“It’s becoming a disturbingly familiar scene in America - mentally unstable cops”

Should these dogs shot by police be considered "revenge killings?"

 Should the following cases of dogs shot and killed by police be considered revenge killings? I ask this question as I've noticed a disturbing common denominator about dogs killed after their owners had been in recent trouble with the police. The same police departments returned at a later date and killed the family dog under questionable circumstances.

I'm not suggesting this is what happened in these three separate incidents. The stories told to me are only one side (the victims) detailing what happened, including the events leading up to the family dog being shot by police. In most cases, the police had no prior contact with the family. I just like to present different possibilities whenever I see a pattern.

I won't name names as to prevent retaliation by police on the families who were kind enough to forward me this information. Here are three cases of dogs shot by police that sound suspiciously like revenge killings.


In Illinois a dog owner was outside playing with his two dogs when several police officers showed up and drew their guns. The dogs were barking, and the owner was told to get the dogs inside or they'd be shot. A teen member of the family came to the door and a gun was drawn on the teen. The dog owner was handcuffed and taken to the police department, where he was later released since he wasn't the suspect the police were looking for. A few months later his dog was shot six times by this police department and had to be euthanized.


In N.C. a family's home was raided. The sum of $15,000 and a gun collection of legal firearms were confiscated. According to the son, the police were upset no charges could be made in the case. A month later, the son's residence was raided and flash grenades thrown into the house. His dog was shot to death and the owner was charged with misdemeanor marijuana possession. Charges are in the process of being dropped as the case has been determined "unfounded" meaning the investigation being conducted was false and baseless. It's not uncommon (or illegal) for people in the south to hide money in their home instead of using a bank. At the time of this article, the money hasn't been returned and the family is struggling to pay their mortgage.


An Alabama dog owner whose dog was shot and killed by police had a run-in with the police prior to the incident that took the life of his family dog. In early 2012, he was arrested for failure to register manufactured mobile home and pay land taxes. He was held in jail for 15 hours, hosed down, put in stripes and had to pay a bail bondsman to be bonded out. The catch is, he has never had any property in his name. All property in question is in his father's name. The father had paid the taxes and registered the home. The case was thrown out when receipts were brought before a judge, who couldn't believe what all this dog owner had been through.

A later incident occurred with the same Alabama dog owner. Last June he was arrested for "unlawful possession for a controlled substance" when police came into the family home when his mother wasn't there. The prescription drugs were hers. He was jailed for a day had to pay a $10,000 bond. Charges were reduced to "controlled possession" and he was placed on a years probation and fined $3,000 plus court costs. Although a drug test given came back negative, this dog owner was required to go through a court referral drug program as a condition of probation.

Apparently there's a law in Alabama stating that the lawful owner of controlled medication must keep said medication on their person when away from the home. If drugs are found in the home and the person the prescription is made out to isn't there, an adult in the home with the drugs can be charged with controlled possession.

Seven months later, this owners dog was shot and killed by the same police department who took part in the two previous arrests. He's recently been arrested by yet another questionable charge.

Are these revenge killings caused by those charged with a crime taking the case to court? These cases all have a disturbing similarity. Those charged were innocent, and these dog shooting victims believe their dogs were shot in retaliation. Revenge killings brought about by those arrested taking a stand and going to court to defend themselves. The ultimate price after being found innocent was paid by the family dog in each of these three cases.

What do the readers here think of these cases? Do any of you who are now the victim of dogs shot by police have a similar story to tell? It's alarming to think how many of these cases may exist.