Update to the "Ava" case

[jaggirl47]

http://www.erieco.gov/DocumentView.aspx?DID=839

The owner refused to talk to the DA for criminal charges to be pressed against the officer. I actually talked to her on FB and asked her why. She stated "the truth will come out during the lawsuit". So, of course I asked her why she was more interested in a monetary lawsuit than criminal charges being placed against the officer. I was then banned from the FB page.

[selzer]

She left her dog run loose while she had the cops coming, why should she get any monetary reward for that?

From what is in the district attourney report, it looks like the officer should have shot the dog. It also appears that the necropsy confirms that the dog was shot in the manner the officer states.

So many days later, I am still ticked at the owner of this dog.

Is she now expecting to get rich off of her poor dog's dead body? The more I hear about people, the more I love my dogs.

[jaggirl47]

Originally Posted by selzer

She left her dog run loose while she had the cops coming, why should she get any monetary reward for that?

From what is in the district attourney report, it looks like the officer should have shot the dog. It also appears that the necropsy confirms that the dog was shot in the manner the officer states.

So many days later, I am still ticked at the owner of this dog.

Is she now expecting to get rich off of her poor dog's dead body? The more I hear about people, the more I love my dogs.

Yes, she is expecting to get rich from it. She deleted my comments off of the FB page but doesn't realize they still show up on the search feature of FB. I copied them and sent them to the DA, to include where she informed me she wrote an official sworn statement and that the DA purposefully left them out of his official investigation. One thing I cannot stnd is dishonesty, and that is a perfect example.

[GSD_Xander]

Originally Posted by jaggirl47

Yes, she is expecting to get rich from it. She deleted my comments off of the FB page but doesn't realize they still show up on the search feature of FB. I copied them and sent them to the DA, to include where she informed me she wrote an official sworn statement and that the DA purposefully left them out of his official investigation. One thing I cannot stnd is dishonesty, and that is a perfect example.

If you didn't already I would get screen shots of them too.

[selzer]

Citizens should be really ticked about this. This will hurt the overall feeling toward the police in general, and it may hurt the career of the officer. But it hurts the people, the citizens of the locality. Oh regardless to the final outcome, jurors must be paid (if a jury trial), court officials, dispositions, lawyers, the time it takes from the court system, etc, etc.

I hope that city files a counter suit so that if her case is found groundless, she needs to pay for the court costs, the time for the investigation (that would not have been necessary if her dog did not charge the officer), any time that the officer needs to spend in dispositions or in court, and a healthy fee for an uncontrolled dog.

When the cops shoot your dog dead, they still feel bad about it, even if it had to be done. They, most of them are human, and many are even dog lovers, so most of them are not going to give you a ticket to add insult to injury. But crap like this might change that. I mean, if any weakness or compassion on the part of the officer is an indicator that the officer should have acted differently, well, I don't know, I can see them writing a lot more tickets regardless to the tragic nature of the situation.