Police Dogs Die

[glojo]

Originally Posted by A210AMG

It seems 'they' look after their own so hopefully with the RSPCA on the case justice will be done.

It is this rediculous comment that really annoys me and why, why do folks say this?

Who do you think reported this incident? Do you seriously think that an RSPCA Inspector will uncover facts better than a very experienced Detective Superintendant?

The facts will be discovered and if there is blame then that person will suffer, they will feel the full force of the law and also the full force of a police internal enquiry.

I cannot, cannot think of any reason, good bad or indifferent as to why these two dogs were locked inside that car on such a hot day, but......... there might, just might be one that my tiny little brain cannot think of.

I can think of reasons why they MIGHT not have been allowed in those police dog kennels but I cannot think of no reason why they were locked in a car and left in the blazing sun...

To suggest a cover-up is daft, crazy, rediculous and immature. I do however expect some of our members to make these silly suggestions.

What do we think our media will do regarding this iisue?

Do we seriously expect them to let it go?

Do we expect other dog handlers to let anyone get away with killing policedogs?

If there has been negligence then there will be no cover-up, but there will be punishment and it will be double jeopadry. If the officer is guilty of a criminal offence they will get punished by the courts and they will get punished by the police, but never let that spoil the atitude of our idiots that believe there will be a cover-up...

YesI am angry, angry with idiots that thinks the police would cover up something so emotive.

[PXW]

Originally Posted by glojo

I am a great believer in freedom of speech and you have made what I consider to be wild accusations.

I can say I have been to the Moon or I know someone that has but am I being truthful? You have made the allegations so please substantiate them.

That officer will answer ALL QUESTIONS put to them regarding this terrible incident simply because that is the wayit is.

We are taking about the death of police dogs..

These animals are part of a very, very close knit team of brothers\sisters and those that serve in that section have a code...... Times might have changed, but the dog comes first, last and every other number in between.

I do NOT ACCEPT that the handler deliberately did what they possibly did, and they will be devastated. Contrary to what you are alleging, (put up or perhaps withdraw your allegations) this handler will not want to lie... it would be pointlessand only make matters worse.

It could be that they have a legitimate excuse\reason for leaving these animals in the vehicle? Whatever they say will be checked and there is no way they would even consider not answering any questions, it is not going to happen.

Going back to your statement regarding police officers falsely putting in statements reagrding alleged persuits!! ALL COMMUNICATIONS ARE RECORDED. If an officer went through a speed camera at 14:44hrs on the 1st April 1907 and they allege they were in persuit of a vehicle, then the first thing that corroborates that statement is the offending vehicle being snapped! NO SNAP, THEN PERJURY..... There will also be a recording from the officer saying they were persuing a vehicle... No radio communication... PERJURY. There will also possibly be a notebook entry made by the officer saying how they were responding to an unspecified emergency.

Now you have made the claim so please tell us the names of those that have committed perjury.

I am a defender of our police when I feel the need as I feel it wrong to make flippant, unfounded, uncorroborated remarks. I am however also one of the main critics of some acts carried out by our police service. I just tend to try to be impartial and until we know the facts reagrding this event, it just seems wrong to point fingers..

Boringly predictable. I didn't make an allegation. I reported what has been reported to me. By someone involved in the incident. Sorry about that, and sorry if it offends your sensibilities. It was simply a report that indicates to me that sometimes the police also do things wrong...like the rest of the population...like me....dare I say, like you too. I do not tar the whole police force on account of that and I don't support those who would do so. You will of course call me a wild accuser, a maker of flippant uncorroborated remarks etc - but look at the history of my posts, and see for yourself.

You seem to draw a distinction between police officers and civilians, declaring that the quality of investigation of officers is somehow higher, and that unlike civilians, officers will always answer all the questions put to them. Why? Are they a higher life form, or just like you and me? Your accusation seems to me to be a 'flippant uncorroborated remark'....

However, from months of seeing this kind of debate, I'm afraid I can see where this is going. I'm bored. I'm going elsewhere on the forum till this one has died down a bit.

[GRAV888]

Originally Posted by glojo

I am not angry...

Originally Posted by glojo

YesI am angry

[timskemp]

Originally Posted by glojo

Do you seriously think that an RSPCA Inspector will uncover facts better than a very experienced Detective Superintendant?

YesI am angry, angry with idiots that thinks the police would cover up something so emotive.

No, I think a Detective Superintendant would get the investigation over and done with in a couple of interviews and a few days, at minimal cost and rapidly, and then present a case to the CPS who would consider it not in the public interest to pursue a case against a highly qualified officer with a blameless record who represents a valuable asset to the police service and has been trained and employed at huge cost to the taxpayer.

I expect the RSPCA will be allowed to see what they are allowed to see and a case will be brought with a minimal punishment, probably retraining / community service. Or they'll only uncover evidence showing that there were circumstances outside of any individual's control.

I certainly don't expect it to be dealt with in any way as if I'd left my two dogs in the volvo while I went shopping, because I'm not a police officer.

The service is not bent, it just, naturally, wants the best protection for its employees, and if I were on that side I'd want the same. I'm not on that side and as a dog owner (and former breeder - we've just retired one bitch and sold the other) I'm naturally disgusted and would like to see the guy brought to punishment in the same way I would have been. I'll be very surprised if he is.

[renault12ts]

^ take cover...

[robertjrt]

Sheer negligence by the person responsible for the health and wellbeing of an animal.

After 7/7 in London there were frequent bomb alerts. I was waiting at the lights in Piccadilly in my car on a hot afternoon when the Police "do not cross tape" was stretched in front of my car, all stop. I left my car and took Pip, my dog with me into the Burger King where it was safe and cool. I was informed that BK had a no dogs policy so I asked for some water for him which the manager was please to provide. As the circumstances demanded.

The point of this story is that on a hot day the animals welfare is paramount, no excuses as there are none.

[glojo]

Originally Posted by timskemp

No, I think a Detective Superintendant would get the investigation over and done with in a couple of interviews and a few days, at minimal cost and rapidly, and then present a case to the CPS who would consider it not in the public interest to pursue a case against a highly qualified officer with a blameless record who represents a valuable asset to the police service and has been trained and employed at huge cost to the taxpayer.

I expect the RSPCA will be allowed to see what they are allowed to see and a case will be brought with a minimal punishment, probably retraining / community service. Or they'll only uncover evidence showing that there were circumstances outside of any individual's control.

I certainly don't expect it to be dealt with in any way as if I'd left my two dogs in the volvo while I went shopping, because I'm not a police officer.

The service is not bent, it just, naturally, wants the best protection for its employees, and if I were on that side I'd want the same. I'm not on that side and as a dog owner (and former breeder - we've just retired one bitch and sold the other) I'm naturally disgusted and would like to see the guy brought to punishment in the same way I would have been. I'll be very surprised if he is.

First off

The RSPCA can prsoecute this case but the investigation will NOT be as professional, will not be aas in depth, will not be as thorough and it will only be in relationto the suffering of the dogs.

My guess will be that the police will actually investigate

It will be a thorough in depth investigation that will look at the overall conduct of this officer. Were they on a mealbreak, how long was the mealbreak, was this an authorised break. Did they haveaccess to the police kennels, were the dogs allowed to be put in the kennels.. was the officer on duty.. were theyboth police dogs ..... etc etc.

It will look at every aspect of this persons conduct and....

IF, IF, IF this officer was negligent then there will be without a single shadow of a single doubt that they will also be charged under the Police Discipline Code


We flippantly suggest\hint that there is one rule for the police and another for the public. I totally 100% agree. there is.

Originally Posted by timskemp

I certainly don't expect it to be dealt with in any way as if I'd left my two dogs in the volvo while I went shopping, because I'm not a police officer.

Again I agree,
If this happened to you, the chances are that you would be prosecuted and fined.

If this officer is guilty, they will go to court, they will hopefully receive the maximum punishmenty the court can dispense and then they will appear before the Chief Constable and with a little luck they will be sacked!!!!! This involves the instant loss of their pension. So yes there is one law for one section of society and one for another.

Folks here continually tell me I am pro police because I keep saying how we should treat folks as being innocent until proved guilty. I am saying this officer MIGHT be innocent and there MIGHT be a reasonable explanationand that is all I am saying. However I have continually made my feelings clear regarding this issue and if they were negligent then they will feel the full force of the law and the best authority to deal with this is the Police.

Yes I am angry

Angry about how these animals have suffered

Angry at how some members of this forum are judge and jury without knowing a single fact regarding this tragic event

Angry because these armchair critics ALWAYS go into 'hanging mode' if they here that a police officer has exceeded a speed limit, parked on double yellow lines, or allegedly been rude to them

Angry because these self same armchair critics will not complain when we hear about some human being raping a two year old infant

Angry because these self same armchair critics will not complain when we read about a young child being beaten so badly, their teeth are knocked down their throat and their backs broken

Angry because these self same arm chair critics that scream when the police might exceed a speed limit, then try to tell us all that it is perfectly acceptable for a pop singer to lay naked in the bed with young children that they invite into their house!!!

But I'm not really angry

Oh and my mate told me that he was the first man to land on Mars but do I believe him?

[gina2201]

Plain disgusting, thats all I can say.

[glojo]

My wife bought me a book to read last year and imagine my surprise when I saw a photograph of my dog in that book.

This picture would have been taked at the height of summer and I guess a picture paints a thousand words

[Frank O' Phile]

Originally Posted by glojo

This picture would have been taked at the height of summer and I guess a picture paints a thousand words

The 2 words on the side of the box says it all....

[renault12ts]

GJ. Not you in the picture then??

[glojo]

Originally Posted by renault12ts

GJ. Not you in the picture then??

That is a very good friend, he has just 'mugged me' and is helping himself to a 'hot dog'


Note the padding on his right arm (he was a woose)

[lewyboy]

Angry because these self same armchair critics will not complain when we hear about some human being raping a two year old infant


Please, please restrain yourself.

No offence meant but that statement is just rediculous.

[glojo]

Originally Posted by lewyboy

Angry because these self same armchair critics will not complain when we hear about some human being raping a two year old infant


Please, please restrain yourself.

No offence meant but that statement is just rediculous.

Please show me the thread that highlights our armchair critics laying into the person that commited that vile and sick act. I might have missed it and my comments might then need reviewing.

[trapperjohn]

The officer/officers involved will have that gut wrenching pain of the responsibility in their lives forever. They know their act was criminal. They have lost operational partners through neglect. The force have lost, possibly, donations of future operational dogs (or do they breed their own dogs nowadays) The officer/officers responsible for leaving the dogs in the car on that day may not be blamed in this brand new society of ours but they will carry that responsibility themselves. The officer/officers will probably be thrown off (sorry, redeployed to other duties), "dog section" and be back on the "beat" as soon as the investigation is over. I also predict a "move" for their Inspector or whatever rank heads up their dog section. Perhaps the Sgt and Inspector will move. The old adage of sh*t rolls downhill may still be alive though.