Facebook
Twitter
RSS![[Masthead]](http://www.marshallnews.com/images/nameplate.png)
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (42)
After receiving a call regarding an aggressive dog, Marshall Police responded. The first officer on the scene, Christopher Chamberlin, was exiting his patrol car when he saw the dog barking and chasing three small children. According to the police report, he drew his weapon and ran to intercept the dog. The children were rescued by an adult woman and taken inside a residence on the 300 block of S. Lafayette.
The dog broke off the chase and return to a sit on a porch. Chamberlin returned to his vehicle and picked up a shotgun "in case deadly force became required," according to the report.
Officer Tom Ryburn arrived and the two police officers kept the animal corralled on the porch while they attempted to locate the owner.
Katie Christopherson called the report in to police. At the time of the report, she said she had been walking down the street and the dog came off of the porch and chased her.
The dog was described as a full-grown white pit bull with a reputation for aggressive actions.
"He has been very aggressive in the past," Christopher said, adding that another resident refused to even walk his small dog in that direction.
Chamberlin and Ryburn kept the dog contained on the porch for almost two hours, Christopherson said.
At one point during the incident, every Marshall Police officer on duty was on South Lafayette dealing with the dog. MPD called in the Sheriff's office to help locate the owner.
The dog jumped down from the porch to the south side of the house and Chamberlin and Ryburn circled to keep the animal from running off. Ryburn was holding a "catch pole," which is a pole with a looped rope or cable at the end to slip over an animal's head.
The barking and growling dog charged at Ryburn. Chamberlin fired his 12-gauge.
Witnesses like Christopherson corroborated the police report. Christopherson said," I think they did everything they could. They were here a long time."
After the incident, officers photographed the scene and took statements from witnesses. During the last dog shooting, officers took a lot of criticism from citizens for a lack of documentation of the incident.
From January 2010 through Monday, Aug. 30, Marshall Police have responded to 759 animal calls with two dogs having to be put down. In comparisons, MPD's 911 calls through Monday, Aug. 30 only tallied 643.
Chief Mike Donnell said this was a situation where the net launchers he has requested might have made a difference in the outcome.
Contact Pat Nolan at
Related Stories
MPD seeks non-lethal animal control tools
http://www.marshallnews.com/story/165474...
Dog owners question action by Marshall police
Comments
These officers did what they needed to do. Everyone needs to quit talking crap and takingone side or the other. Yes it was a Pit bull.. That is not why they shot it. Pit Bulls can be GREAT family dogs and YES IT IS HOW YOU RAISE THEM!!! Come on people. Come together for once on something......
Good Job MPD for protecting our fellow citizens.
Elton and Laura:
They WERE prepared:
Mean dog + charge policeman =
dead dog.
Punish the people who make dogs mean, not the breed. I think breed-specific bans are a load of bull muffins!
As for the police, aren't they supposed to be prepared? Obviously not!
And also.....The whole net gun for dogs, They dont shoot a dog unless it is charging or chasing someone, its not for fun its for protection. If a dog is shot there is a good reason, they dont just have "dog season" as most of you are hinting at. Im sorry but if a dog charged at me and I had the means to stop it and it was legal I would do the same. If a dog does not charge if its a playful dog and there is no intent to harm from the dog, they will do as one reader suggested, put it in a kennel until the owner can be found. But the dog in question has apparently been found "mean" or "vicious" on more than one occasion and I quote, "The right thing was done, one neighbor was too scared of this dog to walk his own dog by the house, sounds like a dog that has had this coming for a long time."- oldschool17. And as for the mother who had to get her kids inside away from the dog, Im sure she is grateful for what was done also. Now her children can play outside without fear of a dog. Im not saying all dogs are bad as per my last sentence the way it sounded because they are not, BUT there are some that are hints the dog in question. Really? Come on people, all of the people who have posted about, "oh, there are better ways" or "it was cruel and there were other ways to handle this, Think about what you would have done. Would u honestly walk up to the dog, whom was trying to bite or maul as some cases states, and get the little kind gentle voice and say, "awww come here puppy!" I THINK NOT. Put yourself in their shoes, Oh and BTW there was citizens helping to so whats with all the criticism toward the cops? there is none for the concerned citizens who were helping? No because, you find that as a good deed and not as a threat to animals when they were also detaining the dog so it could not hurt any one! Like I said, put yourself in their shoes, would u have done something different and risk being bit?
ummmhmmm,
Perhaps you should focus on the story's topic of discussion.
Having lived in and paid taxes to Marshall for nearly forty years, I am glad that my presence was not needed by MPD at this incident. I am a taxpayer and citizen, but I am most definitely NOT a police officer or animal control officer. Had it been me that was called upon to handle this incident, I fear that most folks would have been sorely disappointed, and not a few would have been literally scared to death.
However, I am proud of, and quite thankful for, those officers that serve the public trust at MPD, as well as our other local law enforcement officials that responded. They are the ones that are trained and paid to make those split second decisions that I find it somewhere between difficult and impossible to make. Necessary decisions, to be sure, and decisions that MUST be made every day to insure the safety of every person in Marshall. But, still, decisions I would rather not have to make.
Having made the decision to use lethal force in this incident, should this officer second guess his decision? Absolutely not. As citizens and taxpayers, should any of us second guess his decision in this incident? Absolutely not. I feel quite sure that the decision made at the time was the right decision. I fully trust the officer made his decision based on all of the facts available to him at the moment. Not for one second will I believe that he acted rashly, dangerously, or without cause in this incident. Should this officer, or any other officers present be chided, berated, or cajoled about the outcome of the incident? Again, absolutely not.
Should the officers involved receive the support (and counselling, if needed) from MPD and the citizens of Marshall that they justly deserve? You better believe it! If we are willing to authorize and empower these good men and women to protect our lives and property, then we certainly must be willing to stand by them when they perform those jobs and make the tough decisions the rest of us hope we never are called upon to make.
Who said anything about guns being the answer? Who cares, the were the solution and thats all that matters.
Ok so in response to proudmarshallite, once a dog is deemed vicious, that's it! what if it would have been one of your kids it was chasing would u feel the same way? Besides if animal control would have been involved the dog would have been euthanize. So either way the dog would have been put down. Plain and simple, and if they had the nets the dog would have been taken by animal control and killed, so either way the dog was vicious and would have been killed. I know i'm being repetitive BUT do u get the point yet? They did their job and tried to detain the dog until they could find the owner whom by the way was apparently MIA. If you know your dog is viscous keep it in doors! Sorry but thats the way I feel. When people avoid even walking by your house because of your dog *that should tell you something*!!!!
Apparently my earlier comment was interpreted as..... personal attacks, are disrespectful, threatening, obscene or in other ways objectionable.
Guns are not the answer!!!!
Buy a net? get them more shotgun shells
It's becoming apparent with this second dog shotgunning, that Marshall is just a small town without the time, money or skill resources necessary to deal with "red zone dogs" (and their apparently irresponsible owners), in any way other than shooting the dog.
Perhaps Marshall should consider an ordinance, requiring people who choose to have aggressive dogs to build fences that will contain them, and "yes," that might well include a concrete base to the fence so the dog couldn't dig out. Too expensive? So what? Why should Marshall taxpayers have to pay for the resource expenditures necessary to ameliorate these physically dangerous dog situations? Put the financial burden on the people who own these dogs. Require them to take precautions and preventive measures, IMO. And while your at it, how about some hefty fines for owners of dogs that require these kinds of police responses? Whose fault is anyway, that an apparently "red zone dog" is running loose - the dog's, or the dog owner's?
Lastly "yes," "red zone dogs" can be rehabilitated and their owners trained, according to Caesar Milan, Dog Whisperer, but apparently Marshall doesn't have those resources.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfijzsKvV...
This whole shotgunning of dogs scenario is really ironic in a town that seeks to honor a dog as a revered, local treasure and symbol of "higher" animal/human connection. Jim must be rolling over in his grave.
Here in Wisconsin, I recently read reports of a 4-year-old girl mauled to death by a dog. At the request of the owner, the dog will be euthanized this week.
It's always sad when any animal encounter has to end with the animal being shot - but in this instance (and any other instance), I would far rather hear of the dog being shot, than of a child (or other person) being hurt so badly that they bled to death before help could come for them.
Marshall PD did the only thing - the right thing - that they could in this situation and I applaud them for helping to keep Marshall safe.
No one has yet mentioned the guy they call the dog whisperer. Are there any more like him around close enough to call in if something similar happens in the future? What would he have done? I say the real odds would favor him being bit.
For those that suggest using a net to throw on the dog, contact MPD and maybe you can sign a waiver or provide your own insurance for such a ridiculous attempt. There is a solution that apparently escapes some. It's called a shotgun, and if applied properly as it apparently was in this case, does the job just fine. Oh, and for prevention, it's called keeping your dogs put up where they're not allowed to be aggressive towards other members of our community. And if that doesn't work for ya.........move! But good look finding a police department that handles it any other way.
I am happy no children or innocent people were hurt by an aggressive dog.
As far as the net goes, great concept but I wouldn't put sway the shotgun until the animal is netted and secured.
I would hate to hear that a police officer had been injured by a dog while attempting to net it or worse yet that the animal escaped and then hurt a small child or innocent person.
Just my opinion.
Thank you for the update.
Either the capture nets need to get here soon, or other solutions need to be come up with. The situation is going downhill fast. If need be, improvise a temporary net. May not be perfect, but would do in a pinch!
As an animal lover, I never like to see any animal shot, but, sometimes an animal is more of a risk than it's life is worth. The MPD was very patient in trying to find another resolution in this case. They spent 2 hours looking for the owners around town, an owner that nobody knew in the neighborhood. They only had a first name to go on, no last name and a vague vehicle description.
There is no bite suit as Mr. Crump states...could you see someone trying to chase a dog in a bite suit? Think people think. As for the animal control officers...2 of them, they are not police officers. They work a staggered shift throught out the day and are usually off by 8pm each day. No animal control officer was on duty at this time. If you want 24/7 ACO coverage...you will need to pay for it.
Everything was done to keep from shooting this dog, it's a shame it had to happen. But, MPD did a very good job for what they had to work with in this case. Take care of your animals, especially if you have a breed that their reputation arrives before the dog does. Leaving a pit bull on a porch with kids in the neighborhood, a pit bull that is known for previous aggressive behavior, is poor judgment on the dog owner's part. This is where the blame should be placed, not with MPD.
If there is a call that mentions a dog involved, one of the cops should grab the suit on the way out. But in this case, they had two hours!
My comment got deleted. Bye-bye first amendment.
One dog, not a pack. No use of pepper spray or attempt to use doggie treats. Was the dog off its owner's property? Was the dog sitting on it's own porch? Story doesn't say. Dogs naturally tend to be more defensive/aggresive when on their property. It sounds as though this incident need not have happened. If the dog was off owner's property and scaring people previously, it should have been reported and referred to competent, trained "dog catcher" animal control person. Prevention is worth a pound of lead shot. How do postal workers manage to deliver mail if Marshall dogs are so hostile? Do meter readers feel threatened? Analyze how this could have been prevented.
Very well done MPD, I would have shot it a lot sooner (10 minutes) but because of the human haters in town you did well to wait it out and try to find owners. Did anyone else notice how they could not contact the owners after 2 hours, funny a Pit Bull owner wouldn't answer a phone call from the POLICE! The right thing was done, one neighbor was too scared of this dog to walk his own dog by the house, sounds like a dog that has had this coming for a long time. Again very well done MPD!!!
A police officer is trained to protect and serve the citizens---not trained to catch aggressive dogs--maybe we should look at the Animal Control Dept.--not the MPD!!! The MPD just seem to be protecting the citizens from harm. Where was the Animal Control Officer? Doesn't seem to mention if there was even one there??
drop555,
You do realize, dont you, that Marshall Animal Control ARE cops, right? They rarely find anyone who actually WANTS the job so an officer is thrown into the position. It has been that way for years. They do the best they can for that.
where did my comment go?
well notfrommarshall, I wish there were more like you in our city. It seems we have people here, at least on the blogs, that care more about an aggressive loose dogs well-being than that of the citizens that could be walking nearby. How sad it is when some constantly question the values and decision-making abilities of those that are out there to protect us.
I'm just glad they hit the dog and not a person, Most Marshall Cops the chief included couldn't hit water if they fell out of a boat. I would like to say even tho I have had sharp words for the MPD in the past That THIS time they did it right. By the book and with the interest of the community in mind. I'm sure the officers were thinking about not wanting to get bit them selves but if the dog had got away it could have been worse. So even tho it seams like I'm slapping myself in the face I'll say it again "Good job guys" Apparently my hypocrisy knows no bounds" Also at least this time they tried to figure out who owned the dog. Props on that to.
People you just dont get it. For one, if the officer went to get the attack suit while getting dressed it could of maimed a child or another officer. You sir that ask why he didnt use the catch pole. It siad in the article that he tried to use it. you have to have a certain angle to use it and you take a chance of getting rabies if you get bit. The animal charged the police officer in doing so the dog threatened the officers well being. By law a dog can be considered a deadly weapon. That officer had every right to use deadly force. LOOK ON THE INTERNET AT PICS OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN ATTACKED BY PIT BULLS OR OTHER LARGE DOGS.
I would have shot the dog a lot sooner than that. Who cares about an uncontrolled dog when human lives are at stake.
pitbull should be banned,I know its all how they were trained and all that,, known two that were the best dogs ever, both females.But most people that have them have some kind of wanna be a wangsta additude so the dog end up being a problem.Whatever dog breed is popular end up with the most dog bite reports and pits are the popular dogs for the wangsta right now,they have the potential to be deadly
Animal Control officers do kill dangerous animals. It's part of the 'control'.
Our officers are either not trained to handle these dogs, or are simple afraid of them. Animal control never seems to be around or involved just an officer and a gun..Hope it keeps being the dogs who get shot and not an innocent bystander. Get the Animal control officers trained or replace them with someone qualified to do the job and keep the guns out of the picture. An officer should never be even put in this position if we have qualified animal control officers.
Thanks
ok....i am still soo confused at the MPD. Did it not say that he was "holding a catch pole"? well, why not use it....call the Animal Control Officer and have the dog picked up and put in a cage until the owners can be identified. Wow, that took a genius to think of that one! Instead, lets call in the entire police force on duty, AND the sherrif dept to try to locate the owner for 2 hours!! Come on....someone needs to be replaced. Looks as if they are trying to find something to keep them busy for a couple of hours.
I meant an officer to put one on, not for the citizens! But I wouldn't be afraid to put one on and do it!
Do they have enough training suits for all citizens of Marshall who happen to live in that neighborhood or any neighborhood the dog might roam to? They had already held the dog at bay for 2 hours and the owner was not locatable!!! They went above and beyond to do all they could. They simply did what had to be done to protect the citizens they work for. Maybe one of you neighbors will get a dangerous dog and it will get loose in your yard and chase children in your neighborhood--then we will get you a training suit and let you handle it!!!
WWSJ - What would Jim say?
http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h53/MR...
They could have handled it way better! Don't they have the training suits in the K-9 unit? Put one on!
And what would have happened if the dog escaped from the porch and attacked, maimed or kill a person--people would be criticizing the MPD for NOT shooting it--can't please all the people all the time--bottom line-- MPD has protected the citizens of Marshall from a dangerous animal.
IS FAR BETTER FOR A YOUNG CHILD SEE AGGRESIVE DOG KILLED THEN TO SEE A FRIEND OR FAMILY ATTACKED BY THE DOG. GOOD WORK MARSHALL P.D. ONLY THINK YOU WAITED TO LONG TO KILL IT, SHOULD HAVE THE MOMENT THE OFFICER SAW IT CHASING THE KIDS. I ALSO KNOW CERTAIN STEPS HAS TO BE KEPT.
Get the police department what they need to do the best they can. A child or an adult should never have to witness the killing of an animal nor should the lives of law enforcement or the public be threatened due to the discharge of a firearm. Marshall, buy the officers the nets!
Good job officer Chamberlin, keep up the good work, to keep us safe.
Sounds like the correct outcome was arrived at. A dangerous and aggressive dog with a lackadasical owner was removed as a threat to innocent people.