What's new
By:
Filters

Austin Police Officer Fatally Shot Dog While Responding To Wrong House

jodav

jodav

VIP Member
An Austin police officer who responded to the wrong house on a domestic disturbance call is accused of fatally shooting an innocent man's dog.

s-JUSTICE-FOR-CISCO-large.jpg
The dog's owner, Michael Paxton, was playing Frisbee with the Blue Heeler, named Cisco, on Saturday afternoon when the officer entered his home, ABC reported.

"While I was at gunpoint, my dog came from my backyard barking at the officer," Paxton wrote on the "Justice For Cisco" Facebook page. "I yelled for the officer to not shoot my dog, that he will not bite, but the officer immediately shot and killed my dog right in front of me."

As of Tuesday afternoon, the Facebook page had 43,262 "Likes."

"I was unable to stop or restrain Cisco because I was being held at gunpoint," Paxton also said.

Austin Police Department Sergeant David Daniels said that the officer, Thomas Griffin, is "distraught" by the incident, according to NBC.

Paxton's neighbors admitted that they had been fighting at the time that officers were looking for their residence, the Austin American-Statesman reported.
HTML: 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/17/justice-for-cisco-police-officer-killed-dog-texas_n_1432682.html

[video=youtube;BWqDR4c07fw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWqDR4c07fw&feature=related[/video]
 
Unfortunate for sure but it must be so difficult for officers who have to deal with all types of dangerous situations to make the right call everytime?
 
I agree with you Gman, it is a very tough job, but what I can't seem to understand is why he shot the dog so quickly, very sad for the everyone involved. :(
 
Sounds like that officer is trying to pass the buck to me the way he is saying "why didn't you get your dog" how the hell was he suppose to if he's at gun point?!
He knows he's done wrong, admit it, take the blame and move on. Just be thankful he didn't have a g/friend back there who came in and started shouting.
 
I agree with leemoo, your not going to do anything with a gun pointed at you apart from be scared. Did this situation demand the policeman brandish his gun in the first place? they have other defensive weapons that if used would have probably avoided this situation.
 
Jodav, the video said the officer was given information that there was a drunk armed man on the scene, so yes, the officer would have came up with his weapon out.
 
Austin police officer's duties for his own safety after he kills pet dog
by SHELTON GREEN / KVUE News
kvue.com
Posted on April 18, 2012 at 9:30 PM
Updated today at 10:42 PM

AUSTIN – Austin Police have changed the duties of one of an Officer for his own safety they say after threats poured in shortly after he shot and killed a pet dog this weekend he says was threatening him.

Austin Police are also taking another look at the department’s Deadly Force Use Policy when it comes to aggressive animals.

“Aggression is overused. Dogs are usually, if anything, fearful. Most dogs aren't aggressive. I mean, they just aren't,” said Troy Pfeifer, owner of “Sit Means Sit Dog Training”.

Pfeifer teaches children, mail carriers and meter readers how to avoid being bitten by dogs.

“Most dogs, and this is the huge majority of dogs, if you stop, fold in your body parts and you don't move, most dogs will come bump you, look at you, smell you and walk away,” added Pfeifer.

This past weekend, Austin police officer Thomas Griffin was responding to a report of a domestic disturbance on East 5th Street. The problem was that the 911 caller gave dispatch the wrong address. When Officer Griffin arrived to what he thought was the scene, he yelled at the first person he saw to put up his hands. That person was Michael Paxton who was with his blue heeler, named Cisco, in their front yard.

Officer Griffin says he shot and killed Cisco because the dog was charging him.

Austin police's policy on deadly force against aggressive animals says: “In circumstances where officers encounter any animal which reasonably appears under the circumstances to pose an imminent threat to the safety of officers or others, officers are authorized to use deadly force to neutralize such a threat.”

“There's so much room for interpretation there," said Michael Paxton, Cisco's owner. "Is the dog running at you barking? Is it a dog biting you? Or Is it a dog just barking at you?”

“I don't think deadly force was required but it was his quick first response,” says Lauren Hays, a certified animal behaviorist who has her own ideas about changes she believes APD should consider when reviewing its policy on aggressive animals and deadly force.

“I think there could be something in there about it's also possible to use other things to stop that threat short of using a weapon," said Hays. "You might train the officers, to think through, how fast is this going to happen? How big is this dog? Is this a known dangerous dog already? Think through a couple of things like that before going straight to the gun.”
 
I know this situation is different but it shows that these officers never know what to expect.

A regular traffic stop? or maybe not!


The officer emptied his semiautomatic in retaliation! Darn good shooting from somebody that just got the crap scared out of him! A coroner’s jury ruled that Hamilton , Montana , Police Officer Ross Jessop was justified in killing a man during a late night traffic stop. It took a six woman jury an hour to rule that Officer Ross justifiably shot and killed Raymond Thane Davis after Davis shot at him. The five hours of testimony included this chilling video recording of the shooting made by the police car dash camera. Davis first tried shooting Officer Jessop in the face from a few inches away. The click of Davis ’ revolver’s hammer hitting a previously fired round was audible on the tape. Davis then shot again as Officer Jessop retreated and drew his own weapon.

Watch this one twice (at least) to get the FULL bone chilling effect. It’ll make your hair stand up! As indicated earlier, this happened in Hamilton , Montana . Just shows how fast things can go to crap. If you listen close, the first time the suspect pulled the trigger it went “click”. They found out later that the hammer fell on a spent case in the revolver. The outcome would have been much different if there had been a live round in the cylinder. The driver of the vehicle (suspect) died of his wounds after being hit, then driving into a telephone pole after he sped away. Never let your guard down, stay calm and shoot straight… as many times as you have bullets. Reload as required.


[video=youtube;4zvRN1i4_rM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zvRN1i4_rM[/video]
 
from seeing the video seems the ofice told a diferent story to is colleague.
A difficult situation. But the office did not seem to check to see who was in the house and as said seemed to shoot the dog rather qucik. He asked the guy to put his hands up and held him at gunpoint, then says why didnt he get the dog?
to me it seems the office was confused and obviously had been told there was an armed guy on the scene.
But to shoot the dog within 20 seconds of being on the scene is rather quick and not time to judge the scene etc. Only after he shot the dog did he ask the guy questions!
Very sad story and and innocent man and his dog got in the way due to error.
 
What about the dispatcher sitting comfortably behind the safety of a desk? They had a role in this too when they sent the officer to the incorrect address?
 
Gman496 said:
What about the dispatcher sitting comfortably behind the safety of a desk? They had a role in this too when they sent the officer to the incorrect address?
Click to expand...
true! maybe they should have verified the address, but then if the caller gave out the wrong address once they would have probably in panic given it out wrong again!
 
Linny40 said:
true! maybe they should have verified the address, but then if the caller gave out the wrong address once they would have probably in panic given it out wrong again!
Click to expand...

Yes that's a possibility too Linny. I'm not laying blame at any one individual but simply pointing out that the whole sorry affair was a combination of miss information to start with, wrong address, target suspected to be drunk, in a heightened state and armed, angry nervous dog and one nervous officer. It just isn't as straight forward as "The terrible officer shot the poor dog"?

One thing is very clear though, that innocent guy and his dog were not a factor in the resulting events, they were without doubt the unfortunate victims of circumstance. :dunno:
 
problem is if they do get a "sorry" for the police its not going to help and nor is any compensation - poor fella was scared out of hit wits and lost his companion :( no amount of compensation is going to bring him back :(
Gman think everyone has their part to be blamed for except the poor guy and his dog who had no idea what was going on.
Unfortunately this sort of thing is not a 1 off. will any lesson be learnt from it - doubt it sadly :(
But if we were in that situation - who knows!!
 
It always blows me away how a person who is normally very reasonable, loses all sense of reason when an incident such as this occurs. How many will put more stock in the life of an animal than that of a human being. I mean this officer whose everyday job is to risk his life to protect the people, is now receiving death threats for shooting a dog. I am not trying to get around the fact that yes, both the man and his dog were the victims of this event and it is terrible that it worked out this way. But come on, as rtm stated he was dispatched to a domestic disturbance that involved a drunk and armed man, so he was on guard immediately arriving on the scene and then here comes a dog running towards him. Anyone witnessed how fast a dog can attack and move? How on earth would he have time to put away his sidearm and pull pepper spray or another alternative to deter the dog? And at the same time maintain control of the suspect? So....unfortunate? Yes. Is the officer the devil in disguise? Not even close.
 
As stated in the article I posted:

Austin police's policy on deadly force against aggressive animals says: “In circumstances where officers encounter any animal which reasonably appears under the circumstances to pose an imminent threat to the safety of officers or others, officers are authorized to use deadly force to neutralize such a threat.”

The policy is now under review, and may be changed in light of this incident. Most police department's policy is to send at least 2 officers to a domestic situation, as the situation can change rapidly. His supervisor which showed up was more than likely his back-up to the domestic. The police chief did apologize to the owner, and from what I have seen, the owner doesn't want any harm to come to the officer, but for the department to review their policy.
 
Animal Control report shows Cisco had recently charged stranger

Cisco-coverphoto.jpg

by KVUE.com
kvue.com
Posted on April 19, 2012 at 10:56 AM



AUSTIN -- A service report from Animal Control officials states that a dog recently shot and killed by an Austin police officer was accused of charging at a stranger last month.

The report states that a citizen named William Harris made a call to Animal Control on March 21.

He told officials that he was walking when he came upon a man, believed to be Michael Paxton, owner of the dog named Cisco. Harris told Animal Control that the man's dog began to charge at him. He states that the owner, Paxton, told Harris to stand still so the dog would not bite him.

Harris said he felt that if the owner was not there, the "aggressive" dog would have bitten him. Harris said he wanted the owner of the dog to learn about leash laws and not letting his dogs run loose.

Over the weekend Officer Thomas Griffin responded to the wrong house for a domestic disturbance on East 5th Street. When he arrived, he yelled at Michael Paxton, who lived at the house, to put his hands up. The officer claims the man's blue heeler, Cisco, charged at him. He shot and killed the dog.

Austin police have since apologized and are now taking a look at the department's deadly force use policy when it comes to aggressive animals
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top