topic Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT? in Community Chat

DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

itiswhatitis — Mon, 17 Jul 2017 02:34:02 GMT

Jury Awards Dog Owner $1.2M, Pet Shot By Cop A dog was shot twice at close range by an Anne Arundel County police officer in 2014; his owner sued police and won $1.26 million this week.

PASADENA, MD -- A Glen Burnie family was awarded over $1 million after a jury decided that an Anne Arundel County Police officer unjustly shot and killed their family dog in February 2014. Initially, after the shooting, an Anne Arundel County Police investigation cleared the officer of wrongdoing, stating that the dog was aggressive.

Cary Hansel, the attorney representing Michael Reeves, the owner of the dog, Vern, said the killing was "senseless, unnecessary and unconstitutional." The officer who shot the dog, Rodney Price, shot the dog twice at close range. "The duty to serve and protect extends to our animal family members as well," Hansel said in a prepared statement.

Office Price was investigating a burglary in the 900 block of Lombarde Circle in Pasadena on Feb. 1, 2014, when he encountered Vern, a Chesapeake Bay retriever, in the front area outside of the home.

Two months after the shooting, in April 2014, about the loss of Vern.

“On April 26, 2014 my best friend Ches-a-bar Vernon Goldnut Reeves would have been 5 years old. He was shot and killed by a one year rookie police officer of Anne Arundel County PD(north). Vern was in his own yard at the time of the murder. I am heading home this week from Afghanistan to be with his remains and his partner Jazz. May my boy continue to swim in the Heavens of the Chesapeake! Buddy I miss you and will see you very soon.”

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

Drythe — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 02:58:26 GMT

I think so.

People learn slowly.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

hyacinth003 — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 03:06:48 GMT

Really sad. I know I would be devastated if it was my pet.

Some people value the lives of animals and some don't.

Money wouldn't make me feel one bit better.

Hyacinth

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

JillyMarie — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 03:10:41 GMT

The need to kill needs to be contained.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

NicksmomESQ — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 03:16:54 GMT

The dog should not have been shot.However,the amount of damages awarded was excessive. I'm pretty sure it will be significantly reduced on appeal.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

Noel7 — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 03:37:55 GMT

I have read way too many news reports of police shooting a family dog without cause.

In some areas there is no rule against it and it needs to stop. The dogs were beloved family members.

Sometimes the only way to stop something like this is by suing and sending a message that it will no longer be tolerated. It's just too bad the shooter wasn't punished in some way.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

sheilababe — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 03:42:58 GMT

I think the dollar amount is crazy. I love our dogs but I would never even think about getting this amount from the taxpayers. If the cop was wrong then he should be dealt with. The taxpayers should not have to pay out millions for someone else's wrongdoing.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

KathyPet — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 03:43:59 GMT

THe shooting was unwarranted but really 1.2 million? Way excessive. JUries have awarded way less for the killings of a human being.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

tansy — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 03:44:32 GMT

@Noel7 wrote:
I have read way too many news reports of police shooting a family dog without cause.

In some areas there is no rule against it and it needs to stop. The dogs were beloved family members.

Sometimes the only way to stop something like this is by suing and sending a message that it will no longer be tolerated. It's just too bad the shooter wasn't punished in some way.

Exactly what I was going to say. There have been too many cases like this.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

itiswhatitis — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 03:46:17 GMT

@tansy wrote:
@Noel7 wrote:
I have read way too many news reports of police shooting a family dog without cause.

In some areas there is no rule against it and it needs to stop. The dogs were beloved family members.

Sometimes the only way to stop something like this is by suing and sending a message that it will no longer be tolerated. It's just too bad the shooter wasn't punished in some way.
Exactly what I was going to say. There have been too many cases like this.

There's another one more recent in the news. Two dogs in the confines of their backyard. They survived with the help of a go fund me page.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

Noel7 — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 03:49:11 GMT

@sheilababe wrote:
I think the dollar amount is crazy. I love our dogs but I would never even think about getting this amount from the taxpayers. If the cop was wrong then he should be dealt with. The taxpayers should not have to pay out millions for someone else's wrongdoing.

@sheilababe

We pay out for mistakes like that all the time. That's kind of the point, suing forces others to change their behavior.

Put cameras on officers that will show what really happened.

I have no idea why non-aggressive dogs are shot, but it happens often and in front of children at times.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

Marp — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 03:52:04 GMT

I don't have enough information to know if the jury got it right but when I was living in SoFl there had been a rash of shootings of family dogs by LE under unwarranted circumstances. Some of the dogs were confined yet still killed because the officer "feared for his life" simply because the dogs were barking at them..

One night several officers were going through yards looking for a suspect and I told the two that were going into my back yard that if anything happened to my dog the wrath of God would look like a walk in the park. The dog was not in the yard but under past circumstances they earned a warning from me.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

Dash — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 03:59:10 GMT

I bet the family is laughing all the way to the bank. Over $1,000,000 for a dog. They won the lottery. And it's tax free. The verdict is ridiculous. The jury would not have awarded as much if a child had been shot and killed. I doubt this will stand on appeal, and the people in that county and state should be outraged.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

Noel7 — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 04:01:23 GMT

@Dash wrote:
I bet the family is laughing all the way to the bank. Over $1,000,000 for a dog. They won the lottery. And it's tax free. The verdict is ridiculous. The jury would not have awarded as much if a child had been shot and killed. I doubt this will stand on appeal, and the people in that county and state should be outraged.

Have you ever had a dog?

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

Dash — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 04:06:16 GMT

Yes, I love dogs, but that's not the,point. $1 million is an outrageous verdict. Rarely are such sizable verdicts awarded for the death of humans, unless the human is, supporting a family, the breadwinner. It's sad that a dog died, but a dog is personal property, same as your tv or car, nothing more, as a matter of law.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

Marp — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 04:12:04 GMT

@Dash wrote:
Yes, I love dogs, but that's not the,point. $1 million is an outrageous verdict. Rarely are such sizable verdicts awarded for the death of humans, unless the human is, supporting a family, the breadwinner. It's sad that a dog died, but a dog is personal property, same as your tv or car, nothing more, as a matter of law.

I'm happy that you love dogs but please love them from a distance.

Awards such as this are meant to send a message that a particular behavior is not acceptable and hopefully will prevent another incident such as this.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

itiswhatitis — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 04:13:14 GMT

@Dash wrote:
Yes, I love dogs, but that's not the,point. $1 million is an outrageous verdict. Rarely are such sizable verdicts awarded for the death of humans, unless the human is, supporting a family, the breadwinner. It's sad that a dog died, but a dog is personal property, same as your tv or car, nothing more, as a matter of law.

@Dash yes this verdict/award has been called "unprecedented." Largest for this type in American history.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

Dash — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 04:18:46 GMT

It's unfortunate you can't discuss a legal issue without getting overly emotional and personally hateful.

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

Noel7 — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 04:19:22 GMT

@Dash wrote:
Yes, I love dogs, but that's not the,point. $1 million is an outrageous verdict. Rarely are such sizable verdicts awarded for the death of humans, unless the human is, supporting a family, the breadwinner. It's sad that a dog died, but a dog is personal property, same as your tv or car, nothing more, as a matter of law.

The law needs to change, that's the point. In reality, a dog is not the same as a TV .

Re: DID THIS JURY GET IT RIGHT?

Noel7 — Sun, 16 Jul 2017 04:23:00 GMT

@Dash wrote:
It's unfortunate you can't discuss a legal issue without getting overly emotional and personally hateful.

Huh? I haven't seen anyone get emotional or hateful. There is no need to be insulting.