I have no details on what occurred. I know only what the woman involved said. I simply don’t know what happened. As to your last sentence, it has nothing to do with this. I have not said the cops actions were correct. I have said that we don’t know what happened. That is all. Unless you have access to more info that’s what I have to go with.
Of course we have indpeendent verification of some of the details.
We know there is a dead dog.
We know who shot the dog.
We know the individual belongs to an occupation which has, in recent years, been documented shooting and killing numerous dogs.
In light of these facts, the more reliable witness, of the two, in this situation, is the non-police officer.
Yes, what happened is known.
The officer shot and killed the dog.
I daresay the “official story” of the officer will differ from the story of the law-abiding citizen.
The party whom did not shoot and kill the dog is therefore more reliable than the party who did shoot and kill the dog as to the circumstances surrounding the killing of said dog.