One minute it was there, and the next, it was gone!
Posted on 10/22/2011 7:55:16 PM PDT by Immerito
A Cheshire police officer, who was a witness during the trial of convicted killer Joshua Komisarjevsky, and his wife were both arrested by Naugatuck police in connection to a dog-theft incident, police said.
Thomas and Dawn Wright, both 39, of Naugatuck, turned themselves in to the borough police department on Wednesday after learning of a warrant charging them with stealing a dog, obstructing an animal control officer and fourth-degree larceny.
According to Naugatuck police spokesman Lt. Robert Harrison, a complaint was lodged with police in September after a borough resident stumbled upon a photo of a black pug posted on Naugatuck Patch.
(Excerpt) Read more at naugatuck.patch.com ...
I thought you’d be interested.
Mmmmmm. It seems someone from Chesire would more likely be involved with a cat.
One minute it was there, and the next, it was gone!
interesting.
we have relatives in cheshire and visited last year.
nice in the summer, cold in the winter.
Perhaps the Cheshire cat is the true mastermind. :-)
Reading the comments to the link, the owner let the dog out and it ran away.
The police officer and his wife found the dog, put up fliers to find the owner.
No one responded so they cared for the dog.
The officer and his wife claim to have *found* the pug. But people who *find* dogs wandering the streets do not object to a dog’s ID chip being read to determine whether a private citizen’s assertion of ownership is legitimate.
“The dog had an embedded identity chip, Harrison said, but the Wrights refused to allow police to scan the dog’s chip to confirm whether the pug was the reported missing canine.The complainant said the dog cost her $1,378 and provided a receipt, police said.”
The big question: why did they refuse to allow the dog’s chip to be scanned?
Agree with you that not allowing the dog to be scanned is weird. I just wanted to cover the before part of the story.
So many don’t click on the link, trying to encourage the link click.
Not just “weird”, but inexplicable if the police officer and his wife were being truthful about the circumstances surrounding their acquisition of the pug.
I would say that’s not “weird” behavior; that’s behavior typical of people who *knew* the dog belonged to someone else and, moreover, typical behavior of people who *knew* who that someone else was.
Honest people, upon learning that information, would have returned the dog to the owners. Yet, the dog remained with the officer and his wife for nearly two years before the dog was removed from their home.
“I just wanted to cover the before part of the story.”
The “before” part of the story is an unsubstantiated claim by a sole commenter that the police officers made a good faith effort to locate the dog’s owner—an unlikely claim. A trip to a vet would have determined that the dog, indeed, had a microchip, and upon discovery of the chip, the dog’s owner could be identified and the dog returned to its owner.
As another commenter points out, as a police officer, he would have known to have the dog checked for a chip, and of his legal and moral responsibility to return the dog to his owner.
He didn’t.
You cherry picked the one poster’s comment blaming the owner. Make the criminal the victim, and the victim the criminal. Then you admit that you tried to sway opinions on this forum after Immerito called you on it.
So, I did read the article, and the cop is guilty and probably could have been charged with some more serious offense involving obstruction of justice.
No I didn’t try to sway opinion any person to any point. I was pointing out the comment section in the link was useful. Geez.
Useful for what? Spreading false information?
On what substantiated grounds do you suppose that the dog’s owner, who had microchipped her dog, failed to put up fliers?
It was a beagle,
His name was Snoopy.
thanks for always posting the Doggie Ping!
What I don’t understand about this story is WHY would any dog lover would want to keep a dog that is someone’s elses family pet? Just beyond me.
I know its a free country..but ‘status dogs’ ..hhhrumph!
there are so many wonderful ones at the “doggie Orphanages”.Unless you need a pure bred, like K-9’s, there are even breed rescues.
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.