Dog owners question action by Marshall police

Thursday, July 29, 2010

A Marshall family seeks answers after an incident that resulted in Marshall Police killing their dog.

Family members and witnesses to the shooting say Marshall Police Sgt. Nathan Offield say they didn't think the dog needed to be shot.

Nine-year-old Joyce Riedel said she has had bad dreams since the July 9 shooting of the brown and white boxer named Paca.

"There were two shots," Joyce said. "I thought they shot my dog too."

After the incident, Joyce said she and a friend picked up the spent shotgun shells near where the grass was stained with the blood of the dog they occasionally played with.

"He was always friendly and playful," she said.

However, according to the police report, that is not the call police received when they were notified of an aggressive dog. Police responded to reports of an aggressive pit bull.

Joyce's mother Angela Riedel made the initial complaint.

"The dog was in back fighting with my dog," Riedel said.

Both Riedel and Joyce said they couldn't be sure the dogs weren't playing, but it seemed more aggressive and louder than what they thought was a normal level of play.

Riedel said some of the little kids she babysits were scared of the big dog.

"I didn't realize that dog was from around here," she said.

Just before the officers arrive, Paca had wandered from the back of Riedel's home to just outside the front door where it was barking at the kids on the other side of the screen door.

At this point in the story, witnesses to the incident and police tell different stories.

According to the police report, Offield and another officer arrived on scene to see Paca growling and barking as it chased a 15-year-old boy into the Riedel residence. The report makes it seem as if the boy narrowly escaped before turning to attack the police officers.

The boy "was able to make it into the front door of 623 E. Vest before the dog caught him," according to the report. "The dog then turned his attention to Sgt. Offield. The dog lunged at Sgt. Offield barking and growling. Sgt. Offield shot the dog with the shotgun assigned to his patrol vehicle."

Riedel said that isn't the way she thought it happened.

The boy arrived at her house and walked toward the dog when the police officers shouted at him to get in the house, Riedel said.

"They were getting out of their cars and yelled at (him) to get in the house," she said. "It lunged at (the boy) and the cops took that as a vicious lunge. I don't think they realized it was a playful lunge."

Riedel said the dog then turned and walked into the space between her house and house next door. It was there, roughly an even distance between the two houses, that the first shot was fired.

The first shot hit the dog in the butt/hindquarters region from behind according to descriptions by Riedel and the William Lucas, brother to Paca's owner. That shot occurred with the officer standing about 10 feet from Paca, between the street and the houses.

Lucas said he though officers shot the dog from behind due to the wounds. Marshall Police Chief Mike Donnell said he believe Lucas was mistaking entry and exit wounds.

"A lot of time people don't see the entry wound," he said. "They see the exit wound because that's where the blood is."

The geographical location of the second shot is disputed. Riedel was comforting children upset by the shooting and thought it took place near the same spot. However, when Lucas arrived on scene after the shooting, he said the dog's body was lying near the back of the houses.

"It looked like he was trying to come home," Lucas said. "They didn't need to kill him."

According to the police report, Offield shot the dog the second time because it was severely injured and appeared to be suffering.

After the shooting, Riedel said the Marshall animal control officer drove by.

"I don't know why they needed to kill the dog," she said. "I just thought animal control would pick him up until the family came and got him."

Lucas agreed. "If everybody was inside, like they said, there was no threat to anybody -- even if the dog was vicious. Why not let animal control handle it? Isn't that why we have them?"

Donnell said that once an animal has been deemed vicious, it doesn't stop being vicious because it was wounded.

"I don't want to be mean, but how do you pick up an aggressive wounded dog," he said. "It is still going to try to bite and fight you. A wounded animal is very dangerous."

"If shooting dogs is their policy, it needs to change," said Crystal Stephenson.

Donnell said he is looking into purchasing a specialized type of gun that fires a net.

"We don't want to go around shooting things," Donnell said. "At the time, the officer shot it because he deemed it a threat to himself and the public."

Donnell also said if someone's dog gets loose, they should call the police at 886-7411 so officers can be alerted.

"That way we can call you or get it back to you," he said.

Contact Pat Nolan at

View 61 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • this is terrible. there was absolutely no reason to kill this defenseless dog. all of the police officers think they are above the law and can kill off god's creatures whenever they feel like it. that is animal cruelty and the police officer should be punished, not that that would ever happen because he's a COP.

    -- Posted by xmarshallx on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 3:26 PM
  • 'smatter fella's, outta pepper spray?

    Now they got somethin' to talk about over beers.

    I don't know. I wasn't there. Very unfortunate all the way around. Poor doggie.

    -- Posted by What the f...... on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 3:32 PM
  • It is always difficult to make decisions when community safety is at hand. I pray that if my children were in a similar situation that the responding police officers would make the same judgement call.

    -- Posted by joboda on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 3:50 PM
  • It seems to me that people will be more hesitant to call the police about a loose dog if they think it may be shot. I know for sure, I would.

    -- Posted by luvthoseowls on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 3:51 PM
  • The officer should be reprimanded and/or suspended with no pay as well as get charged with animal cruelty. They could of called animal control to the scene instead of shooting the poor dog!

    -- Posted by tyota on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 3:54 PM
  • We have a dog, so I sure sympathize with the owners of Paca. It's a tragedy to lose a pet, especially when it might have been avoided. But I'm with Joboda, too. I also have kids, and I guess I would rather see a dog lose his life unnecessarily than take the chance a kid might get bitten or mauled. Even pets we think are trustworthy can suddenly get aggressive in the right situation. I feel sorry for Paca's family, but I feel sorry for the officer, too. I bet he didn't want to shoot the dog and thought it was necessary. Bad deal all around.

    -- Posted by taxedpayer on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 4:24 PM
  • very sad indeed. all the way around this is a sad story with a sad ending. The story says the 15 year old retuned home and was walking towards the dog. 15 years old i think he would be able to determain if the dog was aggresive.He obviously did not feel a threat from the dog. and why the hell would the officer use a shotgun? and the article says he hit the rear end at ten feet,dummy,vital organs are in the head and center mass. I thought our taxes went to "Animal Control" for such a senerio. Not animal killer. Dont we have a dog handler on the dept? wouldnt a tazed dog be better than a dead dog? my heart goes out to the family of the lost dog,and i hope Officer Offield honestly felt there was a threat and not just wanting to fire his big gun with Barney Fife syndrome.

    -- Posted by star1701 on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 4:57 PM
    Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
    There are conflicting reports of where the dog was hit. One of the owners thought it was hit in the rear. The police say it was facing the officer when it was hit and the wounds observed by owners could have been exit wounds. The dog's body has already been buried, and as I understand, it was not taken to a vet for examination prior to burial.
  • Hell ya, I agree, I would much rather my child or your child get mauled by a dog that an irresponsible owner allowed to roam the streets. We surely don't want an officer to destroy the animal prior to seeing it actually draw blood, wait a minute....that really doesn't make sense. Lets see, he got a call of a vicious dog who upon his arrival, charged him in an aggressive manner...nighty night! And why a shotgun? Because they work better. Sad the dog had to go, but really, blame the owner.

    -- Posted by MHCFAN on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 6:47 PM
  • I definately think the officer acted in the only way he could. He was called to the residence because an aggressive dog was fighting with the residents dog in the back yard. In this kind of situation the nearest officer is going to respond, rather than have people sit around waiting for animal control. When that officer gets there and the dog is growling and barking at children through a screen door in an agressive manner, then lunges at another person, and turns and lunges at the officer, what else could he do? Is he supposed to wait and see if the dog bites his hand off before he shoots? As for the comment about tasering the dog? Are you kidding? An aggressive dog is coming at you and you're supposed to taser it? The taser is in your hand, which means you'll be attacked before you can taser it!!!!!! This is an unfortunate situation, but when you have an animal, that animal is you're responsiblity. If it's loose and appears aggressive, action has to be taken. The safety of others is going to come first. If my child was hurt because of a dog that was acting aggressive but others thought the dog was just playing and protected the dog over my child, there would be hell to pay!!!!!

    -- Posted by Reader101 on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 7:17 PM
  • If a shot gun was used the wounds would not really have an exit pattern, shot stays in an animals body in the muscle, bone and organs. so if wounds were seen on its hind quarters from a shotgun they would have been entry wounds. If dog was not killed at 10ft by a shotgun more that likely it was running away so the hind quarter wounds mentioned.

    Either way sorry for the dog and hope officer did not over react. and really glad no childern were injured either by dog or shot shell pellets in a residential area.

    -- Posted by drop555 on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 7:57 PM
  • yes i have a small dog and it got out and called the police he got out of the house if you do that then thay give you a ticket for allowing your dog at large in most cases thats not true i was out chasing him and trying to find him thay even had him at the pound his tags were on him and thay put him as a stray even though i called them and let them know i was looking for him thay didnt care that it was my baby sons dog so now when he gets out witch is far inbetween i go find him with out asking any of them for help because im disabled and cant afored there tickets

    -- Posted by angel1968 on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 8:17 PM
  • A complete investigation of this incident should be the next step in determining action to be taken. On the surface it appears to be very poor judgment on the part of the police officer. But to give the officer the benefit of the doubt, we should review all the evidence before judgment.Boxer dogs are generally very friendly and playful, unless trained otherwise.

    -- Posted by izaak on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 8:59 PM
  • If the dog was lunging at the officer in an agressive manner, shouldn't there have been a clean shot to where the dog would have died on the spot INSTEAD of being between the houses in the BACK? 10 feet away isn't really that far when speaking of a dog trying to attack you, unless the officer has REALLY bad aim, the dog should have died 10 feet away from the officer, no? The person who called the cops said herself she couldn't tell if the dogs were fighting or playing, and said that the dog was not attacking the kids or the 15 year old. I find it odd that the officer has a different story than the person who called the cops..She has nothing to gain as she's not the owner, so why lie? Not saying the officer is a liar, just questioning... Also, pulling out a shotgun in a residential neighborhood is just as dangerous as an aggressive dog. I'm glad nobody was hurt, and I'm especially glad none of the children were hurt.

    -- Posted by MG2008 on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 10:00 PM
  • exit wound...shotgun...I ain't buyin it. The dog was running away.

    -- Posted by outsider on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 10:13 PM

    -- Posted by wheresthelove on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 10:31 PM
  • I remember hearing a story about another "vicious" dog that was terrorizing people from its yard. The police came, took the dog they could get (not the "vicious" dog), and left no note or explanation for the owner. The dog's owner comes home and one of his dogs is missing. She was taken to the animal shelter and the owner was given a ticket even though the police took the dog out of the yard (remember, wrong dog). I think the officers could use some training on dealing with situations involving animals or simply leave it up to animal control to make the call. I'm sorry the dog is gone, but it shouldn't have been allowed to run free like that. This is what could happen (not what should). And remember, don't forget to have your pets spayed and neutered!

    -- Posted by jayhawk on Thu, Jul 29, 2010, at 11:08 PM
  • And this event happened in the town that claims "Jim the Wonder Dog" as a local treasure. Hmm. Maybe the Marshall City Council could buy some episodes of "The Dog Whisperer" for the MPD to watch. Let's face it, it is highly unlikely (short of another "Jim the Wonder Dog") that canines will anytime soon be learning to communicate with people in human modes of communication. Maybe some doggy behavior training is in order for the MPD, given how this incident played out. Of course, a properly cared for and trained dog is the ultimate solution.

    -- Posted by Ray on Fri, Jul 30, 2010, at 5:59 AM
  • I wonder how Paca would have responded if the officers had placed a few beef sticks in his path, instead of pumping a couple of 12 gauge rounds into him? Hmm. In human standoff situations in L.A., police are trained to negotiate and draw out the situation over time and defuse it - if life safety is not an over-riding issue. Would a few beef sticks have defrayed this contentious dog vs. cop situation until those more qualified to ameliorate the situation (animal control officers) arrived?

    -- Posted by Ray on Fri, Jul 30, 2010, at 6:16 AM
  • Dogs get loose from time to time no matter what the owner does to try and keep them tied up or fenced in. Why didn't they take it to a Vet to get the truth (was it running away or attacking) if there wasn't anything to hide?

    -- Posted by mosthonest1 on Fri, Jul 30, 2010, at 8:25 AM
  • Doggone it!!! Good work, MPD!!!

    -- Posted by Takealoadoff on Fri, Jul 30, 2010, at 8:26 AM
  • My first and foremost comment is people need to learn the difference among the animal breeds...a boxer resembles a pit bull, but does not look like one, OK? I have owned both in the past and know there is a big difference, except for the fact they both think their families are the people who love and play with them. I do not accept the fact the dog needed to be shot....I do accept the fact the officer made a judgement call and it may very well have been the wrong call in this occasion. Any dog will consider a stranger a threat, and I think this dog considered the officer more of a threat to his home than the dog was to the neighborhood.

    If nothing else let this show us to alert our neighbors that we have a pet, and introduce them to said in the future a simple phone call may clear up the problem without needless deaths of animals.

    And, a few lessons on dog breeds, and dog behaviors couldn't hurt either.

    -- Posted by cooahla on Fri, Jul 30, 2010, at 9:02 AM
  • I have a boxer, wonderful freindly overgrown puppy she is! She is fenced in and on a long chain so not to bother my neighbors, occasionally we let her run in the yard when we are out with her and sometimes she gets out of the fence, we catch her ourselves..Thank goodness! I haven't heard of too many aggressive boxers, not that they don't exist, just not something you hear of. When the police get a call of a loose dog why don't they immediatly dispatch animal control, we have that department specifically to deal with animals! I'm almost afraid to call any law anymore, it seems to back fire, you get tased to death, family pet killed, I understand law officers being a little jumpy this day and age with how crazy the world is but maybe they should have some therapy or training to keep them off edge and not so over aggressive.

    -- Posted by MBGAL on Fri, Jul 30, 2010, at 10:05 AM
  • My heart goes out to the Reidel family at the loss of their pet. Sometimes dogs get lose and run into my back yard where my dog is on occassion. Does that mean the MPD is going to shoot my dog because she barks and growls at another dog? I believe that I had seen Paca before. This incident is troubling for me and I hope and pray that the Reidel girl can find closure!

    If Paca has been buried already, maybe he should be exhumed so that "real truth" answers can be confirmed. And Sgt. Offheld should think before he pulls out a shotgun in a families back yard! Maybe he should have used "blanks". When an officer shoots a person there is an investigation! A thorough investigation is in order here too!

    Next time let the Animal control officer or a representative from the animal league handle this kind of situation. Maybe if he has a big dog, he should consider how he would feel if someone shot his pet because the dog lunged forward which many dogs often do with their owners.

    Our pets should not be the target of "trigger happy" cops!

    -- Posted by farmer'sgranddaughter on Fri, Jul 30, 2010, at 11:42 AM
    Response by Pat Nolan/Staff writer:
    Paca didn't belong to the Riedels. Riedel is the person who called in the complaint. Paca belonged to William Lucas and Crystal Stephenson.
  • A few years back the police killed my daughters dog. It was in her backyard and was laying down. Earlier a black dog had jumped on a jogger (but did not bite) and when they came out to investigate they saw my daughter's dog (also black) laying in the backyard. When her dog was approached it got up and started moving away. The officer made a judgement call, that this dog that was going to escape from him was this vicious dog that had jumped on someone and was trying to run. He had to shoot it twice to kill it. This dog was the most passive dog and would walk away from people. The then police chief said that it was a mistake but she should not have let it be in her yard not chained up. They would not let her have the body or it's collar as it was evidence. We were heartbroken. And we wonder why that there is not a lot of respect for some police officers.

    -- Posted by jebbs on Fri, Jul 30, 2010, at 11:50 AM
  • The situation is bad, that's for sure. But dishonesty isn't helping. Anyone that's remotely familiar with firearms is not buying the exit wound story. On top of that, the dog wasn't even the same breed as in the original call. Something doesn't add up.

    With that in mind, people need to focus their energy into getting what we can out of the situation. Pointing fingers, dishonesty, and inflammatory comments from both sides of the fence do not do anything to rectify the situation or help keep similar situations from happening in the future, and that should now be the goal.

    -- Posted by thebirdman on Fri, Jul 30, 2010, at 11:53 AM
  • Shoot first ask Questions later >=/

    -- Posted by S&S okla on Fri, Jul 30, 2010, at 12:07 PM
  • I presently don't have a dog, but have owned: a Great Dane, a Dalmation, a Doberman/Golden Retriever cross, and a Rat Terrier. The Rat Terrier was the smallest and the most ferocious. Little dogs are often the meanest, nastiest, most feroucious and yes, most likely to bite, IMO. Serously, how would the MPD respond to a report of a vicious Chiuaua?

    Most Boxer's I've met have been nice dogs, but all dogs I've met are territorial. In other words, a dogs bark, or lunge often merely means, "Don't crowd me! Get out of my face! Get out of my territory!" That's why most dogs are considered "watch dogs." They're very territorial creatures. And "yes," maybe the dog considers some territory to be its, when it isn't. Shouldn't humans take into consideration that humans have the reasoning powers to figure that out and dogs don't and reason accordingly short of killing the dog?

    -- Posted by Ray on Fri, Jul 30, 2010, at 4:20 PM
  • Considering the general dog situation in Marshall, I can't really blame officers for shooting a dog that appeared to be attacking someone.

    I have seen numerous strays or at least wandering dogs in town and most have not been friendly but looked very suspicious or acted aggressively.

    I was even attacked by a pack of four medium sized dogs while I was minding my own business walking down the street, fortunately I eventually scared them off without injury. I was also attacked by a small dog running out of a house. The owner stated "don't worry he won't bite" but the dog leaped and snapped at my arms.

    If anyone is to blame in this situation, its those of you in town that allow your animals to wander outside of your own yard. I'm sure the police are aware that there are actually dangerous dogs wandering loose in town. I would have been very happy to have the police shoot one of the dogs that attacked me. Had a child faced the same situations I did they could have gotten badly hurt. Its tragic if someone's pet is shot by mistake, but the overall situation in town makes it all the more likely to happen.

    -- Posted by Akura on Fri, Jul 30, 2010, at 6:26 PM
  • my thoughts for what they matter:

    1. So some of you are saying that if a dog is charging you and you are holding any weapon, even a shotgun, that you would have perfect aim and be able to shot a running, leaping animal that is at most 30" tall, about 8-10" wide at its shoulders or if it was broadside of you about 36-40" long? LOL you apparently have never tried to shot a moving target, let alone an animal that you really dont want to shoot and one that is charging at you, supposedly.

    2. Another possible solution from a poster was to throw out beef sticks? you really think that you would have time to throw a beef stick or two in an EMERGENT situation, one where you were called to the scene of a dog that was possibly attacking kids? Even if you had unwrapped beef sticks in a ziplock bag, would you think to throw the beef stick instead of drawing a weapon for protection? or do you think that an angered, vicious dog is simply going to just stop and eat a beef stick instead of continuing on its path to attack? Come one USE COMMON SENSE.

    3. A letter written in the paper about the incident, based on witness statements after the fact are not so reliable.... stats show that if 20 people see the exact same accident, there will be almost always 20 different variations AND that does not even factor in the guilt in this case by the person who called in the report to 911 once the dog was shot, the anger from the dog owner and other emotions that allow a person to ignore the real facts.

    4. Many of you are just assuming that the officer set out to take the opportunity to play with his weapon and had a pre-conceived idea that he wanted to shoot an animal for any reason just so he could shoot something, anything... that is a sad view of life that you have.

    5. Shotguns can shot a slug instead of pellets... not saying this one did.... However, if you have seen all of the shotgun wounds that I have seen had only very small amounts of blood oozing from the small holes and if a shotgun was discharged close enough to the target, then the exit wound would jagged bleeding alot... I have seen people shot at point blank range with shotguns and I have seen them shot at a distance and none of the entrance wounds are anything more than a pellet sized hole with very little blood coming out.

    Again, the emotional response is simply a knee jerk response to this situation and any one of you would have cried for the head of the police officer if a child was mauled while the officer stopped, not stopped the dog, and instead waited for the dog catchern or delayed response to toss out a beef stick to 'see if the dog might possibly stop'

    -- Posted by mrxray on Sat, Jul 31, 2010, at 1:55 AM
  • Ray... so if it was your child at risk you would demand that the police officer wait until he can determine if the dog is simply trying to relay a message to the humans that 'this is his territory' instead of protecting your child?

    -- Posted by mrxray on Sat, Jul 31, 2010, at 1:57 AM
  • well I have a pitbull and they dont look like no boxer!! If the cops are going to go around and shoot peoples dogs then maybe they shouldnt carry guns either! Sounds like to me the officer was gun happy plus did it in front of kids.. How would he like it if someone shot his animal infront of his kids or family.. They have too big of a power trip! Sorry for your lose pacas family

    -- Posted by pittgirl on Sat, Jul 31, 2010, at 2:50 AM
  • "Ray... so if it was your child at risk you would demand that the police officer wait until he can determine if the dog is simply trying to relay a message to the humans that 'this is his territory' instead of protecting your child?"

    I can't really answer that as I've never had a child at risk from a dog, and have never seen one at risk from a dog. To tell you the truth, I'm a lot more worried about kids at risk from trigger happy cops, than I'm worried about kids being at risk from territorial dogs. From what I read in the newspapers and see on TV news, I strongly suspect there are more kids killed by cops every year in the U.S. than there are kids killed by dogs. Dogs don't pack 12 gauge shotguns.

    Apparently you've missed the parts in my posts where I've been saying "training" would likely have been very worthwhile for the dogs and the cops and may well have eliminated the need for deadly force in the first place. This incident would seem to indicate that MPD is not trained to confront dogs in a "red zone" state with anything other than deadly force. Training for dogs and cops still is very worthwhile. By all means, let me emphasize that again to all dog owners and cops in Marshall and beyond. Understanding even a few of the basics of dog behavior can go a long way when confronting any dog. You'd be amazed at what you can learn about dog behavior by just watching the "Dog Whisperer" vid's available on Youtube, IMO,

    -- Posted by Ray on Sat, Jul 31, 2010, at 3:19 PM
  • "The two dogs later in the evening got to our neighbors dog and tore it up, chased their livestock. The next morning those dogs had gone 1/8 mile and within 20 feet of the back porch tore up a little terrier."

    "The dog (Canis lupus familiaris[1]) is a domesticated form of the gray wolf, a member of the Canidae family of the order Carnivora. The term is used for both feral and pet varieties."

    I suspect many Marshallites have heard that feral pigs running wild/returned to the wild, go completely wild in a few generations so it should come as no surprise that dogs (descended from wolves) living in the wild, or at least poorly supervised and cared for by irresponsible owners and living in rural areas (approaching wild), might well do likewise. It is humans who are the higher order beings who are responsible for the care of all lower order animals: horses, cows, dogs, cats, goldfish, whatever (according to the Bible). That's an over obvious statement even for the non-religious, but it's one I believe some humans are prone to neglect, IMO. How man's dominion over animals is to be effectively and humanely administered seems to be a matter of differing opinions not only in Marshall, but the rest of the world, IMO.

    -- Posted by Ray on Sat, Jul 31, 2010, at 3:44 PM
  • There's no mention in this story of any citation having been issued by MPD to the dog owner(s) in this case. If the dog in this case was being so poorly supervised, trained and/or managed that it necessitated the MPD to kill it, shouldn't the dog owner(s) at least have been cited for letting such an allegedly dangerous animal run amok - as has been alleged in this story, citing heavily the MPD report? If no citation was issued to the dog owner(s), it would appear that "someone" may have made a decision that the dog was fully and solely responsible for its own behavior and the dog owner(s) had no responsibility in the matter. Would such a decision by some Marshall authority be acceptable to Marshallites, or would some Marshallites find that disturbing? Hmm.

    -- Posted by Ray on Sat, Jul 31, 2010, at 4:02 PM
    Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
    No citation was issued, according to Police Chief Mike Donnell. He indicated it was legally justified but unnecessary and inappropriate in the circumstances.
  • Have any of you commenting here ever seen a child that has been attacked by a dog? I have! It is not pretty. The emotional scars are the worst part, they never heal.

    Be happy that this is not the story we are reading about.

    I would hate for an animal of mine to go down that way, but if I had animal that was threatening a child the decision is clear what would happen.

    -- Posted by litlmissme on Sun, Aug 1, 2010, at 2:44 PM
  • Ray: Really pessimistic... lol you are assuming a lot... one, that dogs dont kill more kids per year than police (note to be honest you would have to subtract all the children killed by police while committing crimes to get a real number) but you even admit that you were assuming.

    Two, you assume that most police officers are just trigger happy idiots willing to shoot anyone, including a kid, quickly and without consideration. Three, that NONE of the police officers dont have training regarding dog behavior which would include that information that they have learned if they own their own dog.

    four, when assuming that the police officer had another choice you are ignoring the possible fact that the immediately upon his arrival the officer saw a dog acting aggressively and when it lunged toward him he had to act within a second or two. I guarantee you that no matter what training you have, if YOU respond to a call where there is a report of an aggressive dog, then when you get there you see the dog acting the same way and its anger directed toward a child, you would react with the interest of protecting the child and then your self BEFORE you would take the time to stop and evaluate the dog's psychology.

    Again, if the officer would have not done anything and the dog mauled or killed someone then there would be a law suit filed immediately and the city would have been on the hook for millions of dollars and the officer would have been figuratively 'hanged' by this city and soem of you posters.

    When you condemn the officer in this situation without having watched it happen yourself, you are using an emotional response combined with preconcieved hatred of Marshall Police to form your UNEDUCATED opinion that is not based in reality or fact.

    -- Posted by mrxray on Sun, Aug 1, 2010, at 10:27 PM
  • Ray... you really are extremely biased against the PD... lol amusing really, sad even more so.

    the lack of a citation in this case would be pointless since the dog is dead... it is not like the owner can take corrective action and take better care of watching his/her pet.

    -- Posted by mrxray on Sun, Aug 1, 2010, at 10:29 PM
  • Ray: Owner keeps dog on leash or in its own fenced in yard would equal, in this case, a dog that was still alive and no 911 call stating there was an aggressive dog loose possibly harassing kids.

    Why is that when something like this happens that some of you people on this board and every where, for that matter, instantly blame the police or the city, instead of placing the blame on the owner who let the dog run loose, aggressive or not?

    I would think that you would, in an attempt to have honest discourse, would have to agree that the owner was at fault and the officer was merely acting to protect the citizens of this community who he felt were at risk of physical harm.

    -- Posted by mrxray on Sun, Aug 1, 2010, at 10:32 PM
  • "When you condemn the officer in this situation without having watched it happen yourself, you are using an emotional response combined with preconcieved hatred of Marshall Police to form your UNEDUCATED opinion that is not based in reality or fact."


    Where there any kids in immediate danger after they went inside? No. Could the officer have used bear spray/pepper spray? Yep. Based on the call he should have had it in his hand before he exited the patrol car. A dog is a lot smaller than a grizzly bear.

    Mailmen don't carry shotguns for dogs. They carry pepper spray. Why the disparity between mail carriers and MPD?

    I live in bear country and bears are rarely killed so why does MPD think they should routinely be killing dogs when better options are clearly available?

    -- Posted by Ray on Mon, Aug 2, 2010, at 1:05 AM
  • "Ray... you really are extremely biased against the PD... lol amusing really, sad even more so.

    the lack of a citation in this case would be pointless since the dog is dead... it is not like the owner can take corrective action and take better care of watching his/her pet."

    Hogwash. It's called accountability before the law. Perhaps Marshall, MO has no laws regulating responsible dog ownership as is the case where I live. Perhaps it is not against the law to let an aggressive dog out of the yard in Marshall so it can terrorize the neighborhood. Where I live those laws are called "leash laws." Any dog in a public place must be on a leash, or the dog pound will seize the animal. Personally, I think their should be such laws requiring dog owners to be accountable/responsible for their pets malfeasant behavior. If you don't want to be responsible for your dog don't get one. If Marshall doesn't have some form of "leash law" then it's less civilized place than I'd hoped.

    -- Posted by Ray on Mon, Aug 2, 2010, at 1:15 AM
  • "Ray... so if it was your child at risk you would demand that the police officer wait until he can determine if the dog is simply trying to relay a message to the humans that 'this is his territory' instead of protecting your child?"

    You are presenting a hypothetical situation that is not the issue in this case. If the moon were made of green cheese, would you go there and make yourself a grilled cheese sandwich?

    -- Posted by Ray on Mon, Aug 2, 2010, at 1:18 AM
  • "Why is that when something like this happens that some of you people on this board and every where, for that matter, instantly blame the police or the city, instead of placing the blame on the owner who let the dog run loose, aggressive or not?

    I would think that you would, in an attempt to have honest discourse..."

    Apparently, you have a reading comprehension issue, or don't understand that all my emphasis on trained and disciplined pets requires owner involvement, and my questions about possible citation of the owner(s) was an inquiry about owner culpability as well. And as far as honest discourse, it is you who wage ad hominem attacks on me, make things up, call me biased, etc. when I'm merely addressing the issues and asking valid questions.

    -- Posted by Ray on Mon, Aug 2, 2010, at 1:26 AM
  • "And... if you want to bring in the whole Humans over animals religious discussion, would not God frown on the owner for failing to protect the animal that he/she choose to own?"

    Youbetcha - never implied anything different. Is there anything else you'd like to start an argument about that has no foundation?

    -- Posted by Ray on Mon, Aug 2, 2010, at 1:28 AM
  • "Ray... you really are extremely biased against the PD... lol amusing really, sad even more so."

    Ad hominem (personal) attacks usually occur when an opponent in a debate has no meaningful response. Please don't attack the messenger. Bias has nothing to do with it, but if you want to make it about bias and ad hominem attacks, I suggest you look in a mirror and ask yourself, "Why do I feel police behavior in this case is above being questioned, and why do I feel police in this case are above the law (accountability), and why can't I just handle the truth?" How did that feel?

    -- Posted by Ray on Mon, Aug 2, 2010, at 2:39 AM
  • RAY and others, Then why don't we require a complete investigation? If an accident occurred from poor judgment, or insufficient training, the incident could be forgiven with an apology. However,to leave as a justifiable killing will result in many people being unsatisfied. This is a SERIOUS matter and the Police Chief should consider it as such.

    -- Posted by izaak on Mon, Aug 2, 2010, at 11:04 AM
  • Does anyone not understand this dog was dead either way? I mean if an aggressive dog lunges at an officer or children, even if the officer simply captured the dog it would have been taken to the pound and killed for being a dangerous dog. So excessive force or not, the dog was dead either way. I actually applaud the officer for the 2nd shot and not making the dog suffer. I have had pets (dogs & cats) since i was very little, had any of them ever been aggressive with me or with anyone else I would have been the first one to pull an old yeller. Pits, Boxers and Pinchers were bread to fight, that's all they were made to do. Animals all have instincts, including humans, your kids in danger you will do things you've never in your life though about doing no matter how dumb or insane. A dog feels threatend or nervous it will kick in insticts, and those dogs instincts are to attack and fight, once that kicks in there is no going back! So while it might have been exsesive force to shoot the dog, it was going to die either way, so really all this complaining is for nothing.

    -- Posted by oldschool17 on Mon, Aug 2, 2010, at 11:06 AM
  • Izaak, this is no where near a serious police issue! The same paper has a story about a man on trial for the rape and molestation of his own children, as well as forcing them to kill people. We had a priest a few months back arrested for molesting kids. I would consider those serious crimes, are you seriously saying the death of a dog is equal to that of those two stories? Because personaly I consider this just as important and serious as jay walking or blowing grass into the streets!!!!

    -- Posted by oldschool17 on Mon, Aug 2, 2010, at 11:18 AM
  • "...even if the officer simply captured the dog it would have been taken to the pound and killed for being a dangerous dog. So excessive force or not, the dog was dead either way."

    If true, then what a primitive place Marshall is.

    "A dog feels threatend or nervous it will kick in insticts, and those dogs instincts are to attack and fight, once that kicks in there is no going back!"

    Really, many, many dogs where I live feel threatened, kick into attack/fight, then charge, then are stopped by their owners tall strong (dog proof) fence. After the people walk by the dog walks off (goes back) and lies down. Many homeowners call them watch dogs and the police recommend homeowners get them to prevent crime.

    "Because personaly I consider this just as important and serious as jay walking or blowing grass into the streets!!!!"

    Really? Do you blow your grass into the street by discharging a shotgun at it, while children are watching???

    -- Posted by Ray on Mon, Aug 2, 2010, at 11:34 AM
  • this is just another reason why i will never live in or around marshall again.

    -- Posted by once_removed on Tue, Aug 3, 2010, at 7:55 AM
  • To Oldschool17, I do feel sorry for you if in fact you think the death of a child's pet is no more important than jaywalking. Very sad.

    -- Posted by izaak on Wed, Aug 4, 2010, at 9:54 AM
  • Izaak, it was just a freaking dog! The point is we are talking about a dog, not a person or any crime what so ever. Simply put, we are talking about a dead dog. If this was a kid's pet (story doesn't say, the kids in the story where of the other dog) than get the kid a new dog and go on down the road.

    -- Posted by oldschool17 on Wed, Aug 4, 2010, at 12:50 PM
  • just a freaking dog????another reason i am glad i don't live in marshall any more.

    -- Posted by once_removed on Thu, Aug 5, 2010, at 7:27 PM
  • Ray apparently you have not seen a grown man or a crazed animal ignore pepper spray... LOL try again

    -- Posted by mrxray on Sat, Aug 7, 2010, at 12:19 AM
  • Ray the hypothetical situation was the reality. you cannot have it both ways. you were not there, did not see the situation, as I did not.

    All you can go on is biased opinions.

    -- Posted by mrxray on Sat, Aug 7, 2010, at 12:21 AM
  • I know... it is does not matter if the "humane' tactics might fail...

    I think the situation would still have to have common sense. No two situations are the same and you have to wait and see once you get to the scene and make a best guess, but instaneous decision... save a child or save a dog?

    I guess the dog wins with some of you.

    -- Posted by mrxray on Sat, Aug 7, 2010, at 12:24 AM
  • Its a dog people, chill out.

    -- Posted by mtownresident on Mon, Aug 9, 2010, at 4:31 PM
  • "Ray apparently you have not seen a grown man or a crazed animal ignore pepper spray... LOL try again"

    You again accuse me based on another assumption with no basis in fact. You're wrong, but at least you're consistent. I've ever known of a "grown man" not responding to the sprays police carry on their belt, who weren't high on drugs. Are dogs in Marshall now taking methamphetamines?

    -- Posted by Ray on Tue, Aug 10, 2010, at 10:07 AM
  • "Ray the hypothetical situation was the reality. you cannot have it both ways. you were not there, did not see the situation, as I did not.

    All you can go on is biased opinions."

    Apparently, in your world no one is allowed to examine and analyze the information surrounding an event for its veracity. You accuse me of bias, but that's just another personal attack without merit, or foundation. I'm a little surprised your abuse is tolerated. I know I'm tired of your abuse. You've thrown a lot of irresponsible statements, but none have stuck.

    -- Posted by Ray on Tue, Aug 10, 2010, at 10:13 AM
  • "Its a dog people, chill out"

    It's also police discharge of a firearm in a residential area with kids in close proximity. Some jurisdictions require police officers to file a detailed report (explanation) every time a gun is drawn from it's holster, or rack, let alone fired. What policies and/or procedures are in place detailing MDP's permitted use of firearms? Are those policies and procedures (if any) available for public and journalistic reading? Where all of MPD's policies and procedures regarding police use of firearms complied with (if policies or procedures exist)? And let me answer Mxray before he spews forth another ad hominem attack on my person alleging bias, "That's not bias. In law, it's called interrogatory."

    -- Posted by Ray on Tue, Aug 10, 2010, at 10:25 AM
  • Ray, a police report was filed if you read the article. I'm also sure (no i don't know for a fact) that some kind of report was filed based off an officer firing his weapon. Now the officer did this in order to protcet himself & children from a dangerous dog (the mother herself thought it was dangerous enough to contact police!). Now again, it's just a stupid dog, I know some people treat dogs like humans but they aren't. Dogs are around because of man, we bread them from wolves thousands of years ago, so they aren't even one of god's baby creatures, we made them ourselves. Some worked out great (retreivers) some we screwed up on (pits), but they are man made. Dog is simply a dog, this was dangerous so it needed to be killed, rather by shotgun or needle makes no difference to me, because I gurantee a dog endagers my child it will be dead no questions asked.

    -- Posted by oldschool17 on Tue, Aug 10, 2010, at 11:18 AM
  • Oldschool:

    Yes, certainly I read the news article and that's why I'm asking the questions I do. Yes, I understand how dogs have been domesticated and bred, thanks to my four years of agricultural voc. ed. classes and FFA in Saline County schools. You say it (the dog) needed to be killed and I say that's highly debatable. Obviously, we disagree. Okay, no need of beating a dead horse - or dead dog.

    I've posted a number of links to "Dog Whisperer" videos. Anyone familiar with the contents of Caesar Milan's shows, and his training methods, knows that properly trained and cared for dogs indeed don't need killing and indeed are quite unique creatures in God's design (not necessarily simplistic). I do believe that the vast majority of domesticated breeds of dogs are fully capable of being trained to behave properly around humans, and that this dog's death in Marshall could have been prevented on a number of levels that I've already explained.

    I certainly wouldn't go so far as to try and domesticate wild bears, or other wild creatures, but it appears some people, at least, think they have an understanding that allows them to do that.

    ...and on a wilder note, others think they are capable of peacefully coexisting with them (bears). That's a stretch, even I (and the State of Alaska) aren't ready to make.

    -- Posted by Ray on Tue, Aug 10, 2010, at 3:47 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: