We have another controversial dog shooting case. Cathy Luu and her family say that an El Monte police officer shot their 2-year-old female German Shepherd, named Kiki inside their fenced-in front yard while looking for a runaway teenager. What is different about this case is that a home security camera recorded the scene and it contradicted the account of the two officers.
The two officers arrived at the home at 4:30 p.m. They had an appointment to discuss their teenage son, who had run away from home over the weekend. They wanted a photograph. The police said that the officers shook the gate and looked to see if there was a dog in the yard before they entered. However, the video camera shows the officers parking their car and then entering the yard without checking for dogs despite two “beware of dog” signs. One sign was mounted on the gate through which they entered.
They shot the dog which ran to the backyard.
Four children were in the home when the officers shot their dog. Moreover, when they fired the shots there was a children’s pool party taking place in a front yard across the street.
El Monte police Capt. Dan Buehler continues to insist that the officer followed procedures: “They did go up to the front (gate),” the captain said. “There was a beware of dog sign of the gate. They did what we always do as police officers. They shook the gate. They didn’t see any dogs.” The video contradicts that account. Moreover, the family says that the officers denied seeing the “beware of dog” signs.
She also said that when she said her dog needed medical attention, an officer responded that the dog was okay and demanded to see license documents not only for the wounded dog, but for the family’s other dogs. The family said that the officers delayed them for an hour before the dog could be treated.
The family also says that police told them that they would cover the medical costs for the dog but then changed their minds when told that the dog required a $7,000 operation. Luu says a supervisor insisted that the cost exceeded the value of the dog — a harsh accounting that does not consider the fault of the officers and the value of the dog as a family member.
Unable to pay for the operation, the family put Kiki down.
Source: SGV Tribune
Why is it that postal workers, who deal with loose canines far more often than police officers aren’t gunning down family pets?
At what point in a police officer’s career does the unwarranted fear that is at the center of every police shooting, human and canine alike set in?
PS. In my neck of the woods it amazes me that so many doorbells do not work. …. We can put a man on the moon, but we can’t make doorbells that work !!!!
Rattling the gate is one of the oldest precautions (tricks) in the books.
Whether Fido is smart or not, when that gate rattles metal on metal, every non deaf dog that is in their yard comes a running. I think if a dog hears the can opener going for his food, and the gate rattling at the same time it creates a conundrum of Epic proportions,.. but my money is on run to the gate first, then go to the food. The bonus to gate rattling is the dog also acts as the doorbell. This saves on electricity too (unless you knock).
There was no emergency, the officers were not under pressure.
Mailmen that don’t want to get bit are trained to rattle gates. Mailmen that don’t .rattle gates, learn VERY quick to rattle gates.
These two failed miserably at “entering a gated yard 101”
This woulda coulda shooda been a routine police citizen info sharing meet.
A 3 second rattle and none of this would have happened.
..PS. I often do a 2nd three second rattle …. especially when the dog bombs on the ground look like they came from an elephant.
Statistically anytime a cop enters your property, your dog is at risk.
If your dog is shot, your recourse is limited – cops have a history of lying to protect themselves.
Bottom line, do not let a cop on your property.
You know what amazes me; when you want to join the police force you must be 100% clean, and in shape. But once you become a cop you become nothing but a fat slob who couldn’t catch a ten year old (unless he uses his gun of course). All but a handful stay in shape. This should be a requirement as well as a mental evaluation once a year. I once saw a motorcycle cop here in Florida. If this fat slob weighed less than 280 and stood about 5’7″ I’d be shocked.
Who you gonna believe, LEO, Inc. or your lying eyes?
Gives new meaning to police state…. What you say is not what you saw….
Reblogged this on ExCop-LawStudent.
Unjustified killing of dogs by cops happen all the time. It’s but one component of the extrajudicial punishment authority that police officers wield at their pleasure. Think of the taser mindset. Anyway, more here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/PUPPYCIDE
http://reason.com/tags/puppycide
What vow? To protect and serve? Yes, the law, not the citizen. That’s the fact, check it.
They are trying to stall this so it would go away. It’s just ridiculous, the fat male partner split, the female got panic and drew the weapon saw the dog approaching and immediately discharged her weapon without even a second to evaluating the situation. It’s the fact, check the vid.
When her partner split, as he’s walking out he had his hand on the weapon. Not even a second after the German Shepard approached the female officer the shot was fired.
This is outrageous!! Both are out of shape slops that acted inappropriately out of fear, then had the nerve to tell the owner that she shot the dog but it was fine. When asked why, they demand to see the dogs(that’s right both dogs) registration before the dog can be transport to the vet.
To add more insult to injury, they lied about it on their reports, then the vid came out and proved otherwise, then they tried to back tracked and said it was a missed print. Will you ever trust what they have to say again? Ever?
Deplorable.
The way this was handled after the fact was inexcusable. (I will get to the incident later) First, them showing interest in whether the homeowners had dog licenses whilst the dog itself needed medical attention sounded more like the officers were trying to drum up some violation to excuse the action of the officer in the shooting. Then the fact that they dismissed the dog as not needing medical attention, just plain stupid. You get an actual police officer who is shot in the side and vomiting up blood would they be as equally dismissive. What animal gets smoked by a .40 or 9mm bullet and doesn’t need medical attention?
Yep, and typical when the bill is 7 grand the department backpeddles. But, I’m sure they did not hesitate to hire this PR firm to attempt to make the incident go away. I’ll bet they spend twice what the vet bill would have been to save the dog.
As for the actual shooting of the dog. I have a problem with that in this case for the following reasons:
1) The backdrop of the shooting was poor. First either the house or the street and the other residences were not worth risking. Also the dog was on a sidewalk and if a round hit the sidewalk there is the possiblity of a richochet. But even if the backdrop was the lawn I don’t see the risk being worth it.
2) I believe it is more likely than not the officer was equipped with a Taser and that should have been used instead. If the officer lit up this dog with a Taser, I could accept that, though grudgingly. I evidence the officer was equipped with a taser based on that she holstered her pistol on her right side and she has straps on her left leg that are consistent with a thigh holster for a Taser. The recommended place for a Taser is in the weak hand side and drawn with the weak hand (the opposite of what is used with a pistol) Given the circumstances the Taser should have been used if a weapon was to be used at all.
Now, I am giving a lot of deferrence on whether this dog was actually attacking the officer. I think it is slighly more likely than not the dog was not but I can see how the officer might interpret it that way. That said I do not believe given that a Taser being available the pistol was a reasonable use of force. I can say from first hand knowledge that a Taser IS effective against dogs and having had to have used both a Taser and firearms against dogs the two are equally effective but the Taser is certainly less problematic and injurous to the animal. Yet I agree there are times when an extremely violent dog can make the choice of a pistol preferrable. I don’t see that in this case.
On balance it can be articulated that one does not use a Taser in a deadly force situation, in other words the training is that you do not use a Taser when a pistol should have been used, but I don’t perceive the threat to be the same here.
What people see time and time again is this: Police acting like a little military army calling a gun good even as a military army rationalizes the use of a weapon regardless of how destructive they are. Nether values their soul hence massacres life when their life is perceived to be threatened.
I worked with a pilot who lied about what he did on the plane. When the chief pilot found out he had lied about the incident, the pilot was fired on the spot. It is outrageous that those who are sworn to tell the truth and protect us are allowed to get away with this kind of lying behavior. In virtually all jobs I have had, the one sure way to get fired was to lie about something. It seems that the police are exempt from this standard rule.
There are two options for the police chief. He can fire the officers involved, or he can forfeit the credibility of his officers. I can tell you that the next time a police officer testifies in court, the jurors should disregard all of their testimony since they have been proven to be liars, and thus untrustworthy. When the DA starts losing cases because jurors cannot believe police testimony, THEN they might clean up their act, but not until the courts and jurors start tossing those bad cops out of the courthouse.
Every sentence I bark into the Dogologue Machine gets censored for swear barks. So I wont comment on the igPays’ conduct here.
Imagine that, censoring in a land called the home of the free? Had that statement be true censoring would be unknown.
The police hired a public relations firm to handle questions. So far they don’t answer any questions. So we have two officers that really screwed up and then filed a false report. Police back down on the obligation to help the dog and a police chief says black is white in the face of video. This story has gone viral across the globe. In San Diego we have a foundation that would have jumped at the chance to help the dog. Surprised that there is nothing like that in LA for the Vet to know about. But this is really more than shooting a dog ( and then laughing about it on video). The cover up is criminal and telling on how things are handled….unless you think this is the only time.
Fire them.
Only call police as a last resort and go to them, do not have them come to you.
Police are like a small military saying We will protect you, bang, OH I am sorry, bang it won’ t happen again. Rata, tat, tat, tat, we are protecting you. That is a load of satanic crapola.
Police are like a small military saying We will protect you, bang, OH I am sorry, bang it won’ t happen again. Rata, tat, tat, tat, we are protecting you That is a load of satanic crapola.
Kinda makes you wonder what they’ll do if they find the boy.
The Police made a vow. They need to keep that vow – that promise. Police are religious liars. They know they are in the wrong. They are near who they wronged. Follow up on your pledge while you can fill your pledge. Police I say time and time again are like the conniving religious people of Christs day. The clothing of both made them feel invulnerable incapable of doing anything wrong even when they knew the were doing wrong.
I am very glad that you are reporting on this incident. It occurred just a few miles away from where I live, and was reported in my local paper. The authorities have since reverted to “no comment” mode. Sorry, it is too late now to unsay what has been said, which demonstrates that the only time an internal investigation results in a finding of wrongdoing is when the subject of the investigation is out of favor with the powers that be.