The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last month found in favor of police who broke into a home and killed two dogs. The officers had a search warrant. But a search warrant should not be a death warrant for innocent dogs.
The court tells the story mostly from the perspective of Christof Klein, a Battle Creek, Mich., police officer. Klein said he saw a "beware of dog" sign while approaching the house. By the time the raid was over, Klein and his colleagues had killed both dogs. Klein said one was moving toward him when he shot her. The other, he said, was barking.
The 6th Circuit, in an opinion by Judge Eric L. Clay, ruled that killing a dog can violate the Fourth Amendment (search, seizure and probable cause), but that in this case, it didn't. The question, the court said, was whether the dogs presented "an imminent threat to the officer's safety," as an "objectively reasonable officer" would have seen it given the circumstances. The judge found that killing the dogs met this standard.
It is objectively unreasonable to say that a barking dog was a real threat to an armed police officer. That's not an even match. The greater threat was not to the cops. And, to the extent that the dogs were a threat at all, this threat was created by breaking down the door.
Instead, the court set a precedent that will make it very hard for any other dog owner whose pets have been killed in a search to argue that the police should have protected them. That makes this case a double outrage.
Editorial on 01/11/2017