Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Morgana

1) The dog shouldn’t be biting head and face.

2) The dog did not respond to the officer’s commands to let go and return to his side. He had to pull the dog off.

3) The officer claims he was delayed in pulling the dog off because he had no cover officer, but that cover officer was there, his body cam filmed the incident.

This badly trained dog is still working.


21 posted on 02/26/2022 5:40:23 AM PST by heartwood (Someone has to play devil's advocate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: heartwood

Re: 21 - Thanks for making those points.

There was a local K-9 deputy a few years ago. Nice guy who suddenly passed away 10-12 years ago. His dog seemed to have a temperament problem. Growled at kids, people walking by, etc. There were complaints about it, as it nipped at someone. After the dog got a replacement K-9 deputy and he worked with the dog, it was like night and day - the dog was not growling at kids, or people just walking by. Still did his work well. He was retired a few year ago and ai believe is still alive.


27 posted on 02/26/2022 6:15:13 AM PST by Fury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: heartwood

If these points are true, then the officer can be — and I think should be — held civilly liable for his unleashed, uncontrolled vicious dog attacking an unarmed person (we’re not talking about a felony here), just as you and I would be held liable.


28 posted on 02/26/2022 6:16:49 AM PST by glennaro (Do not live your life in irrational fear. Live unmasked, unvaxxed, untested; unbullied and unafraid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson