In most states, as I understand it, police dogs are treated as police officers in terms of criminal prosecution against people that do them harm. The “suspect” pulled out a gun, shot a police dog and would likely have continued shooting the human officers. Would the family have been happier if he had killed a human officer before he was shot down?
I vote they sue the family for the damages (both physical and emotional) that their son inflicted on the poor officer and the department.
Has it ever been upheld in a jury trial? I ask because I could easily see a jury not supporting it.
I personaly have a problem with cops sending canine units into a situation they themselves would not go, then complain that the dog is the same as an officer. Say what you will but in MHO sending an animal into a situation where all he is armed with is his teeth against someone that is armed with a gun is a form of animal abuse. Police Dogs are tools, they respond to commands, they don’t take cover when under fire and they can’t shoot back to defend themselves. They do what they do bcause they are trained that way, they are no more an LEO than an attack dog owned by a drug pusher.
The fact that he pulled a gun is enough reason for the officer to shoot him dead. The dog is just a side story.