the dog advancing toward him.

So now why is the end of the dogs lead and broken collar on the porch? The owners statement said the dog dragged its way back to the porch. Confirming the dog was not on the porch when shot. So how did the end of the lead and broken collar get on the porch if a bullet broke the chain and the dog was more than likely not on the porch when it was shot? was it for inflaiming pictures for the media? What ever the reason by moving them you have a corrupted "crime scene".

Now look at the picture of the man with the dog in his truck. He is holding a choke chain. Where did this chain come from? It appears to be larger in diameter than the one on the porch so is it the same chain. If it is the same chain, how did it get fromt he ground where it was blown of the dog, from the evidence who appears tohave been shot a good distance away from the porch, into the man's hands? Then from the man's hands onto the porch? The smaller chain very well could have been broken by the dog. If I am rushing my dying dog to the vet, I am not going to take the time to go find another collar to put on the dog. So what chain was actually on the dog?

Funk, what is your take on all this?

I hate to say this folks but there are some big, big holes in the statements and the photo evidence. Big holes. I am not saying this conclusive by any means, just observation from what evidence is provided.

I realize now I come accross as a heartless SOB. Part of the job unfortunately. To investigate is to search for the truth, the truth is not always what we want to believe happened.

I am not heartless, again I am very, very sorry this has happened.

GSDlvr2--What you are not understanding is, police officers are not allowed to discuss the circumstances involving an internal investigation. The can't do it, so I am goin to come flat out and say, I don't believe he said that to anyone outside his department and noone from his department made a statement he did dsay that.

Another quick thing about that. It says that the officer supposedly said he acknowleged the dog as he walked past him to get to the porch. I am telling you from the pictures it does not appear this dog was shot on the porch.

The big questions here are how long was that chain. What is the configuration of the side of the house, to the porch, in relation to the legnth of the chain? And where was the dog prior to his advancing on the officer. This we do not know.

What I am saying is, the blood evidence in the picture does not match the supposed statement that the officer acknowledged the dog. A statement I do not believe he made. The woman said in her letter she was unable to talk with the officer. How does she know he made this satement? I can say with 99 % certainty she did not get this from his commanding officer.

The pictures of the choke chains, and location of these choke chains is the biggest hole. How does a chain that was blown of a dog that was shot away from the porch, end up in the man's hand? Did he pick up the dog, then walk a good distance to pick up a broken chain? How did it end up on the porch when the dog was shot away from the porch? Is the chain in the man's hands the one that was really on the dog?

Way, way, way to many holes and to many questions to be answered before anyone goes saying this cop did any wrong.

Preston,

I bet you're a window licker aren't you?