Quantcast

Comments about ‘Review board clears Salt Lake police officer of wrongdoing in shooting death of dog’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Aug. 1 2014 12:45 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Victory80
CLEARFIELD, UT

Brace yourselves: Police hater comments coming!!!

Live From the Swamp
Holladay, UT

Don't officers carry mace? Pepper spray? A baton? Any other non-lethal options? His immediate back-up should have been with him or he should not have proceeded on his own. The officer might have been cleared by the Board and IA; however, he discharged his weapon in close proximity to people and structures without consideration for his environment. If such a move is POLICY for SLCPD, then I'd like them to change policy.

This account of the event is the best I've seen. Thanks, DNews.

Danite
Salt Lake City, UT

Turn and run, get out of his backyard or back peddle and shoot, it was a choice.

You don't have to be a "Cop Hater" or a "Dog Lover" to find issues with this situation. I find it fascinating that so many people pick and choose what "rights" to advocate for. One could be all for certain rights like the 2nd amendment for example but have no problem with other rights clearly being violated as if it's a buffet.

Tragic situation, I'm sure the officer is a fine public servant but this is unacceptable. Training and policy needs to be changed.

VIDAR
Murray, UT

Of course there is only one version of events that happened this day. The most effective weapon any police officer has is their pen. With a pen they can send a person to prison. With a pen they can write a report in such a way that the desired outcome happens.
The only counter to this is the camera. Cameras only report the non-biased facts.

OC Fan
Orange County, CA

I've got a Weimaraner Kendall could adopt!

We're looking for a good home for her.

dalefarr
South Jordan, Utah

The civilian review board may have swallowed the so called "exigent circumstances" malarky but I don't think a court would. There weren't any exigent circumstances justifying the officer's intrusion into the back yard.

Kaladin
Northern, CO

The officer did what he had to. It is unfortunate. The life of a child is more important than the life of a dog. Those of you sitting on your couch typing away about how the officer should have done this that or the other were not there. The account says he had little time to react and the dog was coming at him with a purpose. The department will probably give additional training due to this incident but the officer was cleared. The end.

Naked Truth
Salt Lake City, Utah

Live From the Swamp,

Why should his back-up have been with him in the backyard? They were searching for a missing boy, not pursuing a dangerous criminal.

Joe Schmoe
Orem, UT

I'd rather have a live police officer than a live dog. Sorry it had to end that way but human safety first. At all costs.

Prodicus
Provo, UT

@Victory80: So anyone who doesn't think that police should be able to ransack areas where they have no probable cause to investigate, and then use indiscriminate deadly force for no reason, is thereby a "police hater"?

If so, count me and anyone else who cares about liberty and justice in!

The SLCPD is going to lose this lawsuit. Big time.

Reporterson
Salt Lake City, UT

Not a police hater or much of a dog lover, but I was struck that the report says "they looked at any place a three-year-old could possibly have gotten into or could be located within," but then the officer "knew he would need to enter the yard due to structures and shrubbery being present as he had zero confidence he could 'clear the yard' by simply looking over the fence." That must be some three-year-old they were looking for. My first reaction is this looks like a white-wash. If the dog could not have gotten out, what made them think a three-year-old could have gotten in.

Naked Truth
Salt Lake City, Utah

Danite: "Tragic situation, I'm sure the officer is a fine public servant but this is unacceptable."

Why is it unacceptable? Were you there? Did you see how it all unfolded? I'm sure that looking back at the situation with 20/20 hindsight we would all like to see it handled differently--probably including the officer--I just don't understand how so many people can be against what the officer did without having witnessed the action themselves. Is it just blanket distrust of or even hatred for law enforcement?

Shane333
Cedar Hills, UT

Kaladin,

Wasn't the child at home when this all happened? So please explain to me why the police officer had to make a choice between the neighboring dog's life or the kid's life when the kid was at home and never in danger.

sjames
AMERICAN FORK, UT

I understand that the cop was scared blah, blah, blah.

Wasn't he trespassing in the 1st place? After all, he had no consent to be there.
To me, it's the lawlessness that's the problem. If I accidentally killed a police dog, I could be charged with serious crimes, even if it happened on my property.

This officer could have avoided killing the animal. He has mace, tasers, clubs, feet, etc. If his intrusion into the property was so minimal, why couldn't he just run away? The dog was shot dead at least 10 feet from the gate.

BU52
Provo, ut

This is only step one, the lawyers are salivating in the wings. Taxpayers get out your checkbooks.

Holiness is required
Springfield, KY

Weimaraner would be the correct spelling for the breed, I had one that was too sweet. He did like chewing on electrical cords, until he found one that was plugged in.

Jimmyisliberal
Salt Lake City, UT

Once again the usual neo-con "freedom fighters" unfazed by this unwarranted and unconstitutional search of this man's backyard. In closing, one better possess a law degree prior to lecturing me about law. Especially criminal law.

Kralon
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA

"second entrance that could have easily been opened by the missing child."

I would really like to see a picture or a video of a gate that a 3 year old could easily open!

Not that I don't trust the police report but, oh wait . . .

Sorry, but my experience with police is I don't trust a single thing they say in regards to protecting their own!

environmental idiot
Sanpete, UT

For those that keep yelling about mace and tasers. Those are secondary weapons and are not located on an officers belt where they are as easily accessible as his handgun. The handgun is the primary weapon when some one is (and understand this) in immediate threat of life or serious bodily harm. If an officer deems he has time to go to the secondary non-leathal force then he can use pepper spray or taser. In the incident of a charging animal or criminal you would go to your most important and most assessable weapon.

I have a dog. He had never been aggressive except of one incident and has never been aggressive since. To expect that a dog (or human) will never be aggressive is an overstatement of your expectations of the beast. It can happen no matter how gentle you think they are.

As for Mr. Kendall's attitude, I have pretty much lost the sympathy I had for him. I wouldn't pay him anything for the dog. I go get a mutt out of the pound and give it to him and see if he really cares for animals.

george of the jungle
goshen, UT

I could of guess that the verdict would be when the dog owner rejected the offer.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments