re: California woman sues police for excessive force after K-9 ripped off her scalp

quote:

---

There is no way, at this point, to know if the police “allowed” this to happen or let the dog chew on her “excessively”.

---

It's a police dog that is trained to latch on and thrash and not let go.

quote:

---

For all we know, the first place the dog latched on to her was her nappy head

---

Ahh. Gotcha. Your subcontext is perfectly clear...

quote:

---

It's trained to obey commands. If it doesn't do that then it should be retired from service

---

Yes

quote:

---

This was absolutely excessive considering the crime

---

Yes

quote:

---

and some of the posters in this thread have a tenuous grasp on their humanity.

---

Some people suck

Good boy

quote:

---

Did her actions cause this to happen. Yes or No

---

Yes. It doesn't change the fact that sending a dog to tear off a chunk of her scalp is excessive. She looks to be an overweight old lady. The cop couldn't catch her? Had to send the dog?

quote:

---

It doesn't change the fact that sending a dog to tear off her a chunk of her scalp is excessive.

---

That's not what they sent the dog to do.

Again, if she doesn't break the law, whether you think it's insignificant or not, does this happen?

quote:

---

Sending the dog, at all, was excessive. quote: Again, if she doesn't break the law, whether you think it's insignificant or not, does this happen? Irrelevant to my point. Arrest her. Take her downtown and book her. Put her in jail for a few months. If they needed the dog for this fat old lady, then they're pussies who shouldn't be cops.

---

You’re a buffoon. The woman was hiding in a field and the cop didn’t have eyes on her. She could’ve had a gun and this is absolutely protocol in that situation

quote:

---

It's trained to obey commands. If it doesn't do that then it should be retired from service. This was absolutely excessive considering the crime

---

How far was the Handler from the dog when it made contact With the fleeing suspect? Do you know?
Do you know if the dog was given a command it ignored?
Do you know if the cops purposely waited to call the dog off of the suspect?
I didn’t think so.
Yet you know this was excessive!


the dog latches onto the first Moving target it sees. That’s why you always want the dog in front of you or you stand still if you’re involved in a foot chase, dog is let loose, and you’re in front of it.
The dog is trained to restrain by latching on and thrashing to whatever part It can get- hand, arm, foot, crotch, or head. It doesn’t differentiate between targets- body parts or humans.
Until someone can prove beyond reasonable doubt that the cops were purposely neglect in allowing the dog to gnaw on this woman or the dog didn’t obey a command, there’s nothing to discuss.

It has nothing to do with humanity. It’s just how things play out when you’re stupid and run from the police.

quote:

---

To be fair that is ridiculously excessive for a woman shoplifting

---

It’s not because she shoplifted, it’s because she ran off into a field, hid in some bushes and refused to surrender to police. In that situation, police aren’t going to randomly poke around a field and hope they don’t get shot by a suspect hiding there. They’ll let the k9 find and detain the suspect.

Further, assuming they followed k9 procedure, they yelled loudly into the field that they were going to use their dog and that she was going to get bit if she didn’t surrender.

She was warned, she chose to stay hidden, she found out.

quote:

---

You’re a buffoon. The woman was hiding in a field and the cop didn’t have eyes on her. She could’ve had a gun and this is absolutely protocol in that situation

---

Yep. It's only excessive if they have eyesight on her and she is willingly surrendering. If she wasn't then it's an unknown situation to the dog and the police. If she identified herself early in the process, no problem at all.