K-9 shot, killed after it bit child...Sheriff's office dog 'went crazy'

a reply to: Jakal26
That blurry name looks like Deputy Josh McC_ _ _ _ _ ? His dog looks like the more vicious of the two. And Josh looks younger and more lazy than the other cop.

a reply to: Mikeultra

Agreed. I couldn't make out "Josh" but can make out the "Mc---" something. Working more on it now.
He definitely caught my eye. Of course, could be wrong. We will see.

Assaulting a K-9 dog is viewed equally as assaulting an officer in the eyes of the law. I would not be surprised if the police department there would try to turn a lawsuit around on the victims, or at least the one who shot the dog in self defense.

But you raise a good point. I have seen a few videos lately that show cops using lethal force when not necessary. Is it legal to use lethal force on the police officers when they act out in a crazy manner? It is just insane what is going on these days.

a reply to: FirePiston

a reply to: Jakal26

The Virginia Mountaineer Newspaper reported on this in the May 22, 2014 paper.

Not online, but in the hardcopy paper they put out. I don't have pictures to upload, because this is from some family there.

What the article says is that the dog belongs to Rick Jackson, and that charges are pending. We think it means the charges are pending against the officer because the Sheriff said if charges are brought he would turn it over to the state police, but as of last week they were still pending.

No updates from that story yet, the next paper comes out on Thursday. It happened at Patterson next to Whitewood.

originally posted by: Mikeultra
a reply to: Jakal26
That blurry name looks like Deputy Josh McC_ _ _ _ _ ? His dog looks like the more vicious of the two. And Josh looks younger and more lazy than the other cop.

Josh's dog is a bomb dog. Josh's last name is McClanahan, and he's a resource Officer.

The K-9 in question is "Panzer", Rick Jackson's dog. Panzer is undergoing an autopsy, but the cause of death seems fairly evident to me, a pissed off relative protecting the family.

originally posted by: Jakal26
a reply to: FirePiston

Oh...to answer your question about the victims. The boy was taken to a children's hospital, the mother to a local hospital (was released the same day I think) and the father was not charged with anything....as far as I know. Again, the article pictured in the OP is the only source of info I have at all. No updates and can't find locals chatting about or even mentioning it. It seems they have kept it quite hush hush.

The woman bitten wasn't his mother, it was his aunt - Barbara Matney. The boy bitten was a Vandyke. The boy was treated locally, then sent to Johnson City because of swelling in his arms (where the bites were) and was released. He came home Sunday. Ms. Matney was bitten in the stomach, evidently no further complications. The guy that shot the interloper was only mentioned as "a relative", probably the boy's uncle rather than his father.

As of last Wednesday, charges were "pending", and the Sheriff said that if charges were filed, he would turn it over to the State Police. Normally, when a case is remanded to a higher authority (i.e. the State Police), it's because a department is not allowed to investigate itself (for obvious reasons), and that would indicate charges against the deputy, rather than the guy who shot the canine.

"The Voice" is a local paper that does print many things others won't or are afraid to. They don't whitewash everything but it seems they certainly like to keep their "connections" to other stories by having buddies in the PD. They whitewash this one well and even though I respect that they printed it when no one else did, I don't respect the sugar coating and covering up of guilty party(s).

Now that's a fact! The publisher of The Voice has apparently been banned from school grounds because he exposed a double-standard held by the school administrators, where they said "do as we say, not as we do", and got the pictures to prove what they were doing. The county school honcho was telling parents that they had to send their kids to school in their own districts, and was then photographed sending his own OUTSIDE of his district.

Fun times!

originally posted by: Jakal26
a reply to: Asktheanimals

That really shouldn't have anything at all to do with leashing this K9. It cannot be considered a dog can it? After it is trained, one would think it is no longer just a dog. It is a weapon! And this weapon lashed out at a child. It is tantamount to this cop leaving a loaded gun in his back yard. Except this loaded gun didn't just "lay there"....on it's own accord it decided to attack an 8 year old boy, not just once but numerous times.

Given the information in the article and the description of the K9 circling the house and trying to find entrance, I truly believe it was looking to kill him. Maybe not in those certain terms, but surely to subdue......(as it had been trained?)

Why did this K9 decide to attack this boy so violently that it would attack numerous people willing to fight it, to get to the child? Even provoked, a dog generally bites....even a few times, and is done. Maybe I'm a bit wrong on that. I am going to have to look further into it to be honest. The question of why it attacked him remains.

There may be more to the story than is being told. Dogs often react like that against folks who have been devilling them. You torment a dog, it don't forget, and when that dog has been trained to not stop until he's satisfied with the outcome, well, you get the picture.

IF that was the case - and that's a mighty big "if", pure speculation going only off of the dog's behavior - then he was just acting the way dogs do when you tease them. Those sorts of dogs don't have much sense of humor. I ran guard dogs for a while, and we caught a kid outside the fence teasing them. We tried to explain to him that those dogs would EAT him if they ever got out, and he should stay clear, but the kid was dumb as a box of rocks and couldn't be taught a damned thing, and kept coming back and doing the same thing. Lucky for us they never got out to get him.

REALLY lucky for him.

Well hell! My last post ain't showing up for some reason I can't figure out, so it must not've been that important!

a reply to: nenothtu


Thats was messed up! lol... Glad you got that fixed!

Did you know your wife is so smart and sweet! I really like her a lot!

a reply to: OpinionatedB

Why thank you! I'm kinda partial to her myself!

a reply to: OpinionatedB

Thank you for all the updates and for digging into this a bit with me throughout the course of the day. I really appreciate it.
THIS is exactly why I choose ATS over all others, it is why I don't even bother posting a find like this in multiple places (besides maybe fb and I have some very good research inclined friends and acquaintances there as well....but the best of the best are still using this site.

I will be keeping a close eye on developments within this story.....I intend to seek even more direct contact with sheriff and to make sure that the charges brought (be they just...and not ludicrous and unfit for the original crime) stick. At the very least it should be seen to that he doesn't have a K9 again. New job for this guy. End of story. He has screwed up any chance at redemption in my eyes, in that regard. Otherwise, hell, who knows....he might be one of the "decent" ones. I don't know but I do know that either way it doesn't matter, it is irrelevant. Someone could have been killed here and someone has to be held accountable.....in this case, he and HE alone seems to be at fault. The arguments that the dog was at fault have no weight.....that argument matters not if the dog is properly leashed/restrained/supervised....

Again...thank you. (And everyone else as well)

a reply to: nenothtu

There may be more to the story than is being told.

There wouldn't be more to the story had the K9 been properly restrained/leashed/supervised. That makes it the brunt of the story and end of story to me.

Having said that, I agree with everything else you said. I am nearly certain this child and this dog had a past that wasn't "all dog" when it came to behavior not befitting a relationship between a K9 and a neighbors' CHILD! (Dogs tend to be more aggressive and on alert when strange kids/kids not living in it's territory are around....obvious reasons...they can be unpredictable, it's simply a defense mechanism.)

In the end, all that goes without saying because........sentence one of this comment.


Btw....thanks for your input and thanks for sharing your knowledge about this story as well....A different "spin" puts it into a bit more "balanced" context for me.

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
A trained attack dog is really no different than a trained attack human and considering it cannot communicate it's intentions to it's so called handler in any direct and clearly understandable way it certainly shouldn't be magically protected by laws that protect it and it's handler from liability when that trained thing does something that damages another.

I have a neighbor about 250 yards away from where I sit right now who has two dogs he claims are drug dogs or used by the K-9 guys or whatever, I really think he's just a scaredy cat that tells stories to make himself feel safer from...whatever...

But this guy moves into a house directly adjoining the property I occupy and simply puts "beware of dog" signs out instead of putting up a fence while he has some really big german shepherds wandering around his yard with his little kids playing there with no adult in sight whatsoever most of the time.

I have kept dogs for at least the past 20 years and know from experience they have bad days just like anything else, I have been bitten several times by several different dogs over the years, and believe it or not, all of those bites were accidental as in if the dog was not on a leash tied to me I would not have been bitten while the dogs fought with other dogs that were running free.

I don't care what kind of dog it is, the goddamned thing needs to be under control at all times and the department and handler of this dog should be held fully accountable and liable for any damages arising from this incident, as my neighbor will be one way or the other if his dogs wander too far and conduct themselves in a threatening fashion.

A dog without a human controller is a dog wandering around in a threatening fashion.

It's not like you can ask it what he or she is doing wandering around your space like you can a person now, is it?, but then you can go to prison for life for defending yourself and your loved ones and property for dealing with it....

Things develop a taste for certain things after a time just like I did when I was in the military, which was the reason I got myself the hell out of the military....

Some things are just so WRONG!!!....

Anyway....

Some police people have been killed when serving no knock warrants lately and the person was justified for the shooting in at least one case, maybe this crazy stuff with police dogs being above reproach is about to change also, as it should be.

Another issue is it was a child that was injured, if it had been you or I the attack would have been justified, you or I would have been brought up on some bogus charge to justify the dog attack somehow and charged with killing a police officer...

Then, another issue, how the # does one take the testimony of an entity that cannot communicate to the court in a suit or trial, is it secondhand testimony of the handler who cannot possibly keep up with the canine when set free?.

FLAKY!!!!!

I am always interested in stories like this, and after having a "trained attack dog" he was nothing like you have described. He wasn't mean at all, played ball like any other dog. But if you touched me without permission, yelled at me or showed any aggression towards me he would become very agitated, and waited for me to tell him what to do. If you just attacked me without provocation you would receive a free trip to the ER. He was like any other dog other than he would bite if told to do so. He would search the house before entering when returning home, he was great around kids, loved to play but never left my side. If he was to go outside and do his business, he always made sure he was visually aware of where I was and what I was doing. Getting in my truck was out of e the question, he was better than any firearm, smarter than any other dog that has owned me.

He would smell drugs, black powder, he would even protect a sitting child, and no one could get within 15 feet if told to do so. He greeted everyone with a keen eye and never showed any aggression unless it was warranted in the 10 years I had him. He was a police dog from Belgium with two years of service and the officer retired, and sold him to a trainer in my area. He was trained for personal protection and a fabulous companion. I have a dog now untrained other than obedience that is the same breed and exhibits the same protective qualities. He was a Belgian Tervuren as well.

a reply to: Jakal26

Ah I didn't do anything at all besides bring it to my husbands attention and asked him if we could find out more, he was the one who found out the information.

ATS is a nice community, and its always good having more than one person looking for info when you need it!

I'm not sure of all the circumstances or what caused this. Is this officer at fault? Only for allowing his dog to get out from the sounds of it, but even that I'm just not certain. If the way he (and other officers) keep their dogs usually works perfectly then it could have just been a fluke that caused this attack - which seems weird off the top anyway.

I used to own a wolf, and in my state if you own a wolf you have to have an enclosure for them which includes fencing over the top of the enclosure as well. (And yes you can still have a full enclosure that covers a very large area and have it still high enough for people to walk in)

I think this incident needs to help us to reconsider how we house police dogs, and perhaps make it just that much more difficult for them to get out.

I am less likely to blame the cop (Deputy Jackson) until we know a little more about what really happened after talking to others about this, although in any case the state is responsible for all medical etc.

I believe the question here becomes, is Deputy Jackson negligent in allowing his dog to get out, or did the dog escape an enclosure (fenced in area) that has normally been effective?

a reply to: OpinionatedB

I'm not sure of all the circumstances or what caused this. Is this officer at fault?

The circumstances? He left the dog unattended, in his yard, unleashed. If he lived within "city limits" (I don't know) then there are most certainly leash laws that he was not abiding by. Whether it had "worked perfectly" in the past or not becomes irrelevant IF he was living within city limits. If he wasn't then I doubt there were any leash laws in place. I live outside of city/town limits and there aren't any here that I am aware of....unless a particular dog has been threatening in the past and the owner has been notified to keep it leashed. I had a collie (recently had to put him down due to age, illness, and a spinal problem stemming from a few run ins with the local traffic) that I kept for years without leash, though I will admit to a few problematic incidences with the neighbors young grandchild. I leashed my dog because of those instances, for a few years I would leash him anytime those kids would come to see their grandparents. I supervised him when he wasn't leashed....at all times.

Having said that, I will agree that there are times that dogs "get loose" and disobey. I had a small dog that was hell bent on seeing the neighbors dog, nightly. She was the neighborhood breeder and he couldn't control himself......would sneak of incessantly...and he would do it with FULL awareness that he was not supposed to. The slow, low crawling, glancing back to see if I was somewhere watching....stopping when our eyes would meet when I was, indeed, watching....it gave him away

I think this incident needs to help us to reconsider how we house police dogs, and perhaps make it just that much more difficult for them to get out.

This, more than anything else, is what should be addressed here.

In my eyes, the officer is still at fault. He was obviously not supervising this K9. Evidence of that is the fact that the neighbors had to shoot the dog....where was this officer? I asked that before and still have to wonder. Whether it escaped or not, why was he not around to be certain that didn't happen. With building an enclosure rather than leashing there is responsibility. The same that comes with making sure a leash is secure and not compromised. He should have been making checks.....BUT, I say that KNOWING how dogs can be and how fast those suckers can dig a hole when they need to. I have a miniature dachshund that can, when seeking yard moles and the like, dig a hole with those two stubbed off little legs....just about as fast as I can dig with a small garden shovel. LOL

As I said, I wouldn't go as far as to call for his badge. That seems a bit extreme at this time, given the information we do have. I will go as far as to say that he should lose his position working with a K9 unit. There is great responsibility that comes with that post, surely others are more qualified in regards to supervising and limiting public interaction with these dogs. As predictable as they can be, there are those "other times"....I recall my high school years and how they used to line us up and run a drug sniffing dog through our ranks when we would have "random" searches after returning from the vocational school (20 miles away from the HS in my area). That all stopped when a dog went snap off and started attacking a kid that had a joint in his pocket.....from then on we were instructed to exit the bus, the dogs would search the bus and be on their way. In the school, we were directed to stay in classrooms and teachers were to shut the doors and the dogs would check lockers, etc.....but NEVER (after the aforementioned incident) did they line us up like that again (welcome to "Oxyland" USA....not even worth a mention in regards to police state indoctrination techniques...lol....been going on here for years)

Anyways, I'm getting off topic.

And this.....

Ah I didn't do anything at all besides bring it to my husbands attention and asked him if we could find out more, he was the one who found out the information.

Hey...that's doing something. I appreciate it, no matter the lack of effort one might think it involves.


ETA: How rude of me......Thank your husband for me, from one online stranger to another
I nearly forgot!

a reply to: Jakal26

Wow, your stories of being searched at school... I NEVER had to put up with that sort of thing growing up and I made darn sure I lived in a rural enough area when my kids were growing up once I found out they were doing that to kindergarteners in the city.

School is for learning, and I cannot imagine it any other way. Where I lived the pre-school through high school kids were all in one building.... the area was that small. The only time the cop (we had 1 on loan from another town that we shared him with) came to the school was to teach the kids that cops were not bad and if ever there might be a need for help it was okay to talk to him.

To me, what you describe is a horror story.

Back on topic:

If the dog was in the yard, then I'm sure the dog was behind a fence? The fence scenario is the only reasonable one, and the only time you don't need to supervise an animal (unless of course you live out like I used to... then you don't need a fence either cause there just aren't much people) because they are secured behind fencing.

This is my thought process, that if the dog was in the yard then the dog was also most likely fenced in. What, in my imagining, would then have happened was the dog managed to escape from a fenced in area... which would mean the fencing simply hadn't been adequate enough to fully secure him, hence another alternative for the next animal would be needed.

If indeed the dog was fenced in, then that would mean the officer most likely was not at fault because there are no leash laws or otherwise if an animal is behind a fence, unless you live in my state which would call for a full enclosure should you own a wolf.

I believe when we are going on presumptions, we have a tendency to presume different things.

As far as my husband, he is in this thread... and I'm sure he will read of your appreciation when he gets off work! His name is Nenothtu. He is from that area.

originally posted by: Jakal26
a reply to: OpinionatedB

ETA: How rude of me......Thank your husband for me, from one online stranger to another

I nearly forgot!

You already thanked me, in the post above. I'm not a stranger - I grew up in Russell County, just outside of Lebanon in the boonies. We don't have any strangers around there, other than the occasional Yankee furriner, but most of them were just passing through - they seemed a bit uncomfortable in that environment. When I first moved there as a kid, I was shocked at all of the people I'd never seen before in my life waving at me like I'd been there all my life. Within a week, I wasn't a stranger to anyone for 40 miles around.

SVCC alumnus, Law Enforcement curriculum. I helped with the yearly in-service training of the LE officers around there, from Russell, Tazewell, Buchanan, Dickenson, Wise, Lee, and Scott Counties, but that was 30 years ago.

I got the info by the simple expedient of calling my sister, who Lives in Buchanan County.