# Who is at Fault , CT Buddy, GSD Shot by adopter's BF



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

I'm not good at C/P articles, this is what's happening in CT, regarding a rescue GSD adopted out, shot by the adopter's BF.

Who's at fault? I have my own opinion but thought it would be interesting reading.

First article
<span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">'THEY SHOT MY DOG'</span> Rescue agency said adoption of Middlefield dog was not complete - The Middletown Press : Serving Middletown, CT


Today's article
Dog shooting prompts call for centralized laws - The Middletown Press : Serving Middletown, CT


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

WHAT the **** is going on over there with people shooting dogs.


----------



## DFrost (Oct 29, 2006)

I'm not sure who's fault this is. I'm sure we don't have all the facts. I was trying to think what we should do with this guy. I just couldn't come up with an answer of my own so I borrowed a few ideas from another thread on this board;

I think we should:

I hope this guy gets the book thrown at him...

He needs to be charged with something! 

there should atleast me a $10,000 fine, maybe he`ll think twice before he does it again, at the very least he should have his fanny kicked, 

I hope the owners pursue civil action to recover the loss at least.

, throw the book at this jerk. Fire him, charge him with cruelty to animals, charge him with destruction of property, charge him with discharging a firearm, charge him with being a total [censored myself]. Send him to JAIL. Prison. Let him be with those people he was so much better than and got locked up. Because that is where he belongs.

I think that about covers it. Oh sure we could wait until ALL the facts are in, but what fun would that be.

dFrost


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

well, I think the fault starts with the rescue, she supposedly pulled the dog from a humane society, had him for 3 days, did NO HOME CHECK, this couple came, met the dog and took him home..Apparently the paperwork was not complete either..

The dog bit the woman 2 days after having him, they called the rescuer who didn't get back to them until a day later, saying she would pick him up another day later, then supposedly tried to get a 'friend' (an ac officer) to get him,,by then the BF shot the dog in the head(

So, my opinion, Rescuer #1,,BF will not be charged, since it's "legal" in CT to shoot your dog if it's deemed aggressive..However, the Rescuer is saying the dog still belonged to "her" since the paperwork was incomplete. 

My opinon also, this rescuer is pulling dogs left and right, not doing proper home checks or evaluations ( Website does not list them as a 501, no adoption fees listed, "not" much info except to "contact" them..


----------



## Zoeys mom (Jan 23, 2010)

It's still the BF's fault. If the dog is aggressive and is not a dog you can or want to handle YOU RETURN THE DOG. Home checks are great and a company that can service you in a jiffy is better, but in this economy help is short. If the dog is soooooo aggressive and you fear it, load it's mean butt in your car crated and return it yourself. Christ where I live it is impossible to adopt a dog practically and the wrong homes get picked all the time. In the end it is the owners responsibility to treat the dog humanely and give it back if the dog is more trouble than they can handle.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Here is more info on the story.
http://www.greenwichtime.com/local/article/Humane-Society-chief-Connecticut-animal-cruelty-615295.php

http://www.greenwichtime.com/local/article/State-animal-control-office-probes-slaying-of-601625.php


----------



## Syaoransbear (Sep 25, 2008)

If it's actually true that the dog did not belong to them yet, then the man should be charged. I'd also like to know what they were doing to the dog before it bit. It doesn't seem like a threat if it bit, then a few hours later THEN they killed it. That's not really self defense, that's vengeance.

However it seems like this lady runs a pretty shady rescue. She rescues dogs and puts them in homes as fast as she can. This dog was only with her for 3 days, that's not enough time to evaluate the mental health of the dog and it would be her fault if she placed a dangerous dog with the couple. She also should have did a home visit, but honestly a home-visit doesn't always reveal if someone is just a wacko. She also didn't pick the dog up IMMEDIATELY after it bit. It isn't the couple's fault if they were scared of getting bit again and didn't want to care for it another day. Although, they had a bunch of other options than shooting it.

But the couple sounds pretty shady too. They didn't report the bite, no one has even SEEN the bite, no one has seen the body of the german shepherd(check for abuse, dogs don't usually bite for no reason), they put the wrong address on the adoption papers, they can't keep their story straight about who actually shot the dog, the man wouldn't tell her where the dog was shot, etc. 

It seems like both parties are full of shady people, and an innocent dog was the one that paid for it.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

From my understanding, the paperwork wasn't complete because it was on a trial basis. That seems like a logical policy - give the family and the dog a couple of days to see how they get along and then finalize the paperwork. 

The ACO says that he knows the dog was shot in the head because the people said so?? I didn't know that was a legal finding. We should be able to clear up all the open police investigations in the US by the weekend!

The people left a message with her, she called them back, they agreed for her to come pick the dog up on Thursday. Then, instead of calling her back to get the dog immediately, they just shot the dog in the head. She was looking for someone to help her get the dog sooner, but the dog was already dead. 

The woman was bit on Tuesday, the rescue didn't get the message until Wed morning. They shot the dog Wed night. They couldn't have waited for another 12 hours?


----------



## IllinoisNative (Feb 2, 2010)

DFrost said:


> I think that about covers it. Oh sure we could wait until ALL the facts are in, but what fun would that be.


Touché! LOL!

I'm sure there is enough blame to go around on this one. It seems like everyone is a little complicit. I just wish these dog shootings didn't happen under such *shady* circumstances.


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

I agree, I think this dog was failed on all sides starting with the rescue ending with the BF. and YES I think he should be charged but I doubt he will. 

And apparently after the dog bit, he was put in a crate, still fed and watered, and "ok",,so I guess I really don't 'get' why the guy felt he had to shoot him a day or so later? Sad sad for the dog


----------



## GSDolch (May 15, 2006)

Just because a dog is "ok" for a few days doesnt mean it really is ok.

Duke, a GSD of my ex husbands long long ago went after my son, who was only 2yrs old. My son wasnt even looking at him and I was between both of them. Had I not been, my son would be dead. I put Duke in the crate and called my husband. I gave him food and water, and he was just fine. He was fine when my ex got him out of the crate to take him to be put down. That was nice on my part, I wanted to shoot the dog myself.

Depending on area it is not unheard of to put the dog down via gun shot. More in the south. My uncle did it to his GSD years ago when she attacked and killed a neighbors dog and started going after people. (this was when she was older to, and yes they took her to the vet, nothing was wrong with her at all)

Its not an attitude that many understand. For days after Duke went after my son I wanted to shoot him. Even though he was calm at the time. For some its just a way of life. 

What I don't agree with is the way the events went or the "rescue". If the dog bite than they should have called the police and filed a report and had them take the dog. The dog should have been put down IMO if it has a bite history. I don't always agree with this, but considering the "rescue", I wouldn't doubt it if she just rehomed the dog without telling anyone its record.


----------



## APBTLove (Feb 23, 2009)

Honestly, I didn't read the whole thing, but if the dog was truly unstable, or aggressive for no real or warranted reason, I don't see a huge problem with euthanizing it. And that's what he did... A bullet put in the right place is about as humane as it gets. I know people who put their own dogs down by gun. They said the dog's don't even make a peep. They are dead before they hit the ground.
Could I do that? No. Not unless I had no other option and my dog was suffering... 

As for why they left him for a few hours, fed him, and took care of him? Well, I can see them taking the time to think it over and calm down... If I were going to euth a dog I'd want to be calm and I would want the dog to be calmed. 

Something you hear often is "He'll be taking that long walk in the woods." When a dog is unstable...
Meaning the dog gets to go out and be a dog... Is taken for a last walk with his master, and is shot in a private area and either left or brought back and buried.

Again, I couldn't do that unless I had no other option. But would everyone be as mad if the man had used euthasol? 


I'm sorry, I just get a bit riled nowadays when I see people going to great lengths to save every man-biting dog because it has had a rough life. It makes me sick that the money, time and effort that could save a dozen mentally healthy dogs is put into one unstable/unwarrantedly aggressive dog... 


For this particular case, who knows... Only the adopted can answer these questions everyone is asking, and until they do, speculating and crucifying him isn't helping.


----------



## kiya (May 3, 2010)

I don't think we have the whole story. The dog should have been returned. Anyone adopting a mature dog has to realize you do not know the dog or its history, its triggers. It is a chance you are taking and if you are willing to take the chance then you should be educated on proper handling and even expect that something could go wrong. Who knows what trauma the poor dog went thru before it ended up in the wrong peoples hands. Chances are that most of us here, who know how to handle a dog wouldn't have had a problem.
Everytime I see the posts of dogs in shelters, I wish I could take them. But I have cats, and always will have cats. So in my mind I could never take that chance. Someday I will be able to take in a very young pup. It's so very sad.


----------



## LARHAGE (Jul 24, 2006)

DFrost said:


> I'm not sure who's fault this is. I'm sure we don't have all the facts. I was trying to think what we should do with this guy. I just couldn't come up with an answer of my own so I borrowed a few ideas from another thread on this board;
> 
> I think we should:
> 
> ...


 

I have no problem with any or all of them, there is no need for trigger happy morons at large.

I also think the " Rescue" was at fault, 3 days is hardly enough time to access a dogs temperament, either is a half hour or so enough time to access a persons charachter. I'm pretty sure if she had done a thorough home check, verified a Vet contact and spent more time actually listening to these people, she would have seen a few fleas jump off the pigs.


----------



## LARHAGE (Jul 24, 2006)

APBTLove said:


> Honestly, I didn't read the whole thing, but if the dog was truly unstable, or aggressive for no real or warranted reason, I don't see a huge problem with euthanizing it. And that's what he did... A bullet put in the right place is about as humane as it gets. I know people who put their own dogs down by gun. They said the dog's don't even make a peep. They are dead before they hit the ground.
> Could I do that? No. Not unless I had no other option and my dog was suffering...
> 
> As for why they left him for a few hours, fed him, and took care of him? Well, I can see them taking the time to think it over and calm down... If I were going to euth a dog I'd want to be calm and I would want the dog to be calmed.
> ...


 

I too would have no problem with this dog being HUMANELY destroyed if in fact the people making the decisions were competent, compassionate people with the dogs best interest at heart, the fact they lied about virtually everything does not exactly reek of integrity, who knows what transpired, I sure as heck have a hard time believing any part of the story in light of the fact they have lied about everything else.


----------



## Dainerra (Nov 14, 2003)

also, it's not like it was a couple hours after the bite. It was almost a day and a half. They called her Tuesday, she got back to them Wed, they shot the dog Wed evening.

Add in the different versions of who actually shot the dog etc etc.


----------

