Interesting CCW shooting incident...

Status
Not open for further replies.
T165 – one of the things that I thought odd was that the responding officers told the dog-owner “I can take you to jail for allowing your dog to run loose and attacking someone” and then told my brother-in-law “I can take you to jail for discharging a firearm within city limits” OR “I can turn it over to the detectives and let them sort it out”… both the dog-owner and my brother-in-law said to just let the detective sort it out.

There weren’t any other witness to the incident, it just happened so quickly and the only “witnesses” only saw after the shots were fired and no one wanted to get involved or give a statement. This occurred in Atlanta… to my knowledge, the dog-owner wasn’t charged (at least not arrested) – but may have been given a citation at a later point… I do know that they are trying to sell their house and they didn’t want attention drawn to the situation purportedly because of that reason.

As it stands right now – none of this is affecting his clearance as far as I know, being lower level misdemeanor’s and the fact that he hasn’t been found guilty of anything I would think makes it unlikely to have any immediate impact… though I’m sure he had to follow the same as I would on my clearance and advise them of the arrest.

I think that the reality is for those that CCW… if you are involved in a shooting, you want to be sure it was necessary (and I don’t mean that to be the only reason) because it seems that inevitably lawyers tend to get involved and they run up a tab pretty quickly.
 
Cass, we had a german like that that we had put down. I tried to dominate it out of her but it didn't work so, she got put down. It's too much of a liability.

In that case though the guy would have been more than justified in shooting.

I think the interesting thing is that the guy shot in a neighborhood. I bet people freaked out and I don't know about treating the cops like that. I think the OP's original points were pretty good.

Why not just go to the station with a lawyer and get it over with? Cooperation is usually a good thing.
 
A few points and I agree with much of what was said.
First off, Im a dog owner who just spent last night in the hospital from an unintended attack by a pitbull. 4 other owners and myself were breaking up a fight between a pitbull and a huge rottweiler. The other owners pulled the other dogs away fromt the fight (it turned into a melee) I grabbed the dogs that were fighting by their collars, handed the pitbull with my left hand to the owner who could not hold him (shes a skinny little twiggy thing). The rottweiler looked at me, yelped and rolled over in submission (all 120 plus lbs of him) and pulled my shoulder badly (right hand was caught in his collar). The pitbull broke loose and leaped at the rottweiler as he rolled, the pitbull had his eyes shut and bit full force onto my forearm. Suprisingly with the adrenalin rush I did not feel the bite. The pitbull was hanging on my arm completely off of the ground shaking (bulldogging) wildly, I looked at my arm,my reaction was to yell OUCH, the pitbull opened his eyes, released immediately and ran with his tail between his legs.
I now have many cuts from each and every tooth and a 3/4 inch deep canine puncture in my forearm.
Keep in mind that my dogs were present, the last bite from another pitbull I was wearing jeans and gloves and had only a few scrapes small cuts and some big bruises. The last bite my younger dog (a husky/lab/shepard mix) grabbed the other dog and pinned him by his throat to the ground and did not let him up until the other dog stopped struggling. This time the damage occured so fast he did not have time to react.
Ive witnessed many many dogs fighting over the years, the medium sized dogs have some of the worst fights you could witness. My pure husky is a dominant male and has more than a few scars to show for it (he doesnt start them but ends them fast). Just a few weeks before he "beat the dog-snot out of" the same pitbull for challenging him, it happened in a half of a second. But keep in mind that like instinct tells such a primative dog to do, as soon as the other dog submits the dominant dog stops instantly.
I dont know if getting between a large GSD and a large mastiff would be so advisable. Certainly in some states the laws say that if your dog is off leash and either pursuing, chasing, attacking, biting, or threatening another dog or domesticated animal, or you, you are justified in killing it.
I dont like the reaction of the authorities in this case.
 
Unfortunate situation. Unless your brother-in-law wishes to trust a court appointed attorney he will have to come up out of pocket to defend himself. That is, unless he wants to argue the merits himself. I'm not sure of the legal process in Atlanta but it looks like the arrest warrant was fast tracked if it only took a couple of days for the detective to secure it in hand. Perhaps he rubbed the investigator the wrong way. Obviously the probable cause affidavit submitted by the Investigator convinced a judge to issue the bench warrant. If it had happened on another day and different responding officers had showed up or a different detective caught the case there may not have been any arrest at all. Law enforcement can be arbitrary and capricious. I think it is better known as an officers discretion. I hope it ends well for him.
 
If a lawyer would have been present, why didn't he want to go to the station? Or have the Captain present? What did he think would have occured?
 
If a lawyer would have been present, why didn't he want to go to the station? Or have the Captain present? What did he think would have occured?
Click to expand...

My guess is he knew he was forcing them to arrest him but felt that standing up to them was simply what he needed to do.

The statement "well if you bring a lawyer I need to bring my Captain" sounds like a scare tactic to me and an attempt to get the guy to voluntarily give up his right to counsel just to "make things go away". That's standard LE tactic, to try to get someone to talk without their attorney present. That's not a bad thing, it's just what they are trained to do.

As this escalated, he decided he didn't want all these cops coming to his house so he refused.

I would guess that he knew an arrest was forthcoming but he held his ground anyway.

Hard headed? Probably. But I can respect someone who stands their ground.
 
In my experiences with law enforcement from both sides of the badge,

sometimes making the police annoyed, or not saying anything can lead to your arrest but that doesnt mean that it doesnt turn out better for you in the end. If there is one universal rule to follow is if you get in trouble wrongfully or not keep your mouth shut and get a lawyer pronto and that seems to be what he did.

As far as I can tell from the situation the detective probably decided since he had enough evidence to get the warrant and the good Colonel was not coming to his station he could just arrest him and bring him to the station for not playing ball.

It sounds like he should get off with no legal troubles. He will have to pay up for the lawyer though.
 
Just my 2 cents worth: First let me say I understand why he shot at the advancing k9. As a LEO I have learned that sometimes you have to do things that you don't agree with. I have also learned that you have to explain yourself and that the best policy to use is: whether its easier to explain why you take a certain action or why you do not. I go with which is easier. The role of LEO is to present the facts and let the judicial sysytem enterpit them and make judgements. This may be why this offficer took the action he did. ie; shots were fired within the city limits as far as the DC charge I'm not sure how the statue reads so I can't say. The other thing I would be interested in knowing is about poss charges on the mastiff's owner for the running loose and any complaints about the weapon being discharged from other citizens. The BIGGEST concern should have been if the intended target was not hit where did the bullets go being a populated area. (Hope the neighbors are safe). again just my 2 cents worth.
 
The five misses? That is why I carry frangable ammo on my dog walks. If I miss, hopefully it will break up when it hits the pavement (I'd be firing at a down angle).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Grab the collar and pull 'em apart!!!.........I think (know) not!!!!!!!!!...........you do that with a couple of determined combatants and you WILL wind up the loser!...........I have owned many, many dogs over my lifetime. Nearly all were what's considered a 'passive' breed..........Walker Foxhounds..........and the worst bite I have ever experienced was in reflexively (stupidly!) reaching into my dog box to separate two brothers that were mutually trying to relieve each other of an ear!.............One, an about 50 pounder grabbed my right arm just above my wrist and shook me like he was killing a rat...........now yes, when he realized what he was into (as I dragged him out of that box via my attached arm) and following a couple good punches, he backed down........have that experience just once and you will quickly gain a LOT of caution in similar circumstances.

Kick or beat 'em apart, and even then you'd best be damned careful or you'll wind up with bruise and puncture wounds that'll pain you for weeks............as in the case I described disabled me for about a week.

Dogs are NOT people, don't think or react like people and when in fight or flight situation will instantaneously revert to their 'survival' mode. If you are on the likely to be injured side of that mode you WILL pay the price!

No judgement whatever relative to the OP issue, but PLENTY of opinion based on real life experience in dealing with agressive animals.
 
The five misses? That is why I carry frangable ammo on my dog walks. If I miss, hopefully it will break up when it hits the pavement (I'd be firing at a down angle).
Click to expand...
Aside from the potential concerns that frangible ammo will not put down a large breed if needed, the use of frangible ammo would likely not have precluded the charges that were filed.

Calling the police immediately after discharging the weapon to report the incident and having the ability to describe the situation from the shooter's perspective (I was in fear of death or serious bolidy injury via attack from an unsecured large breed dog) might have.
 
rbernie said:
Aside from the potential concerns that frangible ammo will not put down a large breed if needed, the use of frangible ammo would likely not have precluded the charges that were filed.
.
Click to expand...

"Precluding the charges" is not my concern.

Having 9mm rounds whistling through a suburban neighborhood is.
 
I have a 160lbs Saint Bernard,(and oddly enough he also does'nt care for people of color,no idea why...)and in this situation I whould have just let the dogs fight it out;I'd bet the farm on my dog no doubt about it.
I whould not worry about the mastiff attackin' me because my dog whould attack the other before he could pose a threat to me.
As for what the cops pulled on the gentleman in this post I can only say its a load of horsesh*t! The man did nothing to warrent being arrested. I myself whould sue the police department for such treatment. I don't think I'd be the only one who whould either.
 
Good thing those LEOs got him off the street huh. The nerve, trying to protect oneself and ones property...
 
It seems to me to be a case of some POPOs sticking it to the guy who wouldnt play their game. It happens. Being a police officer is a tough job. Im glad I am out of it.
 
Bishop.357...sitting judges enjoy vast protection for the decisions they make while acting in their judicial capacity. As long as they hold jurisdiction to make those decisions a Judge is extremely hard to sue in civil court. Almost impossible in fact. I do not know of a single case where a sitting Judge lost at either the state or federal level. It is referred to as immunity (add you own adjective). Police officers and Prosecutors also enjoy immunity but not as protective as that of a Judge. I've heard this immunity referred to by different adjectives also.

In the case of Jarhead's brother-in-law the officer/detective wrote a report/probable cause affidavit and submitted it to the PO's office for review. Sometimes a law enforcement officer will show up in a court of competent jurisdiction, while in session, and petition for the arrest warrant themselves. It depends on the rules of the court, the LEO's Departmental rules and regulations, or if the prosecutor wishes to allow such action. If the prosecutor doesn't like LEOs petitioning the courts for arrest warrants they can simply refuse to prosecute them so it's best to check with them first. And some judges wish a prosecutor to review the probable affidavit first.

In this case Jarhead's brother did nothing wrong by refusing to talk to the police/detective on his terms. The police/detective did nothing wrong by refusing those terms, tacitly, and simply taking what was known and presenting it to the Prosecutors Office or Judge in the form of a probable cause affidavit for a decision of whether or not the conduct met the minimum requirements for an arrest. There is a big difference between probable cause for an arrest and guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Many civilians are confused by this. In this case the Judge issued an arrest warrant and the police/detective are not liable for that. They cannot be sued for the Judge's decision. Nor can the Judge, if he has jurisdiction over the potential crimes listed in the probable cause affidavit, be held civilly liable. Plus, Jarhead's brother-in-law presented no arguments/statements to defend himself from the facts of the case. If he had been more forthcoming he may very well not been arrested at all. It's a judgement call. The law is not perfect or consistent.

I would encourage all interested High Roaders to read up on differences between probable cause, arrest, proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and conviction of a crime. It will give you a better understanding on what is really going on in the world of law enforcement and why certain things happen which seem to be misunderstood by most civilians. Probable Cause is a legal low hurdle. Easy to clear. Just because an individual is arrested on probable cause alone is not even close to meeting the requirements to successfully sue a police officer regardless if the charges are dropped, go unprosecuted, or adujicated "not guilty".
 
Last edited:
To the OP. I think your brother did it mostly right. I myself (with the benefit of hindsight) would have put the dog away before the cops got there, but I wouldn't make a statement without a lawyer. The whole thing with the captain coming over could go either way, but whatever.

Not being "nice" to the police by excercising your rights will not win you any friends, but that doesn't matter because when the police are investigating you they are NEVER your friend no matter what. This comment is in no way meant to disparaige the police... that's just their job. As a law abiding citizen who had a day as interesting as your brother-in-law, the best you can hope for when they investigate is that they don't get it wrong.

As another poster wisely said, if you don't treat it as an adversarial relationship, you do so at your peril.

Frankly, he's only dealing with a disorderly conduct charge. That's peanuts compared to what he could've been dealing with through a minor slip of the tongue if he had gone down to the station to be a good sport.
 
Last edited:
Hello ti65,

I thank you kindly for the informitive post you wrote. But truth be told,I would not have hired a lawyer and played the courtroom game,that whould be the last thing on my mind.
The corse of action I whould take is something no one whould want to hear about.In fact you whould not even want to know about it.
There are some people out there who handle situations far diffrently then the the average person,I happen to be one of those few.
You swat a fly with a rolled up newspaper, I use an atombomb.
I hope that I've made my point without saying to much,I truely do not want to make anyone "uncomfortable" with my words.I like this forum very much,and hope to remain a member.So,if I've in any way made anyone uneasy;please let me know so I may apologize. Thank you.
 
JCisHE said:
I wouldn't have shot at the mastiff unless it did come after me and I had the marks to prove it. That was a bad idea. I mean, its somebody's dog and a little tussle between dogs is no big deal. They LIVE that way. Imagine the little kid who finds out his dog is dead. It was a bad idea from the start.
Click to expand...
This may be the dumbest statement I have ever heard on here. If that mastiff did did come after you and you did nothing to stop it... I guarantee that you would have the marks to prove it. That is the equivalent to saying; "if a man with a knife came after me I would let him stab me so that I could prove his intent". That's just ignorant.

And, even though you state that you have seen big dogs fight, you don't sound like you have. It more than often ends in major injury or death when two alphas go at it. I know this from many many experiences.
 
I have been very impressed with the response on this thread to this situation and much of the insight (though I would think that suggesting that you wait until you have actual bite marks as proof of a 250lb Mastiff’s intentions would be a slight “tactical miscalculation” of the reality)… I have been limiting my responses so as not to impact my brother-in-law’s situation until he gets a resolution (it would be unfortunate for this thread to get attached to the actual incident while it is still a pending case and to possibly interfere with a dismissal). He is one of my best friends and I want to keep it that way.

I would like to add a minor update of recent information I learned about the incident – it was well known in that neighborhood that the Mastiff had previously been involved in a well documented random attack that resulted in very severe injury to another person and my brother-in-law was deliberately aiming low on the dog to ensure a safe backdrop behind it.
 
I would like to add a minor update of recent information I learned about the incident – it was well known in that neighborhood that the Mastiff had previously been involved in a well documented random attack that resulted in very severe injury to another person and my brother-in-law was deliberately aiming low on the dog to ensure a safe backdrop behind it.
Click to expand...
If it's "well known", why:

1. is the dog still alive?
2. does the owner still have food to eat and a roof over his head?
 
To me, the point is this:

“Sometimes right & wrong doesn’t have anything to do with it”.
Click to expand...

The OP was saying that the gentleman in question had a few opportunities to co-operate, and he made other choices, probably leading to a warrant for his arrest.

I don't have any problem with the gentleman wanting legal representation.

However, if it were me, I don't have unlimited amouts of time (to deal with legal issues) and unlimited amounts of money (to pay for legal bills).

It's easy to sit at your PC and expound on doing the right thing no matter what the cost. Hell, many of you may be willing to do just that.

But if being reasonable by going to the police station with my attorney, or meeting with the detective only keeps me out of jail (a place I've NEVER been and have no desire to go to) and saves me a little (or a lot) of money, then that's the way I'll go.
 
But if being reasonable by going to the police station with my attorney, or meeting with the detective only keeps me out of jail (a place I've NEVER been and have no desire to go to) and saves me a little (or a lot) of money, then that's the way I'll go.
Click to expand...
Going to see the cops with his attorney would have been perfectly reasonable, with or without the "captain" or whomever present. Why he didn't do that baffles me.

Talking to the cops without benefit of counsel, especially when you may be a suspect in a crime is foolish in an infinity of ways.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
CCW holder shoots off-duty cop (brother-in-law)
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Replies
281
Views
21K
Fleetwood_Captain
F
A
  • Locked
CCW without a permit?
Replies
2
Views
490
SHvar
S
P
  • Locked
Cop pulls gun at Snowball fight
Replies
6
Views
597
Jorg Nysgerrig
J
N
  • Locked
Supermarket Ninja
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
The_Antibubba
T
G
  • Locked
Need help/advice for soldier
Replies
9
Views
637
Flyboy
F
Back
Top