Delivery Man Mercilessly Kills Angie Harmon’s Dog

Daily Caller ^ | April 01, 2024 9:25 PM ET | LEENA NASIR

[Red Badger]

Famous “Law and Order” and “Charlotte” actress, Angie Harmon, said an Instacart delivery man shot and killed her dog.

Harmon wrote a lengthy post to her Instagram account Monday detailing the horror that allegedly happened at her front door. “This Easter weekend a man delivering groceries for Instacart shot & killed our precious Oliver,” she wrote. “He got out of his car, delivered the food & THEN shot our dog.” The actress posted a video and photographs of her small dog as she paid tribute to her beloved family pet.

Harmon went on to share more details with her 584,000 Instagram followers.

“Our ring camera was charging in the house, which he saw & then knew he wasn’t being recorded,” she said.

The actress explained that police were involved in the matter, but much to her dismay, they weren’t able to give her the closure she needed.

“The police let him go b/c he claimed ‘self defense’. He did not have a scratch or bite on him nor were his pants torn,” Harmon wrote.

The star said she was not expecting this particular person to be at her doorstep in the first place.

“He was shopping under a woman’s identity named Merle… the pic is on my story,” she said.

She followed up with some more disturbing information.

“He shot our dog with my daughters & myself at home & just kept saying, ‘yeah, I shot your dog. Yeah I did.’ We are completely traumatized & beyond devastated at the loss of our beloved boy & family member. #RIP OLLIE 🐶🐾🕊️🌈” she wrote.

Harmon turned off the comments on her social media account.

There was no further information provided.

[Hot Tabasco]

Which dog was it?

My guess is that it's the bigger one since it looks mean as hell and could probably rip the throat out of a bear.../s

[ransomnote]

It looks like the file was edited - my tab had crashed since I last looked at it and when I refreshed, the URL changed slightly.
I will put the page link below and the jpg below that.

https://people.com/angie-harmon-says-instacart-driver-shot-killed-her-dog-8623335

The JPG works for me
https://people.com/thmb/LdNop_wBxuTaZxWU4BGGccIxMcs=/1500x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(719x0:721x2):format(webp)/angie-harmon-dog-ollie-1-040124-661a2f4284be4a5cbff7850b40d659bb.jpg

[nagant]

This glosses over the fact that his response was disproportionate to the actual threat.
~~~~~

Please cite this supposed fact. It is not in evidence.

[alternatives?]

Hopefully someone was able to eat the dog.

[DiogenesLamp]

The police, who investigated, believe otherwise.

You don't know what the police "believe." What they most likely believe is that they don't want to get involved in this mess.

You are assuming the dog "has not been demontrated to have been dangerous".

In dog cases of which I am familiar, there is a standard of past behavior that usually applies. If a dog has bitten people before, than the dog may be presumed dangerous, but with no know history of aggression, dogs are not usually considered dangerous.

A reasonable man could easily shoot an aggressive dog which is showing all signs of being willing to bite him, before it actually bites him.

And we have no way of knowing at this point if this dog displayed any of that. Most people would simply back away and get in their vehicle. I have been confronted by aggressive dogs, and I simply kick the sh*t out of them.

Most states have laws which allow people to shoot dogs which are running loose if the dog threatens them.

I suspect this is California, but the location wasn't given that I can see. I don't know what the laws of California are regarding loose dogs, but i'm pretty clear on what they are about loose guns. They frown on that a great deal.

I find it interesting the door camera is reported to be down by the dog owner.

That is interesting, and tends to indicate she is lying. More like it shows the dog behaving aggressively and justifies his shooting of the dog.

I don't have any of these "ring" cameras, but I have never heard of them needing to be "charged." I thought they worked off of house power.

That little tidbit does indeed smell to me.

They control any video which might exist. They have good reason to claim their is no video if it shows their dog being aggressive.

Exactly, and people have no qualms about lying or withholding evidence to get the result they want.

But the absence of video doesn't disprove her claim unless it can be demonstrated she's lying about her camera needing to be charged.

Also, perhaps video may emerge from a neighbor's house or perhaps he recorded the incident himself.

[nagant]

We have only this man’s word that this is the case, and I see his response as excessively disproportionate to the alleged threat he faced.
~~~~~

We are not considering whether or not the dog broke the law. We are considering if the shooter had no right to defend himself. You have no evidence that he did not.

[DiogenesLamp]

We live semi-rural and a couple years ago some new neighbors from over a mile away let their dogs out and it killed one of our chickens. When I found out who it was and confronted them. They were surprised that they couldn’t just let them roam.

I have lived in the country (outside of a big city) for much of my life, and in my experience nobody keeps their dogs penned up. I can name five of my neighbors who let their dogs roam.

From my experience, in the countryside it is normal to let dogs roam. Of course it's also normal to expect them to get shot if they get into someone else's chickens.

Usually they will be warned by the neighbor before they shoot them, and sometimes the neighbor will say "go ahead and shoot them if they get into your chickens."

[ansel12]

The way she describes things doesn’t instill confidence in her, she just sounds untrustworthy as an observer.

[Dr. Sivana]

A bite from even a small dog can cause significant damage, especially if infection sets in.

My sister-in-law, who was living Alberta, Canada, went on a walk and was purposely across the street from an uncontrolled small dog.

The dog crossed the street and bit her. She is of frail constitution, but worse, when she called in the incident, the dog owners quickly got the dog a rabies shot after the fact, but before animal control got involved. Because the dog had just gotten the shot, there was no way to tell if he had rabies at the time he bit my sister-in-law, so SHE had to get the shots.

The neighbors did not learn their lesson, and a later time when she was walking, the dog ran across the street again. This time my brother-in-law the hockey/soccer player, was with her. He is a mild Canadian, but with a dog attacking his sister, he used his soccer skills to return the dog across the street. The dog died of internal injuries. The owners threatened to call the police, and the brother told them to go ahead, he will wait. They decided against it. Those were bad dog owners responsible for the death of their bad dog.

[NWFree]

If someone shoots my dog I would fear for my life and defend myself to the fullest extent of the law.

[DiogenesLamp]

The entire problem here is Angie Harmon.

I suspect much of the bile directed at her is emanating from the belief that arrogant TV stars deserve bad things to happen to them. That she is getting her "comeuppance" for being a celebrity.

I don't know her and i've never watched "Law and Order", so I don't have any reason to particularly like or dislike her.

I don't know if she made a serious mistake or not. I would like to hear more about the specifics of her circumstances.

Most people I know who live in the country let their dogs roam freely. I don't know if she lives in the country or in the city, so I don't know how unreasonable it was for her dog to be outside.

[Hot Tabasco]

This. You don’t have to get bitten to have the right to defend yourself against a threat.

InstaCart delivery persons are forbidden from carrying firearms......

Delivery company Instacart responded, stating that the driver, who does not have a history of prior incidents, has been suspended. The company also said carrying weapons while providing the service is against the company's safety guidelines.

Sounds to me like Angie has grounds for a lawsuit if she chooses......

[DiogenesLamp]

How can you tell a dog is "relatively harmless" from a still picture presented by the owner?

You can judge the size and the breed. It's not a pit bull. Were it a pit bull, I would be far less ready to condemn someone for shooting it on sight. It's not a huge dog, like a German Shepard or a Rottweiler.

It would be painful if it bit you, but it cannot hardly threaten to do any serious bodily injury to a full grown man.

Dogs act much differently when not in the presence of their owner.

I've known many who were little aggressive sh*ts whether their owner was present or not.

Dogs, genetically, have the capacity of being aggressive and dangerous. A bite from even a small dog can cause significant damage, especially if infection sets in.

That's not a serious likelihood in this day and age.

Owners have the legal responsibility to control their dog. They are responsible for what their dog does.

Sure. *IF* their dog does something. Do we have any evidence that this dog did something? She said his pants wasn't even torn.

If he had bite marks, or even a ripped pants leg, I would say shooting the dog was a perfectly reasonable thing to do. As near as I can tell, he's got nothing.

I have repeatedly encountered owners who deny any responsibility for their dog's actions, even after incontrovertible proof their dogs did enormous damage, usually to livestock, but occasionally to humans.

Me too. @$$holes abound in our lives.

[GOYAKLA]

Did you miss, /s ?

[DiogenesLamp]

Harmon as a celebrity undoubtedly has security cameras and if they support her version of the story she’ll release the video. If she doesn’t then that’ll tell a story too.

As I mentioned to "marktwain", it is telling that she is saying her camera didn't capture any video because it was "charging."

My point here is that I am not going to automatically exonerate a guy who shot a dog. I believe such an action needs to be justified, and I also believe that his action constituted disproportionate force to the threat involved.

https://www.charlottenc.gov/cmpd/Animal-Care-and-Control/Services/Pet-Animal-Law-Enforcement/Leash-Law-and-Tethering

We all know that in city limits, pets have to be on leashes. At least you answered one question I had, and that was "Where did this even take place?"

Even so, I don't know if the law allows people to just shoot dogs that have escaped from people's houses or got off their leashes.

[Navy Patriot]

I suspect much of the bile directed at her is emanating from the belief that arrogant TV stars deserve bad things to happen to them.

You would be right.

The operative word that you selected is "Arrogant",

Arrogance affects everything about the person who bathes in it, including their decisions regarding their responsibility toward others, including dogs.

Like I said, The entire problem here is Angie Harmon.

[DiogenesLamp]

"Merle the Muslim"? Doesn't sound right.

Not the usual Muslim sounding name, but I don't suppose "Malcolm Little" is either.

My point is that we don't know enough information to arrive at such a speedy conclusion as some on this thread appear to have done.

Still if the driver felt threatened couldn't he have used dog spray or some other repellent?

Apparently he thought a gun was a better solution, and it indeed is if you think you might be robbed.

I don't even have so much of a problem with him using a gun if he would fire it initially to scare away any aggressive dog. I'm not sure a dog would continue charging after hearing the blast of a gun at close range.

But if so, then shooting it becomes quite reasonable.

It must have taken some period of time to draw it, so I have to wonder if he thought through his actions in the time he chose to draw the weapon.

[linMcHlp]

DiogenesLamp:

"It would be painful if it bit you, but it cannot hardly threaten to do any serious bodily injury to a full grown man."

Not true.

[MeganC]

I agree. She thinks her Hollywood entitlement applies everywhere when in fact it doesn’t even apply in Hollywood.

[DiogenesLamp]

That is not correct. We have a report the police concluded he acted in self-defense.

Without having read such a police report, I would not give it the degree of credibility that you seem to impart to it. The cops don't want to be involved in these things, and the guy gave them an explanation good enough that they felt they could wash their hands of the affair.

I don't consider such a thing dispositive on the face of it.

I have investigated cases where the police had several previous reports of problems from a dog or dog, which they took into consideration when the dog was finally shot.

And this is the normal methodology in my experience. Aggressive dogs get picked up by the Animal shelter after repeated offenses. The owner gets hauled in front of a judge and then ordered to comply or the dog gets destroyed.

The owner(s), when self-reporting on the Internet, never mentioned all the problems their dog(s) were previously involved in.

We have no knowledge of previous offenses by this dog. If there are any, this mitigates what the man did. Are you aware of information regarding this dog's past aggressive behavior?

Yes, we have more than one man's word. We have the police who investigated, conclusion the shooting was self-defense.

Again, I toss that out without any consideration unless it has details in the actual report which better explain the circumstances.

Just alleging that the police didn't want to mess with it is not proof of anything. The police often don't want to mess with domestic headaches and would rather get back in their car and leave.