two dogs that lived down the street approached. Bosch’s dog was not one of them. "The brown dog was vicious and running toward him [...]"
It appears to be well proven that the dogs were loose. The only debatable point is whether they were running toward someone with intent to bite or with intent to lick. As there are no witnesses to the speed of the dogs, or to their attitude, it's up to the human to decide the fate of animals. Even if he was mistaken, he erred on the safe side.
Sometimes police officers kill dogs in very questionable circumstances. This doesn't look to be one of them; anyone could do the same seeing two large dogs running toward him. Nobody has to be bitten to start defending themselves. As dogs can't be always clear about their intentions, this duty belongs to their owners. In this case their owners were nowhere in sight.
Statements of the neighbor go too far when she mentions, twice, that
"Why does our tax dollar pay for him to sit up at his Momma’s house for four hours to visit her while he’s at work, to visit her, on the police motorcycle while he’s dressed in uniform, why?"
The work schedule of anyone, including a LEO, is between the worker and his boss. Looks like the neighbor has an axe to grind, considering that she is not involved in this in any way. She just threw at him all the grievances that she could come up with.
How are you accounting for the dog’s hip dysplasia?
The neighbor, by virtue of being a taxpayer *is* one of his bosses. Thus, she is perfectly in the right to question why a government employee who is clearly on duty is engaging in personal errands for hours on end since her taxpayer dollars are going to pay his salary.
>>The work schedule of anyone, including a LEO, is between the worker and his boss<<
Uh, wrong, Hoss. Their salaries are paid with taxpayer dollars, therefore it is her business.
As always, the officer went home safe that night, that is all that matters.
Got a JackBoot licking addiction?