Bad Experience with Carmel PD

[Prometheus]

This goes along with my saying that:

There is no such thing as a good police encounter. be glad he didn't steal (confiscate) your firearm.I'm guessing the charge will be dropped. Take some photos, get some statements from the neighbors and have a copy of the ordinance.

10-1 The judge will drop the charges.

As to the cop, talk to the chief, and get your ducks lined up to file a formal complaint.

 

[Liberty Sanders]

Guys, many thanks for the reps that are rolling in. I know it seems like a little thing but it really means a lot to me to know that there are still people like you in the world.

It makes this crap a lot easier to take.

 

[j706]

I would not be paying that ordinance violation. I highly doubt given your background as well as the circumstances that the city attorney will prosecute that. Crazy! Goes to my old saying "Common sense ain't to common".

 

[LPMan59]

I would not be paying that ordinance violation. I highly doubt given your background as well as the circumstances that the city attorney will prosecute that. Crazy! Goes to my old saying "Common sense ain't to common".

i fail to see how his history as a LEO is relevant to....oh wait, now i get it.

 

[SavageEagle]

Liberty,

Sorry to hear the dog attacked you and glad you didn't have to do more than you did. It saddens me as well that this police officer has advised you to commit a felony.



After all, if it wasn't necessary to kill the dog to stop the attack and that's his justification for charging you as he did, it wasn't necessary to kill the dog to prevent injury to yourself or another person.

He's an officer of the law. He should know better, a fact I'm sure the judge will make crystal clear to Officer ShortPants.

Blessings,
Bill

Bill, while you're technically right about it being a felony, he would have also been fully justified shooting the dog according to the lines just below your highlighted portion:

(e) It is a defense to a prosecution under this section that the accused person:
(1) reasonably believes the conduct was necessary to:
(A) prevent injury to the accused person or another person;
(B) protect the property of the accused person from destruction or substantial damage;

Personally, I would have shot the dogs. Once they attack, whether they bite me (Like they did Liberty) or not, I'm not taking any chances and will shoot.

I had almost the same thing happen with a couple pits a while back. My youngest two and a neighbor kid were in my yard playing when these two got loose. They came sprinting at my kids and I jumped in front, stuck my arms to the side, stepped forward and yelled. They changed course, but if they had not I would have drawn and shot them. Luckily I didn't have to, but Animal Control had to tranq them to get them to calm down I found out later. The owner lost the dogs because he couldn't keep them pinned.

Never hesitate to shoot an attacking animal. Sometimes a warning shot won't phase them and it could mean your life.

 

[down3green]

Wow, I think I would complain to the chief too.

I have his card right here:

Carmel Police Department

Michael D. Fogarty
Chief of Police

3 Civic Square
Carmel, Indiana 46032

Office: 317.571.2523
Fax: 317.571.2512
Email: mfogarty@carmel.in.gov


.

 

[j706]

i fail to see how his history as a LEO is relevant to....oh wait, now i get it.

Well if you can't figure it out I won't be able to help you out man. Sorry

 

[abnk]

Firing in a direction where there is no threat is reckless. However, you saved an old lady from being mauled. A little officer discretion goes a long way.

 

[Eddie]

i fail to see how his history as a LEO is relevant to....oh wait, now i get it.

In all seriousness, I think it would be fair to take his history as a LEO into account when deciding whether or not to issue a citation in the same way that an officer could look at any person's vocation; he is probably not a scumbag if he holds a professional license of some type.

To me discretion implies being able to look at the whole picture and make a choice about whether or not a person needs to go to the next level in the criminal justice system. I don't think a guy should get a break just because he is a LEO.

I see it as on the one hand we have an ordinance violation, on the other hand we have a citizen running out to intervene in a dangerous situation, getting the situation under control and then self reporting the incident to the authorities. To me that fact the he self reported would carry the greatest weight because it shows that he was taking responsibility for his decisions and making a record of them. The fact that he served as a LEO would carry about the same weight as if he held any other professional license, i.e. he's gone through some scrutiny by others to get where he's at so he's probably not a scumbag.

 

[bigus_D]

Sounds like some OC spray might have been a better tool.

This does sound like a huge load of BS, though. Good luck!

 

[DarkRose]

In all seriousness, I think it would be fair to take his history as a LEO into account when deciding whether or not to issue a citation in the same way that an officer could look at any person's vocation; he is probably not a scumbag if he holds a professional license of some type.

To me discretion implies being able to look at the whole picture and make a choice about whether or not a person needs to go to the next level in the criminal justice system. I don't think a guy should get a break just because he is a LEO.

I see it as on the one hand we have an ordinance violation, on the other hand we have a citizen running out to intervene in a dangerous situation, getting the situation under control and then self reporting the incident to the authorities. To me that fact the he self reported would carry the greatest weight because it shows that he was taking responsibility for his decisions and making a record of them. The fact that he served as a LEO would carry about the same weight as if he held any other professional license, i.e. he's gone through some scrutiny by others to get where he's at so he's probably not a scumbag.

The mitigating factor I would see in his history as an LEO would be the fact that he has had some training in quickly analyzing dangerous decisions and making split-second life or death decisions. That, IMO, should count heavily in his favor.
That being said, any citizen who made the same judgement, with the same sound reasoning should also get credit. To be honest, I've never had to make a snap decision in a dangerous situation like that, and honestly do not know how well my own thought process would work. So kudos to the OP for staying calm, making a good decision in a tense sitauation. If it had been me, I'd like to think I'd also have remained calm enough to shoot the dog, once an animal attacks/bites me, all bets are off for my safety.

 

[Expat]

To me discretion implies being able to look at the whole picture and make a choice about whether or not a person needs to go to the next level in the criminal justice system. I don't think a guy should get a break just because he is a LEO.

I would not be surprised if they are being trained not to use discretion. If you go by the book, you don't try to think for yourself, you can't get in trouble. If you start using discretion, you end up getting shredded at some point by a lawyer. "do you always handle situations like this in this manner" "why not" 'you let this guy go, but my client you arrest". Or next week the OP ends up shooting a neighbor kid accidentally, "explain to me officer why you knew this guy was out there shooting in the city limits and did nothing about it, now there is a dead kid, how does that make you feel?" I learned a long time ago that most stupid rules come about because some really stupid person actually did it...

 

[00BlasterResto]

As I said the other day in a thread, if they showed up, you should have said.
I didn't hear anything....,,,
"This is not advice, however you call them at your own risk. Which is a pretty big risk these days"

 

[00BlasterResto]

Sounds like some OC spray might have been a better tool.

This does sound like a huge load of BS, though. Good luck!

You might aswell just shoot the dog.
The cops came out and sprayed some family freinds dog "inside their fence mind you" and killed the dog..............
This happened in Peru IN for the record....

 

[Jack Ryan]

If the dogs got out once, they'll get out again. What ever they did last time, they'll do again.

What happens NEXT time?

 

[Liberty Sanders]

This neighbor is a pretty standup guy. He completely supports what I did and is of course VERY grateful that I intervened to prevent the lady from being hurt.

He says he's been considering putting the first dog down because of his unpredictability (he's more aggressive than his brother) and I get the impression that this incident may have made up his mind for him.

He's actually in the process of moving to a more rural area for the purpose of getting the dogs out of this urban area and has been installing a substantial fence to make sure that once he's moved they'll be secure.

A lot of trouble for a couple of mutts, but hey, I love dogs too. If I didn't there'd be some dog parts out on 99th Street right now.

Of course if I HAD killed the mutts the copper would have found something else to charge me with.

 

[LPMan59]

Well if you can't figure it out I won't be able to help you out man. Sorry

Well if you can't recognize cynicism/sarcasm without purple text, I won't be able to help you out man. Sorry.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Bill, while you're technically right about it being a felony, he would have also been fully justified shooting the dog according to the lines just below your highlighted portion:



Personally, I would have shot the dogs. Once they attack, whether they bite me (Like they did Liberty) or not, I'm not taking any chances and will shoot.

I had almost the same thing happen with a couple pits a while back. My youngest two and a neighbor kid were in my yard playing when these two got loose. They came sprinting at my kids and I jumped in front, stuck my arms to the side, stepped forward and yelled. They changed course, but if they had not I would have drawn and shot them. Luckily I didn't have to, but Animal Control had to tranq them to get them to calm down I found out later. The owner lost the dogs because he couldn't keep them pinned.

Never hesitate to shoot an attacking animal. Sometimes a warning shot won't phase them and it could mean your life.

The point I was making, Ryan, was that the responding officer had already said that the shot fired was unnecessary, therefore a shot to kill the animal would have been also... at least in his opinion... and should be plenty of rope for the judge to yank and watch him (the responding LEO) twitch.

I gotta say, I'd have a lot more trouble shooting a dog that was approaching (even rapidly) than I would a person attacking. I can be much more certain of the person's intentions. I won't say I'd never shoot the dog, but I've had a pit bull in my house and he lives with my daughter now. He loves to play and he's very inquisitive and exuberant, so when he sees something or someone new, he wants to run over and investigate... usually barking. My daughter's new neighbor threatened to shoot him when she first moved in where she is now, simply because they didn't understand and because of the media-inspired phobia people have about these lovable dogs.

Don't hesitate to kill an attacking dog? Sure. But make sure he's attacking (and that he's attacking *you* and not someone behind you, there to do you harm) before you go getting all trigger-happy.

Note: This is not a "gun control" argument, just a reminder to think with an open mind rather than jumping to conclusions.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[LPMan59]

oh come on Bill, it was funny if not true.

My apologies for being too snarky.

 

[xring62]

Thats a good statement ,"Never involve the government in anything" or police{maybe only for traffic accident report} ,i take care of everything with myself