Return to “Dog shot in city park”
Since we're moving in diagonally across the corner from him, I guess you're a neighbor now too.TB820 wrote:I live in Stephenville, right down the street from Chili (don't know him personally though).
This was from one of the mother's comments, and backed up thirdhand via a deputy who took an interest in the incident.flintknapper wrote:Do you have a source stating that this is where the bullet lodged, I only ask because from the photo... I could discern no obvious exit wound, (rather supporting what you have said).
I still haven't been able to confirm caliber. The .40 is what I last remember seeing him carry on duty, but he may have something different for concealment. Of course, buttlet weight and quality would also have a lot of effect on the depth; a 135gr PowRBall isn't going to make it far in anything, (which is why I keep some of the 100gr .357 ones in a speed strip for when I know I'll be in a crowd) where a 180gr bullet with less aggressive expansion could conceivably exit the chest and damage the sidewalk on a shot like this.I would think this would result in the bullet having exited the bottom of the animals muzzle or at best lodged in the very back of the throat where the bulk of the tongue is. Certainly the bullet could have suffered some deflection, but experience tells me that a 40 S&W at close distance penetrating thin skin, thin bone (nasal cavity) and little (if any muscle) would have stayed pretty much on course.
As I understand it, the bullet was lodged in the flesh of the throat, which would be consistent with a shot taken form in front and above.flintknapper wrote:Anyone other than me think that the photos here suggest a different "trajectory" than first reported?
Appears to be an entry wound on the dogs right side, I can see no clear exit wound...but a "blood shot" eye on the opposite side suggests a shot taken from the side or an angle.
Though, as was pointed out on another board, doesn't that look more like restraining the dog with a double handful of neck, rather than the cute cuddling they were no doubt trying to show?
Seems unlikely that she wouldn't mention it if she was doing anything, or that the paper which has so far been pretty sympathetic to her would leave that part out if she did mention it.flintknapper wrote:I don't see anything in the story that would lead me to believe she was doing nothing? How did you arrive at that conclusion?
He could try to climb the fence; the netting makes it difficult, but not impossible, and fall. He could try to lash out at the dog, causing it to defend itself. He could try so hard to shrink that he actually becomes a small black hole (hey, it's almost as likely as the bullet missing from that angle and hitting a child on the playground) which would cause the entire Dallas city council to condemn him.And what "injury" do you suppose would befall a young healthy boy standing on a sidewalk next to a tennis court, come on........
I'd also think the fact that she didn't recognise him as such speaks volumes against her observation skills; she's supposedly been walking the dogs at the park for months, which indicates she's been here for at least a semester, Chili is very outspoken, (He used to also be the only LEO in the county with Tazmanian Devil and Bugs Bunny body armor covers, courtesy of my granmother's sewing skills. Not exactly the sort of personality that blends in.) he's the only black LEO in the county, there are only a few officers at Tarleton, only a few blacks in the area, and, as granddad used to say, "if Chili was about two inches taller, he'd be round." He's not an easy guy to miss on campus, and usually the only cop students know by name within a month of arriving.I don't see what difference this should make....but thought it odd that she brought this up as well.
As a correction to this, I checked again today, and all gates on this side of the tennis courts are locked, eliminating that option. It's hard to tell in the photo, but the slope to the water is pretty steep, and the water is fairly deep there, so trying to run that way would have been risky as well. The netting on the chainlink also makes it more difficult to climb than normal, so just climbing out of the dog's reach would take more time than they had. The sidewalk itself is wide enough for two people to comfortably pass, but they were effectively trapped in a navigable area of about six feet wide and 180-240 feet (three or four tennis court widths) long.KD5NRH wrote:As you can see, it's not a great place to be approached, especially with the dog coming up from the water. There is a gate in that fence well out of frame to the right, but it's too far away for kids to have any chance of outrunning a dog to get to it, and if the dog made it in too, they'd be corralled with it.
Really? I remember an age when I was terrified of flying. My father did a few parachute jumps in the service and my grandfather was a pilot, airplane mechanic and former paratrooper; either one would have used violence without hesitation if necessary to stop someone from making me go up in a plane. Did I learn that fear from them? (For the record, I outgrew it pretty quickly, and jumped at every opportunity to go flying with granddad afterward. Now I just have a loathing for airline security.)KBCraig wrote:I also find it a shame that this man has raised his children to be so terrified of dogs -- and they obviously learned it from him.
Does she deal with a lot of junkyard dogs? Special bulk pricing for dogfighting rings? Actual working (not show) herd dogs? She's probably not dealing with the dregs of doggy society, or even the "blue collar" working dogs unless she's grooming a few police or security animals, and yet these well-cared for dogs with owners who could easily afford enough obedience training for them to qualify as command-restrained in areas that recognise such (Stephenville doesn't, but a couple of towns around here do) are still injuring people who have a lot of experience in dealing with animals.dihappy wrote:KB, my fiance is also a dog groomer. Safe to say that not many "pits" come in for a "groom", however they do come in for baths and nail clips. She has also never had a problem with "pits", she has however been bitten by Chow Chows, Labs, Mix breeds, and the many, many, "toy" sized dogs out there. Her co worker was scared badly on the face by a lab.
If you see a child clearly terrified of something, regardless of how you feel about the thing that is causing the reaction, are you just going to stand around and watch the show, or try to intervene?flintknapper wrote:I'm not getting the point you are trying to make (my fault).KD5NRH wrote:Even failing that, any decent adult should try to help them, not just stand around and watch.
Can you expand on this please.
The boy, based on *her* description of the event, was in a panicked state out of fear that *she recognised* as being caused by her dog, yet she chose to do nothing at that point. I don't know how old she is, but since she's a college student, she must have had at least 18 years to figure out that stark terror often makes people do things they otherwise wouldn't, (after all, that seems to be what she and others are accusing Chili of) so he should have seen the potential for the child to cause himself injury.“One of the boys ran and the oldest boy backed up against the fence and was trying to wave Jackson off,” Reyes said. “I could tell he was terrified of dogs.”
flintknapper wrote:This has not been proven by any stretch of the imagination.03Lightningrocks wrote:And...with all this being said. The point still remains that the man shot a DOG...a dog that was not on a leash and in the control of it's owner. A dog that was a threat to the well being of the mans children.
At that point, any reasonable adult should be able to see that, regardless of the dog's intent, it could easily cause the children to place themselves in great danger.“One of the boys ran and the oldest boy backed up against the fence and was trying to wave Jackson off,” Reyes said. “I could tell he was terrified of dogs.”
Also this statement from the third article:Sangiovese wrote:I don't know about arm's reach... but we do have a quote the Chief of police mentioning that the dog was very close.KBCraig wrote:I have found no reference to the distance in either of the posted articles. Where did you read that it was "within arm's reach"?KD5NRH wrote:"He shouldn't have reacted so fast" when the dog was already within arm's reach. Great thinking there.
From this article - http://www.empiretribune.com/articles/2 ... 889780.txt
“We know Chili was not disobeying any laws by carrying his gun in the park,” Tarleton Police Chief Justin Williams said. “The trajectory of the shot and the blood from the dog being on the sidewalk indicates he was close - real close - to Chili and his children, which he perceived as a threat.”
At one point during the incident, Williams said Alexander decided not to fire at the dog because he could see people behind it. Shortly thereafter, he fired a single round when the dog was approximately three feet away from him.
From the article that hasn't yet hit the website: (the dog's name is Jackson)Wildscar wrote:One more thing that nobody has touched on (unless I missed it somewhere). How were the kids interacting with the dog before it became aggressive?
Doesn't sound like they were chasing it, or otherwise interacting at all until it approached."One of the boys ran and the oldest boy backed up against the fence and was trying to wave Jackson off" Reyes said. "I could tell he was terrified of dogs."
Sounds pretty reasonable on his part. For her part, one wonders why she wasn't already doing it after seeing the boys in obvious fear of the dog.Reyes said the officer, Sgt. Jeff "Chili" Alexander, warned Reyes twice to call off the dog.
Say it with me now: "Call off your dog." Now let's try her line: "Jackson." How did he have time to repeat his *and* draw the gun *and* pass up one opportunity to fire (remember story #2) before she had time to say two syllables? I can do that in the time it takes to draw from an open carried, non-retention holster. Or does the dog only accept stand down orders typed in triplicate and filed at Doggy Headquarters? If it doesn't respond to its own name then it's not as "well behaved" as has been claimed, and has no business being off leash regardless of any ordinances.But, before Reyes had a chance, she said Alexander pulled out a gun and shot the dog in the face.
"He shouldn't have reacted so fast" when the dog was already within arm's reach. Great thinking there.Dog to make full recovery
By JESSICA HORTON
Staff Writer
news@empiretribune.com
Published: Friday, August 15, 2008 11:08 AM CDT
Jackson, the pit bull/boxer mix shot in Stephenville City Park on Monday, is home and expected to make a full recovery, according to the dog’s owner, Briana Reyes.
Reyes said doctors and the staff at Ark Veterinary Clinic saved Jackson’s life.
Meanwhile, Reyes and her two roommates, Kolby Graham and Kathleen Cranford, who were with Reyes when the incident happened, say they are trying to recover from the ordeal that left them stunned and shaken. On Monday afternoon, the three roommates who are also Tarleton State University students, were walking their four dogs in the park.
“It’s something we’ve done at least three days a week all summer,” Reyes said. “We take three laps around the park, then let the dogs run down to the stream for a quick swim.”
The girls admit they violated a city ordinance by not having their dogs on leashes, but said they had no idea it was required. They said they were never given a warning by city officials or police and never saw signs indicating the dogs had to be on leashes. In fact, they said it is not uncommon for dogs to roam freely inside the park.
“We did not intentionally violate the law,” Reyes said. “If we had known, we would have had the dogs on leashes.”
What happened next, however, was something the three said no one could have expected. While the dogs were playing near an embankment, Jackson approached an off-duty Tarleton police officer’s children.
“One of the boys ran and the oldest boy backed up against the fence and was trying to wave Jackson off,” Reyes said. “I could tell he was terrified of dogs.”
Reyes said the officer, Sgt. Jeff “Chili” Alexander, warned Reyes twice to call off the dog.
But before Reyes had a chance, she said Alexander pulled out a gun and shot the dog in the face. Stephenville Police Chief Roy Halsell said Alexander was within his rights to carry a gun and use it to protect his family. He said no criminal charges will be filed.
Reyes and her roommates say they will try to heal from the traumatic experience, but will not be taking their dogs back to the park.
“Watching a man pull out a gun and shoot a dog in the park is terrifying,” Cranford said. “We had no idea he was a police officer — or if he would shoot us next.”
They all say they wish the incident had never happened.
“It is unclear who is really at fault. Both parties could have handled it differently. Obviously we should have had our dogs on a leash - but he shouldn’t have reacted so fast,” Reyes said. “It was a horrible situation and it could have been prevented. I’m sorry everyone had to go through it.”
Well, they weren't close enough to hear him yelling at the owner, but were close enough to know that the dog didn't growl.k6gixx wrote:"A whole park full of people failed to notice a pit-bull "growling and snarling" at a small child?
One of my relatives got a couple of broken hand bones from a goose attack; they have extremely strong wing muscles.03Lightningrocks wrote:Most of us can fend off a crazed goose without the aid of a firearm.
Got it first try.xpur3l0g1cx wrote:http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html
