Texas Officer Shoots Family Dog In Responding To The Family’s Report of a Burglary . . . Then Allegedly Refuses to Finish Off Suffering Dog

10246316_1415396162058836_8394800075273499741_nWe have another case of a family dog shot by police. The latest such incident occurred in Rains County, Texas where Cole Middleton says that an officer responded to his call about a burglary at his home and shot his dog upon exiting the police car. To make matters worse, Middleton alleges that the officer refused to finish off his cow dog Candy despite his pleas that she was suffering. They have identified the officer as Rains County Officer Jerred Dooley.

Middleton, a dairy farmer, says that he came home to find his house burglarized and his guns, iPad, and wife’s jewelry gone. While they waited for police, he joined his father in harvesting in the field. He said that he saw the police car arrive and was walking toward it. As the car pulled into the front of the house, the dog began to bark. Middleton says that they beeped the tractor’s horn repeatedly to show that they were coming. Candy was lying on the bed of a truck parked next to the house. After the officer shot the dog, they say that he opened the door of the house and said “I shot your dog. Sorry.” They also said that he retreated to his car and told them over the loudspeaker not to approach him.

Middleton said that he ran over to his dog and found it writhing in pain and dying. He told reporters that “she was still alive and I begged and pleaded with him to please shoot her again because I don’t have any firearms. They got stolen. He went and got in his vehicle and backed out of my driveway.” He said that he had to kill Candy with his bare hands to put her out of her suffering. The family said that the dog was actually shot behind the ear.

Middleton says that more officers arrived and began to question him about the blood on his shirt, which he explained was from the dog that he was holding.

The family has created a “Justice for Candy” website which states “Candy was brutally murdered in her own yard by Rains County Officer Jerred Dooley after her owners had been robbed. Her only crime was barking.”

We have seen a series of these cases (here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here). The concern is that police routinely shot dogs without taking minimal efforts of avoidance or alternative measures in terms of force. Since pets remain classified as merely chattel in the United States, family dogs are not treated like humans in the use of lethal force.

The website includes a video of the officers at the scene. The police department is making no comment at this time but say that it will be investigated.

10006054_1414983438766775_3525188551110331365_o

Source: IBT

39 thoughts on “Texas Officer Shoots Family Dog In Responding To The Family’s Report of a Burglary . . . Then Allegedly Refuses to Finish Off Suffering Dog”

  1. People are so quick to judge. God forgives all. Ask and you shall recieve. Middleton your a God fearing man. Forgive and you will be able to get over this. Until you do that you’ll never find peace. I truly believe that you have carried this to far. It was a dog. Yes I have a dog. The Good Lord will take him when he sees fit. Had it been a HUMAN I COULD UNDERSTAND. A DOG HAS NO SOUL. PUT YOUR ENERGY INTO SAVING A LIVING HUMAN. COPS SHOOT PEOPLE MORE THAN DOGS. EVERYDAY IT HAPPENS. SAVE A PERSON AND GET OVER YOUR DOG. This will go away in the publics eye. When it all settles I hope you have it in you to FORGIVE.

  2. Candy needs to be frozen until a judge rules the idiot , power hungry , sociopath deputy buries the Family’s dog, or better yet tarred and feathered and run out on a rail.

  3. I can only tell you this is not unusual i personally had my German Shepard shot and killed in Fort Worth texas by a police officer. The dog did not charge him just barked. Their were 3 cop cars and 2 cops shot my german Shepard one shot then the other went up and shot him in the head one minute later. While the neighbors watched. This was over 30 years ago before cameras of course the cops stood up and bared false witness for each other and said the dog attacked them. One big lie. I went and complained and was arrested for trying to say they killed the dog. So to see this happen makes me fill a little like old King got some respect today. Fire him and put him in jail mand never let him have a gun again.

  4. I am so sorry for Cole and Jayna’s loss, as well as Candy’s suffering. Such cowards who can’t even react like humans towards a protective but otherwise loving dog have no business with a badge. Even more pathetic was how offended Dooley sounded when Cole begged him to put Candy out of her misery, as if he hadn’t been the one to cause it! I am glad he was fired, and I wish he’d never be allowed to be a cop or carry a gun again.

    http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2014/04/update-cattle-dog-shooting-deputy-fired/

  5. Tragic for this man who lost his beloved pet. As for the cop who killed Candy, he should be tarred, feathered, and put in stocks on the town square. In thinking about it, I am amazed that the men and women who deliver mail to every house on their route, Monday through Saturday, where they encounter pets daily do so without killing one. But, police officers feel so threatened by dogs that citizen’s pets are murdered daily in the United States. I think the fear is real in the encounter because God bestowed the gift of discernment unto all canine to see and understand evil intent in people. Candy was in retreat. Why? The saying goes, ‘never trust anyone who your dog doesn’t like’. To protect innocent citizens and their pets, I say we change the law. The law should require police to come totally disarmed (just as the mailman does) to a residence whenever a homeowner requests an officer for the purpose of making a report.

  6. Citizens of Rains County should keep their animals inside when the Jerred Dooley is on duty since he is apparantly so frightened of animals that he has to murder them. I wonder if he did that as a child as well?

  7. It should be common sense to put the dogs in the house or elsewhere when strangers are expected to arrive. These dog owners around here are the worst. They just let them run wild onto others’ property….and even if they apologize once, it happens again the very next day. Chickens get killed, cats get chased, trees get pissed on, charging occurs…and the list goes on. Never trust a cop, but also never trust a dog owner…..all are goofy in the head. Every single memory I have is like this, so I have no choice but to maintain that perspective. To me it’s beyond fact and should be absolute belief they are goofy in the head.

  8. There repeated reports cause great pain, but they do not subside. What are the discrete specific steps that should occur to help solve this obvious and chronic horror. There is no karmic fate too great to befall officers who shoot family pets without any reaonable restraint.

  9. The cop’s first name is Jerred? With a weeny name like that he would be afraid of a puppy. Fire him now before he runs into a child with a toy rifle.

  10. WOW… such a vicious animal. Did they have a permit to let this beat run free?

  11. This police officer is indeed fortunate that the dog owner’s guns were stolen prior to this incident occurring. If it was my dog that got shot, and I still had my gun, well………

  12. How does the post office deliver hundreds of millions of pieces of mail daily without committing random acts of wanton violence against man and beast?

    Rains County, Texas, police officer clown Jerred Dooley depraved fraction of a human being and frightened puppy murdering coward.

  13. Here is my analysis of the incident based upon the information provided here.

    Facts alleged:

    The officer (or deputy) was dispatched to a residental burglary call. The shooting of the dog happened after the deputy exited the patrol car, the deputy claiming he was charged by the dog. The deputy stated in the video he had been previously, and rather recently, bitten by another dog. According to the reporting party(ies) the deputy then told them to stay away but the instead contacted him and demanded the deputy shoot the dog again to end its apparent suffering. They stated deputy then left the scene. At some point the shooting deputy returned and there were at least two Department of Public Safety Highway Patrolmen. One is holding a Taser at the beginning of the video but later holsters it. The DPS officers talk to the reporting party/dog owner as to what happened. The R/P is emotionally upset about the incident. The reporting party states he needed to drown the dog to end her suffering. There was a necropsy performed on the dog by a verternarian. The reporting party states that a dash cam would provide evidence to support his claim. The necropsy report indicates the dog was retreating.

    Analysis of event:

    • It seems likely, though not enough information is provided, the DPS highway patrolmen were called to the scene as a backup to the scene just prior to the event. One of the deputies called for this. Not knowing what was going on, the DPS patrolman could be reasoned to have the taser in hand but he later did not see a use for it
    • It is unknown whether the shooting deputy had a taser or not but this is not essential to what happened with the ultimate shooting. If the deputy had the taser available its use could be an option but it is indeterminate in the general sense to use it instead of a pistol by it is usually the best outcome for the dog at a slightly more risk to the officer. This paragraph is in general terms not as necessarily applicable to this incident.
    • The necropsy of the dog indicated that the shot was not immediately fatal but should lead to death at an indeterminate point in the future. The report did not indicate brain injury, but I am not qualified to say state with medical certainty or authority.
    • A subsequent shot directly to the brain would have caused immediate or near immediate death and is permissable by law enforcement personnel to perform to end an animal’s suffering. There is no indication that a subsequent shot would have risked a richochet that might have endangered others as this was a rural farming area.
    • The dog owner shows signs of emotional distress and injustice from the events.

    Conclusions based upon facts presented:

    There is insufficient evidence either way as to whether the dog presented a clear and present danger to the officer available to me based upon the information provided. The dash cam, if available would successfully, if not conclusively, provide this evidence.

    The necropsy reports the dog was suffering based upon its injury and this fact is backed up by the actions of the dog’s owner in that he had to drown the dog because his fireamrs, a preferable method, were not available due to the home invasion theft. The necropsy report that the dog was retreated is out of scope of a criminal necropsy and should not have been rendered by the veternarian. That conclusion is based upon the subsequent investigation. A better scope of fact would have been that the dog was facing away from the shooter at the time of the shot. But, this is understandable given that a vet might not be trained or accustomed to autopsies performed by medical examiners. The necropsy clearly shows how suffering could occur.

    Regardless of whether the dog was shot for justifiable reasons or not, which is not shown determined by the information provided so far due to the alleged availability of the dash cam, the actions by the deputy were unacceptable from a procedural, humane, and duty point of view:

    The deputy was called to a non-threatening cold burglary. There was no prior report indicated that the dog might represent a threat. An ordinary dog barking and running toward a person is not in itself indicative of a threat to an officer as dogs often dart up to a person, stop and continue barking to encourage what they percieve as a trespasser on there territory. If the dog jumped at the officer and/or showed clear intent on behalf of the dog to attack the deputy that would be more evidence the dog intended to harm the deputy and that would have resulted in a greater justification of the shooter. This is not clearly indicated by the facts presented but the addition of further evidence would be more definitive.

    The deputy failed to follow through on the burglary investigation which is a clear violation of department policy and common police procedure. It appears more likely the deputy did not want to address the issue of the dog shooting and leads to credibility he shot the dog in a manner he realized at some point might not have been justified. If he perceived the shooting to be justified he would have almost certainly stayed on scene. He should have called a supervisor to come on-scene and address the issue especially given the fact that the dog’s owner readily protested the shooting.

    Telling the reporting party / property owner and the others to stay away from the scene is not warranted in the slightest. There was no articulated reason for this happening such as would be the case if a large farm animal was wounded and running around in a threating manner. This was a dog that was mortally wounded and the dog posed no threat.

    Action warranted.

    The deputy who shot the dog should be discliplined as per department policy for the events alleged. The action for shooting the dog needs further information provided to me. But if this is ruled not to be justified it should increase the punishment assessed against the deputy.

    The sheriff’s office should pay restition to the owner.

    While the deputy claims he was bitten before, it might lead him to have a greater fear of dogs, but that should not influence his decision to more quickly shoot dogs in the future as every incident is different from previous encounters. The deputy should receive further training on this matter.

  14. People express outrage over such occurrences. But appear to not actually care, as they aren’t contacting their State legislators about seriously diminishing police powers, forcing them to all report to non-police association influenced psychological testing, and making them suffer by fine and imprisonment when they break the law. Grand juries may as well be composed of Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot, Emperor Nero and the Marquis De Sade. We must attack police in the state legislatures. It can be successfully done, because there are more “civilians” than police—and clearly, no legislator has much concern about anything besides being re-elected.

Comments are closed.