Cop goes to wrong house, shoots owners dog.

[SirDoom]

...if a man enters my home and shoots my dog, regardless of what uniform he has on, I'll shoot him in return. I personally think that if the police officer had been killed on the spot after shooting, it would have been completely justified. (and that's not just my love of animals over humans talking either)

As of now, the moment has passed, and force is no longer necessary in return. However, the officer should be charged with... something. Whatever you would charge a random citizen with if he had broken into a house and shot someone's dog. I don't mean "let's send the police officer home for a month and make him think about what he's done". I mean kick him off the force and throw his ass in a jail cell for 5 years

 

[Bertylicious]

Because that would solve everything for that family! Hurray!

A surgeon is even more valuable then a police officer, if they make a mistake like that, you can bet they won't be able to work for a very long time.
The US has a strange blind spot to police officers.. it disturbs me greatly.

I dunno about that mate; it's very rare for an incident of malpractice to result in a doctor being barred from practicing. Surgeons make mistakes all the time and people die, but the medical profession understands that if you crucify every surgeon or doctor for every instance of malpractice that pretty soon you won't have any doctors.

Jocular flipancy aside, I do recognise that this is an awful thing that has happened. Pets are part of the family and to have one killed in such an abrubt and horrific way is particularly traumatic. That doesn't, however, justify an emotional, knee-jerk, reaction.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

The innocent man surely deserves an apology at the least, but this is hardly a massive case of Police stupidity or corruption: it is just a fuck up. Shooting the dog was a pretty shit turn of events, especially since the poor bastard was sent to the wrong house.

My only question is; why was he alone? I was under the impression that Police usually travelled in pairs for their own protection and flexibility with situations, why did they send this guy out on his lonesome?


However, to anyone posting pics of dogs asking 'how can that hurt you?'....you're a fucking fool. Any moderately sized dog (Golden Retriever/Labrador upwards) and even some small ones are capable of intense violence if their brain decides it is needed. Dogs have accompanied men to war, which should really say all that need be said.

 

[CCountZero]

1. Cop gets information about where he needs to go
2. Cop goes into wrong house DESPITE HAVING THE INFORMATION (seriously it's not like he was picking a house at random) and barges in
2a. The cop has his gun already drawn as he goes in
3. dog barks at the cop, the owner tells the cop the dog won't hurt him but can't get the dog back because the cop is pointing his gun at the dog
4. the cop shoots the dog who WASN'T attacking him (the guy had time to explain that the dog wasn't going to hurt the cop...)

Cop fucked up bad by going into the wrong property, and that mistake should cost him for sure.

However, having his gun drawn when called to a "disturbance", which I will assume to be a "domestic disturbance", could easily be normal practice in Austin, Texas. Keep in mind that, as far as I understand it, Texas has some of the most lax firearm laws in the US.
And of course we don't know how the call was described to him, whether someone said they saw a gun, or heard a firearm discharge.

Hell, I could call the cops right now and tell them that I saw my neighbor with an assault rifle, and they'd be coming in with the guns drawn, and I live in über-peaceful Denmark, in a quiet neighborhood.

Until the investigators arrive and make their judgement, what the caller said happened is effectively what happened as far as the police are concerned.

As for the dog getting shot despite the owner trying to reassure the cop that it wouldn't attack, well, if the cop thought he was in the right place, then why the heck would he take the owners word for it?
And there's no video of the dog, only sound.


Bottom line, the cop fucked up bad by going to the wrong place, but otherwise he acted just like any cop would, and should.

He should be facing some sort of disciplinary action, and he should be checked for literacy and be given map-reading instructions or something, but otherwise he did his job.

 

[zefiris]

Cops can't do anything without everyone shouting "CORRUPTION" at the top of their lungs.

I'm certainly not going to say they're infallible, but the reason they quote-unquote "get away" with the things they do is often because they're completely justified.

This has been proven wrong two postings above yours.Police corruption is shouted so often because, quite simply, it's happening so often. The facts are pretty damning.

but this is hardly a massive case of Police stupidity

Barging into a house, gun drawn, in situations like this is always police stupidity. This is why he should be fired: The next time, he might open fire on a human. A gung-ho cop like this should not be allowed to remain in his position (which he is likely to abuse).


I think it is hilarious that the same people that would demand a shopping clerk that disrespected them to be fired are standing so stauntly behind a cop that made two gross mistakes, each of which should get him fired.

 

[shintakie10]

1. Cop gets information about where he needs to go
2. Cop goes into wrong house DESPITE HAVING THE INFORMATION (seriously it's not like he was picking a house at random) and barges in
2a. The cop has his gun already drawn as he goes in
3. dog barks at the cop, the owner tells the cop the dog won't hurt him but can't get the dog back because the cop is pointing his gun at the dog
4. the cop shoots the dog who WASN'T attacking him (the guy had time to explain that the dog wasn't going to hurt the cop...)

Cop fucked up bad by going into the wrong property, and that mistake should cost him for sure.

However, having his gun drawn when called to a "disturbance", which I will assume to be a "domestic disturbance", could easily be normal practice in Austin, Texas. Keep in mind that, as far as I understand it, Texas has some of the most lax firearm laws in the US.
And of course we don't know how the call was described to him, whether someone said they saw a gun, or heard a firearm discharge.

Hell, I could call the cops right now and tell them that I saw my neighbor with an assault rifle, and they'd be coming in with the guns drawn, and I live in über-peaceful Denmark, in a quiet neighborhood.

Until the investigators arrive and make their judgement, what the caller said happened is effectively what happened as far as the police are concerned.

As for the dog getting shot despite the owner trying to reassure the cop that it wouldn't attack, well, if the cop thought he was in the right place, then why the heck would he take the owners word for it?
And there's no video of the dog, only sound.


Bottom line, the cop fucked up bad by going to the wrong place, but otherwise he acted just like any cop would, and should.

He should be facing some sort of disciplinary action, and he should be checked for literacy and be given map-reading instructions or something, but otherwise he did his job.

Police procedure back where I lived in California for a domestic dispute was always diplomacy first and to never go in without a partner. I'm hopin that the procedures in Austin are the same, but I could be wrong.

Unless the officer is respondin to a call about shots fired or one of the parties havin a weapon, weapon drawn before you even get into the house is a horrible breach of procedure. Even if he had got the right house, what exactly was he plannin to do with that gun? He was alone, respondin to a domestic disturbance call without anyone (as far I've read anyway) sayin there were weapons involved, and he came in without cause or warnin with his weapon ready. Was he really expectin to defuse a situation by pointin a gun at someone?

Wait...Texas. Maybe that was his plan all along.

 

[CCountZero]

SNIP

The thing is: The cop did not go to the wrong adress by his mistake, he got the wrong adress from whoever reported it.

Also, from what you hear on the news report (and the tape) the owner started yelling AFTER the dog did something to make the officer shoot / the officer shot the dog. I get the strong vibe that lots of people are just nagging on the officer because of the sake of it.

Seems to me the hat who called it in is to blame, then.

On the dog issue, I heard the owner try to tell the officer that the dog wouldn't attack, but the officer discharged his firearm right after. Less than five seconds after, right after.

But yeah, if the Officer went to the address that he was given, then he is in the clear far as I'm concerned.

 

[CCountZero]

Snip

Police procedure back where I lived in California for a domestic dispute was always diplomacy first and to never go in without a partner. I'm hopin that the procedures in Austin are the same, but I could be wrong.

Unless the officer is respondin to a call about shots fired or one of the parties havin a weapon, weapon drawn before you even get into the house is a horrible breach of procedure. Even if he had got the right house, what exactly was he plannin to do with that gun? He was alone, respondin to a domestic disturbance call without anyone (as far I've read anyway) sayin there were weapons involved, and he came in without cause or warnin with his weapon ready. Was he really expectin to defuse a situation by pointin a gun at someone?

Wait...Texas. Maybe that was his plan all along.

Well, as I said, none of us know what the call-in said about the situation, and for the sake of argument, again it being Texas, the caller could easily have described a situation involving a firearm.

Now, in Denmark, if there's a suspicion that a firearm is in the mix, the police go in with their guns holstered, by unhooked and they'll have their right hand on the weapon ready to draw.

Now, if I take into consideration that this is the US, and then that it's Texas, I can only surmise that the chance of the suspicion being correct just went up twenty-fold, if not more.

So then the police readiness goes up twenty-fold as well, which means he could easily be in the Weaver-stance and ready to fire soon as he approaches, and far as I could tell, he wasn't going that far.

The gun isn't there to defuse the situation, it's there for his protection. He's not gonna help the situation by pointing a gun at them, hell, that's probably only gonna make things worse.
But you try telling an officer to go into a place where a couple of potentially armed, agitated and angry people are arguing or whatnot, without backing him up with a firearm of his own, and the training to use it with deadly intent?

That just won't fly.

There's a reason police often use hollow-point or frangible ammunition for their sidearms. When they shoot, it's usually at closer than 5 meters distance.

Even if he shoots first, he could easily be shot back at, and at 5 meters he's gonna be hit.
For that reason, police shoot to kill.

 

[Jowe]

This is why the police shouldn't and don't need to have guns, I know people will say that its fine if everyone has guns, but wouldn't it be better if no-one has them? The statistics are against you america, you have the most gun crime and most high school shootings per capita etc. Just outright ban the things.

I'm glad I live in the UK.

 

[El Luck]

This is why I think that learning about the way dogs act should be part of police training.

Mistakes happen but still, a little bit of knowledge could have changed the outcome without a dog being shot.

Anyone know if the officer apologised to the guy who's dog he shot?

 

[Ickorus]

Deadly force is supposed to be the last resort which leads me to question why he was drawing his gun before even seeing the guy.

 

[JoJo]

The only thing you can blame this officer for is entering the wrong house. Otherwise he did what any officer would do in that situation, even if it was the right house. Why can't people accept the fact that even police officers make mistakes?

I agree, I'd be angry if it was a human but come on a dog? I don't see anyone complaining about the pig I going to eat for lunch today, maybe the policeman should pay for the cost of the dog so the owner can buy a new one but other than that it's not really newsworthy. The policeman had the right to defend himself.

 

[Coldster]

I watched the video in the link. I was going to say that he was probably just making sure there were less risks, but man, that police officer shot WAY too quickly! Like, he gave it about two seconds. TWO FUCKING SECONDS! Jeez man don't you know that dogs bark at you when you walk into a house pretty much all the time? I don't think the officer should be fired, but maybe fined or something. Oh, and a refresher in common sense too.

 

[Whytewulf]

Sad that the dog died.

Why is every cop story in the US bate for people to jump on US police officers or the US for violence. Withe the tens of thousand responses every day, "mistakes" happen, criminal acts happen, great things happen, but mostly mundane things happen. The sad part is every single one of those has to be treated the same way, because any situation can turn bad. Spend some time on google and you can see anyone of those things, pulling over Batman helping children, crazy grandma pulling a gun on an officer, officer beating helpless man.

For those that don't know police protocal, and I am no expert, but domestic violence is a violent crime and an officer has to expect violence, he could have a gun, killed her, etc. So going in with his gun drawn is not an issue. He told the guy to raise his hands. A large dog potentially went after him. You have a split second to assess the situation, potential violent criminal who may have beat up someone and potential violent dog guarding him coming after you. Do you lay your gun down, and pet the the puppy hoping to calm him? Not many options in this case. Dogs don't stop when they see a gun like humans, it's a deterant to humans. Pets will still attack. If Dog attacks, all Hell could break lose, sadly for his safety and the safety of the victim (which again, he still thinks there is one), he has to shoot the dog. If he goes down... Lastly, officers respond to calls withouth back up often. Depends on the situation, timing, size of force, etc.

Outcome - do a review of procedures, see if there is anyway to improve the process. As any shots fired, the officer if probably on paid leave. Police Force should compensate the man for pain and suffering, but not extreme. I would sue the actual person who was committing domestic violence. This doesn't happen if there is no call, in which no crime was occuring.

I would say that going in gun drawn is entirely the issue (despite the misleading thread title). Could he not have knocked first? Explained to the residents that there has been a report of domestic abuse and that he needs to follow up? My apologies, I don't know a great deal about police procedure but going into a house gun drawn and screaming at the residents really doesn't seem like it would be department policy.

Going in gun first should not be the primary response to every situation.

It's all about the assessed threat level. If it's a speeding ticket, they don't advance gun drawn, if it's suspected felons in a car, they do arrive gun drawn and make the passangers get out of the car hands raised. This was probably borderline, but anytime you enter an unknown house, and there is a suspected victim, you don't know how dangerous the person is, many abusers have weapons, so if knock, it allows them to prepare, get their gun, etc. So an element of suprise can help the officer. Still sucks, but I look at it this way. If it was the right house, non-story, which isn't the officer's fault. JUst a series of unfortunate events.

 

[rapidoud]

Further details (and text article, and what appears to be an unedited dashcam video): http://kutnews.org/post/details-emerge-police-shooting-cisco-pet-dog?nopop=1

Okay so, first thing the cop does is order the man to put his hands up. What caused him to issue this order? Did Paxton appear to be a threat?

Then, in conflict with his first order, he tells the man "get your dog." However, he shoots the dog less than a second afterward, right after saying "dog."

Did he not see the dog at first? This would explain the conflicting orders. The dog must've been rushing toward the officer, otherwise there would've been more time between the order to restrain the mutt and the shooting.

Now put yourself into the officer's shoes: you're confronting a man you don't know, and a dog you don't know, and the dog is rushing toward you. The man, for all you know, just finished beating up his girlfriend. The dog, you know nothing about, it could even be a fighting dog. The dog is barking and running full tilt at you. You have half a second to react.

Even if the dog is friendly, if he jumps on you that's going to be distracting, may even cause you accidentally fire your weapon if you have it drawn (and watching the video further, he did already had it drawn), and would also provide an opening for the man to either escape or attack you. And if the dog isn't friendly, well...

It's tragic, to be sure, but I'm not really sure I can blame the officer.

That's seriously screwd up if that's how American police officers think, and I shudder the thought of ever going there.

There is no excuse for this, whatsoever. Why do you draw your firearm ever in someone's house unless someone is in a very real danger of death? A dog rushing at you isn't imminent danger, you WILL be able to get it off you (with the owner helping you), but just shooting it like that? I question anyone's sanity who thinks this was the sane thing to do.

I can imagine the owner getting at least $200k out of the court case, as I'd be too scared to go near police for the rest of my life.

 

[WaysideMaze]

I agree, I'd be angry if it was a human but come on a dog? I don't see anyone complaining about the pig I going to eat for lunch today, maybe the policeman should pay for the cost of the dog so the owner can buy a new one but other than that it's not really newsworthy. The policeman had the right to defend himself.

Where you emotionally attached to the pig you ate for lunch?
Did a stranger arrive at your house, scream at you and then shoot the pig that you were emotionally attached to? Yeah, not exactly the same come to think about it.

Regarding the part I've bolded; fucking hell dude, it's not like the officer just accidentally knocked over a TV. This guy lives alone with his dog, people get emotionally attached to their pets, and here, some guy just wanders into his house, screams at him and shoots his dog. Fuck dude, thats some pretty scary shit right there. The police department owe him a lot more than just a new dog.

 

[WaysideMaze]

It's all about the assessed threat level. If it's a speeding ticket, they don't advance gun drawn, if it's suspected felons in a car, they do arrive gun drawn and make the passangers get out of the car hands raised. This was probably borderline, but anytime you enter an unknown house, and there is a suspected victim, you don't know how dangerous the person is, many abusers have weapons, so if knock, it allows them to prepare, get their gun, etc. So an element of suprise can help the officer. Still sucks, but I look at it this way. If it was the right house, non-story, which isn't the officer's fault. JUst a series of unfortunate events.

OK, I can concede that perhaps the officer felt the need to have his gun ready. Like you say, unknown situation, and I wouldn't want to read about a police officer being shot whilst attending to a domestic.
But I still feel he could have handled the situation better. Did he really need to approach the man in such an aggressive manner? Surely he could have calmly asked him to raise his hands? After all, he still had his weapon ready, and would have been able to get the drop on him if he had reached for something.
Dogs are highly territorial, and to have a stranger, screaming at his master probably set the dog off. Had the officer approached this more professionally then perhaps the dog would still be alive.