Cops and dogs II: An apology in Vermont
The chief of police in Brattleboro, Vermont, has apologized for the department’s shooting of a sick dog with a shotgun on school grounds.
Chief Gene Wrinn , acknowledged that his officers didn’t follow procedure during the March 21 incident and that they failed to call animal control officers, in accordance with policy.
His remarks came during a meeting Tuesday with residents, held at a local library, according to the Brattleboro Reformer
“We screwed up. We apologize for that, and we’re going to try to make sure it doesn’t happen again,” he said. “We’ve gotten some good feedback. We’re not sweeping anything under the carpet. We’re having conversations.”
Wrinn said two officers responded to the Green Street School playground for a dog complaint, and one of the officers used a shotgun to kill the animal, believed to be a pit bull or pit bull mix.
“It was truly unfortunate that the department had to take the dog’s life, but it had to happen,” Wrinn said.
While some have described the dog as “dying,” other residents say it may have just been ill. “It probably was hungry. It probably was dehydrated,” said one.
Wrinn declined to say if the two officers involved had been disciplined. “That’s a personnel matter, and it can’t be discussed,” he said.
Wrinn noted that department representatives have met with the Windham County Humane Society. “This may be a great opportunity for training for the officers,” he added.
Posted by jwoestendiek May 17th, 2012 under Muttsblog.
Tags: animal, animal control, animals, brattleboro, citizens, complaints, dog, dogs, dying, gene wrinn, meeting, officers, pets, pit bull, playground, police, police chief, residents, school, shooting, shot, shotgun, sick, vermont
Comments
Comment from KateH
Time May 17, 2012 at 3:23 pm
John, did you see the other story (link on that Brattelboro page) about a dog named Kojo who who shot by police and his body dumped over a cliff?
Comment from Interested party
Time May 18, 2012 at 10:18 pm
“but it had to happen,” Wrinn said.” Perhaps I missed the factual recitation which would support this premise. Really? The dog “had to die”? Why? According to the Chief’s apology the department fail dot adhere to policies and if that is the case then it is clear that had they followed the policies the officers would NOT have shot the dog . So in reality the dog did NOT have to die from a logistical standpoint.
Comment from Miss Jan
Time May 17, 2012 at 11:59 am
“Personnel matter” that “cannot be discussed.” That is SO typical of “internal affairs” investigations which is trotted out for the media including the lip-service apology that mimics what is often issued by politicians caught doing no-nos. IA “personnel matters” after delivering the pablum to the media via chief or via the public information officer (more spin delivered at taxpayer expense) will uniformly result in the officer(s) being let off and the follow-up statement to the media contained in one word: justified.
Think of the types of people drawn to police work and think about the thousands of dogs killed by cops. And hundreds of homeless and mentally ill humans shot first and questions asked later – but that follow the same well-trod path. “IA” or “personnel matter” followed with exoneration – “justified.”
Taxpayers are funding this insanity. Just sayin’.