This may turn into a ‘debate’ or IMHO-thing, but for now I have just general ‘questions’ about this recent incident. Of course, we’ll see where it goes as it is likely a bit touchy to some folks (and rightly so!).
Basically, a ‘respected’ cop left his longtime canine ‘partner’ in his closed-up car after heading off to some ‘family emergency’. This is a Police Dog, which my understanding is carries all the ‘protections’ a real human cop has…a person kicks/abuses that dog and its same as kicking a human cop and so forth -> that person goes to jail or faces severe penalties for assaulting a cop. The K9 cops (the humans, that is) I have known in the past have told me repeatedly how they really put the hurt (figuratively speaking) on anyone that messes with or attempts to mess with, their ‘partner’, to the point of excess quite often in my opinion. Anyways, my understanding is that if you harm or even attempt to harm a K9 dog, you are in big trouble, no excuses allowed at all. Ever. And this cop killed another cop - by definition anyways, I think. Is this aspect incorrect?
I realize sometimes a cop is ‘issued’ a K9 that stays with him/her both on- and off-duty, so this may make a small difference in any charges brought (if any even are). I did not notice in the stories I found about being on/off duty at time of death.
Does a police officer have any special treatment (by ~statute, not ‘blue wall of silence’ stuff) in such situations when they cause the death of another ‘officer’? Are K9 laws (if such exist) typically such that the handler has huge leeway in how much responsibility they have for the safety and life of the Department’s property/Officer? What would make such a situation less of a problem for the human officer; possibly dependent of on-v-off duty or whatever other facets would be indicative of facing any legal problems or the severity (misdemeanor -v- felonious, etc)…?
Thanks so much for possibly clearing my confusion here as to why Officer Trotta is NOT already charged with ‘dogslaughter’ at a minimum, so to speak. Chances are that a civilian would be arrested and probably charged if they killed their own dog as such, if I understand how laws are for animal-abuse, etc
In Ohio, as it happens, offenses against police animals are charged one level of felony lower than if the offense was committed against a human police officer. From the little info is provided in the link, however, it appears that the dog died due to the officer’s distracted error, not out of malice. It was a terrible mistake and I highly doubt he’ll be criminally charged. (Still, it won’t do his career any good, I’m sure).
Animal-abuse charges are, IME, usually brought either when the person is purposefully cruel to an animal, or is inexcusably careless towards it. This doesn’t look like that kind of case to me.
Thanks for the info. I differ on the ‘inexcusable’ portion, though. There is just no excuse that I can see here, especially how Trotta was considered to be so. The dog was placed in an area which demanded continued scrutiny, then abandoned there for ‘personal reasons’. Very expensive Police Officer animal dead by another cops stupidity and failing to maintain a safe place for the other ‘Officer’ (by definition unless on or off-duty thing applies to differentiate).
My biggest part of this is/was the question of if a K9 dog is actually protected by statute the same as a human Officer. Understand now its at ~one lever lower felony-wise than if its human. Does that statute say if it matters if it was intentional or not? Does it really matter per statute? Like does DA have ability to say “Oh, he just had a bad day and killed a cop” and do nothing legally when usually a civilian has a VERY limited ability to say “just had a bad day so there is no legal problem here at all”? Several of the stories mention how Trotta knew the dog was in the vehicle, but just did not go back to dog soon enough (~“by the time things calmed down, dog was dead”. Sounds like intentional act and gave precedence to another person when the city was under an ‘official’ heat warning. He knew heat was a problem there and chose to leave an animal in unsafe place - gambled the dog’s life and lost, so to speak. Much different than accidentally leaving a living thing in a car forgetfully - sounds more like it was ~ “I’ll be back as soon as I can” and then not returning soon enough. A planned event, I guess. Details certainly are lacking that would help me see this more clearly (not surprisingly with it being something a cop did that details would make sound all the worse to the public).
Of course, there are exceptions around the nation regarding ‘headline cases’ of death-from-locked-in-hot-car, and I am not trying to push my feelings on this as part of my inquiry. Its the statute(s) and interpretation, and also if it matters that it was a cop that did it.
This answers your original question, about why the officer is “NOT already charged with ‘dogslaughter’.” The event happened three days ago and they are still investigating to figure out exactly what happened.
OK - guess it takes longer to find out things when police are the ‘offenders’ as civilians generally get taken into custody, post bail on charges expected, etc as soon as a crime occurs and police are there with ‘offender’. Helps keep the accused from interfering with an investigation (or so I was taught long ago in Crim Justice classes). I guess that there must be a possibility it was perfectly legal to have that cop kill the other one if ‘they’ have to investigate beyond the dead body being present.
No snark meant at all, but its quite interesting to me that there is even a remote possibility that killing a police dog by heat-death, whether its called intentional or negligence, carries no criminality at all. Otherwise, I would’ve thought Trotta would have to go through the usual ‘arrest/bail’ routine until details beyond the mere presence of ‘dead body in hot car’ emerge along with the already known issue of Trotta not returning to car soon enough because he was ‘too busy’ elsewhere.
Ignorance fought Details are lacking from the newspaper stories was what I meant. Fwiw, I just searched out another story that states the death is not related to police-activity, so Trotta definitely can’t say it was due to ‘duty’ activities, etc. My interest in this comes from former friendships with K9 officers that made their dogs sound like god-like entities that better not even be touched/looked-at, etc - ever(!), and the seeming casualness is kind of shocking to me.
Prosecutors in the U.S. have discretion as to whether or not to seek an indictment. If any or all of the following are observed by the prosecutor in this particular case…
It appears to have genuinely been a mistake by the officer
The officer has an excellent record
The officer is known to have loved the dog or had a close working relationship with it
The officer appears to be showing bigtime remorse
Local public opinion is strongly forgiving of the officer
…then I wouldn’t be surprised if he decides not to seek an indictment, and leaves it to the police department’s internal disciplinary process.
Yes, but you’re assuming intent. The parents of all those kids who die every summer when they’re forgotten in the back seat didn’t INTEND to do that, and from what I can see, neither did Officer Forgetful.
I’m no apologist for police, and a staunch defender of treating dogs right, but it bears mentioning that the ‘personal reasons’ the dog was left in the car turn out to be the life-threatening medical emergency the officer’s son was experiencing.
I still think it shouldn’t have happened – always looking out for the dog is ingrained in me, and I’m sure the police feel the same – I’d like to think I would have phoned a partner from the hospital parking lot and demanded someone immediately come take care of the dog – or just brought the dog into the air-conditioned waiting room with me and to hell with the staff telling me I can’t. He’s a police dog. I’d like to think I would have gone out of the way to make arrangements for the dog early in the crisis specifically because of the odds I’d be distracted as events unfolded.
But I’d hate to have to try to deal with both things at once – an apparently dying child and a dog in danger – and I have considerable sympathy for someone caught in such a crisis.
There are two separate issues here. One is whether it’s outrageous that the officer hasn’t been arrested yet. The incident happened on Thursday and it’s Monday. I don’t think it’s reasonable to complain that charges haven’t been brought yet. He’s been suspended while they investigate, and I’m sure they’ll make a decision by the end of the week.
The other is, I think, whether the laws in Ohio are harsh enough in the potential penalty offered for a circumstance like this. I’m no expert, but I don’t see any special protections in the law for police dogs. As far as animal cruelty charges, the maximum penalty in Ohio is 1 year in jail and a $2000 fine.
Yes, and I can say I locked a guy in my trunk for 5 days and didn’t intend to kill him. At what point is a persons screw up that takes a life enough for the law to take action?
I don’t know about animal cruelty laws, but I have read a lot about the problem of children dying when left in hot cars, including Gene Weingarten’s excellent Pulitzer Prize winning article. Many people are not charged with a crime if it is clear that it was a matter of forgetfulness rather than willful negligence. As others have pointed out, this case is still being investigated, but depending on the jurisdiction, it seems reasonable to believe that the fact that this situation was the result of a medical emergency would go a long way to mitigating any criminal charges.
Whatever people may believe about what should happen in these cases, and from previous discussions I know that there is a wide range of viewpoints, the fact is that (at least in those cases involving children) there is quite a bit of flexibility in the law, and circumstances and intent are taken into account when deciding on any legal action.
Details are lacking from the newspaper stories was what I meant. Fwiw, I just searched out another story that states the death is not related to police-activity, so Trotta definitely can’t say it was due to ‘duty’ activities, etc. My interest in this comes from former friendships with K9 officers that made their dogs sound like god-like entities that better not even be touched/looked-at, etc - ever(!), and the seeming casualness is kind of shocking to me.