Posted on 04/30/2008 5:59:16 AM PDT by Crim
RALEIGH - A hearing into the firing of a state trooper accused of mistreating his police dog opened today with a video of the officer kicking the dog as it was suspended from the railing of a loading dock. The 15-second video, taken by another trooper using his cell phone, shows Sgt. Charles L. Jones kicking the dog, Ricoh, five times. The dog was tied to the railing by its leash at the time, with its front paws in the air and its rear paws touching the ground. With each kick, the dog swung about two feet under the dock.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsobserver.com ...
That said, your typical libertarian internet "lawyer" is showing through.
Assaulting a Police Service Dog is NOT "assault on a Police Officer".
Here is the appropriate North Carolina General Statute:
§ 14‑163.1. Assaulting a law enforcement agency animal or an assistance animal.
(a) The following definitions apply in this section:
(1) Assistance animal. – An animal that is trained and may be used to assist a "person with a disability" as defined in G.S. 168A‑3. The term "assistance animal" is not limited to a dog and includes any animal trained to assist a person with a disability as provided in Article 1 of Chapter 168 of the General Statutes.
(2) Law enforcement agency animal. – An animal that is trained and may be used to assist a law enforcement officer in the performance of the officer's official duties.
(3) Harm. – Any injury, illness, or other physiological impairment; or any behavioral impairment that impedes or interferes with duties performed by a law enforcement agency animal or an assistance animal.
(4) Serious harm. – Harm that does any of the following:
a. Creates a substantial risk of death.
b. Causes maiming or causes substantial loss or impairment of bodily function.
c. Causes acute pain of a duration that results in substantial suffering.
d. Requires retraining of the law enforcement agency animal or assistance animal.
e. Requires retirement of the law enforcement agency animal or assistance animal from performing duties.
(a1) Any person who knows or has reason to know that an animal is a law enforcement agency animal or an assistance animal and who willfully kills the animal is guilty of a Class H felony.
(b) Any person who knows or has reason to know that an animal is a law enforcement agency animal or an assistance animal and who willfully causes or attempts to cause serious harm to the animal is guilty of a Class I felony.
(c) Unless the conduct is covered under some other provision of law providing greater punishment, any person who knows or has reason to know that an animal is a law enforcement agency animal or an assistance animal and who willfully causes or attempts to cause harm to the animal is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
(d) Unless the conduct is covered under some other provision of law providing greater punishment, any person who knows or has reason to know that an animal is a law enforcement agency animal or an assistance animal and who willfully taunts, teases, harasses, delays, obstructs, or attempts to delay or obstruct the animal in the performance of its duty as a law enforcement agency animal or assistance animal is guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.
(d1) A defendant convicted of a violation of this section shall be ordered to make restitution to the person with a disability, or to a person, group, or law enforcement agency who owns or is responsible for the care of the law enforcement agency animal for any of the following as appropriate:
(1) Veterinary, medical care, and boarding expenses for the assistance animal or law enforcement animal.
(2) Medical expenses for the person with the disability relating to the harm inflicted upon the assistance animal.
(3) Replacement and training or retraining expenses for the assistance animal or law enforcement animal.
(4) Expenses incurred to provide temporary mobility services to the person with a disability.
(5) Wages or income lost while the person with a disability is with the assistance animal receiving training or retraining.
(6) The salary of the law enforcement agency animal handler as a result of the lost services to the agency during the time the handler is with the law enforcement agency animal receiving training or retraining.
(7) Any other expense reasonably incurred as a result of the offense.
(e) This section shall not apply to a licensed veterinarian whose conduct is in accordance with Article 11 of Chapter 90 of the General Statutes.
(f) Self‑defense is an affirmative defense to a violation of this section.
(g) Nothing in this section shall affect any civil remedies available for violation of this section. (1983, c. 646, s. 1; 1993, c. 539, s. 108; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c); 1995, c. 258, s. 1; 2001‑411, s. 1; 2005‑184, s. 1; 2007‑80, s. 1.)
Assault on a Law Enforcement Officer is covered under another statute (14-33(c)(4)).
What is more, assaulting a police animal is a class I felony, whereas assaulting a LEO is only an A1 Misdemeanor.
I would suggest you get some formal legal training before spouting off nonsensical internet law urban legends about "If ANY of us had even defended ourselves from this K9....we'd be charged with "assault on a police officer"..."
Because it is obvious that you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about.
That doesn’t answer my question:
Does Herndon get no credit at all for getting the perp canned?
Carolyn
Right there is the salient point. Thank you!
No doubt...I think we going to hear a bit more about “police dog training”...
Here’s another article on it:
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/04/28/trooperdog_0428.html
Dog handlers for the North Carolina State Highway Patrol have stunned dogs with Tasers, swung them by their leashes until they became airborne and hit them with plastic bottles full of pebbles.
None of that was an issue until a trooper used his cellphone to record a video of a sergeant kicking his police dog repeatedly while it was leashed to a loading dock, its hind legs just touching the ground. The video was made public for the first time Monday, and it shows Sgt. Charles L. Jones kicking Ricoh, a 7-year-old Belgian Malinois, five times, causing the dog to swing as much as two feet under the loading dock.
Jones, a 14-year patrol member, was fired last September after the incident became public. Now he is trying to win back his job at a hearing before a state administrative judge.
Police dogs can be lethal weapons, and Jones contends that training them to obey commands can be a rough business. He argues that once his tactics were recorded on video, there was no way public officials from the governor on down would acknowledge that they were accepted practice.
His defence is that this is past and accepted practice...
I surmise that he is truthful in this instance in the admission that there is a pattern of abuse present in the training program...
I bet even money it’s covered up...
Carolyn
Carolyn
Let the judge do his job. Your opinion is not law. The judge's decision should be based on the law, nothing else.
“Does Herndon get no credit at all for getting the perp canned?”
No he doesnt...He didnt go directly to his commanding officer...he didnt go directly to internal affairs....he showed his buddies...it got around...and then it STILL wasnt adressed properly until it was made public...
The fact that he was only going to get a three day suspension is also an indictment of the entire command structure.
The more you argue that anyone here “deserves credit” for anything....the more I think about it..and the worse these actions look...
From the second article:
But then the case became public. Beatty testified that he learned about the incident after the patrol’s public information officer, Lt. Everett Clendenin, told him he had fielded media inquiries. The governor’s office quickly asked to see the video. They were “shocked,” Castelloe said.
The person here who “deserves credit” here is the unknown cop, cops wife, or cops reletive who contacted the press...
If this hadnt gotten out...he would have gotten a three day and already be back on the streets...
Not a good endorsement for the Dept.
Carolyn
Thank you CD.
There would be no video if the cop had not shot it. There would be nothing on this guy if he had not shown the video to others, including the Capt.
The fact that dogs were ever trained at all prior to the invention of the taser suggests to me that this was completely unnecessary; likewise, I can't see any value in swinging a dog; however, BRIEFLY suspending a dog by his neck can be an attention getter for an intractable dog, especially one that has difficulties around other dogs, horses, etc. I wouldn't suggest this for a companion dog, but I think it is appropriate for a patrol dog that has to be relied on to not go haywire when another animal shows up in a crowd situation. Throwing a bottle of pebbles? I can see tossing an object at a dog to get his attention off of some distraction, a plastic bottle with some pebbles would also have some rattle to it...I guess it "depends on what your definition of 'throw' is..." Lobbing it at a dog I could see...winding up and beaning the dog with a Nolan Ryan special...Absolutely NO WAY.
Where does it say he swung the dog in a circle by the leash?
governor.office@ncmail.met
I sent an e-mail to him asking him to please use his influence and see that this guy is not in a position of law enforcement.
Carolyn
He can share a cell with Michael Vick!
“Let the judge do his job. Your opinion is not law. The judge’s decision should be based on the law, nothing else. “
No one of our opinions is law. As a group we make up the population of this great country. As a group we make the laws . So each of our opinions is important in the development and enforcement of laws.
For a long long time judges have hid in the background making decisions which have significant impact on each of our lives. IMO its time to hold judges responsible for their work and toss out those who do a piss poor job. Unfortunately many judges are appointed for life and have no fear or concern.
“There would be no video if the cop had not shot it. There would be nothing on this guy if he had not shown the video to others, including the Capt.”
Question:
In a recent case of a 16 year old girl bein g beaten by a crown of teens...someone took video...
Does this person “deserve credit” for anything other than standing by while a crime was committed?
Is the person taking the video absolved of a crime of not imediatly reporting it to the police?
Isnt the teen who took the video actually an accessory to the act that was captured on video?
Isnt the teen who took the video being charged with a crime?
Now...you want me to give credit to a cop who captured a crime on video, did nothing to stop it, showed the video to his buddies, yet did not go directly to his superiours...
Sorry...no way.
The fact that the video “got out” does not absolve the inaction of the observer to stop or report the crime.
I plan to call that number & I see no reason why animal lovers shouldn't. I don't think a cop should be different from any of us. Time, effort & money is put into these dogs & they will lay down their lives for their human partners. They should be treated with respect by their partners. I am sure there was another way to get him to release the hose.
“Having said that, it sounds as though this dipsh!t was still way over the line. He should be helicoptered and given a permanent tattoo that reads, “Not Suited For Law Enforcement.””
As long as that follows charges for assault on a police officer and animal abuse I would be ok with it. A few months ago a man was charged with animal abuse for telling a police dog to shut up.
No double standard here, move along.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.