Another dog shooting, and major law suit..sigh

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
This is really getting ridiculous with cops shooting people pets.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/12/la-deputies-shot-dog_n_3586993.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

LA Deputies Shot Dog, Let It Bleed To Death, Owner Alleges In Lawsuit

r-LA-POLICE-SHOT-DOG-large570.jpg


A lawsuit filed Wednesday alleges that Los Angeles sheriff's deputies threw a chair at a pit bull, shocked it twice in the face with a stun gun, shot it twice with a firearm and then allowed it to bleed to death.

The lawsuit claims that the 5-year-old pit bull, named Chico Blue, was victim to "inexplicable cruelty" after deputies responded to reports of a shooting in Pico Rivera on Dec. 6, 2012.

Following the controversial shooting of a Rottweiler by Hawthorne police last month, the suit says Chico's death is "part of a larger trend in which numerous animals have been harmed or killed by careless law enforcement officials."

"My office unfortunately receives many calls from people who have lost a family companion due to an unnecessary and excessive shooting by police officers," Jill Ryther, founder of the group Expand Animal Rights Now and the lawyer for the dog owner in this case, told HuffPost. "Despite the many horrific stories I have heard, the shooting of Chico Blue is one of the worst I've encountered."

Steve Whitmore, a Los Angeles Sheriff's Department spokesman, said that the deputies on the scene acted appropriately.

"This is definitely not the whole story, and we look forward to telling the whole story," Whitmore told HuffPost. "When people actually discover what happened, they will understand that we had to do what we did, and we will be vindicated."

According to the lawsuit, the dog's owner, Arturo Gonzalez, had no connection to the shooting to which deputies were responding, but was detained in a vehicle while Chico remained enclosed in Gonzalez's yard nearby.

The lawsuit described the subsequent events as follows:
Chico Blue posed no threat to the officers. However, one of the officers, apparently for his own amusement, picked up a lounge chair and threw it over the fence at Chico.
Shortly after, another officer opened the gate to the area where the dog was securely enclosed and tasered him twice in the face. Chico Blue yelped in pain and despite Mr. Gonzalez's repeated plea to let him take Chico Blue into his home, officers refused to acknowledge Mr. Gonzalez's requests.

After being tasered, Chico Blue staggered through the gate an officer had left opened. Even though the dog was already dazed and injured, an officer near the sidewalk drew his gun and shot Chico Blue twice.

The dog attempted to flee by jumping into an officer's open car door, where an officer kicked the door closed and allowed Chico Blue to bleed to death.

A "Justice for Chico Blue" Facebook page made two days after the incident had 99 likes as of Friday morning. The page has gotten renewed attention from another Facebook page, "Dogs Shot by Police," which posts about police shootings of dogs across the country.

A post on the "Justice for Chico Blue" page from February claims that the LASD is trying to cover up the incident.

"There was an official order sent to [Southeast Area Animal Control Authority] to preserve Chico's body for the necropsy and these a**holes threw him in the f***ing trash!" the post reads. "Wont be able to spread his ashes in his own front yard Major cover-up going on here, but we will not be discouraged!"

Whitmore told HuffPost that the department would not comment on specific details until the case goes to court. Ryther said that there were several eye witnesses but no video of the incident.

The lawsuit is alleging damages in access of $25,000. However, should he win his case, Gonzalez is limited in how much he can expect to be compensated. Cameron Fredman, a local attorney with experience in cases of police shootings, explained that "pets are considered personal property in California, just like a cell phone or a car. That may sound heartless -- and perhaps it is -- but it's the law. A dog owner is limited in their options if their dog is improperly killed."

Ryther said that the main objective of her group, Expand Animal Rights Now, is to change that.

"Animals are not inanimate objects," she said. "They are living beings who are important members of people's families ... Until we force a systematic change, these atrocities will continue to happen."
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
At the bottom of the article is a slide show of cop-shoots-dog incidents from the last several years, as well as the results of our efforts to see if the police departments involved provide training in the handling of dogs.

Here is one that involved a Mayors 2 dogs:

slide_222119_899972_large.jpg


In 2008, a Prince George's County, Md., narcotics team intercepted a package of marijuana at a shipping warehouse. An undercover officer later delivered the package to the address where it was sent and a SWAT team raided the home. The home turned out to be that of Cheye Calvo, the mayor of Berwyn Heights, Md. The package was part of a drug-running scheme and was never intended to reach the Calvo home.

During the raid, SWAT officers shot and killed Calvo's two black Labs, Payton and Chase. A veterinarian later determined the dogs were shot as they were retreating, not charging, as the officers claimed.

Prince George's County officials admitted that Calvo and his family weren't drug dealers, but maintain to this day that they were justified in raiding the home and killing the dogs. Calvo settled with the county in 2011. The settlement included mandatory changes in the way the county police conduct drug raids.

Calvo has since documented other cases across Maryland in which police had needlessly killed dogs.

Training: The Prince George's Police Department did not return inquiries about training.

slide_222119_897633_large.jpg


When the Bullock family returned home from a funeral in June 2009, they discovered their pet chihuahua mix Jack dead on their porch, along with a note to call the police in Blue Ash County, Ohio. The Bullocks had inadvertently had left Jack outside. When police officers arrived to corral the seven-pound dog, he bit one officer. Another officer jolted Jack with a Tazer, then shot the dog three times. The Bullocks were fined $100 for violating the city's vicious dog ordinance.

Training: Blue Ash County police did not answer requests for training information.
 

SamQuint

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2010
1,155
45
91
This is what I was going to say but it is in the article.

The lawsuit is alleging damages in access of $25,000. However, should he win his case, Gonzalez is limited in how much he can expect to be compensated. Cameron Fredman, a local attorney with experience in cases of police shootings, explained that "pets are considered personal property in California, just like a cell phone or a car. That may sound heartless -- and perhaps it is -- but it's the law. A dog owner is limited in their options if their dog is improperly killed."


I used to watch The People's Court all the time and every time a dog death occured all the person would ever win was the price of the dog. The plaintiff would sue for pain and suffering etc but old Wapner would say the law only allows me to give you the cost to recover the "property". Unless you can prove your dog is worth something (Like show me papers that it is a purebred show dog) I am going to give you $200 bucks to get a new dog. The only time they would get more money would be if they had to pay for vet bills before the death.
 

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
6
81
The lawsuit is alleging damages in access of $25,000. However, should he win his case, Gonzalez is limited in how much he can expect to be compensated. Cameron Fredman, a local attorney with experience in cases of police shootings, explained that "pets are considered personal property in California, just like a cell phone or a car. That may sound heartless -- and perhaps it is -- but it's the law. A dog owner is limited in their options if their dog is improperly killed."

And yet "pain and suffering", "personal anguish" and "loss of reputation" lawsuits continue to pay out in other cases.:rolleyes:
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,173
30,124
146
Dogs are extremely sensitive to visual cues. I doubt that any of these shootings occur because of malice on the police officer's part, but generally as a response to what may be seen as a legitimately perceived threat.

When an officer shows up at someone's house, they aren't arriving in the same way that a typical guest would arrive--there is usually a specific voice and manner of speaking that officers will use. Dogs can recognize these differences.

Officers also gesture very deliberately--I believe this is protocol in order to both pacify potential threat from the person they are visiting, and also to remind them that they (the officer), can be a threat. Dogs would see these gestures as a specific type of communication and since dogs instinctively act to defend their turf, I think the natural response with officers is probably to be more aggressive than they are with the average house guest.

On top of that, I wouldn't be surprised that it is protocol in police training to take out animals under any hint of aggression--and the fact that the presence of an officer naturally leads to an above average degree of aggression in dogs, you smiply create this vicious loop of training officers to respond directly to aggression because there is a history of aggression, and aggression continuing to occur simply because of the way that officers are trained in these situations.

It's unfortunate, but I can understand why this happens.
 

Wreckem

Diamond Member
Sep 23, 2006
9,464
1,005
126
And yet "pain and suffering", "personal anguish" and "loss of reputation" lawsuits continue to pay out in other cases.:rolleyes:

Its animal law 101. Animals are personal property and nothing more. You get the property value(which is next to nothing for the average dog/cat). You cannot get sentimental value either. Outside that, there are some states that allow for intentional infliction of emotional distress claims if a scenario warrants.

The legal system does place much value on ordinary pets. That is how it has always been. People have tried to change it but that takes legislative action. It never happens because vets are opposed to it and their lobbying dollars amount to a whole lot more than the average citizen.
 
Last edited:

lxskllr

No Lifer
Nov 30, 2004
58,021
8,249
126
Dogs are extremely sensitive to visual cues. I doubt that any of these shootings occur because of malice on the police officer's part, but generally as a response to what may be seen as a legitimately perceived threat.

When an officer shows up at someone's house, they aren't arriving in the same way that a typical guest would arrive--there is usually a specific voice and manner of speaking that officers will use. Dogs can recognize these differences.

Officers also gesture very deliberately--I believe this is protocol in order to both pacify potential threat from the person they are visiting, and also to remind them that they (the officer), can be a threat. Dogs would see these gestures as a specific type of communication and since dogs instinctively act to defend their turf, I think the natural response with officers is probably to be more aggressive than they are with the average house guest.

On top of that, I wouldn't be surprised that it is protocol in police training to take out animals under any hint of aggression--and the fact that the presence of an officer naturally leads to an above average degree of aggression in dogs, you smiply create this vicious loop of training officers to respond directly to aggression because there is a history of aggression, and aggression continuing to occur simply because of the way that officers are trained in these situations.

It's unfortunate, but I can understand why this happens.
Yea, that ferocious chihuahua above probably had the well trained civil servants shitting their pants. Probably blended with a Doberman, or some other fighting breed. Seven pounds of terror should be shot on sight.
 

KeithP

Diamond Member
Jun 15, 2000
5,661
199
106
And yet "pain and suffering", "personal anguish" and "loss of reputation" lawsuits continue to pay out in other cases.:rolleyes:

In cases where personal property is destroyed or damaged? I doubt it.

In any event, the case in pure BS. If they had a case, they would have filed sooner. They are banking on recent events forcing a settlement. Another d-bag will get a payday courtesy of the taxpayers.

-KeithP
 

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
15
81
I think officers sometimes shoot these animals because they get a kick out of it. They can end a life and not suffer legal consequences.
 

lxskllr

No Lifer
Nov 30, 2004
58,021
8,249
126
That, or getting bitten by a pitbull sucks.

Then don't go in the yard. They had a ready solution, but didn't accept it. This is what happens when you release a goon squad that thinks they're above the law, and trivial conveniences to them outweigh everyone else's rights and desires.
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
Yea, that ferocious chihuahua above probably had the well trained civil servants shitting their pants. Probably blended with a Doberman, or some other fighting breed. Seven pounds of terror should be shot on sight.

I know right, I mean I have punted a chihuahua before with my foot who tried to bite, and trust me he went yelping away. So I find it a lame excuse that needing to shoot a 7lb tiny toy dog was necessary.
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0

It looks like they took the video down, but I saw that video. There was a 7 year old boy in that house, and they claimed a stray bullet hit one of the dogs, sooo, stray bullets could have hit that little boy too. That whole thing was way over the top and unjustifiable in my opinion. One cop who used to be on SWAT gave an interview as to why she quit the force, because she realized what they were doing to innocent people and traumatizing their children.
 

Vic Vega

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2010
4,535
3
0
Pigs are out of control. No surprise here. I bet they stop when people begin to shoot back.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
I'm trying to figure out if the OP is obsessed with just cops or just dogs, or cops and dogs. Lots of law enforcement related posts coming out of him lately.

What's up with the obsession?
 

Vic Vega

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2010
4,535
3
0
I'm trying to figure out if the OP is obsessed with just cops or just dogs, or cops and dogs. Lots of law enforcement related posts coming out of him lately.

What's up with the obsession?

Troll, troll, troll your boat.