4th amendment violation or exigent circumstances?

[Beekeeper]

Don't know if this story is getting outside of Utah, but it's been raging for over a month here.  It seems that a family was unable to find their 3 years old handicapped child and called the police.  After a quick, but not to thorough search, the officers fanned out in the neighborhood.  They knocked on doors, asking permission to search back yards.  When nobody answered, they claimed exigent circumstances and proceeded to search, including fenced in privacy yards.  Now a street over and a block away, an officer gets no answer, and decides to proceed with the search.  The fence is 6 feet tall, with the latch at approx 5 feet above the ground.  Well out of reach of the handicapped 3 year old.  About this time, the child is found, in his own home.  He was hiding, in some boxes he stacked up in the basement, and had fallen asleep.  At about the same time, the officer claims he was charged by a wiemareimer in the back yard he was searching.  He claims he was in fear of being injured and that he didn't have time to use his taser, or his baton.  But he did have time to pull his service weapon, and put 1 of 2 rounds fired, thru the dogs head.  He was then ordered away from the scene, and a neighbor called the dog owner to advise him his dog had been killed.  The meeting was recorded, and 3 different cops were there to meet him.  While they answered his questions, a female officer appeared to be laughing as the guy was alternately crying and clearly angry about them entering his yard and shooting his dog.  A 4th officer was hovering around, and appeared ready to subdue the guy if things escalated.  The guy is demanding disciplinary action, up to and including termination, for criminal trespass, discharging a weapon in residential area, 4th amendment civil rights violation of illegal entry, and destroying private property, since a dog is considered only as property.  After a 5 week investigation, SURPRISE!!  law enforcement found themselves justified in both violating his property rights, and shooting the dog.  

Don't get me wrong, I'm not valueing the life of a dog as greater than that of a person or child.  But personally, I'm not so sure about all this.  I'm not sure exigent circumstances exist, without probable cause to believe the child might have been in that particular yard.  And although not a popular thought, without torn clothing or skin, some bite marks, something to demonstrate the dog was really after him, I have a hard time believing the dog needed to be shot.  I know more than a few officers, and I would say that most of them are practiced liars, arrogant and aloof in their dealings with people.  Many have derogatory names for civilians, and aren't shy about using them.  While I have never been arrested, or charged with a crime, my views of them are colored by several encounters I have had with them.  Including having them pull a gun and threaten to shoot my dog when he became agitated by the officer shouting at me.  

[TOOLS1]

Welcome to America.
TOOLS

[Re-run]

Yep, one of the results of the "war on drugs". Militant police that use whatever excuse they can to void a person's rights.

[Beekeeper]

This thing continues to be in the news here.  The chief of police keeps telling people that it was just a dog, but got very angry when the man revealed that the chief had offered him $10,000 to make this thing go away.  He also keeps reminding everyone that the officer was a hero at a mass shooting that happened here 8 years ago.  Some people did some research, and now claim the officer had no part, other than directing traffic at the scene, after the shooter had been neutralized.  This situation has really polarized people, and several have made threats of bodily harm against the officer.   I'm sure they are being tracked down and will probably be charged with threatening.  

[shinyribs]

You don't even want to get me started on this topic...

My condolences to the dog owner.

[Beekeeper]

Well, Ferguson, Mo ain't got nothing on Salt Lake.  Law enforcement claims they received a call of a man brandishing a weapon at a 7-11.  Three officers arrived just as 3 teens were exiting the store with Big Gulps.  Officers decided one of them fit the description, and confronted them.  One kid had earbuds and his music playing, and he kept walking.  One officer got in front of him and ordered his hands up.  The kid reached to pull his pants up, wearing those low rider pants young people wear these days.  So the officer shot him in the chest multiple times.  No weapon on him.  The 7-11 clerk said no problems in store, no theft, no weapon, no problems.  They left the kids body laying there for over 5 hours while they searched for a weapon.   Can't find one.  Now they are being very quiet, other than character assassination in the paper about a warrant on the kid.  How would they know before they shot him?  They didn't!  Didn't even know who he was until after they had shot and killed him.   Not sure what is going on with law enforcement in our country, but it ain't good.

[TOOLS1]

Check out this shooting that happened here in Kansas City last Dec. http://www.pitch.com/kansascity/anthony-bruno-donald-hubbard-kansas-city-police-department/Content?oid=4366836 An off duty cop shot and killed an off duty Firefighter.
TOOLS

[Beekeeper]

yep, bad stuff.  Seems like our elected representatives, and their minions, seem to think they are rulers enforcing their visions, instead of representing ours.  Very disturbing.