4-- Letter To Washington Humane Society

Washington Humane Society
7319 Georgia Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20012

RE: Complaint of Animal Cruelty

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing to you as the institution responsible for investigating allegations of animal cruelty in the District of Columbia, a responsibility you share by law with the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD). My purpose is to report an alleged incident of animal cruelty of which I have become aware, and to ask that you investigate it and, if appropriate, refer any findings to the D.C. U.S. Attorney's office for criminal prosecution.

The incident to which I am referring involves the shooting of the dog Precious on the evening of May 23, 2008, in the yard of her owner, Michael Bailey, at 5304 Clay Terrace NE, Washington, DC 20019. Although I did not personally observe the incident, I have gathered enough information to believe that a felonious act of animal cruelty might have been committed by the MPD officer (badge #431, I believe) on his way to a nearby criminal incident. Apparently, when Precious, tied up in her own yard, started to crawl under her gate and bark at the officer as he ran by her house, the officer stopped and fired two shots at her, but missed. As Sloan Lewis, the partner of Michael Bailey, grabbed Precious and held her between her legs screaming, "I have her," the officer stopped and fired four additional bullets into her, killing her. There were witnesses, I understand, including children and elderly.

If the facts as alleged are true, this incident would be among the worst incidents of animal cruelty I have heard about in the District of Columbia. As a citizen, I am concerned that if this officer did commit a felony and appropriate action is not taken, other dogs in the District will surely die, not to mention what might happen to nearby individuals, the latter of which is not a legislated concern of yours. Therefore, I am asking that the Washington Humane Society undertake an investigation under its charge to investigate all acts of animal cruelty in the District. I would not be asking for this if this were similar to other instances of police shooting dogs, where officers, untrained to handle dogs and afraid of them, mistakenly believed they were being attacked, or instances where dogs were trained as weapons purposely employed to deflect police officers during criminal busts.

Although I am aware that the WHS shares responsibility for investigating allegations of animal cruelty with the MPD in the District, I am aware of no provision that would preclude the WHS from undertaking this investigation on its own. But, separately, I have requested Police Chief Cathy Lanier to not interpose any objection to the WHS's investigation. Also, I am aware of no provision in the law exempting police officers, on- or off-duty, from the criminal laws of the District of Columbia, including the animal cruelty statutes. Indeed, the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)) between the Department of Justice and the District of Columbia specifically anticipates that they would be subject to those laws: "The [District's] Policy also will advise that the use of excessive force will subject officer to discipline and possible criminal prosecution and/or civil liability". Finally, although the MOU says that "Allegations of excessive force involving a serious use of force. . . will be investigated by the Office of Professional Responsibility, " I do not interpret that provision as precluding the WHS from conducting a concurrent investigation on its own, especially since the MPD seems to have opted to not apply the MOU to incidents involving the shootings of animals, as evidenced by the way it conducts investigations required by the MOU and those involving the shootings of dogs.

Needless to say, I do not expect the WHS to investigate issues such as the use of fatal force where children and elderly were also in harm's way, or whether the dog Precious was interfering with a crime in process, as these issues, it is hoped, will be adequately covered by the investigation conducted by the MPD's professional and independent Firearms Investigation Team, if indeed Chief Lanier orders such an investigation contrary to current procedure, as I have recommended. The current procedure, as you may know, is that investigations of shootings of dogs are conducted by lieutenants in the same districts as the officers who did the shooting, even if people were present nearby and in harm's way. I --- and I know that many citizens of the District of Columbia feel the same way --- am concerned about whether anyone, a police officer or a civilian, has the right to use fatal force against a dog, restrained, on its own property, and under complete control between the legs of its owners, if the dog barks at someone and the person "fears for his life," as Commander Robert Contee said #431 did. The results of your investigation would, of course, be merged with the results of any internal investigations by the MPD and appropriate actions pursed after that. Indeed, if your investigation finds that no act of animal cruelty was involved, it would go a long way to clear the officer's name, although that would certainly complicate matters for the citizens of the District, and their dogs.

Again, I was not an observer to this event. (Until the incident, I knew no one connected with it, and I am submitting this complaint on my behalf alone.) But as a citizen, if I know of an act of cruelty to an animal in the District, I am obligated to report it, and so I am. I am also concerned about the chilling effect that this incident, if uninvestigated, will have on all dogs in the District. Therefore, I would appreciate knowing if your determination is that you are not permitted or authorized to pursue this investigation, so that I can work toward getting that restriction lifted for the future.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

9- Suggestion for those who do not reside in DC

For those readers who do not reside in the District of Columbia, we ask that you do three things:

First, with regard to your not living in DC, you may not reside here but the fact is that you are in effect a citizen of the District. All Americans are "citizens" of DC because this is the nation's capital. Therefore, you should go down the entire list of the suggestions in the posting and decide which items best suit how you feel, and then act accordingly. You are under no obligation to state where you are from, but it would help our cause if our officials our knew what citizens of other places feel about us. In particular, I would write to MPD Chief Lanier, and city council members Mendelson (the chair of the committee on public safety, which oversees the MPD), and Mary Cheh, who is the chief advocate for animals on the city council. and Jim Graham, who sponsored the felony animal cruelty act.

Second, you might consider writing your own congressional representatives and senators, and tell that that you are appalled that this is going on in the nation's capital and ask them to file a complaint with Mayor Fenty on behalf of the citizens of your state to bring this barbaric activity to a halt. Many congressional representatives live in DC and some serve on committees that provide oversight to the District. Write a suggested letter for your representatives and senators and send that to them to sign and send off. (I will post below a suggested letter later).

Third, you can take the lessons from what we are trying to accomplish in DC and apply them to your own cities, counties and states. If you dig deeply enough, you will find similar cruelty elsewhere, but much of it does not make the press, as was the case in DC until just recently. The DC government now knows they are being watched. In Prince Georges' Country in Maryland, for instance, just over the border from DC, this kind of blood bath has been going on almost daily ever since they banned from the city pit bull dogs and mixes and look-alikes a few years ago. For instance, you can read an account of a recent incident there by clicking here.

By the way, the police shooting our dogs is not the only problem we have with animals (dogs) and our government here. Until just recently when a new head of our local humane society took over, on order from our Department of Health, all pit bull strays were killed in our animal shelter, puppies and pregnant mothers alike, because they were never not evaluated for adoptability. But that reprieve is sure to come to an end if a bill now pending before our city council gets approved. That bill would give the mayor the authority to declare any breed of dog he wants a dangerous dog, which could very well mean that the police would be "authorized " to deal with them as they wish. (See www.oppose1789.blogspot.com) In the meantime, our Department of Health, which is responsible for animal control, is ordering the execution of our dogs simply for biting other dogs, even non-serious bites, as long as vindictive owners of the injured animals say the want the biting dogs killed. (See www.savesidney.blogspot.com or www.savebubba.blogspot.com.) The list goes on.

Thank you for caring about the situation here in DC. The more people who speak up, the faster we will bring this bloodshed to an end. And not only bloodshed, but also protect the reputation of the other some 4000 police officers who are dedicated and hardworking, and who care about these issues as much as you do.

Suggested letter to your U.S. congressional representative/senators apears below:

You can return to the main posting by clicking here.

Dear Congress(man/woman) or Senator ________________:

I am writing to you as one of your constituents about a tragic incident that occurred on May 23rd in the nation's capital that I would hope you would raise your voice over.

The incident involved what appears to have been a wanton act of animal cruelty which, if true, would be a felony under the laws of the District of Columbia. In that incident, a police officer chasing a drug suspect, stopped his pursuit when a dog named Precious, on a leash tied to her porch and in her own fenced-in yard, barked at him. The officer then fired two shots at Precious, hitting her once. When the Precious' owner grabbed her and held her between her legs, yelling to the officer, "I have her," the officer yelled back, "I am going to get that [dog]," and then shot Precious four more times. Precious then ran back into her house, hid under a bed, and died. An hour later, the officer arrested Precious' owner, Michael Bailey, for disorderly conduct because of the way he conducted himself after the officer shot and killed his dog. Mr. Bailey spent the night in jail, the night his dog died.

I understand that these allegations may be already under investigation by both the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and the Washington Humane Society, but I still believe that anyone with a connection to Washington must speak out on this abhorrent act of animal cruelty so that justice is done and the wanton killings of dogs everywhere by our police officers do not go unnoticed. Washington, D.C., is not the only municipality with this problem. Therefore, I am asking you, on behalf of your constituents, to write to Mayor Adrian Fenty and ask that through and complete investigations be undertaken, that any act of animal cruelty involved in this case be pursued vigorously, and that measures be taken to prevent these killings from happening again. I am attaching a suggested letter for your or your staff to send to the Mayor.

What makes this matter particularly bad is that the MPD was on the Department of Justice's watch list for seven years as one of the police jurisdictions known for excessive use of force, and was just recently released from the special monitoring two months ago. But as long as these activities are going on in the District by its police officers, the District of Columbia is not a safe place for any of us to visit.

Thank you for reading this letter and taking the action I am requesting.

Sincerely,

Suggested Letter from Congress(man/woman)/Senator:

Honorable Adrian M. Fenty

Mayor, District of Columbia

One Judiciary Square

Suite 1100

Washington, DC 20001

Washington, D.C.

Fax: 202-727-0505; E-mail: adrian.fenty@dc.gov

Dear Mayor Fenty:

My constituents and I were both shocked and saddened to read about the apparent senseless shooting of the dog named Precious on May 23rd by a Metropolitan Police Officer (MPD). If the allegations against the officer who did the shooting are true, this is not the kind of activity that we would expect to see in our nation's capital, a city of which we are all citizens. Moreover, it gives our citizens such a negative view of this great city that some of they may choose not to visit it, and that would be wrong.

My hope is that you have ordered or will order a thorough and fair investigation of the allegations about the May 23rd shooting and, should the findings show that there indeed was an act of cruelty to animals involved, that you make sure that those findings are referred to the U.S. Attorney's office for prosecution. Police officers everywhere must understand that they are there to protect and serve the public and that if they commit crimes in the course of carrying out their responsibilities, they, too, will be prosecuted. And our nation's capital should serve as a model for not standing for illegal activities by its police officers.

Behind the taking of the life of an innocent dog, the tragedy of this incident is that the reputations of the thousands of other dedicated, brave police officers could be tarnished because of the actions of a few, and that, too, would be wrong.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

There are no further postings or appendices below this point on the Shooting of Precious

But please feel free to continue scrolling down this site for past postings on other issues facing dogs in DC.

Please Help Save Bubba From Being Killed by Washington DC City Officials

Please go to www.SaveBubba.blogspot.com to learn how you can help to save a dog from death row in Washington, D.C.

Bubba, a gentle, 2-year old neutered yellow lab dog with no record of any aggression to people, dogs or prey, was accidentally let of of his yard by a workman on March 17th. On the street, he encountered and then got into a fight with another dog. Shortly after that, Bubba was seized by city officials and he has been impounded on death row ever since. Now, the District of Columbia wants to put Bubba to death. Bubba's only crime was to act like most dogs would and defend himself.

It seems that the District of Columbia, one of the most dog-unfriendly cities in the country, cannot tell the different between an accident and an irresponsible act, between a dangerous dog and a common dog fight, between due process and miscarriage of justice. Moreover, the city's department of health, which is responsible for animal control (no one in the city government is responsible for animal welfare), has a reputation for bowing to pressure from influential city council members and citizens.

Bubba needs your help. Please take the time to visit the above site and take whatever action you can to help out. The next time, this could be your dog.

Thank you.

STATEMENT BEFORE THE DC CITY COUNCIL'S COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT (MPD), FEBRUARY 25, 2008

Mr. Chairman. Good morning. I have been a resident of the District of Columbia for 29 years. I am appearing today in my capacity as a private citizen and as an advocate for animals. Thank you for the opportunity to address an issue that is important to more than 20 percent of the citizens of the District of Columbia.

My sole purpose here today is to comment on my extremely favorable reaction to MPD Chief Cathy Lanier's and the Police Academy's prompt response with plans for a training program to address what is a low frequency but high impact, high risk problem. To put my comments on the MPD's very positive response in perspective, I will first describe my limited view of the problem, which is the unwarranted shootings of dogs by police officers in the District of Columbia.

I must say at the outset that the problem is not personal to me. My experiences with the MPD have been extremely favorable in the 29 years --- 25,000 walks --- I have walked my dogs in the District, a city, as you know, that is essentially without dog parks. My involvement with the problem stems from my concern for animals, and I believe that an unwarranted shooting of a dog by anyone is a form of animal cruelty. My contacts with this problem have been several.

In early 2005, after hearing about a horrific incident involving of a Montgomery Country police officer shooting a dog on its own stoop, I conducted an informal survey of several dozen police officers from various agencies functioning in DC to find out what kind of training they received on how to handle dogs. All except one said they received no training. The one exception -- not an MPD officer -- smiled and pointed to his gun. Several months later, in July 2005, I reported the results of this survey in a letter to the editor published in The Washington Post concerning another horrific incident involving an Arlington County police officer and an animal. I concluded that letter by writing that similar such incidents will occur unless " law enforcement departments, animal control centers, and humane societies join together to deal with the matter of training and equipping officers to deal with animals," for their own protection as well as for the protection of citizens and animals.

A month later, another incident did occur, this time just blocks from where I live in DC. As reported in The Washington Post, a MPD officer responding to a false burglar alarm in broad daylight in Georgetown, shot and killed a Weimaraner dog named Peach in her own yard. The officer said that Peach was attacking her. In response to this incident, I wrote the Mayor, urging the city to follow the lead of other police jurisdictions in implementing programs to train officers on how to handle animals in general, and dogs in particular, for the protection of the officers as well as citizens and their dogs. A month later, I received a somewhat tepid response from a mid-level person at the now-Police Academy thanking me for my suggestions, ensuring me that police were trained on how to handle animals, and inviting me to offer further suggestions in the future. (To the Academy's credit, I learned just recently that they did in fact purchase the police-training film I recommended --- "What Dogs Are Telling Cops" --- and incorporated it into the required annual firearm training.)

In September 2006, a dog named Princess was shot to death in a very crowded Dupont Circle in broad daylight by a Park Police officer. The officer, who said Princess was attacking him, was exonerated, even though not a single person at the scene reported that the dog was acting aggressively.

In July 2007, an MPD officer responding to a dog-bites-dog incident in Adams Morgan was getting ready to shoot the larger dog, Sidney, even though the situation was under control when she arrived. Cooler heads prevailed and Sidney was spared.

On the evening of last December 24th, a two-year-old boxer named Scooby was shot to death by an MPD officer responding to am unrelated complaint on the property of West End's Frances Junior High School in a de facto, off-hours dog park, frequented even by police officers and their dogs. The officer said that Scooby was attacking him.

Finally, on February 22nd, Channel 7 reported an incident involving a police officer and dogs that took place in a Georgetown park earlier that week, fortunately without a serious outcome. The details of the incident are not relevant to the problem here except for several statements made by the police officer and his commanding officer, which characterize precisely the nature of the problem of concern to me. In that incident, the officer, who was legitimately responding to a separate complaint about off-leash dogs in a park, encountered a woman in the park with her elderly dogs off leash. In the ensuing conversation, the woman alleges that the police officer told her that "he could have shot the dogs if he wanted to if he felt threatened." (Later, in a phone conversation with Channel 7, the officer's commanding officer commented that "officers are allowed to discharge their weapons against an animal only if their safety is threatened. . . But . . . that is a very subjective thing to determine.") Also, during the incident, the woman said that the police officer told her that he was once bitten by a Jack Russell terrier, and "so he now carries his gun with him when he goes jogging."

When I heard these last comments, surprised that these were the official lines of the MPD two months after the shooting of Scooby, I inquired about the status of the internal review regarding Scooby's shooting. What I learned was that Scooby's owner was notified (by a voice-mail message) that the shooting of Scooby was justified because his dog was attacking the officer. This, despite the fact that there was absolutely evidence to corroborate an attack, among other things.

It seems evident to me that we DC citizens have reason to conclude that the MPD's policy is that if an officer believes that a dog --- on public property or its own property --- is threatening him, the officer is permitted to kill the dog with his firearm. In other words, an officer is not required to assess (albeit, quickly) whether a dog is truly aggressive, is not required to attempt to defuse the aggression by proven means, and is not required to consider less lethal means of force besides his or her firearm, as would be required by the Department of Justice's Memorandum of Understanding on The Use of Force.

For the years I have been walking my dogs in DC parks, those of us with non-aggressive dogs on public --- or private --- property had only to fear getting a ticket if we had the dog off leash. Now, it seems, the penalty is having our dogs shot by the police. There is something fundamentally wrong with this.* I think a lot of people would support me if I reacted to this by saying: No, a police officer would not be justified in shooting a dog simply if he feels threatened by it. There should be more to it than that. No, the matter is shooting a dog should not be a subjective matter, it can be very much an objective matter with the property training. And No, a police officer should not be justified in taking his gun with him when he goes jogging to defend himself against dogs. (If the latter were the case, shouldn’t the District drop its ban on handguns and let all of us arm ourselves against aggressive dogs? Few, I hope, would argue for that, especially police officers.)

I do not believe that any of the above statements --- or shootings for that matter --- by the police officers were expressions of bravado on their part, but genuine admissions that they do not know what to do in situations regarding seemingly aggressive dogs. Fortunately, the problem of police officers shooting dogs in the District is not a high frequency occurrence, but it is a high risk, high consequence matter, especially to the dog that is shot and its owner. I understand that DC police shoot about 12 - 15 dogs a year, mostly in the course of incidents involving criminal activity. Part of that is due to the comparatively low percentage ownership of dogs in the District (about 23%, according to a recent USA Today article), but also because, fortunately, most DC police officers do not fear dogs and know how to handle them from their own personal experiences. But I would venture to guess that even 12-15 dogs a year by best practice standards is still high, and one unwarranted shooting is one too many. Incidentally, I do not know what the frequency is of dogs biting police officers in the District, but my guess is that it is not very high. However, I admit that the wrong dog can do serious damage to a person, especially a child, and can be a serious distraction during a criminal incident.

After the Scooby incident in December, I wrote a letter to the Mayor, again urging the city to put in place a program for police officers on how to handle dogs, for the officer's own protections, and the protection of citizens and their dogs. Within just a few days, I received a message from Police Chief Cathy Lanier, thanking me for my comments and inviting me to partner with the Police Academy to help improve the MPD's training in this area. As I wrote Chief Lanier, her prompt, positive and forward-looking response was quite a remarkable, especially compared to the tepid response I received three years ago after the shooting of Peach, and especially with everything else she has on her plate. Within minutes of Chief Lanier's message, I received a call from Inspector Brito at the Police Academy, inviting me to visit the Academy to discuss the matter further, which I did and will continue to do if I can be of help. My comments in the below letter published in The Georgetown Current sum up my favorable reaction to the Chief's and Inspector's response:

Two years ago, after the shooting of the Weimaraner Peach on Foxhall Road, I made several recommendations to the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) to introduce training for its officers on how to handle dogs. This training was meant primarily for the officers' own protection, which has to be paramount. Immediately after the shooting of Scooby, I resurrected those recommendations without trying to judge what might have happened in Scooby's sad situation. With everything else going on, MPD Chief Cathy Lanier responded immediately with a positive, forward-looking message and invited me to visit the Police Academy to discuss my recommendations with them, which I did. I was impressed that they had indeed instituted my previous recommendations, and was even more impressed with the positive reaction of the Academy's director, Inspector Victor Brito. I am, therefore, confident that the MPD will achieve Chief Lanier's stated goal, which is to have the best Use of Force police department in the country. The training would help officers determine truly aggressive behavior in a dog, provide officers with techniques to defuse aggressive dog situations, and then offer levels of force appropriate to the actual threats.

On the basis of what I have seen so far, my expectations for a successful training program are high, but it is only now in the planning stage. But I shall remain optimistic that a model program will emerge to the point of saying that if the MPD's response to the shooting of Peach three years ago was anything like Chief Lanier's and Inspector Brito's this year, it is highly likely that the shooting of Scooby would not have occurred.

I have to qualify my enthusiasm, however, with two points, both outside of the jurisdiction of the Police Academy. First, from what I know, there is mo MPD General Order on the matter of handling animals in general and dogs in particular. It seems to me that such an order would serve a very useful purpose for everyone and cover more than just the topic of concern here. And, second, surprised that the internal review in Scooby's incident concluded as it did, especially given the highly-trained, independent teams that are supposed to do such investigations, I looked into the matter further. As it turns out, I learned that investigations of the use of firearms where only dogs are involved are not done by the FITs (Force Investigation Team), but by lieutenants in the districts where the dog shootings occurr, even though there may have been people nearby. I would strongly encourage the MPD to change that policy, and refer ALL incidents of discharges of weapons to the FITs. Otherwise, nothing is learned and the effects of the Police Academy's training program will be diluted, if not eliminated. The primary benefit of the FIT reviews should be to improve the quality of the MPD to ensure the public's and the MPD's safety, but if they are not done thoroughly and independently, that benefit may be lost and the wrong message sent, as seems to be the case now.

Looking beyond the above two loose ends, I highly commend Chief Lanier and the Police Academy for their excellent response to the need for an improved training program for officers on how to handle dogs. But I also commend the overwhelming majority of the officers who over the years have dealt with our dogs and kept them out of harm's way because of their own experiences. Finally, I would urge the City Council to support the MPD's efforts by adequately funding and prioritizing them and enacting legislation that supports solving the basic problem.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.


* There is no question but that keeping a dog on its leash as the law requires (on public property) will reduce the risks of its getting shot. But from an officer's perspective, the question should not be whether a dog is leased or not, or on public or private property, but is the dog a threat and what means should be used to defuse the threat?

Read This First

Blogger has been extremely impressed by the prompt, positive and forward-looking reaction to this incident on the part of Police Chief Cathy Lanier, Inspector Victor Brito (director of the Police Academy) and his staff, and City Council members Jack Evans and Mary Cheh, especially with all else that is going on in the District that drains police resources. As we learn of specific measures taken to improve, where warranted, training for police officers on how to handle dogs (and animals in general), they will be posted here (see below message from Jack Evans to constituents). Inspector Brito's goal is to make DC's training a best practice and Blogger is encouraged that that will be possible. The MPD knows, however, that all of us believe that the safety of police officers on the street is of paramount importance, and it is in that spirit that suggestions for change have been offered.

E-mail message from Jack Evans to constituents:

Everyone is very shocked and saddened by the shooting of Scooby in Foggy Bottom at the end of the year. Besides, the senseless loss of a pet, it raises a lot of questions about public safety as an innocent bystander could easily have been hurt.

I’ve been in touch with both Scooby’s owner and MPD Chief Lanier. We are all very committed to preventing something like this from happening again. My office and I are working with the Washington Humane Society (WHS) to set up a formal training program in honor of Scooby. WHS is providing specially produced videos focusing on “police to dog shootings” and hands-on workshops to officers in dog behavior, learning how to read the body language dogs display and non-lethal defensive tactics in the event an officer feels threatened.

Chief Lanier is also planning additional training during their Roll Call Training modules and their 2008 pistol re-qualifications.

I want to thank everyone who’s been interested in this important matter and especially [concerend citizens] who met with MPD and offered specific recommendations to avoid this happening again.

Jack

Dog Off Leash Killed by DC Police Office on Christmas Eve

The following story was reported by NBC on December 26, 2007.
Click here for story on-line


WASHINGTON -- A D.C. man is calling for an investigation after his dog was fatally shot by a police officer on Christmas Eve. Michel Morauw said he was walking Scooby, a 2 1/2-year-old boxer, in a small park near 24th and N streets Northwest just after 11 p.m. on Monday. According to the police department's incident report, an officer said he was on patrol and entered the park "when an unleashed dog attacked him." The report said the officer fired his weapon and struck the dog. Morauw said he is still in shock over what happened. He acknowledged the dog was not wearing a leash at the time, but he said the boxer posed no threat. Morauw said Scooby was eight to 10 yards away from the officer. The dog was frozen in fear, Morauw said. Morauw, general manager of the Park Hyatt Washington Hotel, described himself as very supportive of the police, but he said he can't understand how this happened. "It's a family dog. We have three kids. It was Christmas night. There was no reason," Morauw said.

The following story was reported 12/26 by USA9 (click here for story on-line)

DC Police Shoot Family's Pet Right In Front Of Them

WASHINGTON, DC (WUSA) -- Michel Morauw took the family's two year old boxer Scooby for a walk in a park near 24th and N Street NW after Christmas Eve dinner. He was off the leash when he encountered Officer Michael Handy of the Second District. "All of a sudden I heard someone scream, hold your dog, and by the time I got around the gate, he was aiming at the dog." Tess Morauw was walking toward to park to join her husband and Scooby and heard the shot. "I called Scooby and he came running. My husband is screaming, he's shot, he's shot, and then I see the trail of blood leading back to the park,"she said. As Scooby lie dying on the sidewalk surrounded by his owners...they called their three daughters to come say goodbye. "Our youngest is in a wheelchair and she couldn't come, but one daughter made it in time." The Morauw's account differs from that of officer [X]... a 20 year veteran of the police department...who was dispatched to the park to handle a call. "He felt the dog was going to attack him so he discharged his service weapon," Second District Supervisor Captain Willie Smith said. "We're sorry the dog was shot, but if it had been on a leash this wouldn't have happened."
DC law requires animals to be on leashes while on public property. They can run off leash in official dog parks. The park at 24th and N is not one of them. Owners who violate the leash law can be fined 25 dollars for a first offense. Scooby's family is determined to make sure police release a full accounting on the night their dog died. "It doesn't matter what day it happens, but it's particularly difficult on Christmas Eve with our three daughters at home," Morauw said. "There needs to be a full and genuine investigation. I want to see that report."

Blogger's notes:

(1) The officer was not injured during the incident. In fact, what we heard, the dog never touched the officer.

(2) From reliable sources who knew Scooby, we learned that Scooby was an extremely playful, gentle dog. Floppy and bouncy were the two words used to describe him. He was very much still a puppy at two years old, many who knew him said, but he was not a puppy.

(3) The area where Scooby was shot was the property of a middle school (Francis Middle School) with a condominium close nearby. We visted the scene at 11:00 p.m. and it is well lighted. The area was well known by police to be used as a de facto dog park. In fact, we learned from one person that officers from the nearby SOD used the area themselves behind the school (when school was not in session) to run their dogs themselves. But it was not a city sanctioned dog park because the city has very few of them, an issue that is still under consideration elsewhere.

(4) We also learned that at the time of the incident, Mr. Morauw was picking up after Scooby when Scooby heard the police officer yelling and then broke loose from him and ran around some trees toward the officer who had just gotten out of his cruiser. Mr. Morauw ran to Scooby, who by then was standing still a number of feet away from the officer. He yelled to the officer that Scooby was a good dog and wouldn't do anything. The officer ignored Mr. Morauw's screams and even as Mr. Morauw was running to get Scooby, before he could get Scooby the officer fired one shot and hit Scooby. Scooby cried out in pain and immediately ran down the street toward his home, about 100 feet away, and died.

(5) It is believed that the incident may have been captured on the security cameras of nearby buildings. (Police cruisers do not have video systems, we have learned.)

(6) We have also learned that altogether officers carry "nightsticks" (batons) and pepper spray, they do not carry tazers and may not consider the former two to be effective against certain dog attacks.

Blogger would also like to note the following.

In August 2005, a gentle Weimaraner named Peach was shot to death by a police officer in the dog's own yard when the police officer was responding to a false burglar alarm call. After that incident, Blogger wrote to Mayor Williams and City Councilman Jack Evans (in whose District both these incidents occurred) pleading with the city to develop a training program for police officers on how to handle dog situations. Details on how to start the program were included in the letter, based on a conversation Blogger had with the ASPCA in NY. The letter reported the results of an informal poll of several dozen police officers in the District that Blogger had just recently undertaken in which police officers said they received no training. Eventually, Blogger received a response from someone in the police department thanking him for his ideas, assuring him that there was a program developed in conjunction with the Washington Humane Society, but inviting him to call with further ideas. The following year, in September 2006, a dog named Princess was shot to death in a very busy Dupont Circle (by a Park Police offcier) under circumstances similar to Scooby's death.

BLOGGER HAS LEARNED AND IS ENCOURGED THAT INDEED THE CITY DID INSTITIUTE TRAINING FOR POLICE IN "WHAT DOGS ARE TRYING TO TELL COPS" AFTER THE ABOVE INCIDENT ON FOXHALL ROAD.

(7) Putting aside the training that police officers do or do not receive regarding handling animals, all police officers are required to follow the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on The Use of Force. In this case, the officer had available his knee, his baton, his pepper spray, his tazer gun to use before the lethal weapon. (We have learned that DC police do not carry tazer guns.)

(8) According To the American Humane, 90 percent of vicious dog encounters can be defused by proper training. If 90 percent of vicious dog encounters can be defused, 100 percent of non-vicious dog encounters can be. SCOOBY WAS NOT A VICIOUS DOG. HE WAS A TWO-YEAR OLD PLAYFUL DOG, STILL VERY MUCH A PUPPY ACCORDING TO THOSE WHO KNEW HIM. PLAYFUL DOGS DO NOT TURN VICIOUS EVEN WHEN PROVOKED.

How many times have we read about similar instances aorund the country where officers have shot innocent, gentle dogs that the dogs were attacking them when there is no evidence of an attack or even a touching? (Remember Patton in 2003 in Tennessee?) Why wasn't this officer trained how to recognize aggressive behavior in dogs and how to defuse aggressive behavior? What didn't the officer use his baton, pepper spray, or tazer before he used his gun? Was he properly trained in the DOJ's MOU on The Use of Force (against people or animals)? This was a 20-year veteran of the police force who shot Scooby, and not some rookie police officer.

It seems that as long as police officers do not receive appropriate training on how to handle dogs, the fine for having your dog off a leash is no longer $25, but could be your dog's life. Let's hope that due process, not to mention common sense, did not die on Christmas eve along with poor Scooby. While we can rightly say that this sad incident would not have happened had Scooby been on a leash, that would be equivalent to saying that police officers have the right to kill all dogs off a leash or that police officers can use lethal force against someone who approaches them when the officers are writing a parking ticket. (No police officer I've met here would say that.) The truth is, this also would not have happened if the officer had been trained properly on the handling of dogs and the DOJ MOU on The Use of Force. The training is first and foremost for an officer's protection and then the public's, including their dogs. The officer involved in this shooting has as much a right to our sympathy as Scooby does. No one would not believe him if he said he thought he was about to be attacked by a vicious dog. But based on the facts that we have garnered, then officer might not have recognized that Scooby was not vicious and might not have known what to do if he had been.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS BLOG IS NOT TO THROW STONES AT ANYONE ABOUT THE EVENT OF DECEMBER 24T. WHAT HAPPENED, HAPPENED, AND NO ONE CAN CHANGE IT. LIKEWISE, NONE OF US HAS ANY SAY OVER WHAT THE MPD'S INTERNAL REVIEW COMES UP WITH. BUT WE DO HAVE A SAY IN HELPING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IMPROVE ITS TRAINING FOR THE FUTURE, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BLOG IS ALL ABOUT. MOST OFFICERS WOULD KNOW WHAT TO DO. THOSE WHO DO NOT SHOULD DEMAND THE TRAINING. AND WE KNOW THAT THEMPD WANTS TO IMPROVE ITS TRAINING.

Blogger invites your attention to a comment beneath this posting from someone obviously knowledgeable about these matters in general, and our comment after that.