Win win situation. If the dog had bitten someone the police could also be blamed.
Typical
If the police had shot a student, they would also be blamed.
Do you suppose that firing a weapon while innocent bystanders (students) are within firing range is proper gun handling?
No charges for failing to contain an aggressive dog? No charages even though the dog was, according to the police, aggressive?
That suggests strongly that the police quickly figured out that the dog’s behavior wasn’t a primary problem in the case, and several commentators indicated that the animal was petted by several students.
Finally:
“thats what i been trying to say what if the bullet ricochete and hit A INNOCENT person look where thunder was shot at in the flower bed by the building but he charged her and she shot him is what she claims ok then why was he shot in the back of his head and out his throat WHY because she shot him from behind he NEVER charged her”
Why would a cop shoot a charging dog in the BACK of its head?