The United States Court of Appeals decided that police officers are now justified to put down the citizens dogs if they do anything but sit silently.
The historical decision came after an appeal from Mark and Cheryl Brown, from Michigan. The couple were law-suiting the Battle Creek Police Department, the City of Battle Creek, and police officers Jeffrey Case, Christof Klein, and Damon Young. All after their beloved dogs were put down by officers.
The incident occurred on April 17th, 2013, when a search warrant was released on the home where Mark and Cheryl were living. All, because a police informant reported another man living there.
Therefore, Mark Brown has nothing to do with the police operation, but while he came home on his lunch break to let out his two pit bulls. After doing so, he locked the door and headed back to work when police arrived and detained him. Despite he informed the officers he had the keys, they ignored him and make their entry. The family dogs were hit during the operation.
So the Browns dispute the claims by police that the dogs were barking. And while officer Klein said the larger dog was barking and “lunged” at him, Mark said that the smaller of the pit bulls “never barked a day in her life.” Later, the officer declared the dog “had only moved a few inches.”
After that, officer Klein fired the smaller dog and both pit bulls run away and hide in the basement. But unfortunately, here the officers put them down. They explained the decision saying they “did not feel [they] could safely clear the basement with those dogs down there.”
However, that’s being said, the court ruled in favor of the officers. They agreed with the lower court ruling that the police officers were covered under “doctrine of qualified immunity.” Therefore, no compensating for the plaintiffs in the case, had to be paid.
The decision created controversy among people, with many dog owners being afraid that once the precedent has been set, now the cops can legally hurt their four-legged companions, just because they are dogs.
What do you think about the court’s decision?