Police shoot dog during Champaign DUI arrest

Police shoot dog during Champaign DUI arrest

CHAMPAIGN — A Champaign man who allegedly sicced his dog on police officers attempting to arrest his girlfriend Thursday night has been criminally charged. Champaign police responded by shooting and killing the dog outside the west Champaign home.

Assistant State's Attorney Steve Ziegler said John P. Cargo, 41, of the 1000 block of West William Street, Champaign, was charged Friday with felony resisting a peace officer and misdemeanor aggravated assault in connection with the incident, which started about 11:30 p.m. when officers tried to arrest Lisa G. Ehler, 52, of the same address, for driving under the influence.

Ziegler said police received a call at 11:22 p.m. of a person who had been seen driving fast and erratically on Prospect Avenue. The caller identified the car for police and said Ehler was the driver.

Ziegler said officers found her near her car at the William Street home and said she appeared to be intoxicated.

As they were placing her under arrest, Cargo came out of the house and tried to get in Ehler's car.

"Cargo comes out while they're dealing with Ehler and is told to stay away from them and her car and the witness. Basically, he goes back into the house," said Ziegler.

"As he has the door open, he appears to call to someone or something and the next thing the officers know, a pit bull appears and comes out the door. They order Cargo to restrain the dog. He does not do that and apparently waves in the direction of the officers. The dog then moves toward the officers," he said.

Ziegler said there were at least two and possibly three officers present.

"One officer tried to push the dog away with his foot and the dog growled and snarled at the officers and eventually they had to make the decision to shoot the dog. There is no mention of Cargo trying to comply at all with their commands to restrain the dog," Ziegler said.

After the dog was shot, Cargo came back out of the house and police started to arrest him, but he resisted them.

"He struggles with the officers and winds up falling with at least one officer into thorn bushes, and he and the officer get cut up on the bush and maybe something else," said Ziegler.

Ziegler said Cargo is accused of a felony resisting charge because Officer Corey Phenicie was injured and assault for allegedly siccing the dog on Phenicie.

In a release about the incident, Champaign police did not say which officers or how many were involved but did say that the injured officer did not require medical treatment. Cargo was taken to Carle FoundationHospital in Urbana, where he was treated for minor injuries then taken to the county jail.

He was arraigned Friday and asked for time to hire his own attorney. He was released from jail Friday afternoon after posting $1,000 cash bond and is due back in Feb. 22.

Court records show Cargo has prior misdemeanor convictions for battery and escape.

Ehler was arrested for DUI but released early Friday morning after posting bond.

Police did not return calls or email requests to answer questions about the dog shooting.

Ziegler said he had no idea who shot the dog or how many times.

A couple who lives next door to Ehler and Cargo said they heard three shots.

Dan and Liz Maloney said they heard a commotion outside and noticed more than one police car present when the shots were fired.

"I was very alarmed that someone had been injured," said Liz Maloney, who said she eventually saw both Ehler and Cargo in handcuffs and walking so knew they were OK.

"That was our main concern," she said of her neighbors. Liz Maloney said Ehler has rented the house next door for several years. The Maloneys have lived in their house 20 years. The neighborhood is just east of Clark Park.

Liz Maloney said after the ambulance and police cars left, she later saw a minivan arrive and two men take the dog carcass away. The dog's body was partly on the sidewalk and partly on the boulevard in front of the home.

"It's a lot of drama," said Liz Maloney. "What really bothered me is that the police were looking our vehicle over, I assume for damage, and our tree trunk. There may have been stray bullets or ricochet or something," she said.

Both Liz and Dan Maloney said they didn't know what prompted the shots. They just knew they were concerned for their teenage daughter, who slept through the incident in an upstairs bedroom close to where the altercation happened.

"I have concerns about that. I don't know what was going on in the heat of the moment, but three shots for a dog? I don't know," Liz Maloney said. "Especially in light of the bad press the police are getting from the other dog that was shot. We just have concerns about shots being fired in the dark at night in a residential area."

Police Chief Anthony Cobb told The News-Gazette last month in the wake of the shooting death of a dog in southwest Champaign on Nov. 17, that he planned to begin training officers in the appropriate use of force in dealing with vicious animals.

He also said the department had amended its policy to specify that an aggressive animal must present an imminent threat to a human before deadly force could be used.

An internal investigation of that shooting, which happened in a residential neighborhood at John and Crescent streets, concluded that Officer Andre Davis had acted within departmental policy when he shot and killed a Labrador that was fighting with a pit bull.

Sections (2):News, Local

Comments

News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.

Login or register to post comments

rsp wrote on February 08, 2013 at 12:02 pm

Cargo should also be charged with animal cruelty, due to the fact that his actions led directly to the death of the dog. If he had taken proper care to restrain it the dog would be alive. As for the neighbor, I guess he likes having his child live next to drunk drivers and people who sic their dogs on people. 

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 08, 2013 at 12:02 pm

Hopefully Ehler has her RN license revoked - as this is the THIRD resisting charge for her. As for the neighbor, I would think that this is a pretty nice area, so I would be surprised as well.

Joe American wrote on February 08, 2013 at 2:02 pm

What part of this story leads you to believe that she was resisting arrest?

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 08, 2013 at 2:02 pm

You're right - she was just BEING arrested for DUI (for the 2nd time in Champaign County). It seems from the article that HE was the one obstructing, and then resisting. Fair enough.

Joe American wrote on February 08, 2013 at 2:02 pm

 06-01-07                

STATE CONFESSES TO THE STATUTORY SUMMARY
                    SUSPENSION. STATUTORY SUMMARY SUSPENSION IS
                            RESCINDED. CIRCUIT CLERK TO SEND NOTICE TO THE
                            SECRETARY OF STATE.
                            DISMISSED                                                     01 D 208
                            CASE CLOSED                                                   01 D 999
 

 

But you are correct - she was arrested.  Didn't stick, however.

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 08, 2013 at 2:02 pm

Yeah, I got that from the disposition. I'd just be happier if people like her and her boyfriend didn't exist.

Joe American wrote on February 08, 2013 at 2:02 pm

"Exist" is a strong word, but I can't figure out why she's with this guy.  I'll forego commenting on his record, but it should speak for itself.

rsp wrote on February 08, 2013 at 3:02 pm

birds of a feather flock together?

june58 wrote on February 09, 2013 at 3:02 pm

Didn't EXIST?! What kind of monster are you, SantClarence27? Maybe soon you'll get your wish since Lisa Ehler is dying of cancer. And her 'loser boyfriend' has stood by her side for years helping her get better and loving her and being nothing but a great family man and partner to her. So no, I wish monsters like YOU didn't judge people based on some bogus article on the internet! GET A LIFE INSTEAD OF JUDGING OTHER PEOPLE'S!!

rsp wrote on February 09, 2013 at 3:02 pm

Loving partners get arrested for domestic violence? So being sick is an excuse now for driving drunk? When my father was dying of cancer he didn't drive drunk. No fighting with the cops either. Sending the dog after people. Same thing when my uncle died of cancer. The only cops who saw them were friends. Some people just know how to act when they are out in public. Other people make excuses. 

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 09, 2013 at 5:02 pm

I guess I don't need to respond now, because you said exactly what I would have.

C-U Townie wrote on February 10, 2013 at 2:02 pm

While I feel for her that she is suffering through cancer it would be EVEN WORSE had she hit and killed someone while driving while intoxicated. She would be villified in the eyes of the community for such an act. And no one would care if she was suffering from cancer. Backstory of cancer or not she could have killed someone or more than one person because she was behind the wheel while intoxicated. Being a cancer victim/survivor is just one perspective to this story. 

illini00 wrote on February 19, 2013 at 4:02 pm

 

This is my aunt and her boyfriend. I knew the dog, Shay, and she wouldn't hurt a fly so I'm still scratching my head as to why she was shot when I'm sure no such brutality was needed.

The comments I'm seeing here are making me sick and you guys should be ashamed of yourselves. Yes, Jon and Lisa made a mistake becuase they're human. I'm absolutely NOT excusing anyone's actions here by any means. My aunt should have never gotten into a car after drinking, but for you to say you wished people like her didn't exist is quite a bit harsh so please watch what you say becuase there might be family watching that will be doubly hurt by your insensitive comments. I hope that when you make your next mistake people are just as quick to pass judgement and then maybe you'd know how it felt.

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 19, 2013 at 4:02 pm

I don't think it's unreasonable to say that I wish people who were willing to drink and drive didn't exist - there would be 17,000 fewer fatalities per year in the United States, IIRC. As for the dog, it's ridiculous that anyone would blame someone other than the owner who didn't restrain the dog (among other things). I don't expect the police to protect dogs above themselves.

C-U Townie wrote on February 10, 2013 at 2:02 pm

She needs mental health services. Individuals suffering from life-threatening illnesses have a higher likelihood for developing depression, among other disorders. 

Drinking is an issue, so much so that the DSM has been struggling to find an appropriate way to make distinctions among those who drink:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/24/health/dsm-alcohol-time/index.html?hpt=us_c2

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 10, 2013 at 2:02 pm

That's entirely possible and reasonable. Certainly we, as a society, do not address alcoholism and drug addiction appropriately. We criminalize drug related behavior. We blame the addict for being an addict, as if that were at all helpful.

But we're not talkign about addiction. We're talking about her choice to endanger everyone else on the road for what seems to be the second time. That is simply not acceptible behavior by anyone, and places her in a different group than addicts who sit on a streetcorner and panhandle.

rsp wrote on February 10, 2013 at 8:02 pm

Second time getting caught. 

jeffhelgesen wrote on February 08, 2013 at 12:02 pm

*siccing

Danno wrote on February 08, 2013 at 1:02 pm

"...so, what's the story, Doc? Who will tend to me as I recover?

Nurse Ratched will tend to your recovery."

I feel comforted.

welive wrote on February 08, 2013 at 1:02 pm

and this is why pit bulls get a bad rap the owners shame on him.

 

Joe American wrote on February 08, 2013 at 2:02 pm

I'm quite perturbed by the NG's unhealthy infatuation with police shooting violent dogs.  Yes, NG - it was justified.  If a dog attacks me or my family - leashed or not - it will soon be pushing up daisies, justifiably so.  It's no different for anyone.

bluegrass wrote on February 08, 2013 at 2:02 pm

Hey Joe, where you goin with that gun in your hand?  That doggie growled, so I SHOT HER!

Seriously though, what are you talking about the "NG's unhealthy infatuation.."?  Are you being facetious or serious?

 

Joe American wrote on February 08, 2013 at 2:02 pm

The dog hasn't yet assumed ground temperature and they've already requested the departments statement, not received it, and had time to include that in their story.  And they were all over the only other instance in recent memory. So yes, I'm going with infatuation.

Your song parody was pretty funny, though.

rsp wrote on February 08, 2013 at 2:02 pm

Any police shooting is a big story so they are in their rights to go after it. If they were shooting every day then nobody would pay much attention. It would be "routine". But it's fairly rare so it's kind of shocking, and we can name each event. 

Joe American wrote on February 08, 2013 at 2:02 pm

What does one have to do with the other?  Of course it's their right, as it is yours and mine.  No more.  No less.  I'm just failing to see the corrrelation between doing what's within someones rights and believing that those actions cannot somehow become an infatuation. 

rsp wrote on February 08, 2013 at 3:02 pm

It's the local newspaper. What should they write about? 

bluegrass wrote on February 08, 2013 at 2:02 pm

Have to agree with RSP here, if an officer discharges his or her weapon that's a newsworthy story, caninie casualty or not.  

smokn69 wrote on February 08, 2013 at 2:02 pm

The dog was obeying his or her owner not the dogs fault its the owner.

Sid Saltfork wrote on February 08, 2013 at 3:02 pm

Give the police a break.  At least, they shot the right dog this time.  The dog was doing what he was trained to do.  He was obeying his owner.  He could not be reasoned with at the spur of the moment when the police had their hands full with the owner.  He died in the service of his master.  

Teddy Johnson wrote on February 08, 2013 at 3:02 pm

If you don't know the Champaign police department is corrupt, you don't know anything.

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 08, 2013 at 3:02 pm

While that's been true for a long time, it's improving with the new Chief.

Danno wrote on February 08, 2013 at 4:02 pm

Whoa Hoss. 'Corruptness' exists in every level of human endeavor since Troglodytes. To varying degrees, for sure. To condemn the entirety of the CPD and, call some of our fellow contributors in this forum of not knowing anything...well...you madame, should look in the mirror and, point fingers towards yourself.

Teddy Johnson wrote on February 08, 2013 at 3:02 pm

"The release also said that the department would conduct an internal investigation to determine if, among other things, the firing of the weapon or weapons is consistent with departmental policy."

The Champaign police department will never admit to a mistake unless they are sued. This is a load of BS.

rsp wrote on February 09, 2013 at 4:02 am

Any time they fire their weapons there is an investigation, internal and external. Where have you been? Keep up. 

Bulldogmojo wrote on February 08, 2013 at 3:02 pm

If the mail carriers can use mace spray for dog attacks why can't the police? Shooting the dog seems to be the default response for handling an aggressive dog lately. However If you sic your dog on a cop you should be charged with aggravated battery or similar charge because some dogs can be a powerful lethal weapon to no fault of the dog they just think they are protecting their home.

Video of dog tearing the bumper off of a police car  Imagine if it was the cop's leg.

Joe American wrote on February 08, 2013 at 4:02 pm

Mace rarely works on the most vicious of dogs. And no one, including police, should have to take that chance.

Bulldogmojo wrote on February 08, 2013 at 4:02 pm

I'll defer to your expertise on the efficacy of mace

rsp wrote on February 08, 2013 at 9:02 pm

Besides that is with the idea of them getting away. 

whatithink wrote on February 08, 2013 at 5:02 pm

If the dog was trained to attack, it should've been shot.  If I was this guys neighbor, I'd be happy the dog was shot.  What if it attacked some kid?  Sounds like a couple of white trash people. 

The lady will lose her RN certification if convicted, it is mandatory per being certified.  Stupid woman shouldn't have got drunk and drove her car.

emsed1 wrote on February 08, 2013 at 5:02 pm

Wow.

That's pretty nasty.  It sounds like you don't know her, but would be happy to condemn her anyway. 

What if this was your mom, sister or friend?  How about some common courtesy and a little "due process".

rsp wrote on February 08, 2013 at 9:02 pm

I consider drunk driving to be a social problem. I don't look the other way when people do it, even when they are family members or to be polite. I would rather someone not die because I was afraid of hurting someone's feeling or embarrassing them in public or in private. Have you considered the impact on anyone in her path in her rush to get home to get out of a ticket? And you're worried about us offending someone? Unlike a drunk driver, I don't think we're at risk of killing anyone.

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 08, 2013 at 10:02 pm

this is also her second arrest for DUI, don't forget.

Everyonegetalife wrote on February 08, 2013 at 5:02 pm

Claiming to wish that someone does not "exist" is a pretty bold statement and actually very sad to hear, no matter what the circumstances.  I can only imagine how hard it must be to live in your perfect world.  You are given the liberty of your own opinion, but human decency does not have to go out the window.  Next, please do the educated thing and read other articles on the matter, because I know how hard it is for little minds to believe whatever they read.  WCIA reported that neighbors stated the same "vicious" dog played with their children and was very friendly.  Maybe for a moment can we put ourself in the realm of all possibilities and atleast play with the idea that the police may have been mistaken.  I agree that it is easy to second guess any decision just as we are all second guessing the people in this article and their decisions, but for a moment can we give them the same respect that all of us would expect.

emsed1 wrote on February 08, 2013 at 5:02 pm

Good point.

What is the logic behind posting information on professional licensure, arrest records, assumptions, generalizations...?

I find it tragically ironic that, in the same keyboard stroke complaining about local journalism, that folks will freely draw illogical conclusions and post information that would potentially embarrass a person who cannot reply.

Whether you "know" the person or not there are many people in our community with similar names and it's utterly irresponsible to drag them through the mud.

If the News-Gazette posted your names and criminal history (yes I know they are free public records, but that's not an excuse for character assassination) I suspect there would be a different attitude.

I'm assuming all here are adults, but you should be ashamed of yourselves.  There is a far bigger story here than speculating about who did what.  I LIVE IN THIS neighborhood and there are more than a few things in this story that concern me.  

I don't know anyone directly involved but, even if I did, I'd hope to have the common decency to withhold my speculation.  Is this what adults do in this day and age? 

 

freedom2010 wrote on February 08, 2013 at 6:02 pm

I bet your attitiude would change if this dog bit one of your loved ones. This is the type of scum that has these dogs because they feel "tough" . This guy tried to attack police with his dog as they were doing their job and the police had to kill the dog to stop it. He should be charged to the full extend of the law for putting others in the neighborhood in danger for what he did. And his lady friend should be arrested for putting all our lives in danger!

 

Sid Saltfork wrote on February 08, 2013 at 7:02 pm

How many comments would be made on this story if there had not been a dog involved?  How many dogs are put down in shelters everyday in this country?  If you want to make a significant point on the loss of a dog's life, donate to the local Humane Society.

By the way; the Westminister Dog Show is on this next Monday, and Tuesday nights.

sweet caroline wrote on February 08, 2013 at 10:02 pm

I'll add to Sid's suggestion of donating to the local animal shelter and suggest adopting from the shelter. 

emsed1 wrote on February 09, 2013 at 6:02 pm

My attitude would not change.  I believe in the due process clause of the Constitution and allowing every person, even the most despicable, to have his or her day in court. 

Dogs protect owners.  It's what they do.

Having spent 21 years in emergency services I also know that dogs can't tell the difference between a uniform and a criminal.

It disgusts me that people think it's okay to slander folks they don't know in a public forum.  With a name like "Freedom..." I would expect an understanding of not infringing on liberty, even if it's the liberty of others.

That's the problem in this country. The internet allows No-name anonymous accusations where a century ago a person might reserve his or her opinion until hearing the facts. 

I don't like this situation one bit.  I don't like dogs biting people and guns shooting dogs in my neighborhood.  Thank God it turned out like it did.  IF this story happened as it's presented then yes I think severe punishment is in order, but it needs to be done in a court of law.

We don't slander people in this country based on our vicarious outrage on behalf of others who never even asked your opinion.

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 09, 2013 at 8:02 pm

1) For something to be slander, it has to be untrue. None of this is - it's public record.

2) Since this is written and recorded, it would be libel, not slander. Libel also has to be untrue.

3) I'm sure they will get their day(s) in court. They're completely entitled to that.

4) My personal judgment has nothing to do with due process. People aren't innocent untill proven guilty with general judgment. People are entitle to use whatever facts they want to judge. Me, I have no problem judging someone with two DUI arrests or someone with a felony domestic battery (and a misdemeanor battery to boot) on their record. I'm generally fine with that. Also, anyone who would sic their dog on ANYONE doesn't desrve my pity, consideration, or reservation of judgment.

5) I can say whatever I want in this country based on my outrage. It's not infringing on anyone else's liberty. Period.

illini00 wrote on February 19, 2013 at 4:02 pm

Once again. I know this dog, I know this guy and I have an extremely difficult time believing any of those things you just assumed and spat out. This dog was a big baby and as sweet as could be and I don't think she even knew such commands. Please stop assuming.

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 19, 2013 at 4:02 pm

Even if she didn't - how are the police supposed to know that? It is the owner's responsibility to restrain the dog - ESPECIALLY in such a heated situation. Seriously, why was this guy even getting involved?

rsp wrote on February 08, 2013 at 10:02 pm

Maybe for a moment can we put ourself in the realm of all possibilities and atleast play with the idea that the police may have been mistaken.

When the dog charged the cop he probably just wanted him to throw a ball, right? What do you think restrain you dog means? Bite the cop? Do you really want to play?

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 08, 2013 at 10:02 pm

 

Were the police also mistaken on his felony domestic battery, for which he was convicted? How about her current DUI? I don't have to play nice here, and I hold habitual drunk drivers and wife beaters in a special contempt. They deserve nor will they get any "respect" from me, and that is aside from the potential animal cruelty issues herr. You're certainly free to respect them, but given my experience with both abuse and alcohol related accidents, my opinion of these twois not going to change. Just because my opinion differs from yours does not mean I am uneducated, ill-informed, or "little minded."

Unless of course you think wife beating and endangering everyone else on the road is acceptable and still deserves "the same respect that all of us would expect."

OneLife wrote on February 08, 2013 at 9:02 pm

How about you all shut your mouths and grow up... you are all being hypocritical and childish.. "ooohh dirt on someone who isn't me" GROW UP PEOPLE oh my gosh... do you all live for this or what? A little news that you can pick someone apart with. Let me tell you all something, they are probably reading these comments and with all the horrible things they are going to have to deal with they don't need to hear you all stirring up more drama for them. Shut up and move on. There will be deserving people for you all to pick on tomorrow I'm sure. Perhaps a drug dealer or a rapist. Not a couple who just ended up having a horrible night.

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 08, 2013 at 10:02 pm

I'll take someone who sells some marijuana over someone who bears his wife or drives drunk and endangers everyone else on the road every day.

Bulldogmojo wrote on February 08, 2013 at 11:02 pm

Well, yes you make a good point. We do in part live for our petty torments as evidenced by our anonymous handles and how we abuse the luxury provided us by the newsgazette to rant at more than 140 characters on their stories. I know many people who have hit rock bottom with their drinking sobered up and went on to live happy abuse free lives and this woman may do the same. One benefit that may come of this in part would be a wakeup call for these people to pull it together. That moment of clarity when they realize, wow this is my life in black and white in the form of posts under an article about my arrest and my dog that got killed because I turned him lose on a cop...Maybe

This time next week no one will likely remember the names or details of this situation and yes we will go back to our nitpicking and pettiness until we liberals (The pseudo intellectuals) take a break to watch the next episode of Downton abbey or in the case of the conservatives ( The paranoid doomsday preppers) reruns of Hee Haw. Until then they need to take their lumps in life like everyone else until they stop attracting undue attention to themselves.

Here's to hoping everything turns out for the best for them. 

rsp wrote on February 09, 2013 at 12:02 am

I don't know, if we keep commenting this could be one of the top stories for the year 2013 and come back next year! Won't that be fun. I'm really hoping for the geese. 

cateyes wrote on February 09, 2013 at 8:02 pm

It sucks the attention is on them! Like most drug dealers and rapists, they don't get caught the first time, they continue to do those things until caught. So, I and some on this post, seriously doubt this is the first time that they have done things this bad before. They just got caught this time.

claudiaknows wrote on February 09, 2013 at 12:02 am

*yawn....small town newspaper and people. Meanwhile, in Chicago....

Naksuo wrote on February 09, 2013 at 3:02 am

Come on Champaign PD! You really need some enlightenment on how to deal with domestic animals. According to the Humane Society of the US 39% of homes in the US own a dog so it can hardly be unusual for you to have to deal with these situations. Most dogs no matter how docile are going to show some form of aggressive tendencies if you come in to their home / yard and 'threaten' their owner. Is there no other way to deal with these encounters. Is your first response deadly force when threatened by a person?  How about when threatened by a kid who might not know any better. The article states the dog  'growled and snarled at the officers' and eventually they had to make the decision to shoot the dog'. Unless there's more to the story it seems like shooting the animal is a bit extreme!

rsp wrote on February 09, 2013 at 5:02 am

They repeatedly told the owner to control his dog. Instead Cargo told the dog to go after the cops. If you have a dog that will go after someone on command that is a crime. That isn't the same as a dog that thinks it's protecting it's property from an intruder. Cargo made the decision to bring the dog from inside the house where it was secure. The police did not go into the house, they did not call the dog, Cargo did that. He was told to put the dog back into the house. It was more important to him to defy the police than to take care of his dog so he got his dog killed. I'm sure he will tell us all later how much he loved his dog and how they should have allowed it to just bite them.

Exactly how many times do you think the police confront an angry person every day? A suicidal person? A drunk? Maybe you should do a ride-along. I think you would be shocked. 

Naksuo wrote on February 09, 2013 at 8:02 am

Hmm the story doesnt actually state that the dog went after any one: "One officer tried to push the dog away with his foot and the dog growled and snarled at the officers and eventually they had to make the decision to shoot the dog". Nor does it appear clear from what was reported that he ordered the dog to attack: "As he has the door open, he appears to call to someone or something and the next thing the officers know, a pit bull appears and comes out the door. They order Cargo to restrain the dog. He does not do that and apparently waves in the direction of the officers".  Reading between the lines it does seem obvious the police were dealing with drunks that weren't making good decisions. I absolutely understand that the police have a tremendously difficult job dealing with violent, dangerous and stupid people on an hourly basis. Yet when dealing with these people we expect them to use deadly force as a last resort.  We also expect them to protect innocents who are swept into the situation. I would argue that family pets often fall in to this latter category

rsp wrote on February 09, 2013 at 10:02 am

Some of us use more than one source of information. The dog would also be considered a lethal weapon, not an innocent. They don't have time to see what it's trained to do, how dangerous it is. Do you see anything in the story about how Cargo got into Ehlers car after being told not to? That was before he let the dog out. There's a lot that happened in a short time. This isn't a play by play. 

highspeed wrote on February 09, 2013 at 8:02 am

No one has mentioned the use of the taser! Would a taser work, i do not know. I know it doesnt always work on people.

rsp wrote on February 09, 2013 at 10:02 am

Champaign Police don't carry tasers. If they feel the need for one they call the sheriff's office, which means a wait. 

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 09, 2013 at 11:02 am

It's insane to suggest that the police should not have shot the dog. What else would you have them do in that situation? Allow the dog to bite them? The blame belongs with Cargo, not the police. Here's an idea - If the police tell you not to do something, you don't do it.

rsp wrote on February 09, 2013 at 4:02 pm

Maybe they could give them one free bite just to prove the dog is dangerous. Just to give everyone the chance to say how the cops provoked the bite. That's how it works. 

Alex32 wrote on February 09, 2013 at 6:02 pm

Are you people serious???? The police had every right & were justified in their actions to shoot the animal. It's Cargo's fault for letting the dog out to attack the police officers in the first place. Cargo should be charged with Animal cruelty and thrown in jail & never released! If you DO NOT obey the law their are consequences. It's a shame an animal had to die because of a moron!  The drunk driver should have her license revoked forever.....PERIOD!!

illini00 wrote on July 02, 2013 at 5:07 pm

Again. Shut your mouth. You do not know the full story, this is one side of it. Please let it be and stop reading into every detail.

SaintClarence27 wrote on July 03, 2013 at 8:07 am

Perhaps you should let it be, rather than commenting five months after my post.

Justsayit wrote on February 09, 2013 at 12:02 pm

"An internal investigation of that shooting, which happened in a residential neighborhood at John and Crescent streets, concluded that Officer Andre Davis had acted within departmental policy when he shot and killed a Labrador that was fighting with a pit bull."

The Chief determined that shooting was within policy, how do you think this one will turn out. This dog should have been shot. Tasers have been shown to be effective on animals but you can't use what you don't carry.  This shooting will be found to be within policy, but only after an extended period of time to let the public fervor die down.  This Chief only responds after interest in the story wanes.  IE: Officer arrested in DUI in Sept 2012, yet it is only reported in Feb. 2013.  The Gazette can only hold on to the story for the Chief so long and then it has to come out.  

Discusted wrote on February 09, 2013 at 2:02 pm

I would love for Chief Cobb to post the Champaign Police Department Use of Force Policy which justified Officer Davis to engage two dogs fighting, after killing one, engaging the second one in a running gun battle.

If the News Gazette did a little research, they would find that one of the rounds fired at the pitbull as it ran away, entered the nursing home and ended up on the living room floor of one of its occupants. But this is completely within policy and is in no way negligent on the part of Mr. Davis and his actions.

Maybe if they dug deeper, they would see that this was the second negligent discharge of a firearm by Mr. Davis, the other was at an un armed subject who posed no threat to Mr. Davis but, like the shooting at John and Crescent I'm sure it to was found to be within policy under Chief Cobb's interpretation of the policy.

The actions by the administration of the Champaign Police Department in the manner to which they decide policy violations are controlled by politics.

When it comes down to it any intelligent person can see what is taking place here. Champaign is a political hot box with race at the forefront.

As for the current thread, yes, when a dog attacks a person and your options are limited, lethal force to stop the attack must be used. Unfortunately the dog was only acting at the owners command.

 

 

rsp wrote on February 09, 2013 at 4:02 pm

Maybe you should research the past coverage the NG did on the last report. They did cover how the bullet went into the apartment kitchen. It isn't a nursing home by the way. As a result of that shooting they updated the policy for dealing with dogs. Before it didn't require a person to be in danger, now it does. You can look up the use of force policy of the police web site. And it's disgusted, not discusted

mstrom wrote on February 09, 2013 at 2:02 pm
Profile Picture

Bulldog has said all that needs to be said.  All other comments seem silly in comparison.  Including mine.   Until the source of the problem is treated, the symptoms will continue.  No human has been injured or killed here.  Yes a poor blameless dog has been killed.  Let us hope that a moment of clarity will happen and we will not hear in the future that a person has been hurt or killed.  This is an opportunity for healing and redemption.

Marti Wilkinson wrote on February 09, 2013 at 6:02 pm

Does the state of Illinois really revoke nursing licenses over a DUI conviction? I know someone who got busted for a DUI a few years ago, and she is still a practicing nurse and employed. In her case, I believe she did get treatment, and perhaps that is something the state considers. As long as a medical professional is not under the influence while at work, I don't see a DUI as being necessarily an indication of the need to revoke a medical license.

I underwent treatment for breast cancer ten years ago, and I don't consume alcoholic beverages. Since the lady lives in town she could have arranged for a cab to take her home, or for her boyfriend to pick her up. There are choices that people can make that don't involve drinking and driving. I think a big part of the problem is that people really don't feel impaired, and it doesn't occur to them that driving can be hazardous.

According to the story the boyfriend ordered his dog to attack the police. People get arrested just for 'resisting' a police officer, even if there are no other reasons that merit being handcuffed. There is a certain amount of latitude that is given to officers, and it's not unusual to see people get arrested for no other reason than simply 'resisting'.

cateyes wrote on February 09, 2013 at 8:02 pm

I think it depends on the actual charge of the DUI. If her charge is heightened to a felony, then she will lose her license. She could be charged with just a misdemeanor and it shouldn't mess with her license or job. If I'm not mistaken, I didn't think Lisa was still currently working

OneLife wrote on February 09, 2013 at 9:02 pm

Wow.. well here we go again. *ding ding ding* round 2... ok so 1st off, were any of you there? Nope don't think so. 2nd off none of you know them personally.. how would you people like it if you were on the news on the most horrible night of your life and you had idiots talking bad about you on the internet about how stupid it is... PEOPLE DO STUPID THINGS! You all obviously did, you're going after each other now. Let me tell you all 1 TRUE fact, each news station, paper and website has about 2 or 3 different stories going on, on each of them.. half of this made up drama and lies about them IS NOT TRUE! It is made up by losers like you.. at least they know what they did wrong, you all are hiding behind your computers talking garbage like its nothing. Get a life of your own.

Marti Wilkinson wrote on February 09, 2013 at 9:02 pm

Personally, I don't wish any ill on any of the participants in the story. However, If I do something stupid, and end up with my name in the paper, then I expect that people will probably talk smack about me. I would also hope that my friends and family members will be willing to provide a constructive support system.

Bulldogmojo wrote on February 09, 2013 at 10:02 pm

Well you don't have to worry about me being on the jury because I have read this article and people who read the newspaper cannot be relied upon to make an unbiased decision about a case. I won't mention to the lawyers that I am THE Bulldogmojo poster until AFTER I get my juror donut with the yummy sprinkles from the judge.

What were the names of the defendents again?

BTW you can ask the N-G to turn off comments to this story, they do it pretty often

simple citizen wrote on February 09, 2013 at 9:02 pm

Amazing how many judgemental people there are.  First of all the dog is not a PIT BULL, doesnt even look like a pit bull. I have been around that dog and she was a gentle sweet dog and the owner was probably waving the dog back in the house because she loves to greet people and love on them  Boxers are NOT attack dogs...just the opposite!!! Secondly, whoever reported this, is misinforming people, as usual.  The suspect, which that is what the lady is, has not had the oppurtunity to tell her side, nor does the friend of hers.  Amazing how people go on a witch hunt in Champaign, when probably everybody of  judging would like the same respect to stand a fair trial.  What is it with the Police, if they say it ....it's true?  How manypoeple get pulled over for speeding and the police lie about how fast they supposively clocked you at?  Or try to say" how much have you had to drink tonight?" or why were you texting,,,,, and you don't even have a phone near you?  I'm so tired of the police fabricating stories to cover their own butts.  unbelievable.  As for the judgemental ones, can you really sit there and say you have NEVER sped.....if you have and we know we all have. that is dangerous as well.  As to whether the lady was drinking, how come we dont know what her alcohol content was....hmmm, sounds very suspiciuos and blown up....AS USUAL!!!  News Gazette, shame on you for not getting the full story.  Police, shame on you for your usual suspect behavior.  What ever happened to pepper spray. And to all who stand in judgement... remember ...he who casts the first stone.

 

Sid Saltfork wrote on February 09, 2013 at 10:02 pm

Dog spelled backwards is god.  Awesome......

People get murdered in C-U regularly; and the comments are not nearly as long as when a dog gets shot by the police.  All of the comments show that the first domesticated animal was a dog.  The relationship between man, and canine is the strongest between two species.  In contemporary America, the bond evidently is stronger than in any other country based on all of these comments.  Every one has an opinion on what the police should have done at that specific moment in time even though they were not there.  Thank goodness that cats are not attack animals.

rsp wrote on February 10, 2013 at 2:02 am

We have two stories about a murder with a lot of posts and this one. I think the dog stories get so many in part because there is a divide. That gives more opportunity for exchanges but I don't think it means one story is more vital or meaningful. If there were people defending Fenn's actions or some other aspect of the case I think that story would attract just as much attention.

Sid Saltfork wrote on February 10, 2013 at 10:02 am

You might be right; but dog stories sure get a lot of comments.  Maybe, people watch too much Parolees and Pitbulls?  The comments are usually anger against the police for not using pepper spray, or tazers.  It seems that both are acceptable for angry dogs; but not people.    

sweet caroline wrote on February 10, 2013 at 3:02 pm

I think we would all calm down if only we had some donuts.  And cinnamon rolls.

Danno wrote on February 10, 2013 at 4:02 pm

Pillsbury Grand Cinnamon Rolls are succulent, if your time is short during jury deliberations!

rsp wrote on February 10, 2013 at 8:02 pm

There use to be a donut shop next to the court house but they tore it down. I wonder if that's when they started having trouble getting juries. 

Sid Saltfork wrote on February 10, 2013 at 10:02 pm

I have been on two juries not by my choice within the past ten years.  We never got any donuts.  Maybe, it is up to each judge.  We were lucky to get a short break either in the morning, or afternoon.  No one escorts you to your vehicle parked blocks away either.  You are required to wear your juror's badge during the day including lunch hour.  Sometimes you have to order lunch delivered at your expense.  Try getting a consensus with 13 people ordering from the same place.  You can expect to be treated by security just like everyone else doing business in the courthouse.  Everyone who knows that you are on jury duty will tell you "I wish that they would call me for jury duty".  The next time if ever that I get called for jury duty; I plan on wearing a Budweiser T-shirt two sizes small with cut-off jeans, and work boots.  Not a pretty sight; but it would be worth it to be dismissed. 

rsp wrote on February 11, 2013 at 4:02 am

I've been sent screening letters twice and I think I get rejected as a hardship case. I offer to do a short case. But they never call. 

Virago wrote on February 11, 2013 at 1:02 pm

I wonder if anyone posting here has ever been bit by a dog? And I mean bit HARD  (stop snickering out there, you!!) 


It HURTS.  And needs stitches.  And leaves permanent scars. And sometimes requires the bitee to get shots and the bitER to be euthanized.   Is this what we really wanted to happen here? Do we truly expect our police officers to risk unnecessary injury just in case a growling dog that's been sicced on them by the owner MIGHT not bite?

SaintClarence27 wrote on February 11, 2013 at 3:02 pm

I can't believe that any reasonable person wouldn't be in 100% agreement with you on this.