Family sues Cookeville over bulldog's death

[1911]

The North Carolina family who's pet bulldog was shot by a police officer during a traffic stop are now suing.

Cookeville police stopped the Smoaks family on New Year's Day after a 911 call in Nashville. The call turned out to be bogus, but the traffic stop turned out to be deadly for the family pet. Their pet bulldog Patton was shot when he ran toward one of the officers.

Video of the incident garnered national attention. Now the family is suing the city of Cookeville and the Cookeville police officers, dispatchers and state police officers involved in the incident as well as the Cookeville chief of police for violating their civil rights.

 

[Bill Hook]

I saw the story a while back and all I can say is GOOD.

Some idiots need firing down there.

 

[1911]

Firing?



At the very least!





I was really surprised that people did not form a lynch mob on that officer.

 

[Waitone]

In general I put lawyers in the same category as big fat bottle flys. Then come times when they are absolutely necessary to see to it justice is done. It irritates me the Smoaks have to go through the civil side of the system. I'd just as soon as see the state work these clowns over.

 

[Bowlcut]

well things are kinda slow and sleepy down here in the south. I spent a good 6 years of my life in Cookeville at school, and was just up there not a few hours ago for a wedding. I know a few of the city cops but more of the county cops. hardly any of them are hot headed indviduals, or even people with an attitude problem. from my explanation of the events that happned, by people on both the inside and outside of the know, was that as far as cookeville knew it was still a felony stop with possible threat to them. so they were pumped for sure. the call didnt get made that it was bogus. so they didnt know what to expect, and adrenalyne was flowing. remember cookeville, despite being a pretty big college town, is at best mayberry in the 70's it seems. small town...and these guys that protect us have to deal with old women and their lost cats, to college kids hopped up on all sorts of drugs trying to kill people. not fun. so i personaly dont think its those guys fault totaly....something like that...

 

[4v50 Gary]

Violation of civil rights? Sounds like an attorney's attempt to get an out of court settlement. No civil rights are violated when the family pet is killed. Can't quite equate "due process" with killing of an animal. Generally, when a critter is killed, cost of the critter is the amount of recovery permitted. So, if it's a pound pooch, you get pound pooch $ even if it was the best dog in the world. If it's AKC, you get the AKC value of the dog.

 

[Redlg155]

I don't know. Was the bulldog restrained? Agressive?



Good Shooting
Red

 

[1911]

Dog was restrained in the car with the doors closed with its loving family until the innocent family members were forced out of their car at gunpoint. Dog got out because the owners were forced to leave the car with their hands on their head. The dog got out after repeated pleas from the family to close the door because they had dogs in the car and they did not want them to get out and get hit by traffic. The dog did get out wagging its tail bouncing along when it picked up on the flashlight that was attached to the end of the shotgun. The family child use to play with the dog with a flashlight.

unlike 4v50Gary I hope the jury awards the family with a big fat ck for emotional distress.

 

[TheeBadOne]

 

[Jeeper]

It is really sad because I doubt the family will get much money for this. You cant get emotional distress damages for loss of property which is what dogs are condsidered. Honestly if someone did that to my dog I would kill them no matter if they were a cop or not. If the family begged to let them close the doors so the dog would be safe then it is really reprehensible of the cop not to let them. You can get out of a car and close the doors without being threatening. I would have closed the door no matter what the cop said. I would have made him shoot me because this is ridiculous. I am by no means a crazy PETA nut but I really think that the law needs to be changed regarding damages for loss of pets. Peoples pets are more important to them a lot of times than their family is. I mean you can get money for NIED(Negligent infliction of emotional distress) for watching something bad happen to a relative even if you hate them. I would like to see them get a bunch of money for this. But I seriously doubt they will.

 

[1911]

we'll see!

 

[Zach S]

I can honestly say I'm sick of hearing about this.

During the time I was hearing about this on the news, I also heard about a woman in West Asheville(?) starving her kid, a few reports of child abuse, and a couple from Florida(?) leaving a baby on the steps of a nearby hotel, i think wrapped in a plastic bag. Details were scetchy at best because they were in a hurry to get to the real important stories, Patton for example, and guys I went to HS with who set a dog on fire. I havent heard much since, I got tired of the news and turned it off.

Now for my take on Patton. First off, I think it sucks that it happened, I do feel sorry for the Smoaks, and IMO the doors of the car should have been closed, but if you were to put me in that officer's shoes at that moment, I would have probably done the same thing.

 

[Dorian]

Can someone put a link to the video?

tried cnn.com but they want 9.95 a month to look at ????ty news!

 

[Bigjake]

Honestly if someone did that to my dog I would kill them no matter if they were a cop or not

Honestly, If you have to do something that blatently stupid, use a knife and keep responsible gun owners out of it.

It does suck about the dog, and the cops may have over-reacted a little, but they do want to make it home alive & intact same as the rest of us.

 

[FedDC]

Based on the dogs that cops usually deal with IE Crack houses surrouned with Pit Bulls that will attack when the Police show up...drug dealers on the street corner that have been known to keep Pits with them to sick on the officer when he tries to stop them...I even saw footage a while back where a dog was locked in the trunk bc they intended to give a consent search and let the dog jump out at the cop.

This can not be viewed from the vantage point of hindsight. It has to be viewed as it was unfolding for the guy on the scene. he believed that he was facing armed robbers...most criminals that have dogs have vicious attack dogs...the dog got out and came toward the officer who tried to back up, but did not even have the suspects cuffed up yet. he did not know if anyone had weapons (Which he had reason to believe were on scene in the possession of the suspects) or if there was anyone waiting to jump up and shoot at them from the backseat. He fealt threatened and responded to stop what he percieved to be a threat. I would not have holstered up and removed my lethal force option until all of the suspects were secured, to do otherwise is a good way to die from gunfire while you have a holstered gun. he felt threatened by the dog, it came at him and he shot it. It makes sense if you look at it from his point of view and not from hindsight. Turns out he was probably wrong, but he didn't have all of the info when he had to make the call. Based on what he knew at the time, he was right and should not be punished.

 

[1911]

FEDDC,Where do I start?


“he did not know if anyone had weapons (Which he had reason to believe were on scene in the possession of the suspects)â€

Why did he have reason to believe that they had weapons?There were no reports from Nashville dispatch that weapons where used.

“ or if there was anyone waiting to jump up and shoot at them from the backseat.â€

The car had already been cleared by a THP officer who closed the driver’s side door.Thus eliminating that theory.








“I would not have holstered up and removed my lethal force option until all of the suspects were secured, to do otherwise is a good way to die from gunfire while you have a holstered gun. “

If you will follow the story a little closer you will see that he used a shotgun.




“he felt threatened by the dogâ€

Why? The dog did nothing but wag his tail and chase the flashlight. He never growled and showed no signs of aggression.

I would suggest that you review the tape of this incident frame by frame before you post.

 

[FedDC]

Ok, since I have actually done felony stops, allow me to explain: A car being "Cleared" does not mean that it is absolutely empty. It does not mean that it has been searched. It simply means that a cop looked through the windows and saw that there was no person in the car. There could be weapons.

The fact that he had a 12 Gauge makes even more of a point that he had to shoot bc he could not holster it and pull out his OC. He had his hands full. That makes the shooting even more justified. That type of weapon can not leave your hands until it is secured back in the cruiser.

As for the dogs behavior, I am not a dog Psychiatrist. I do not pretend to know what every dog is thinking. I was however told in training that the ones you have to worry about are the silent ones that aren't trying to scare you. They are the ones that will attack you. We were specifically told that when a dog comes at you silently it is bc the dog has no fear and has confidence that it can attack. Dogs that bark are not as much of a threat bc they are barking from a distance to try and scare you. Watch a Police dog attack someone. It only barks until it is released. Once it has the option, it gets quiet and attacks. It is not "Growling" or anything else. It is running and biting. Having seen that in person, I am far more concerned about dogs that are silent and come at me than dogs that bark from a distance.

Instead of judging how a Felony Stop was done, maybe you should do some research on how they are conducted and the hazards assosciated with them. Then you will understand what happened. It is sad, but the officer chose safety over restraint. In his shoes, I would have probably done the same.

 

[Bainx]

What is there not to understand?

Officer freaked....dog shot.

 

[FedDC]

No, officer percieved threat, responed to percieved threat...dog shot. If he had freaked out and fired 5 shells in all directions...I would agree that he "Freaked" but in this case, he fired in a controlled fashion and stopped what he perceived to ba a threat. Shootings have to be examined from the perspective of the shooter and what he saw/felt. If we look at it in hindsight, it isn't fair to the shooter, be he LEO or not.

 

[rbrowning]

The two accounts of this stop that I read agreed on one very important point. Both the mother and the son repeatedly pleaded with the officer by the passenger side door to close it to keep the dog in. He acknowledged that. If he had listened to them this regretable situation would have been avoided. If the officer at the door had been trying to make the stuation more secure he should have shut the door without being told for several reasons.

First, there is a dog inside. You don't know if it is vicous or friendly. But if it is contained you know that it can't attack.

Second, there may be weapons in the car. Close the door to make them less accessable to those that you just pulled out of the car.

Why didn't TN's finest secure the scene? Maybe there was a little too much adrenalene flowing and not enough thinking going on. Maybe better communications. Maybe better training. Maybe...

I know that situations like this are tough, but this is what seperates the wanabes from those with the right stuff. Unfortunately you don't know for sure if you will pass the test until it is too late. Most officers spend many years without being really tested like this. Unfortunately this officer didn't posess or use the right stuff in this situation. And it has brought a big black mark on a lot of other really fine officers.

 

[1911]

FEDDC

Shotguns can most certainly be "holstered".Take some training at Gunsite or Thunder Ranch and you will find out real quick how to holster a shotgun.

As a matter of fact it is a lot faster to "holster" a shotgun than it is a handgun.

 

[lawcox]

Before the death of common sense, coinciding with the invention of exhorbitant civil law suit damages, they would have taken the cost of the dog out of the officer's pay, disciplined him, and gone on with life. This wouldn't have made national news, and it certainly would not have been a civil rights infringement.
If the officer had not shot, and the dog tore a chunk out of his leg, it would not have made national news. If the officer had used OC, it would not have made national news. I wasn't there and I don't know what the officer saw from his point of view, so I'm not going to Monday morning quarterback. I don't think it should be his job.
Civil damages should be for the cost of the dog, period. Emotional distress is an unfortunate part of life, but it has gotten way out of hand in the courts.

 

[FedDC]

No, you can not holster a shotgun. If you SLING it with a traditional sling behind the back it is not available for use and you can get a back injury falling on it. If you drop it in front with a tac sling it is still available if someone wants to grab it and drag you around with it. Also, Dropping it with a tac sling can drape it over your weapon if you try and push it around out of the BG's reach. That is why many agencies, mine included do not put slings on shotguns. The guy with the Shotgun does not usually make contact with the suspect, he acts as cover officer. Shotgun slings do have a place, but in a felony stop where you have to dismount quickly and bring it to bear, they can be a problem. The funniest example I ever saw was when one of our guys had one on his 870 and we were training with it. He had to do some PT and then pick it up....the sling hung on his webgear and he couldn't get it to his sholder...he must have stood there for 30 seconds pulling on it trying to get it up without ever just letting it back down. The look on his face was priceless.

As far as my training, I have been lucky. We trained with Delta after We graduated from the reactive shooting course at FLETC. Additionally we regularly train out at Weapons Training Bn @ Quantico. I don't feel that Gunsite is going to add much to that...not that I wouldn't like to go if the dept would pay for it.

 

[Watchman]

Im with FEDDC on this one.

Having done felony stops, what most armnchair commandos fail to realize is the fact that an officer usally at the most has but a few seconds to react to a situation that may be reviewed by by several people sitting in the complete saftey of a courthouse...sometimes for months.

In any felony stop and officer is at a disadvantage due to the fact that he must REACT to an act that may be hostile.

Remember that the officers recieved a call about a possible robbery. At that time, that was all the info that they had. In that situation, you must ASSUME that the people are armed and dangerous until proven otherwise.

As tragic as shooting a dog is, after looking at the video, I cant see where the oficers involved violated any procedure. Yes the folks will recieve a settlement, they may even get some money for emotional distress. It was no more than a simple mistake of identity, unfortunatley that dog got shot before that was cleared up.

I'd like to say that I would not have shot the dog myself, but having been in somewhat similar circumstances myself, I cant honestly say that I wouldnt have. Having been involved in some rather nasty raids that involved big ugly trained dogs that ended up getting shot on the spot, I tend to have a more healthy respect for their abilities than the average Joe that only deals with his happy go lucky lab or his almost human basset hound.

I find it somewhat amusing however, to read many off the crtisisms of those that have never been there or done that. To see the sometimes heated responses of those that are so sure of themselves if they were in the same situation, while sitting in the saftey of their homes where the worst thing that can happen to them is that they might spill a beer on their keyboard and muck up their computer.

 

[TheeBadOne]