FWPD Shoots and kills family dog while at wrong address

[kingjason]

The scumbag officer wasn't bitten according to the story. Taking that into context, you can see how I meant "attacked" in a loose manner. Fuck y'alls justifications, the shit is wrong.

You do not have to be bitten to believe you are in danger of bodily injury. You do not have to be shot at to use deadly force. I understand that some dog lovers will not get it. Not every one on this planet has the same same beliefs. We can agree to disagree. There are plenty of people out there that believe you should be able to move around in a public place without being charged by a dog in any manner. It sucks but it happened.

[Geor!]

You have the right to not be bitten by a dog. If you believe you are in danger of bodily injury you can shoot a dog. People do it all the time it just so happens it was a police officer this time.

The scumbag officer wasn't bitten according to the story. Taking that into context, you can see how I meant "attacked" in a loose manner. Fuck y'alls justifications, the shit is wrong.

[bcoop]

It is called the "Good Faith Exception". If the officer went to the house in "good faith" and made a mistake, it is/can be mitigated. A simple mistake led to a tragic event, and it cannot be taken back. I feel horrible for the owners (and the dog), but it happened. It's not like the officer found a house with a similar number, a dog, and thought "Oh geez, here's my chance" and shot the dog.

I hope the city tries to make this situation right. If it were my officer, I would go meet with them and offer an apology and explanation.

That's the problem with you self righteous JBTs. There is no way to make it "right". A new dog won't make it right. This guy getting booted out on his ass (though that will never happen) doesn't make it right. And no amount of money will make it right. A public apology won't make it right, either. Though every single one of those things should happen, none of it is going to replace the hole left by Officer Littledick flexing his authority. That's what you morons don't understand. I make a mistake at work, I have to pay for it and/or get fired. You guys make a mistake, someone or something dies, and you get a paid fucking vacation. All that accomplishes is giving more incentive to fly off the handle like a little bitch the next time you're in the same scenario. And spare me the due process bullshit. You think I, or any other non Union employee have a right to due process when it comes to employment? Fuck no we don't. I could get fired tomorrow because my boss thinks my shirt is ugly. Due process in employment is a goddamn joke, created by lazy fucking union employees.

[kingjason]

Well no, I don't really feel the need to follow all threads on the board but I don't believe that shit for a minute.

You have the right to not be bitten by a dog. If you believe you are in danger of bodily injury you can shoot a dog. People do it all the time it just so happens it was a police officer this time.

[Geor!]

You are incorrect. You did not read a few posts I see.

Well no, I don't really feel the need to follow all threads on the board but I don't believe that shit for a minute.

[kingjason]

If a neighbor calls me and asks me for a cup of sugar and I bring it by the wrong house, their dog attacks me at that house and I shoot the dog, I wouldn't get a good faith exception. I'd get charged with a fucking crime.

You are incorrect. You did not read a few posts I see.

[kingjason]

Purple paint?

This made me laugh.

§ 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS. (a) A person commits an
offense if he enters or remains on or in property, including an
aircraft or other vehicle, of another without effective consent or
he enters or remains in a building of another without effective
consent and he:
(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.
(b) For purposes of this section:
(1) "Entry" means the intrusion of the entire body.
(2) "Notice" means:
(A) oral or written communication by the owner or
someone with apparent authority to act for the owner;
(B) fencing or other enclosure obviously
designed to exclude intruders or to contain livestock;
(C) a sign or signs posted on the property or at
the entrance to the building, reasonably likely to come to the
attention of intruders, indicating that entry is forbidden;
(D) the placement of identifying purple paint
marks on trees or posts on the property, provided that the marks
are:
(i) vertical lines of not less than eight
inches in length and not less than one inch in width;
(ii) placed so that the bottom of the mark
is not less than three feet from the ground or more than five feet
from the ground; and
(iii) placed at locations that are readily
visible to any person approaching the property and no more than:
(a) 100 feet apart on forest land; or
(b) 1,000 feet apart on land other
than forest land; or
(E) the visible presence on the property of a
crop grown for human consumption that is under cultivation, in the
process of being harvested, or marketable if harvested at the time
of entry.
(3) "Shelter center" has the meaning assigned by
Section 51.002, Human Resources Code.
(4) "Forest land" means land on which the trees are
potentially valuable for timber products.
(5) "Agricultural land" has the meaning assigned by
Section 75.001, Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
(6) "Superfund site" means a facility that:
(A) is on the National Priorities List
established under Section 105 of the federal Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42
U.S.C. Section 9605); or
(B) is listed on the state registry established
under Section 361.181, Health and Safety Code.
(7) "Critical infrastructure facility" means one of
the following, if completely enclosed by a fence or other physical
barrier that is obviously designed to exclude intruders:
(A) a chemical manufacturing facility;
(B) a refinery;
(C) an electrical power generating facility,
substation, switching station, electrical control center, or
electrical transmission or distribution facility;
(D) a water intake structure, water treatment
facility, wastewater treatment plant, or pump station;
(E) a natural gas transmission compressor
station;
(F) a liquid natural gas terminal or storage
facility;
(G) a telecommunications central switching
office;
(H) a port, railroad switching yard, trucking
terminal, or other freight transportation facility;
(I) a gas processing plant, including a plant
used in the processing, treatment, or fractionation of natural gas;
or
(J) a transmission facility used by a federally
licensed radio or television station.

You know Frost has a five gallon jug of purple paint and is now out in the front of his yard painting shit, hanging signs, etc.

[Geor!]

It is called the "Good Faith Exception". If the officer went to the house in "good faith" and made a mistake, it is/can be mitigated. A simple mistake led to a tragic event, and it cannot be taken back. I feel horrible for the owners (and the dog), but it happened. It's not like the officer found a house with a similar number, a dog, and thought "Oh geez, here's my chance" and shot the dog.

I hope the city tries to make this situation right. If it were my officer, I would go meet with them and offer an apology and explanation.

If a neighbor calls me and asks me for a cup of sugar and I bring it by the wrong house, their dog attacks me at that house and I shoot the dog, I wouldn't get a good faith exception. I'd get charged with a fucking crime.

[VaderTT]

It is called the "Good Faith Exception". If the officer went to the house in "good faith" and made a mistake, it is/can be mitigated. A simple mistake led to a tragic event, and it cannot be taken back. I feel horrible for the owners (and the dog), but it happened. It's not like the officer found a house with a similar number, a dog, and thought "Oh geez, here's my chance" and shot the dog.

I hope the city tries to make this situation right. If it were my officer, I would go meet with them and offer an apology and explanation.

How do you know this?

[03trubluGT]

How can it be legally or procedurally correct when the cop is the only one in the situation who made a mistake? What about personal responsibility? Is he not responsible? I guess he just gets a pass.

It is called the "Good Faith Exception". If the officer went to the house in "good faith" and made a mistake, it is/can be mitigated. A simple mistake led to a tragic event, and it cannot be taken back. I feel horrible for the owners (and the dog), but it happened. It's not like the officer found a house with a similar number, a dog, and thought "Oh geez, here's my chance" and shot the dog.

I hope the city tries to make this situation right. If it were my officer, I would go meet with them and offer an apology and explanation.

[ALLAN]

Purple paint?

yes serious.

Really only used in the woods though.

[fordracer2]

Yeah, a dog standing on its own front porch is completely outrageous. We might as well allow rape parties on Tuesday nights.

Hmm, hey can we do the rape party on Wednesday? I volunteer at the YMCA Tuesday night's.

[Forever_frost]

i don't usually jump on the ftp bandwagon, but i seriously can't believe that you're making excuses for this guy. ok, fine...he made a mistake and went to the wrong house, but if this guy can't fend off a border collie, without shooting it, he probably needs to turn in his badge and find another profession. there are two reasons that he did what he did; either he's so scared that he's about as effective as a 4 y/o girl would be, or he has a chip on his shoulder and he felt like he needed to be a big shot and show these people who's boss. he likely thought he was at the correct address and felt like these people deserved to have their dog shot...i bet that if he actually knew he was at the incorrect address, when the dog came up to him, he would have never pulled his gun. in my opinion, in any scenario, this guy does not need to be carrying a badge.

Why didnt trooper fucktard get back in his squad and leave when the big bad border collie came up to him wagging it's tail?

[Forever_frost]

Thank you for that explanation Jason.

[STANGGT40]

There's an explanation that I'll go into later....


But for now, it seems that the officer went to the wrong address totally by mistake. He went to 4717 and should have gone to 4917. Maybe he misread the details, maybe it was something else, who knows. But once at the house, the dog(s) approached the officer and he felt he had to do what he did.

Does it make it right? Well, ideally, no. Procedurally or legally maybe yes.

i don't usually jump on the ftp bandwagon, but i seriously can't believe that you're making excuses for this guy. ok, fine...he made a mistake and went to the wrong house, but if this guy can't fend off a border collie, without shooting it, he probably needs to turn in his badge and find another profession. there are two reasons that he did what he did; either he's so scared that he's about as effective as a 4 y/o girl would be, or he has a chip on his shoulder and he felt like he needed to be a big shot and show these people who's boss. he likely thought he was at the correct address and felt like these people deserved to have their dog shot...i bet that if he actually knew he was at the incorrect address, when the dog came up to him, he would have never pulled his gun. in my opinion, in any scenario, this guy does not need to be carrying a badge.