He was not ‘forced’ to kill. He chose to. He could have kicked the dog. He could have hit the dog with his baton. He could have just scratched his ears and rubbed his belly. He had options that could have been exercised. Instead he chose what is supposed to be the last option, lethal force. And he was careless in its use, shooting down the street after the dog was first hit and tried to run.
The dog was no threat. Just wanted to sniff and play like dogs do.
Justifying poor judgement only leads to more poor judgement. This poor excuse for a cop should leave town in shame.
“Just wanted to sniff and play like dogs do.”
I’ve seen what dogs can do and you may be right. But I’ve seen what dogs can do and you can’t be sure that the dog was not charging the cop from what was on the tape. Dogs are territorial like many animals and have been known to bite people to protect their area or pack as it may.
Down the street where I live this lady had a couple of dogs. And I never saw them ever growl, bare their teeth, or charge anyone. She walked them on a leash daily. But about a month ago the two dogs broke free from her and tore a cat, literally, to pieces on the street in front of a house two doors down where the cat lived with its owners. The attack lasted for most of a minute until the lady and a friend could get hold of the leashes and pull the dogs off the cat. The cat was mutilated and dead at the spot. The attack was unprovoked and savage. And it happened so fast no one expected it to be so swift and complete. These are animals that are domesticated and would not normally do something like this. But something triggered it in their minds. How do you guess?
So it’s not a mater of excuses. It’s a matter of determining what happened and applying the right call. The tape along with talking with the witnesses should be the priority en lieu of making a call based upon what may or may not have been happening and the lack of proof of just the tape. There may be a lot more to discover.
wy69