The Crime Scene - To Serve and Inform

Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Complaint over dog shooting filed

Matt Zapotosky

The animal rescue group whose dog was shot and killed by a D.C. police officer in the middle of a crowded festival in Adams Morgan in September has filed a complaint with the D.C. government's Office of Police Complaints about the incident.

The group, Lucky Dog Animal Rescue, posted a redacted copy of the complaint on its Web site.

The complaint claims Lucky Dog has gathered 11 witnesses whose account of events indicates Officer Scott Fike unjustifiably threw the under-control dog, named Parrot, down a stairwell and shot it. Police have maintained Fike acted rightly in shooting the dog, which was aggressive.

The incident was hotly debated after it occurred, though many witnesses interviewed by the Washington Post did generally support the account laid out in Lucky Dog's complaint.

Others supported the police, including the woman who says Parrot attacked her dog, sparking the incident.

Lucky Dog's complaint also lays out some history about Parrot. The group rescued the pit bull-terrier mix on the day he was slated to be euthanized at a Baltimore animal shelter. Veterinary records attached to the complaint say Parrot had a "friendly" disposition.

-- Matt Zapotosky

By Matt Zapotosky  | October 28, 2010; 11:44 AM ET
Categories:  Animal Stories, Matt Zapotosky, The District, Updates  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Levy case: Guandique's girlfriend, FBI on stand
Next: Man charged in decade-old sex case

Comments

the dog bled to death for hours?!?
Fike killed another dog at his house?

I wish Lucky Dog success in their suit.

I wish Officer Fike to be permanently assigned to desk duty, without access to any weapons or animals.

I wish DC police were better: better people, better equipped, better trained, better managed. Laughing at the Levy evidence scene, and "go finish the dog" in Adams Morgan.

Posted by: Greent | October 28, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

The police brutally attacked and killed a dog, not, at least for one of the officers, for the first time. They then falsified reports and covered their name tags while refusing to take statements from witnesses. This kind of criminal conduct by police should never be allowed to happen in a country that is supposed to have rule of law. These officers must lose their badges and be prosecuted. It is truly frightening to me that this behavior is not seen as a very serious threat to our system.

Posted by: DG99501 | October 28, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

DC police are hacks. They're not much better than the little gangbangers offing themselves every night in SE.

Posted by: Please_Fix_VAs_Roads | October 28, 2010 1:16 PM | Report abuse

I am beyond outraged by Officer Fike's egregious criminal conduct. Some dog shootings are alleged to be necessary for public safety and are a close call, but this is absolutely NOT one of those. I've seen all of the hard evidence that has been made publicly available and not a shred of it supports the officer's version.

MPD should be referring him for prosecution for felony animal cruelty, not protecting him. I hope someone eventually sues MPD and Fike in civil court as well. That's the only way they will learn - if they are on the losing end of a massive monetary judgment. This type of conduct severely undermines the community's faith in MPD and in police in general. When will police departments learn that the wanton killing of dogs is not in their or anyone else's best interests? If any cops harm my dogs in a situation like this, I will use every legal avenue available to ruin their lives.

Posted by: VirginiaDad | October 28, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

Why does a gun have to be the first weapon of choice? Don't officers carry tasers and wouldn't that have been the better weapon to use if the officer did feel the dog was going to attack?


Deeanna
http://www.puppies-seeking-homes.com
http://www.puppies-seeking-homes.com/blog

Posted by: deeannaH | October 28, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Not to mention the fact that Sushi's owner admittedly allowed Sushi to approach another UNKNOWN dog (Parrot), without permission of Parrot's handler/owner. And then she allowed the interaction to escalate to the point that she could not remove her dog alone. Why wasn't she charged with not having control of her animal?

Posted by: IndolentCin | October 28, 2010 1:51 PM | Report abuse

if any pit bull even just looks at me or mine in a public space, I will fire it up....and if its owner wants to do something about it, I will fire them up too.....

Posted by: SofaKingCool2009 | October 28, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

MPD needs a new chief.

Posted by: blasmaic | October 28, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

This is the same peaceful dog that bit a poodle and the owners hand causing him to bleed? This was stated by the owner, btw.

Posted by: damnit79 | October 28, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

So, does the woman who claims her dog was "attacked" by Parrot want cops to be the arbiter during animal disputes? I think she supports the cop because he shot Parrot. This was a typical overrection by the cop. All they seem to know is shoot it.

Posted by: jckdoors | October 28, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

This officer should be FIRED from the police force for betraying the trust of those he is sworn to protect, extremely poor judgment erring to the point of criminality, being a loose cannon and not having the psychological stability to be permitted to carry a weapon and really should be ostracized by all canine officers and dog clubs. He also put people in jeopardy by pulling his weapon on a crowded street and than firing it. His life obviously was not in danger and he was the obvious, dominant aggressor. He should be FIRED!

Posted by: tazz2 | October 28, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Nice to see the moronic kid who brought the dog and the "Lucky Dog" Agency completely contradict themselves, both in the report and with their initial claims 2 months ago.

1. Thank you for finally admitting th edog was a pit. You spent the first two days after the incident claiming the dog was a harless shar-pei.

2. Thank you for finally admitting that the Pit instigated the conflict by biting the poodle (so hard that it broke the dogs leg). Young Aaron swore up and down for days that the poodle instigated the fight.

3. The dog suffered for an "hour or two" after it was shot? Well gee...thats specfic. All your "11" witnesses (there were hundreds who came out of the woodwork the day after it happened claiming to be witnesses, that was obviously a crock) and none of them could tell within an hour of whether the dog was alive or not?

I could go on and on, but this has gotten beyond the point of idiocy. Some adoption agency gives some ill equipped kid a dog with an unknown temperment, who then takes the dog out amogst thousands of people and other animals on the street and fails to control him.

He then lies about various details of the story.

It is unfortunate a dog had to die, but the blame here lies with its quasi owner and the agency who obviously isn't vetting their volunteers very well.

Posted by: Nosh1 | October 28, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

You people are idiots, and you give washingtonians a bad name. This "docile" dog attacked another dog, bit his own owner, bit the canine officer who first tried a nonlethal restraint on the dog, and then charged the canine officer a second time before the officer finally shot him. There couldn't be a more justified case of shooting dog. What else was he supposed to do?

Idiots.

Posted by: dctarheel2 | October 28, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

SofaKing... although you seem like the type of person I would take seriously... your comments are irrelevant and completely ignorant.

Well dcartheel2 I would like to ask if you were even there. But from the sound of your oh so intelligent post I'm guessing not. If you take the time to read the report filed by the police you will see that it does not state that the owner was bitten, or state who instigated the incident. It does however state that the officer had scratches to his hand and wrist which are not consistent with his "bite".

Lastly, Nosh please show where I can find the evidence that this dogs leg was broken. I am more than interested to see this. Oh and may I suggest proofreading next time.

Posted by: mrscsw1213 | October 28, 2010 9:08 PM | Report abuse

Just read the complaint and have a sick stomach - if this is correct these officers lack basic humanity and should not be in the positions they have - Very scary.

Posted by: myrlyn | October 28, 2010 11:22 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company