Dog not on a leash in St. Louis? That’s a puppycide!

Wednesday, September 12th, 2012

WNEM TV 5
-Eapen Thampy

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

32 Responses to “Dog not on a leash in St. Louis? That’s a puppycide!”

  1. #1 |  Alex Wolcott | 

    And stuff like this is part and parcel of why my reaction is as follows whenever I hear about a police getting killed while on duty: GOOD – WE GOT ANOTHER ONE.

  2. #2 |  Ghost | 

    Isn’t cruelty to animals one of the marks of a serial killer?

  3. #3 |  En Passant | 

    Either the Chief of Police is lying, or his officer was lying to him. Or both, of course.

    An honest enquiry would have taken the word of the disinterested bystander, a neighbor who saw the event, over the word of a self-interested officer.

  4. #4 |  stlgonzo | 

    Ahhh this is St. Louis Michigan. I was wondering why I hadn’t heard this one. We do have real problem with strays running around in packs in St. Louis Mo.

  5. #5 |  Longbow | 

    The Waingro excuse always seems to fit in these circumstances…

    “I had to get it on, man! He was makin’ a move! I had to get it on!”

  6. #6 |  Dave Krueger | 

    Maybe we should get the postal service to train cops on how to deal with neighborhood pets. The fact that cops don’t even have the coping skills of a mailman doesn’t say much for cops, does it? Of course, the guy who delivers your mail might not easily relate to someone who sees his job as an opportunity to feed his intellectually-deficient, self-important, power-craving ego.

  7. #7 |  Dave Krueger | 

    What is it about dogs that they so rarely seem to pose a serious threat to neighbors who see them every day and yet cops immediately shoot them and then claim to have felt in fear of life and limb?

    You don’t have to be much of an investigative journalist to see through the bullshit cops dish out in situations like this. But never do I ever see a reporter ask neighbors if they felt at risk living near the dog in question.

  8. #8 |  Maria | 

    There is a weird detail in the police report. The cop states that he repeatedly called and whistled to the dog to come to him, but then he goes on to state that he started backing up when the dog turned to come towards him.

    So either he wasn’t prepared or expecting the dog to actually be a good dog and obey or he was expecting/wanting? the dog to be aggressive no matter what.

    In the cops own written words it’s evident that the dog displayed no aggression until after the cop had started backing away from it. And then displayed serious aggression after the cop tried to repeatedly kick it. Wtf.

    Which leaves open the question, why was this cop running around chasing a dog in the first place if he was that afraid of catching it? Seriously do these guys not call animal control anymore?

    It’s like the whole “Control your dog! Put you hands up!” orders given to owners in the past, but to a stupid animal. “Come here puppy! Stay!”

  9. #9 |  En Passant | 

    #7 | Dave Krueger wrote September 12th, 2012 at 1:39 pm:

    You don’t have to be much of an investigative journalist to see through the bullshit cops dish out in situations like this. But never do I ever see a reporter ask neighbors if they felt at risk living near the dog in question.

    But in this case one such neighbor did speak with a reporter, and the neighbor’s view was published in the news report. The police inquiry, however, did not consider the neighbor’s eyewitness testimony of the events, nor the neighbor’s longstanding observations of the puppy’s behavior.

  10. #10 |  swampy | 

    Blood is boiling…….

  11. #11 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #9 | En Passant | September 12th, 2012 at 1:51 pm

    But in this case one such neighbor did speak with a reporter, and the neighbor’s view was published in the news report. The police inquiry, however, did not consider the neighbor’s eyewitness testimony of the events, nor the neighbor’s longstanding observations of the puppy’s behavior.

    True, but they only talked to one neighbor and that was only because she was a witness to the event. They did not ask anyone whether they were afraid of the dog on a day to day basis of if they felt their children were in danger because of the dog. Reporters seem to think that complete coverage is provided by presenting two sides, in equal proportions, to every story, which ensures that their coverage is never sufficient to draw a conclusion as to what really happened.

    Of course, the “two sides” mentality works perfectly for a bipolar society where every issue fits neatly into categories of left/right, republican/democrat, conservative/liberal, black/white, religious/atheist, gay/straight, Christian/Muslim, immigrant/native, guilty/innocent, etc, etc.

  12. #12 |  Dave Krueger | 

    Goddamn block quote thingies.

  13. #13 |  Jack Dempsey | 

    I feel safer.

  14. #14 |  Cyto | 

    One side effect of these puppycide stories should be the broadening of the perception that police testimony is unreliable. They uniformly profess fear of serious bodily harm or death in situation that could not possibly result in death, and almost never would result in serious bodily harm. Their chain of command routinely backs them unconditionally.

    Anyone who has at least passing experience with animals will be able to see through their nonsense. Eventually that has to erode their credibility when trying to establish probable cause for a stop or guilt of an infraction (like assaulting an officer or resisting arrest).

    Of course, in many cases the veracity of police testimony is written into law. When I lived in Georgia the only way to challenge a speeding ticket was to ask if the officer was trained, his instruments properly calibrated or if the location he was observing was too steep. Even if you had video proof that he was wrong (or lying) you could not introduce such evidence. A dishonest or unreliable officer was legally unpossible. Don’t know if they’ve changed that since. (if so, they probably expanded the treatment to more areas rather than eliminating the practice)

  15. #15 |  Marty | 

    a 5000 person town in the middle of Michigan… good grief, Barney Fife had better coping mechanisms than this pussy. has there ever even been a documented attack by a golden retriever?

  16. #16 |  SamK | 

    I carried mail. Even nice dogs will attack a stranger. Even big dogs attacking someone with half a clue are near zero threat.

    …and golden retrievers are some of the most viciously territorial creatures I ever encountered. I didn’t realize their mouth could open that wide or that it had that many teeth in it…definitely the scariest looking of the dogs that came after me.

  17. #17 |  marie | 

    They uniformly profess fear of serious bodily harm or death in situation that could not possibly result in death, and almost never would result in serious bodily harm. Their chain of command routinely backs them unconditionally.

    Not just their chain of command. Since 9/11, cops (and firemen) can’t be criticized in any way because they are “first responders”. To quibble with that characterization of cops is seen as somehow pissing on the graves of those 9/11 first responders.

    When I suggested to our attorney that the home-invasion model for search warrant executions must surely be illegal when investigating a non-violent crime, and when the cops know the residents have no record of crime or violence of any kind, he said, “But if you were married to a cop, wouldn’t you want him to come home safe at night?”

    That’s the defense attorney! So, not just their chain of command. It is much worse than that.

  18. #18 |  Linda | 

    First, I am not sure why they call this “asking the tough questions”. No follow up questions for the police cheif? It looks like many people are standing behind Scouts family. The guy put a big sing in his yard, Friends and neighbors are participating in rallies and marchs.
    http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/Friends-neighbors-rally-behind-owners-of-dog-fatally-shot-by-police-officer-in-mid-Michigan/-/1719418/16572456/-/11b0x7ez/-/index.html

  19. #19 |  Burgers Allday | 

    http://www.myspace.com/mattsuivh/photos/albums/more-police-stuff/1206949#mssrc=SitesPhotos_SP_AlbumCover_ViewAlbum

    “O, that Burgers!” ™

  20. #20 |  Nancy Lebovitz | 

    Off-topic: http://www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/sns-rt-us-britain-hillsboroughbre88b0ry-20120912,0,3044372.story

    Police blamed the victims of bad stadium design– the story gets straightened out 30 years later.

  21. #21 |  MikeV | 

    On the link posted on #18:
    “…MLive.com reports the officer fired seven shots Saturday after the dog ran in front of his cruiser and tried to bite him. In a police report, the officer wrote that the dog was “showing its teeth and growling.”

    The dog was shot at least twice and died at a veterinarian’s office….”

    If it ran in front of his cruiser, how did it try to bite him? Through the window? Why didn’t he just leave it alone or call animal control?

    Seven shots with two hits? Guess it’s hard to hit a dog that’s running for it’s life.

  22. #22 |  Marty | 

    #16- we had a golden and I’d never heard any stories of aggression- thanks for the counterpoint.

  23. #23 |  jb | 

    I have done door-to-door sales for years, and many regular or return home calls as well. Sure, there are some dogs that snarl and bare their teeth – for crying out loud, that’s their job covering the home front.

    I am usually petting most any animal in the yard after two minutes.

    From the witness’ account, we find the cause – the taunting by the officer. This isn’t rocket science, and the police chief ought to be fired with the officer for total incompetence. But having lived right next door in Alma, I can vouch for the fact that competence and law enforcement do not mix well up yonder. I speak from experience.

    Cops shoot dogs because they can get away with it, and always do.

  24. #24 |  Over the River | 

    How many times to I have to say fuck the police before they give me no reason to say so.

  25. #25 |  Over the River | 

    How many times to I have to say fuck the police before they give me no reason to say so.

  26. #26 |  whim | 

    How does the army of telephone repairmen, utility meter readers, postal carriers, FED-Ex and UPS deliverymen, lawn-care and pool maintenance workers, avoid a tremendous body count in their daily dealing with pet dogs?

    They are not armed. Most even lack pepper spray or mace. When confronted by a dog, they retreat. That is what the dog wants, because they are in its territory.

    I think the proliferation of police shooting of dogs has several root causes:

    1) The police are obviously hiring too many sadists, thugs, psychos and bullies. WHO else would do such terrible things as shoot harmless pets, beat and otherwise abuse compliant, handcuffed prisoners, and routinely lie their heads off on the witness stand?

    2) Rank intimidation of the civilian population.

    3) Immutable mantra of going home “safely” at the end of their shift.
    And,

    4) NO CONSEQUENCES for police shooting of pets.

  27. #27 |  Scooby | 

    If you were married to a cop, you’d understand. That cop’s wife just wanted her husband coming home in one piece, with no holes in him, and definitely with no dog hair or slobber on his uniform pants.

  28. #28 |  BamBam | 

    http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2012/09/federal_justice_agency_reaches.html

    Chock full of comedy …

    Money quote: The federal agency found that the excessive force used by officers results from bureau “deficiences in policy, training and supervision” that have been in place for a long time.

    Money quote 2: “We all agree this bureau and this community can improve the way we serve Portland’s vulnerable population,” Reese said.
    He added, “What we’re talking about today is about process and systems, not about police officers…They’re not the ones to blame. I support them.”

    So the problems occur not by police actions, but by mysterious forces? How can there be accountability if no one is to blame? How can you support evil, unless you’re evil?

  29. #29 |  Bergman | 

    Re: Marie, #17:

    Safety is an important consideration in any job. But when safety carries a higher priority than getting the job done, there’s a problem. If that job is essential to the survival of our civilization, that’s a really serious problem. Police work is dangerous. Cowards need not apply. Far too many do.

  30. #30 |  el coronado | 

    @#16 –

    I delivered for UPS for a number of years, and I never saw even one ‘savage monster Golden’ like you described. Yes, I ran into a territorial Golden or 2, but – being Goldens – they were *polite* about it, and never came close to attacking/biting me. My experience with that breed was the same as everyone else’s: they’re sweetie pies. Are you sure you weren’t dealing with abused/inbred Goldies? Now, **Basenjis**, OTOH…..

    Oh, and for any cops out there, I never shot even one dog – and _still_ “made it home to my family every day”. You candyass psycho pussies.

  31. #31 |  Mario | 

    whim @ #26

    You forgot to mention Girl Scouts selling cookies door to door. Somehow they manage to “make it back to their families.” (Perhaps, when an “aggressive” Golden Retriever threatens, they drop a box of Samoas as a diversion and run like hell?)

  32. #32 |  Peter Sterne, Sr | 

    Where does this lead? “Of course the shooting was justified, he was jaywalking and we have a no jaywalking ordinance in St. Louis. He then moved toward the officer while saying something and the officer felt threatened”.

Leave a Reply