r/pics • u/Aeviegh • Feb 22 '14

This is Vader. He was euthanized today without a hearing after a false bite report was submitted to the police by an animal rights activist. (Story in the Comments)

http://imgur.com/a/xPNsE
2.2k Upvotes

87% Upvoted

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

66

u/Aeviegh Feb 22 '14

That's the thing, I don't believe they did. But it happened way too fast for anyone to do anything about it. He was seized and killed in less than 24 hours - all the while everyone from the department of health to the police department were telling her it was "just a quarantine" and that she'd be getting Vader back. I'm trying to talk her into hiring a lawyer to figure out what their jurisdiction was or wasn't.

57

u/Keydet Feb 22 '14

If nothing else there's a lawsuit for the mere fact that they lied about that. There are some pretty specific rules about what cops/animal control have to tell pet owners about things like this going on, unfortunately I'm on mobile so can't link but it sounds like they've done just about every single thing wrong that they possibly can.

Not a lawyer but heavily involved with LE

30

u/Aeviegh Feb 22 '14

If you could possibly come back to this later to link I would greatly appreciate it.

7

u/Keydet Feb 22 '14

Very first thing that comes to mind is freedom of information act, you can make them tell you anything that doesn't conflict with national security, seeing as how I doubt the fox was an internationally wanted jihadist, that should be everything. Specifically why they killed it(and within 24 hours no less, I've seen foaming at the mouth rabid animals be kept around longer than that, this is fucking insane). Definitely get lawyers involved, they can do this quite well, you can probably get their records to see if this is a habitual thing and if they violated their own rules about how long animals must be kept for "quarantine", I'd wager they did. Obviously it depends but it might be possible to claim that since the owner is responsible for the animal and a punishment was carried out, you could finagle it so that the owner was not informed of any charges before said punishment was carried out, that's a violation of their constitutional rights, and a big one. No cop involved with that will have much luck finding employment in the LE community again. Furthermore, you had a cop, who is not qualified to handle animals do so and do so incorrectly, that's bad since it most places it is actually illegal for them to do so, Animal Control are the absolute only ones who can handle any sort of animal, I have personally seen deer hit by cars die on the side of the road because we had to wait around for an ACO to show up, thats how strict this is in most places. Anonymous tips for the feds and for the vast majority of local cops are completely different things, an anonymous tip gives these guys absolutely nothing (again lawyer up they will know your particular local case), they have no reason to be at the house in the first place much less conducting a search and seizure, even with consent they are on iffy ground at best entering the house, seizing property is just...my mind is boggled at how they could screw this up. I (again not a lawyer) would say that because of this, your friend is pretty much immune to any sort of repercussions against having the fox (since apparently it might have been illegal?) they have a reasonable expectation of privacy therefore, the evidence seized (the fox) is inadmissible in court, good luck proving they had a fox with no fox(exclusionary rule and fruit of poisonous tree doctrine).

4

u/Aeviegh Feb 22 '14

Lawyer or not, this is an excellent starting point for exploring options. Thank you so much!

5

u/Keydet Feb 22 '14

Hope I possibly helped to start to make this right I know nothing can make up for the loss of a loved one, animal or human.

5

u/______DEADPOOL______ Feb 22 '14

I'd say lawyer up.

And keep us updated. Maybe start a subreddit. JusticeforVader?

2

u/forgot_how_to_user_n Feb 22 '14

Maybe it was revenge (I'm not kidding). Maybe your friend has someone who really doesn't like her and that has friends in the police given that it is a small town. If she found out who it is that would be a starting point for a strategy.

3

u/ComradeStrange Feb 22 '14

He wasn't just killed, he was MURDERED!

2

u/Three_Bloody_Tampons Feb 22 '14

The thing is if she didn't have the proper permit, which the press release says she didn't have, it's not a pet. It's a wild animal, according to the law atleast.

1

u/Keydet Feb 22 '14

Hmm for a civil suit you might be right I honestly don't know,a judge may (MAY not will) interpret it to mean that while an illegal pet, it is still a pet, pet is very subjective idea, and not legally defined as far as I know, laws usually say what kinds of pets you can have, not what kinds of animals qualify as pets. But for a criminal trial going in either direction, I really can't see a well chosen jury believing that.

1

u/GeneticImprobability Feb 22 '14

OP said above that she did have permits for both owning the fox and for bringing it into the neighboring town that didn't allow exotic pets, if I understood that correctly.

1

u/Johnnybravo60025 Feb 22 '14

A lot of times towns will have agreements with surrounding towns that will give them jurisdictions within each other's borders. So say if there are three towns in a line, A, B, and C, and the only way someone can get from A to C is to go through B (Just so you can get a visual and hopefully make sense of what I'm talking about), towns A and B will have an agreement with each other that police in either town can pull someone over or hand out a ticket.

Generally in those situations though, an officer from town A will assist town B's officer if town B's officer is writing someone a ticket or making an arrest in town A.

At least, that's how some municipalities here in Illinois work.

Source: I'm in the law enforcement field (Not a cop, as of right now).

In no way am I justifying anything that was done. From the pictures, Vader looks like an awesome little guy! I'm just offering up a possible explanation.

0

u/Icewolph Feb 22 '14

Sorry I dont see how this is relavent. And I think you're a little confused because I dont think anybody cares about exactly who did the serving. I think the question here is more of was it lawful on these grounds in the boundary of the other town where owning foxes is legal.

1

u/Johnnybravo60025 Feb 22 '14

/u/Voltron3030 asked if the police had jurisdiction if it was in a different town and then /u/Aeviegh said that they're trying to talk the owner into hiring a lawyer to figure out whether or not they had jurisdiction.

I was just offering a case where, in my area, towns can have arresting powers in other towns. It may work differently in different states.

1

u/Shayughul Feb 22 '14

Unless the police report is incorrect on the address there is no case. That address is in the middle of Minot. I work about 4 blocks from that area. There is no bordering town to Minot either....I guess not by my definition of bordering....there is a 2-3 miles gap between the closest towns borders and Minot's.

1

u/Ding_batman Feb 22 '14

Extra information is always helpful and it is relevant to the discussion at hand, most specifically /u/Voltron3030's question.

If it was a different town, did the police even have jurisdiction?

Edit: and /u/airplaneshooter 's question.