Quantcast
Utah

Review board clears Salt Lake police officer of wrongdoing in shooting death of dog

Comments

Return To Article
  • Victory80 CLEARFIELD, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 2:37 p.m.

    Brace yourselves: Police hater comments coming!!!

  • Live From the Swamp Holladay, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 2:42 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 3:14 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 3:15 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 3:20 p.m.

    I've got a Weimaraner Kendall could adopt!

    We're looking for a good home for her.

  • dalefarr South Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 1, 2014 3:22 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 3:30 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 3:41 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 3:43 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 3:52 p.m.

    @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
    Aug. 1, 2014 3:53 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 4:01 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 4:09 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 4:11 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 4:19 p.m.

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

  • Holiness is required Springfield, KY
    Aug. 1, 2014 4:33 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 4:41 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 4:50 p.m.

    "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
    Aug. 1, 2014 5:13 p.m.

    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
    Aug. 1, 2014 5:46 p.m.

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

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 6:25 p.m.

    A well armed, well trained, decorated, veteran detective/police officer shot and killed a family pet.

    Was the child found before the family pet was shot?

    Reports indicate the child was found before the family pet was shot.

    Why did the officer continue to search for the child when the child had already been located?

    I respect law enforcement.

    However, in this case there are too many unanswered questions.

    The police department offered a settlement and then rescinded the offer due to the pet owners social media posts.

    The SLCPD has come away from this tragedy looking like they are anxious to protect their own, protect the image of the PD, first and foremost...end of story.

    Sad.

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 6:49 p.m.

    If this officer's actions were within the law and policy, then the law and policy MUST be changed! There was no immediate danger to anyone that warranted the officer entering that yard in the first place. Private property rights must be held sacred and strongly protected! Without such protections, individual freedoms are meaningless.

    There was no reason, evidence, "hot pursuit", probable cause, clue, or justification for that officer to enter that yard without permission! None. Period.

    This case needs to be fought and fought hard to preserve (restore) private property rights.

  • Lifelong Republican Orem, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 7:08 p.m.

    A judge in Utah will throw this case out so fast that they won't know what hit them.

  • SLC Grandma Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 7:47 p.m.

    It has been reported that the missing child was found in his own home one-half hour before the police officer entered the Kendall backyard and shot the dog. Half an hour is, to me, too long a time to elapse before the officers out patrolling the neighborhood and searching for the child are notified to call off the search. Geist would be alive today if prompt notification had been given to the searchers - shouldn't that be Standard Operating Procedure in such situations? Kids sure communicate with each other instantly - can't the police?

  • EJM Herriman, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 8:53 p.m.

    I stand with the officer and the results of the review board. Judges will as well. End of story.

  • pharmacist South Jordan, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 9:10 p.m.

    The Real culpret here is the childs parent that called the cops in the first place, seeing that the child was found in the home all the time. The parents have a duty to know where their child is, espesially if the child has a handicap. But,if it was up to me, the family pets of this so called officer should be seized and given to caring homes as he has shown very publiclly how he feels towards family animals. A personal law suite against the officer should now be considered for his lack of judgment.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 9:23 p.m.

    "To expect that a dog (or human) will never be aggressive is an overstatement of your expectations of the beast."

    You are absolutely right, enviromental. I have a dog that is the sweetest thing, he is great with kids, let's them hang all over him. Never is aggressive with people. But. . .

    But, he is a BIG dog. And he has a BIG bark. Exactly what I want when strangers come to the door. But I am almost 100 % sure that he would never bite anyone.

    But you notice that "almost"? He is an animal, as sweet, and good natured, as he is.

    The thing is, if a cop came in my backyard looking for a child (which it is absolutely legal. Sorry jimmyisliberal, if you are implying it's not you are wrong. Also if you are implying there is a criminal case here you are laughably wrong), if that cop came into my yard there is NO WAY he would know my dog most likely would just sniff him, then want to be petted.

    Unfortunately.

    But, good for me, I NEVER leave my dog outside when I'm not home.

  • Utah Dem Ogden, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 9:27 p.m.

    Just curious - during the search did any other cop encounter a dog? Did any other cop enter a gated backyard when there was no answer at the front door?

  • ChemicAl SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 9:51 p.m.

    All of you saying this was an illegal search really need to take a law class to assuage your ignorance. A child was missing, thus exigent circumstances warranted the entry of private property in order to preserve the safety of that child. It does not matter that the child was later found in his own home. This was not known at the time and so has no weight in the argument.
    Now, let's spell out a different scenario for you. Suppose the child really was in the yard with that dog, and the officer chose to not search there because of it's presence. If the child was later found dead or severely injured in that yard, I would bet my paycheck all of you would be screaming on here about the ineptitude of the police officer's decision to not enter.
    In the end, the officer did nothing wrong. It was tragic that the dog was killed, but no dog's life is worth more than the life of a child or an officer of the law, period.

  • silverbear Goshen, UT
    Aug. 1, 2014 10:38 p.m.

    Once again the Gestapo tactics of our men in Blue has been approved. If He killed someone it would be okay because it was in the line of duty. Illegal trespassing, killing a dog and its all okay because he was Threatened? Come on time to reign in John Wayne and punish him. If it was a civilian the asap would be down on the person. Their is even state laws for inhuman treatment of animals.

  • pharmacist South Jordan, UT
    Aug. 2, 2014 7:05 a.m.

    This sounds so much like another government cover up- sweeep it under a rug and hope it goes a way. If the officer has any real feelings about what he did, he should leave the police force here, and go look in another community out of state, so that we might once again perhaps feel safe with our own police again

  • Jimmyisliberal Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 2, 2014 1:27 p.m.

    @Mark...Obtain an Ivy League law degree and maintain a successful criminal law practice for nearly 20 years. Once you completely these steps get back with me and post once again. However, this time when commenting you might actually know what you are talking about beforehand.

  • Overdubbed San Diego, CA
    Aug. 2, 2014 5:05 p.m.

    He was looking for a lost 3 year old in a yard where he, himself, could not see into the yard and where he had to shoot a dog.

    Does it sound like a 3 year old would make it in there?

    This is a baloney situation. Sure -- maybe he had to go out of his way to find that child, and maybe that required extraordinary measures (turns out it really didn't but how would he know?). But with taking extraordinary measures he must also accept extraordinary responsibility and he must take extraordinary CARE as he conducts his duties. In this case, that extra responsibility and care was not seen.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 2, 2014 6:08 p.m.

    Jimmyisliberal, you're funny.

    And, of course, wrong.

    The most an ambulance chaser could ever hope for, in this case, is that SLC would settle out of court so that the ambulance chaser could squeeze a few bucks into his pocket.

    What an ambulance chaser would NEVER want would be to see this inside a court. Take this to court and ambulance chaser looses, easily.

    Of course, if you think this is such a good case, why don't you take it pro bono, counselor?

    Yeah, that's what I thought.

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 2:30 p.m.

    So the fact are: the child was found 30 minutes earlier.
    The child was found in his own home, Why didn't the police search there first, before searching strangers homes and yes your yard is part of your home? He was not in pursuit of someone fleeing. If the gate was locked could he legally kick it in?
    He discharged his firearm without knowing the background and even though he probably emptied his clip (seems to be policy also) someone could have been shot by his careless action, and aren't they supposed to exercise care?

    Also since when have they ever said it wasn't justified, I can only think of once in the last dozen years.

    Not a cop hater, my brother is a state trooper, insight into the "culture of the police" would tell you that they protect their own.

    Shoot a Cop Dog and they charge you with murder, Cop shoots your dog, for defending your house, it's apparently OK.

  • Mediamaid Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 5, 2014 10:52 p.m.

    I have yet to hear "facts pertaining to the case" that may have an significant impact "final" case decision. This fact I speak of and still seek is that of the height of the gate to which a child of three years old can or cannot physically reach to open. I have seen insightfulness like this escape officers time and again as recent as ten days ago. Also, are police compassionate to the surrounding circumstances to render at least heartfelt condolence "supported" with an offering of like say a "police dog"?

  • Jimmyisliberal Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 6, 2014 2:04 p.m.

    @Mark...Ivy League educated lawyers are not interested with "ambulance chasing" my friend. However, we are very interested in spreading intellect to those in dire need of it. Remind me again where you obtained your law degree? In closing. Obtaining facts prior to making any nonsensical comments is an absolute in my profession. You might want to begin applying this philosophy prior to any more elementary posts.

  • Go Big Blue!!! Bountiful, UT
    Aug. 12, 2014 9:13 p.m.

    Pretty much every fenced in yard in my neighborhood has a dog in it. To not be better prepared to meet a dog is weak sauce.