Officer Shoots 69 Dogs

Discussion in 'Off-topic' started by Malum Prohibitum, Oct 19, 2018.

  1. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,050
    1,428
    113
    Yeah, you read that correctly.

    So the Detroit officers are serving a warrant for drugs and shoot the family's three dogs. The family sues for a Fourth Amendment violation, arguing that shooting the dogs is seizing property without due process.

    The trial court dismisses, saying the dogs were unlicensed, and therefore the family had no possessory interest in the property (i.e., the dogs).

    The Sixth Circuit reverses, denying the officers qualified immunity.

    That's the backstory, but what shocked me is that one of the officers has shot 69 dogs. He had shot 38 prior to the dogs in this case, and 69 by now. Maybe it is habit forming?

    https://blogs.findlaw.com/sixth_circuit/2018/10/police-cant-shoot-unlicensed-dogs-during-search.html

    https://www.criminallegalnews.org/n...d-immunity-officers-no-knock-home-entry-case/

    http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/18a0507n-06.pdf
     
  2. Nemo

    Nemo Man of Myth and Legend

    12,829
    827
    113
    Seems that cop needs shot 69 times.

    Let me think about this. Restrained and small caliber weapon, hits carefully placed, with bleeding control if necessary lets me think he could live through all 69 and remember them for a long time.

    I suspect he would have limited mobility and be a bit sore most of the time, but hey, he deserves it.

    Nemo
     

  3. Fallschirmjäger

    Fallschirmjäger I watch the watchers

    12,835
    63
    48
    Just a little extrajudicial punishment for suspected miscreants... what's anyone worried about?
     
  4. Nemo

    Nemo Man of Myth and Legend

    12,829
    827
    113
    I'm worried about the "extra" and "suspected" along with the animal being the method and receiver.

    Nemo
     
  5. GoDores

    GoDores Like a Boss

    3,034
    85
    48
    If the officer's testimony is accurate, he's shooting a dog every six days on average. Don't police have to file some kind of report if they discharge their weapon in the line of duty? Wouldn't it be a red flag if an officer was filing such a report once or twice a week for six months?

    I think this is excellent support for the premise that officers should have to buy individual liability insurance policies, subsidized by their employing agency only to the "average" cost of such a policy for a new officer. Officers with a history of behaving responsibly get an effective raise by pocketing the difference between the subsidy and their lower insurance costs. Officers with a history of successful claims against them become unemployable once they can't get an insurance policy or it becomes too expensive to do so.
     
  6. Craftsman

    Craftsman Well-Known Member

    2,974
    242
    63
    In many urban areas, SOP is to shoot all dogs when serving a felony warrant. A harsher variation on "you can beat the rap but you can't beat the ride."
    Police wonder why urban residents view them as a hostile occupying force?
     
  7. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,050
    1,428
    113
    Think this case will change anything? the Sixth Circuit says no qualified immunity. This means in future cases that there is clearly established law.
     
  8. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    12,638
    1,714
    113
    Whether it's dogs, people or anything else, I'm glad to see the "qualified immunity" get-out-of-jail-free card being subjected to scrutiny and not given an automatic pass as has been the normal response in the past.
     
  9. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    12,638
    1,714
    113
    Supreme Court.