cop slits dogs throat

[BehindBlueI's]

Question... What is the penalty for someone that would kill a police dog? Not trying to start anything, but would it be treated just the same as killing someone's pet, or are the police animals considered to be law enforcement "officers"?

The only special consideration police dogs get is the same as seeing eye dogs, search and rescue dogs, etc. get. The law provides for "interference" with the service animal's duty becoming a crime, which would not apply to a non-service animal.

When you get to the level of killing the animal, it is a "D" felony regardless of if its a service animal or not.

Indiana Code 35-46-3

IC 35-46-3-11 Version a
Cruelty to a law enforcement animal
Note: This version of section amended by P.L.161-2013, SEC.8. See also following version of this section amended by P.L.158-2013, SEC.563, effective 7-1-2014.
Sec. 11. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally:
(1) strikes, torments, injures, or otherwise mistreats a law enforcement animal; or
(2) interferes with the actions of a law enforcement animal while the animal is engaged in assisting a law enforcement officer in the performance of the officer's duties;
commits a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) An offense under subsection (a)(1) is a Class D felony if the act results in:
(1) serious permanent disfigurement;
(2) unconsciousness;
(3) permanent or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member or organ; or
(4) death;
of the law enforcement animal.
(c) It is a defense that the accused person:
(1) engaged in a reasonable act of training, handling, or discipline; and
(2) acted as an employee or agent of a law enforcement agency.
(d) In addition to any sentence or fine imposed for a conviction of an offense under this section, the court:
(1) may order the person convicted to make restitution to the person or law enforcement agency owning the animal for reimbursement of veterinary bills; and
(2) shall order the person convicted to make restitution to the person or law enforcement agency owning the animal for reimbursement of the cost of replacing the animal, which may include the cost of training the animal, if the animal is permanently disabled or killed.

IC 35-46-3-11.5 Version a
Cruelty to a service animal
Note: This version of section effective until 7-1-2014. See also following version of this section, effective 7-1-2014.
Sec. 11.5. (a) As used in this section, "service animal" means an animal that a person who is impaired by:
(1) blindness or any other visual impairment;
(2) deafness or any other aural impairment;
(3) a physical disability; or
(4) a medical condition;
relies on for navigation, assistance in performing daily activities, or alert signals regarding the onset of the person's medical condition.
(b) A person who knowingly or intentionally:
(1) interferes with the actions of a service animal; or
(2) strikes, torments, injures, or otherwise mistreats a service animal;
while the service animal is engaged in assisting an impaired person described in subsection (a) commits a Class A misdemeanor.
(c) An offense under subsection (b)(2) is a Class D felony if the act results in the:
(1) serious permanent disfigurement;
(2) unconsciousness;
(3) permanent or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member or organ; or
(4) death;
of the service animal.
(d) It is a defense that the accused person:
(1) engaged in a reasonable act of training, handling, or disciplining the service animal; or
(2) reasonably believed the conduct was necessary to prevent injury to the accused person or another person.

IC 35-46-3-12 Version a
Torture or mutilation of a vertebrate animal; killing a domestic animal
Note: This version of section effective until 7-1-2014. See also following version of this section, effective 7-1-2014.
Sec. 12. (a) This section does not apply to a person who euthanizes an injured, a sick, a homeless, or an unwanted domestic animal if:
(1) the person is employed by a humane society, an animal control agency, or a governmental entity operating an animal shelter or other animal impounding facility; and
(2) the person euthanizes the domestic animal in accordance with guidelines adopted by the humane society, animal control agency, or governmental entity operating the animal shelter or other animal impounding facility.
(b) A person who knowingly or intentionally beats a vertebrate animal commits cruelty to an animal, a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if:
(1) the person has a previous, unrelated conviction under this section; or
(2) the person committed the offense with the intent to threaten, intimidate, coerce, harass, or terrorize a family or household member.

---

(c) A person who knowingly or intentionally tortures or mutilates a vertebrate animal commits torturing or mutilating a vertebrate animal, a Class D felony.
(d) As used in this subsection, "domestic animal" means an animal that is not wild. The term is limited to:
(1) cattle, calves, horses, mules, swine, sheep, goats, dogs, cats, poultry, ostriches, rhea, and emus; and
(2) an animal of the bovine, equine, ovine, caprine, porcine, canine, feline, camelid, cervidae, or bison species.
A person who knowingly or intentionally kills a domestic animal without the consent of the owner of the domestic animal commits killing a domestic animal, a Class D felony.
(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; or
(C) prevent a seriously injured vertebrate animal from prolonged suffering; or
(2) engaged in a reasonable and recognized act of training, handling, or disciplining the vertebrate animal.
(f) When a court imposes a sentence or enters a dispositional decree under this section, the court:
(1) shall consider requiring:
(A) a person convicted of an offense under this section; or
(B) a child adjudicated a delinquent child for committing an act that would be a crime under this section if committed by an adult;
to receive psychological, behavioral, or other counseling as a part of the sentence or dispositional decree; and
(2) may order an individual described in subdivision (1) to receive psychological, behavioral, or other counseling as a part of the sentence or dispositional decree.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Thanks BBI. So it sounds like the officer may indeed be guilty of a D Felony. I don't think he can use the defense that he reasonably believed it was necessary to prevent harm to himself or another person, seeing as the dog was restrained at the time.

 

[Dean C.]

I hope the officer gets tortured in prison. That is an disgusting act of violence committed by an equally disgusting person.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Thanks BBI. So it sounds like the officer may indeed be guilty of a D Felony. I don't think he can use the defense that he reasonably believed it was necessary to prevent harm to himself or another person, seeing as the dog was restrained at the time.

He would be in Indiana, assuming the facts are as presented. Since this was in Baltimore, though, their laws may be more or less strict.

 

[Libertarian01]

To All,

Since it is on the east coast I was expecting the rights of animals to be held higher than the rights of humans.

This is what I found for Maryland:

§ 10-606. Aggravated cruelty to animals--In general Prohibited

(a) A person may not:
(1) intentionally mutilate, torture, cruelly beat, or cruelly kill an animal;

(2) cause, procure, or authorize an act prohibited under item (1) of this subsection; or
(3) except in the case of self-defense, intentionally inflict bodily harm, permanent disability, or death on an animal owned or used by a law enforcement unit.
Penalty
(b)(1) A person who violates this section is guilty of the felony of aggravated cruelty to animals and on conviction is subject to imprisonment not exceeding 3 years or a fine not exceeding $5,000 or both.
(2) As a condition of sentencing, the court may order a defendant convicted of violating this section to participate in and pay for psychological counseling.
(3) As a condition of probation, the court may prohibit a defendant from owning, possessing, or residing with an animal.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Trigger Time]

I hope the officer gets tortured in prison. That is an disgusting act of violence committed by an equally disgusting person.

He will get special treatment in prison. All the guards will get off talking to him. But hey it's still prison. And if he's a fellon he can't be a police officer again! That's the best part of all this. Toss out the bad cops

 

[ModernGunner]

Well, the article doesn't say WHY Bolger killed the dog with a knife rather than a gun shot, so there's that.

If Bolger is just some 'loon with a badge', by all means, lock him up. If there actually was some justification for such an action that, by most viewpoints is held as an 'atrocity', then that needs to come out, just as openly, and just heartily defended.

 

[BuddieReigns]

Reprehensible behavior of course, and he should certainly be locked up, but are we really advocating violence, torture, and murder against a human being for what he did to a dog?

IBTL.

I'm for all three. Just being human doesn't make your life worth anything.

 

[RedneckReject]

I have to wonder if there is more to this story. IF this man chose to slit a restrained dog's throat because it bit someone who openly admitted she knew the dog only did it out of fear (and that she made the mistake of touching the dog) then, yes, he is a prick of epic proportions. However I have to wonder if there is more to it. Honestly I hope there is. I hate to think that anyone could do something so awful to a defenseless (at that point) animal. IF the dog really did nothing to deserve this then yeah, I have no pity for this guy and I hope he gets what's coming to him. If someone did that to one of my dogs I would go crazy.

I also have to wonder why on Earth he would choose to slit its throat instead of shoot it. You would think that slitting a throat would put you in harm's way more than a gun shot

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I also have to wonder why on Earth he would choose to slit its throat instead of shoot it. You would think that slitting a throat would put you in harm's way more than a gun shot

There's no good reason. Someone will chime in with "ricochet" but I've destroyed a few badly injured deer and a rabid pitbull. There's always some dirt nearby, use it as a backstop, shoot through the vitals, done. Its cleaner, its less likely you'll get injured by the animal, and its infinitely more PR friendly.

Like I said earlier in the thread, its a pretty good sign of someone who's bat-poop crazy.

 

[Snapdragon]

IMO, the words "I'm going to ****ing gut this thing" show malice, not self-defense.

 

[rgrimm01]

I think it speaks volumes that his ilk did not circle the wagons around him justifying his actions.

 

[Mark 1911]

Don't need a whack job like that on any police dept. Good riddance.

 

[IndyGal65]

I believe that a person's compassion for or treatment of an animal is a good litmus test for the character of a person. I loathe this kind of display of a lack of mercy and apparent lack of good judgement. He is a monster who definitely should not be in a position of authority.

 

[churchmouse]

Well, I guess very few of you grew up on a farm in the 50's. I saw Great grand dad smoke more than a few dogs for far less than biting someone. Egg sucking dogs got smoked. Biting dogs would get smoked. Goofy useless dogs would get smoked. Chicken eating dogs got smoked. If an animal served no purpose it got smoked. Sick dog, yup, smoked. That was the way of things on the farm. Not just that farm either. When I say smoked it was a 12 gauge quick and done. The loss of live stock was not taken lightly. Biting as well. Grand dad would just take care of it and say "They are just dogs, there will another along directly" and he was right.
Not condoning LEO's actions just saying how it used to be. Many still see things this way.

Things are different these days I am aware. If the dog needed to be put down there are more humane ways to achieve it than slitting it's throat. Is there more to this and will we ever know, I hope so.

 

[Snapdragon]

Yeah, but Grandpa didn't say "I'm gonna ****ing gut this thing" and proceed to butcher it. I'm not thrilled about the idea of the 12 ga, but at least it was quick and humane, and Grandpa was acting out of necessity and not malice.

 

[churchmouse]

Yeah, but Grandpa didn't say "I'm gonna ****ing gut this thing" and proceed to butcher it. I'm not thrilled about the idea of the 12 ga, but at least it was quick and humane, and Grandpa was acting out of necessity and not malice.

I am just pointing out how times have changed. I was raised around that kind of activity. We butchered Hog/cows/sheep.....you name it. It was a way of life for those folks. I do not remember any pleasure being taking from it. Just how things were.
I in no way condone what happened. Some people still look at animals in that way. As stated, there are more humane ways to deal with this.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

When I say smoked it was a 12 gauge quick and done.

There's a big part of the difference. This wouldn't have gotten the play or the reaction it did if a firearm had been used. He'd still be wrong, but the reaction wouldn't be as strong and it probably wouldn't have made the media. Knives and the slitting of a throat do not get the same reaction as shooting, and they are not the same from a psychological perspective, either. This is an important lesson that bears repeating, and its not limited to the destruction of animals. People view gunshot wounds as cleaner, more professional, and more clinical than a stab wound. Knives are intimidating, primal, messy, and associated with revenge and anger. Its a point made many times in both history (Doc Holliday killed a lot of folks in self defense, but the only time he used a knife he almost got lynched despite multiple witnesses siding with him) and in academic research (like "On Killing).

I've shot and killed dogs chasing our chickens when I was growing up. I've had to put down a long time hunting dog/pet/friend. I understand the death of an animal and do not remotely put it on par with a human life. However, it never crossed my mind to use a knife.