Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Chicago police must pay 330k for killing dog in home raid
The Lookout ^ | 08192011 | LIz Goodwin

Posted on 08/19/2011 8:10:23 PM PDT by Artemis Webb

A federal jury says Chicago law enforcement must pay $330,000 to a family after officers shot their dog during a home raid that turned up no illegal activity.

Thomas Russell, then 18, opened the door to his home in February 2009 to find police officers with their guns drawn. He asked if he could lock up his 9-year-old black labrador, named Lady, before letting the officers inside. The Chicago Tribune describes what happened next:

Police refused the request and came into the house, the lawsuit said. When Lady came loping around the corner with her tail wagging, Officer Richard Antonsen shot the dog, according to the suit, which alleged excessive force, false arrest and illegal seizure for taking the dog's life.

The cops handcuffed Russell and his 16-year-old brother, and eventually charged Russell with obstructing their operation. He was found not guilty. According to NBC, the jury awarded $175,000 to Russell, $85,000 to his little brother, and $35,000 each to the brothers' parents. The officer who shot the dog owes $2,000 in damages, and his supervisor owes $1,000, according to NBC.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption
KEYWORDS: warondogs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last
A law enforcement spokeswoman told the Tribune that the officers were protecting themselves.
1 posted on 08/19/2011 8:10:26 PM PDT by Artemis Webb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

Damn shame the trigger happy cop didn’t have to shell out more than 2k.


2 posted on 08/19/2011 8:11:41 PM PDT by Artemis Webb (Perry 2012! A Conservative who can win!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb
When Lady came loping around the corner with her tail wagging, Officer Richard Antonsen shot the dog

Dumbass. And taxpayers get to foot the bill for this. What was the raid about, more War on Drugs insanity?
3 posted on 08/19/2011 8:13:25 PM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

Glad the family is getting a payment, but the cop, not the city, should have to pay.

His $2K fine is NOTHING. And what an idiot - shooting a dog whose tail was wagging!


4 posted on 08/19/2011 8:13:32 PM PDT by Joann37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

All these payouts should come out of the police’s budget.

Only then would there be any accountability for their actions.


5 posted on 08/19/2011 8:13:32 PM PDT by DB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

He felt threatened by a 9 year old black lab? what a chicken ____ fagot.


6 posted on 08/19/2011 8:16:54 PM PDT by RC one (NO MORE RINOs!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

Protecting themselves from being licked and drooled on. What idiot would shoot a Lab wagging its tail?


7 posted on 08/19/2011 8:20:31 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (My tagline is in the shop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DB
All these payouts should come out of the police’s budget.

Completely agree.

8 posted on 08/19/2011 8:20:59 PM PDT by Onelifetogive (I tweet, too... @Onelifetogive)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Joann37

“And what an idiot - shooting a dog whose tail was wagging!”

He must have confused the dog with a gator! Hey, Sonny Crockett had a gator on board his boat, and you didn’t mess with that fella/s;)


9 posted on 08/19/2011 8:24:47 PM PDT by Frank_2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

I know, but it’s a start. Too bad the taxpayers are going to get shafted for the rest of the bill.


10 posted on 08/19/2011 8:24:57 PM PDT by Ronin (Obamanation has replaced Bizarroworld as the most twisted place in the universe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

sound like the police officer was in the wrong here. The police officer and supervisor should be fined more


11 posted on 08/19/2011 8:26:02 PM PDT by 4rcane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb
Chicago police must pay 330k for killing dog in home raid

Wouldn't that be "Chicago taxpayers" who have to shell out the cash?

12 posted on 08/19/2011 8:29:42 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4rcane

Fine? how about FIRE... As in FIRE the officer.

And the stupidvisor if he was there too.


13 posted on 08/19/2011 8:29:46 PM PDT by cableguymn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb
I was a police officer for the LAPD in the 70’s and never was threatened by a family dog. A member of a family, yes. but never by a dog. A few growled at me, protecting their master. I would just scratch their head and they would settle down. sheesh.
14 posted on 08/19/2011 8:32:06 PM PDT by ExtremeUnction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExtremeUnction

Over my 28 plus years as a police officer, I have been confronted on several occasions by dogs. Without exception, I tried my best to fend off the dog with whatever was present, a trashcan lid or a fence or my coat, whatever. In all those years, I have yet to shoot a dog (and I don’t like dogs).


15 posted on 08/19/2011 8:34:00 PM PDT by doc1019 (You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

Why a “federal” jury?

Oh well, this is better than the usual result.


16 posted on 08/19/2011 8:34:00 PM PDT by Forgotten Amendments (Days .... Weeks ..... Months .....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ronin

“I know, but it’s a start. Too bad the taxpayers are going to get shafted for the rest of the bill.”

I think it’s a great start, and a great precedent. Chicago is self-insured, but a lot of smaller cities aren’t. After having their cops using a few pets for target practice, let’s see what some of those cities’ insurance premiums look like - if they can actually GET insurance, that is.

Frankly, I’m not upset at all about the taxpayers in Chicago footing the bill. Eventually, it will hurt. Maybe that will wake them up!


17 posted on 08/19/2011 8:38:00 PM PDT by The Antiyuppie ("When small men cast long shadows, then it is very late in the day.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ExtremeUnction

The problem might be, the homeowner instinctively requesting to secure the dog...Knowing they’d shot the dog otherwise.


18 posted on 08/19/2011 8:38:43 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Shoot too!


19 posted on 08/19/2011 8:39:46 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RC one

“He felt threatened by a 9 year old black lab? what a chicken ____ fagot.”

Are these police REALLY the type of people citizens want “protecting” (and I use that word loosely) them? Should they even be allowed to carry guns?


20 posted on 08/19/2011 8:40:24 PM PDT by The Antiyuppie ("When small men cast long shadows, then it is very late in the day.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: doc1019

“Over my 28 plus years as a police officer, I have been confronted on several occasions by dogs. Without exception, I tried my best to fend off the dog with whatever was present, a trashcan lid or a fence or my coat, whatever. In all those years, I have yet to shoot a dog (and I don’t like dogs).”

Just a good loud yell and stamping your feet will scare 99% of the meanest dogs. It’s too bad that most police nowadays never get the opportunity to learn this, because shooting is just so much easier.


21 posted on 08/19/2011 8:43:43 PM PDT by The Antiyuppie ("When small men cast long shadows, then it is very late in the day.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb
the police aren't paying jack....other than the $3K. The taxpayers will get stuck paying it. The COPS should go to jail....or have the option of paying the award themselves.
22 posted on 08/19/2011 8:44:54 PM PDT by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Forgotten Amendments

There will be a lot of animal destruction if they enforce Martial Law or use extra legal, executive controlled, Gestapo-like forces and they will get away with it.

That’s a terror tactic to gain psychological control. A lot of people could be destroyed, too, for resisting tyranny.


23 posted on 08/19/2011 8:49:40 PM PDT by Surrounded_too
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DB

To be more specific, the bulk of the settlement should be paid with deductions from the salaries of administrative personnel, and down the chain of command to the guy who shot the dog. The rest should come from whoever appointed the chief of police.


24 posted on 08/19/2011 8:50:40 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

The dog killing is bad, but what is worse is that they tried to frame the 2 kids afterwards to cover their own behinds. Better to send some innocent citizens to jail and possibly give them a criminal record than admit you went to the wrong house and apologize. People wonder why I don’t trust Chicago cops!


25 posted on 08/19/2011 8:50:45 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb
Damn shame the trigger happy cop didn’t have to shell out more than 2k.

If that had happened to my family and dog, the paying would have just begun -- draw your own conclusions.

26 posted on 08/19/2011 8:51:39 PM PDT by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Antiyuppie

they should be confined in a mental ward and given lots of medications to control their psychotic behavior. I sat in on a mental health eval for a cop that got just that once. It was fun watching him being involuntarily confined in a mental asylum for being an a**hole. I was loving it.


27 posted on 08/19/2011 8:52:35 PM PDT by RC one (NO MORE RINOs!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: The Antiyuppie

Obviously you have never meant a dog that was intent on biting you in the butt. LOL! Stumping, yelling ... nothing works short of putting up a barrier between you and it.


28 posted on 08/19/2011 8:52:35 PM PDT by doc1019 (You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

Thugcop kills a family pet for kicks, pays a pittance, and the taxpayers get screwed. I’d be upset, except most of the idiots in Chicago vote Marxist, so my givead@mn is broken in this case.


29 posted on 08/19/2011 8:53:52 PM PDT by piytar (The Obama Depression. Say it early, say it often. Why? Because it's TRUE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DB
All these payouts should come out of the police’s budget.

They'll simply steal more to make up for it.

The officer belongs in jail at the minimum for animal cruelty, reckless/wanton destruction of property, false imprisonment.

As long as LEOs are held to a different legal standard than citizens this kind of thing will continue, and escalate. Eventually all citizens will view LEOs with the same level of suspicion and hostility that they would view any other organization if criminals.

30 posted on 08/19/2011 8:59:23 PM PDT by icanhasbailout (Some people would believe Karl Marx was conservative if he had good hair and ran on the GOP ticket)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

Cops...... absolutely worthless. Give me my full 2nd admendment rights and you can do away with the lot of them. Totally useless in my opinion.

Sure there may be good ones but whats the point? They do not protect you, and the good ones, who really do try to serve and protect are usually hamstrung by politics.


31 posted on 08/19/2011 9:04:42 PM PDT by walkingdead (It's easy, you just don't lead 'em as much....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

Our militarized “Law Enforcement” is the standing army our Founders feared.


32 posted on 08/19/2011 9:05:07 PM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Government borrowing is Taxation without Representation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Antiyuppie
Just a good loud yell and stamping your feet will scare 99% of the meanest dogs. It’s too bad that most police nowadays never get the opportunity to learn this, because shooting is just so much easier.

And fun. Lots of US cops these days, especially the younger ones, seem to be on power trips. I personally blame the war on drugs and the SWAT mentality, but there might be more to it than that.

33 posted on 08/19/2011 9:09:31 PM PDT by Ronin (Obamanation has replaced Bizarroworld as the most twisted place in the universe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba

Having lived in Chicago for 15 I will tel you the Police there are overly aggressive and almost always looking for a reason to use force.

When I lived there I tried to be very polite whenever interfacing with them, they are hair trigger and itching to use deadly force whenever possible


34 posted on 08/19/2011 9:15:08 PM PDT by 100American (Knowledge is knowing how, Wisdom is knowing when)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

I believe many owners would rather they be awarded a free shot at the officer that shot their dog.


35 posted on 08/19/2011 9:25:35 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

No.

If that is true you are sincerely f#@cked if you have a pet.

Mentioning the dog is to not have the police shoot the dog because they then can’t be surprised by it.

If you don’t mention it they can shoot it because they didn’t know it was there and it surprisedthem. If you do mention it by your logic they’ll shoot it because you want to lock it up.

They can’t have it both ways. Then there’s no way for you to be able to protect your animal.

And believe me, they do this to other animals. I still remember the female police officer who kicked the family cat across a room and said you’re lucky I didn’t shoot it.


36 posted on 08/19/2011 9:30:29 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

I can’t argue with the verdict except to agree the officer should of had to pay more.


37 posted on 08/19/2011 9:31:42 PM PDT by dog breath
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
The problem might be, the homeowner instinctively requesting to secure the dog...Knowing they’d shoot the dog otherwise.

No. If that is true you are sincerely f#@cked if you have a pet. Mentioning the dog is to not have the police shoot the dog because they then can’t be surprised by it. If you don’t mention it they can shoot it because they didn’t know it was there and it surprisedthem.

Uh...Thanks for that tip.

38 posted on 08/19/2011 9:33:32 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba; Surrounded_too
There will be a lot of animal destruction if they enforce Martial Law or use extra legal, executive controlled, Gestapo-like forces and they will get away with it.

That’s a terror tactic to gain psychological control. A lot of people could be destroyed, too, for resisting tyranny.

--------------------------------

Our militarized “Law Enforcement” is the standing army our Founders feared.


While I agree that in this day and age there are too many of us being hired that have "power trip" issues and honestly shouldn't be in law enforcement my main question would be exactly what gives the Federal Government, even in a "Martial Law" situation the right to give any local deputy or police officer direct orders to do anything?

I know half of my department who would laugh, toss a middle finger at the Fed Bureaucrat and leave our badges spinning while we left with all our gear to go and protect our families against said federal tyranny.

Nonetheless I know of no policy for any department around here (including my own) that would relinquish command in part or in whole to any Fed whom was trying to go against the citizens' constitutional rights. We're not military, we're not wholly owned by "The Government" like the military. We're sworn citizens that have a job. I can legally and willingly and would question a Federal Bureaucrat's orders, a Fed or military person cannot.

I can think of no situation nor any law where my Chief, nor any officer would allow his command to be absolved and our department become "gestapo" in the name of Government Tyranny.

I know a lot of law enforcement officers. Saying willy-nilly that "the police would become gestapo drones" is assuming a lot and without precedence here in the US. I just can't fathom the process by which any local police agency would simply relinquish itself to a "nazi-like regime".

I mean, even at the lowest level, for instance, every police department has different SOP's. Every police department has different types of training. Every state has different laws regarding police powers. How exactly could the police become a "standing army"? There is absolutely no way hundreds or even just tens of departments could effectively work together as a "standing army". It's logistically impossible. Half of the police departments in the US have mediocre equipment at best and there are many normal non-LEO citizens that have way more firepower than most police departments.

I just don't see any logic in how the Feds could conscript all local law enforcement into one giant gestapo army. It's simply logistically impossible. It would be a mess and such a thing would be destroyed quickly. It would be suicide for any police officer to submit to being a "nazi-drone of the government".
39 posted on 08/19/2011 9:34:47 PM PDT by brent13a (Freerepublic is a great sight for conservative news, if you can stomach the cop hating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Beelzebubba; Surrounded_too
Also, I have a strong feeling that if the US Government tried such an unconstitutional "martial law" takeover of the citizenry I believe that they would also disarm and disband most local law enforcement agencies. I really don't think they would even attempt to make then "gestapo-drones".

It would be too much of a liability.
40 posted on 08/19/2011 9:38:23 PM PDT by brent13a (Freerepublic is a great sight for conservative news, if you can stomach the cop hating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: The Antiyuppie

Why don’t they get Cesar Milan to train police departments on how to deal with dogs? He did one with mail carriers on one of his episodes.


41 posted on 08/19/2011 9:43:10 PM PDT by beaversmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

Ok. How many people can name a time that cops did something for you that would be worth paying them for?


42 posted on 08/19/2011 9:43:21 PM PDT by ebshumidors ( Marksmanship and YOUR heritage http://www.appleseedinfo.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

What’s $300K more?

Cook County Taxpayers May Be On Hook For $108 Billion In Debt

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/06/22/cook-county-taxpayers-may-be-on-hook-for-108-billion-in-debt/


43 posted on 08/19/2011 9:48:02 PM PDT by beaversmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

How many people that are law abiding citizens, veterans even, feel uncomfortable around cops (TSA, etc). I mean in a way that you think you could be arrested and set up even if you broke no laws. Am I being paranoid or is it to the point we’re already in a police state? I understand it’s been them against the bad guys for ever, but are all citizens now the bad guys?


44 posted on 08/19/2011 9:51:46 PM PDT by ebshumidors ( Marksmanship and YOUR heritage http://www.appleseedinfo.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

Look fella, all I’m saying is that they’d find an excuse as to why they shot your dog. If you don’t say anything and the dog comes out, they will shoot it and claim it came out of nowhere and they didn’t know it was there. IF you tell them it’s there and you want to contain it, they will shoot it because they took your statement to imply it could be dangerous.

Seriously, what’s your problem?


45 posted on 08/19/2011 10:14:38 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek
What was the raid about, more War on Drugs insanity?

No - it's the War on Dogs.

46 posted on 08/19/2011 10:22:06 PM PDT by kiryandil (turning Americans into felons, one obnoxious drunk at a time (Zero Tolerance!!!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ebshumidors

Cops who shoot dogs that are not threatening them are powertrip psychos and should get some slammer time and stringent mental health exams before release.


47 posted on 08/19/2011 10:25:14 PM PDT by tarotsailor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
The problem might be, the homeowner instinctively requesting to secure the dog...Knowing they’d shoot the dog otherwise.

Look fella, all I’m saying is that they’d find an excuse as to why they shot your dog. If you don’t say anything and the dog comes out, they will shoot it and claim it came out of nowhere and they didn’t know it was there. IF you tell them it’s there and you want to contain it, they will shoot it because they took your statement to imply it could be dangerous. Seriously, what’s your problem?

I have no problem regarding this. I made a statement. You disagree, or want to argue, I can't do anything about that.

48 posted on 08/19/2011 10:45:34 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

Very good!

In cases like this, the officers should be PERSONALLY liable for their actions, rather than the tax payers paying for their malicious acts.

If the officers are personally accountable, I’d bet the farm they wouldn’t be as quick to do suck things. The officer that did this should be selling his house in order to get cash and compensate his victims.


49 posted on 08/19/2011 11:44:50 PM PDT by KoRn (Department of Homeland Security, Certified - "Right Wing Extremist")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DB
"All these payouts should come out of the police’s budget."

Best would be to have these nationwide, daily, awards come from the Police Unions.

50 posted on 08/19/2011 11:55:39 PM PDT by NoLibZone (Obama is bad luck for the US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson