I am all too familiar with the ‘law’ in that area, thanks to a friend who lives near there and her efforts to save two dogs who were being abused.
[one died and the other still suffers]
“Incompetent” does even begin to cover it.
There was no mention of DNA testing of her body, or forensic examination of the bites, which would reveal what animal had its mouth around her skull or any mention of “blood soaked dogs”, at all.
The law and animal control in that area is a joke.
It’s easier to assume than work.
*If* they did all that and it *was* the dogs, yes, kill them but they could at least put in a half ass effort, first, if for no other reason than to give a voice to her death.
Well, I doubt the investigation is over yet. I agree it is better to go with less information and restrict it to what is known...that’s sound practice no matter what.
...the voice of thy brother's sister's blood crieth unto me from the ground...