I’m getting sick of reading these kinds of stories:
The owner of a dog shot and killed by a Salt Lake City police officer last week released video of his initial confrontation with two other officers before finding his dog lying in his backyard.
…Police had been in the neighborhood searching for a missing three-year-old boy.
…Salt Lake City police spokesperson Robin Heiden said last week the officer had felt threatened enough to need to fire his weapon, but she declined to release more information until an internal affairs investigation is complete.
A local civil litigation attorney who has no connection to the case agreed discuss with 2News the legal issues in the case.
Did the officer legally enter Kendall’s property? Pankratz believes both parties could make a case for that question.
Under Utah and United States law, police generally need to have probable cause and a warrant to search a private property. However, the “exigent circumstance doctrine” allows certain exceptions, including missing child searches.
So while executing a missing child search police allegedly encountered a large dog acting aggressively while searching a fenced in yard, and shot and killed it.
I’m really not going to question the exact events of the shooting. Honestly it sounds very believable. Dogs can get aggressive when strangers enter their territory. Still why were police there in the first place? They didn’t have a warrant, at best they could have probable cause. But then there’s this little detail.
But did the officer actually believe the child was on that property, a block and a half from the boy’s home? He would later be found sleeping in his own basement.
The kid wasn’t there. He was at home sleeping under a box and some blankets according to other stories. So the missing child report seems legit, and I believe the dog would likely be defending his property, because that’s what dogs do.
But again, this problem all arises from why police entered the property in the first place. If you ask me this case REEKS of complacency of police and the 4th Amendment, and the upper level police brass not being very concerned with officers overstepping their boundaries.
Here’s the video the homeowner took of the confrontation with police after the smoke had cleared:
While I have every sympathy with the owner, I will note that dogs or any other animal are NOT people, and shouldn’t be treated as such. Also his assessment that the officers should have just retreated and shut the gate may not have been a valid course of action if the police accounts that the dog was VERY close are true.
One reason I carry a gun is in case of dangerous dogs, especially when I’m with my daughter. A dog can easily kill a baby before I could diffuse the situation, so if a dog is posing a likely threat to me or my baby I’m going to kill the damn thing as quickly as possible and let the chips fall where they may.
Still let’s get specific. There is a house near mine that I sometimes walk past that has a 100+ pound dog of some breed I’m unfamiliar with. This dog is VERY aggressive in his behavior, barking and growling without the standard tail wagging that shows he’s just defending his territory. When I see him he’s in a fenced-in yard, with an approximately 4″ fence.
My plan of action goes as following. When I pass this house I am ALWAYS on the opposite side of the street. This means I’m on the side without the sidewalk. I frequently have my hand on my gun the moment I see this dog is in the yard. Now that’s the end of it, but in the event that this dog jumps that fence (which he is certainly capable of doing) I’m going to engage him. Thankfully this hasn’t happened. Still this engagement will be on PUBLIC property, NOT in the owner’s backyard. If I was to be an asshole and jump the fence or open the gate I would EXPECT to get mauled by this dog, and it would be MY fault.
My issue is not with cops shooting a dog that was threatening them, or even cops searching for a missing child that wasn’t really missing. Instead it was cops entering private property under what appears to be VERY tenuous probable cause.
I’m sorry, police, but “Probable Cause” does not mean “Because I felt like it”, which is what this case really seems like at this moment.
What do you all think?
