Federal Office Shoots Dog in Dog Park

This is a sad story that's getting a lot of air play in Baltimore now. People aren't just upset that a dog was shot. They are upset that a federal officer did it and most likely will get away with it.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/ma...r-dog-fight-shooting-20100803,0,7786058.story

A man was walking his sister's Siberian husky, Bear-Bear, in a dog park near his sister's house. Yes, Bear-Bear was off his leash, but that's allowed in this dog park. (It was within a fenced-off area.) Bear-Bear was three years old and known to many of the residents. There had never been any problems with this dog, who was a rescue husky but was also very loving according to all reports.

Then they encountered someone new -- a federal police officer who was new to the area. The fed (who was there with his wife) was walking his German Shepherd on a leash. When the dogs started to play rough, the fed asked the dog-walker to call off the dog. But before the walker could respond, the officer pulled a gun and shot Bear-Bear in the abdomen. According to what I heard on the radio this afternoon, he said it would be fine because he had only shot the dog in the "rear." It seems he is a lousy shot or has lousy vision. Bear-Bear died hours later. (Oh by the way, if what I heard on the radio is true, he used hollow point bullets, so the husky didn't have a chance.)

This incident has the community in an uproar. They've never had problems with confrontations in this dog park -- owners know how to follow the rules. OTOH the shooter was new to the area. Other dog owners have come to the defense of Bear-Bear, pointing out that the husky was always well behaved and didn't even bark or growl. (Yes, he played rough, but the owner explained that huskies do that. You would play rough, too, if you were strong enough to tow sleds in Alaska.)

On top of that, the dog's owner encountered even more trouble whens he tried to get something done. The shooter was reportedly uncooperative, and the county police don't want to do anything. They aren't pressing charges. They aren't even naming the shooter. Animal control didn't want to get involved because the dogs didn't show any signs of having been in a fight -- so it seems they really were just "playing rough."

I know that when an animal is killed or hurt in this way, some people say they don't care because it was an animal, not a human. But if this guy pulled out a gun and pulled the trigger because two dogs were playing rough, what could he do under a real crisis? I understand that it can be nerve-wracking to see dogs "play rough." I'm sure my first response would be "Holy shit! Leave my dog alone!" But I think my second response would be "Let me get my dog out of this" or "Let me get the other owner to help" or something. Not "I know, I'll just pull my gun and shoot the dog!"

Also, at least one local talk show host saw another layer to the story. He is using this as an example of yet another federal law enforcement officer who will probably get away scot free. For example, in 2002, again in Maryland, an innocent man was shot in the face by FBI agents who thought he might be a suspect in a bank robbery. Yet again, the identity of the shooter was not released, and little, if anything, happened to the shooter.

LOG said:

What ever happened to a greater duty for the greater title?

Edit: Anything come of the investigation of the scout who was shot?

Click to expand...

There is more about the case Schultz and his girlfriend filed here:
http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F3/455/470/569594/

I don't know what came out of it. It's hard to search for a man whose name is so close to that of a deceased catcher.

Ruv Draba said:

In my country, a Federal agent would not normally carry a handgun when off-duty (which he presumably was, since he was walking his dog). If he did discharge his service weapon, it would normally be considered on-duty, and he'd have to defend that use under the handgun use policy of his organisation -- which would probably view the matter dimly. He mightn't get charged, but his duties could well be reassigned.

Click to expand...

From what I heard on the radio, it turns out it wasn't his service revolver, but a personal weapon. No one was sure if he had the right to carry it in Maryland. Probably not as Maryland has strict laws about concealed carry, etc. (Sometimes resulting in controversial cases.) But how cases are handled varies.

Anyway, there's an update. The case has been reopened, thanks to public pressure. (After the article appeared in the paper and on radio and TV, people called the County Executive. ) The federal officer (not an FBI agent but a civilian police officer at Fort Meyers in Virginia had been on vacation (I think) and went back to work, but he has since been put on administrative leave. As of last night's memorial, no charges had been filed, but that may change.

He now has a lawyer, who made a statement that his client acted because he was in fear for his life and that of his dog. He also claimed the owner didn't do anything to contro his dog. (Perhaps he was scared when he saw a gun being drawn?) Jeez. My father has been approached by aggressive dogs when walking a family member's dog. He handled the situation by using mace or pepper spray -- he barely sprayed them with it, and they ran off because of the smell. He felt bad for doing that, even though it was to keep them away from both himself and my brother's dog.