 |
News
|
News Archives
|
Sports
|
TTU News
|
TTU Sports Archives
|
Search
Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Michael Heitman
Cookeville.com
January 15, 2003

Cookeville Police Chief addresses the media at a news conference on Wednesday afternoon while Captain Nathan Honeycutt watches. Terry released the results of an independent investigation of the January 1 incident in which Cookeville Police Officer Eric Hall shot a dog belonging to the Smoak family from North Carolina. (Photo by Michael Heitman)
Cookeville Police Chief Bob Terry released the findings of an independent review of the video in which Officer Eric Hall shoots and kills a family dog. Chief Terry released the report by Gaithersburg, Maryland Police Chief Mary Ann Viverette at a 3:30 p.m. news conference in City Hall.
The two-page report (view page 1 and page 2 of the report online) was requested by the Cookeville Police Department as a supplement to their own internal investigation which found that, "The officer took the only
action he could to protect himself and gain control of the situation." Chief Viverette quoted the Cookeville Police Department's policy on "Use of Force" and later stated, "If, upon review, his belief is deemed to be objectively reasonable, there would be no reason for administrative action against this officer for his actions."
Viverette later notes her greatest concern was that after the shooting, both Cookeville officers turned their weapons in the direction of the Troopers who were handcuffing the Smoak family members. The fact that the Trooper who saw there were no more passengers in the car and saw the dogs but didn't close the door was also a concern for Viverette. She noted that more information would be more helpful for further evaluation. Chief Terry said that he sent the video and only limited information on the situation so that she could make an initional assessment similar to what the officer would have done. Terry said now he will send Viverette more information, including an interview with Officer Hall.
Chief Terry said that this will essentially close this incident as he gives his final report to City Manager Jim Shipley. Officer Hall, who is currently on administrative duty, will be placed back in the field in the very near future. Terry also said that he didn't expect there to be any policy changes as a result of the incident. However, Terry did say that the Department feels "absolutely horrible" about the incident.
The report stems from the January 1 incident where a tip from a caller led Tennessee Highway Patrol officers to make a felony stop on the car driven by the Smoak family. The Smoaks were on their way to their home in North Carolina from a vaction. The father, James Smoak, put gas in his car in Nashville and left his wallet on top of the car by accident. As he drove east on Interstate 40, the wallet flew off the car and sent money flying out of the wallet. Another driver saw the money and called the THP claiming a car going about 110 m.p.h. had money flying out of it. Communication among various dispatchers led to tele-type being sent out to local law enforcement agencies about a possible burglary. The THP caught up with the car and asked the Cookeville Police for backup for a felony stop to be done at exit 287 in Cookeville. The Troopers made the stop and had all of the passengers in the car come out. As the Troopers were handcuffing the three family members, one of the family's two dogs in the car jumped out of an open door of the car which the family asked the Troopers to close. The dog, named Patton, ran down the embankment and back up towards Officer Hall who had his shotgun drawn while providing cover for the Troopers. Hall backed up and then fired at the dog and killing it instantly. Later the Troopers received information that the Smoaks had done nothing wrong and they were released.
The story was picked up by national press when a video taken from a Troopers car was released. The attention has led to the internal investigations and has even sparked interest from the newly convened Tennessee Legislature. Chief Terry said he will be at meetings with the Legislature on Friday.
Comment on this Article
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Sandra Moore on 01/15/2003 08:45PM
(Poster IP:208.24.88.29) How embarassing for so many officers to be present and not one among them have enough sense to shut the car door and avert this embarassment for Southern police departments in general and tragedy for the Smoak family. Shame on you.
How positively scarey that an anonymous phone call reporting something as wild as a car driving 110 MPH on the interstate with money coming out of it and no kind of witness with a name can generate such a Gestapo like response from the police agencies involved. This could happen to anyone.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Victor Weals on 01/15/2003 10:20PM
(Poster IP:152.163.189.98) Greetings,
I hope the City supports the termination of Eric Hall who shot the Smoak family dog. It's frightening to know there is an officer on your police force who acted with such violence. It's a good thing a child didn't run toward him. Officer Hall may be a decent fellow but he is not one you want representing your city, and he certainly doesn't need a weapon.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Ray Lane on 01/16/2003 09:08AM
(Poster IP:170.215.97.100) How absurd to compare shooting an aggressive dog to shooting a child. The individual that made this comparison obviously would place the life of an animal above that of a human being. Is this where we are going as a society?
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Dave Van Doren on 01/16/2003 12:05PM
(Poster IP:216.151.77.6) Mr. Lane,
Obviously, you complete miss the point and I hope to GOD you are not an officer of the law as well. The individidual who made that comment was not putting the life of an animal above that of a human being - they werre merely making a statement about the police department's jackboot thugery. and this statement of yours I find especially amusing "Is this where we are going as a society?" Police act like the Gestapo and kill a beloved pet from an innocent family and YOU have the audacity to use this question to a statement. Get a clue fella!
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By P Cho on 01/16/2003 12:17PM
(Poster IP:209.219.209.72) I wouldn't place the life of an animal "above" a human being but do feel all life is precious -- this officer trained his gun on the woman after the shooting because she tried to get up -- if he shot her would that be justified? The whole incident was a fiasco and I hope the Smoaks family sues their collective asses off!
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Fire Hall on 01/16/2003 01:28PM
(Poster IP:206.155.214.22) How absurd to think the dog was agressive.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Mike Yarbrough on 01/16/2003 02:22PM
(Poster IP:198.26.123.36) You miss the point.
The police are here to protect the public. All too often they see their job as to protect themselves first, then the public. This aggressive tendency is what leads to killing innocent people and could have easily turned out this way here. This was not a case where officer Hall witnessed a crime personally. He assumed the worst instead of "hey this could be a mistake and an innocent family". Are the police under the impression that everyone is guilty?
He made a rash decision based on the fact that it’s just a dog with no regard for the physiological problems this family will carry for the rest of their lives. What do you think their child’s view of all police will be from now on?
Let me ask you this, is it now acceptable for the police to kill an innocent person rather than take a chance on getting hurt themselves? That mentality kind of flies in the face of public service doesn't it?
The next time it could be a child!
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Christina Dupuis on 01/16/2003 05:45PM
(Poster IP:216.204.137.212) I understand perfectly the comparison this person made. You must have missunderstood what they where trying to say. They where not saying that the life of the dog was more important than that of a human, what they where trying to say was that the life of the dog is just as important as that of us humans. To many of us our pets are like our children. I personally love my dogs and I would protect them just as I would my children. What this officer has done is appauling, and even more appauling is that he is being backed up by his department by jumping the gun. This situation could have and should have been prevented. The dog didn't come at the officer teeth first growling and barking at him, on the contrary, a playfull dog jumped out of the car. If this "officer" cannot distinguish the difference between a vicious dog and a playfull dog, he should not have a gun in his hands. I think everyone who has spoken their voice is right on target, this one incident will lead on to more. This situation could have been prevented from the start, how could they possibly pull over a car, handcuff the family inside with out any questioning? Then on top of that ignore the pleas of the family to close the door to ensure the safety of their beloved pet? Or would that have been too easy? Or wait, lets back up a trigger happy cop!!! Now that makes a lot of sense. This man will do this over and over again, what will he do next, accidentally shoot a woman carrying a baby because he thought there was a gun instead of a baby in the pouch???? This cop should not get a slap on the wrist and get his gun back. He needs some intense counseling... I am just outraged by the fact that he is being backed up, why should we trust this police dept.??? My dogs are with me 24/7, I have a sweet teddy bear of a rottie who wouldn't hurt a fly, and a boxer who is just as playful. In that situation my rottie would have jumped out to chase the light comming from the flash light, he wouldn't even have any intrest in the officer pointing the light at him and even if he did want to meed the officer he would be wagging his butt a million miles a minute. My baby would be dead too if this would have happened to me. Poor decision making is no excuse for what this man has done, he should pay for his mistakes just as we all would in the same situation. Just because he is a cop doesn't mean he should get special treatment. Been to TN once, too afraid to go through it now, I couldn't handle loosing any of my loved ones especially on a mistake that could have been prevented... This is an eyeopener for the Cookville Police Dept. and they are choosing to ignore it, that is disrespectfull to all of us who are supposed to respect these officers of the law. They have lost my respect and that of my family and friends.... And all of those who share my opinions.
Reply to this comment
-
Indeed, where are we going?
By Tim Revis on 01/16/2003 08:55PM
(Poster IP:67.35.43.140) I believe that it not only possible but absolutely true that humans can form relationships with animals that are as strong as those they form with humans. And, while the death of an animal pales when compared to the death of another human - and particularly a child - it does not diminish the fact the when an animal companion dies, the clinical symptoms of grief and loss are exactly the same as with any other death. Be that as it may, there are so many legitimate questions regarding the implications of this incedent that it boggles the mind. The idea that someone could observe cash flying from a car and somehow translate this into evidence of a robbery requires a leap of logic that verges on the simplemindedness. That a law enforcement agency could receive such information and give serious credence to the assumption is even more bizarre. That the law enforcement agency not only gives credence but immediately elevates it to a felon - with nothing but the hearsay evidence of an unknown witness is not only bizarre but begins to verge on the unconstitutional. This line is crossed and it actually does become unconstitutional when all presumption of innocence is thrown out the window and citizens are arrested and handcuffed with nothing but a rumor to support the action. Then the constitutional right to the security of personal property while being detained is pitched and not only is personal property not secured, it is destroyed. So, aside from what I and many others consider to be a legitimate concern for the lack moral and ethical behavior exhibited by the law enforcement - one might even say inhuman - in shooting a animal in front of its owners, there is the Constitutional rights that have been destroyed as well. So, while I very seriously discount the motive for Mr. Lane's question, the question is a good one and it stands: Is this where we are going as a society?
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Russ on 01/17/2003 07:09AM
(Poster IP:24.189.184.91) That's not the issue. The issue is someone too eager to use force. It could have been a child and not just a dog which is horrible enough. We have to question the excessive and eager use of force. This is one of the reasons there are cameras in police cruisers.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By UNKNOWN on 09/30/2005 12:09PM
(Poster IP:12.108.135.82) AGGRESSIVE???? THE DOG DIDN'T LOOK LIKE HE WAS GOING TO BITE HIM. THE DOG LOOKED LIKE HE WAS PLAYING. I HOPE THIS COP GETS WHAT IS COMING TO HIM!!
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Kate on 07/19/2006 11:17PM
(Poster IP:205.188.116.70) The dog wasn't aggressive, and the police had no business stopping the Smoaks n the first place. End of story. They should ALL be fired and sued. It happened three years ago and I'm still mad about the lies and cover-up they attempted.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Gregorio Arroyo on 01/15/2003 10:27PM
(Poster IP:24.163.106.168) I guess we shouldn't have expected any more from Chief "Whitewash" Terry than to get a rubber stamp of his approval of Officer Hall's actions.
I wonder if the Gaithersburg police chief knew this was the third dog "Officer" Hall has blown to kingdom come? And I wonder what slant "Whitewash" Terry gave her when he described the case to her.
Are we supposed to be impressed that she agreed with his judgment when she was working from the tape plus his verbal take on the situation?
As far as I'm concerned, this doesn't exculpate Dog Killer Hall. A consicientious TBI investigation should follow. I'm outraged at the suggestion this chicken-$#!T dog killer is soon going to be back out on the street, armed and dangerous. How many dogs does he have to kill in cold blood before his illness is recognized and he's disarmed?
Gregorio
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By S.Johnson on 01/15/2003 11:26PM
(Poster IP:208.60.78.57) I find this whole situation deplorable. I am a certified trainer/behaviorist and that dog was not "attacking" the officer. The dog was out romping around, tail wagging and headed back to his family. There is nothing in the dog's body language (dogs communicate through body language whether or not humans know how to "speak" or read it) to indicate that he was a threat to anyone on the scene.
I'm surprised none of those trigger happy officers blew a hole in the Troopers or the family as well losing their cool the way they did--killing a family's dog AND pointing guns towards troopers/innocent people.
Having also worked with law enforcement K9s and SAR in the past, if this dept. has K9s, I think they should have their K9s removed from them. How can they care for/maintain a dog that is trained to be aggressive when they can't even read a dog's body language?
Dogs have given their lives for humans many times in the line of duty and otherwise--this situation just makes my blood run cold.
I know for my safety and the safety of my show dogs, anytime that I will be traveling through this area of Tennesse, which I do quite a bit as I also have fellow competitor/breeder friends in the area, my attorney and my family will be notified beforehand in the event that they have another case of mistaken identity and attempt to harrass me and kill my dogs.
And seems like a couple of TN state statutes have been overlooked here--
does the law in TN not apply to EVERYONE or are some individuals above the law?
and even though (c)(4) below might could be used by the offending officer's attorney, there is still CLEAR evidence on video that the dog was NOT behaving in a threatening manner to anyone.
this whole thing just reeks of political BS.
State Felony Cruelty Statute Tennessee
Aggravated Cruelty to Animals
§ 39-14-212. (a) A person commits aggravated cruelty to animals when, with aggravated cruelty and with no justifiable purpose, such person intentionally kills or intentionally causes serious physical injury to a companion animal.
(b) For purposes of this section:
(1) "Aggravated cruelty" means conduct which is done or carried out in a depraved and sadistic manner and which tortures or maims an animal;
(2) "Companion animal" means any non-livestock animal as defined in § 39-14-201(3);
(3) "Minor" means any person under eighteen (18) years of age; and
(4) "Elderly" means any person sixty-five (65) years of age or older.
(c) The provisions of subsection (a) shall not be construed to prohibit or interfere with the following endeavors:
(1) Dispatching an animal in any manner absent of aggravated cruelty;
(2) Engaging in lawful hunting, trapping, or fishing activities, including activities commonly associated with the hunting of small game as defined in § 70-1-101(a)(34);
(3) Dispatching rabid or diseased animals;
(4) Dispatching animals posing a clear and immediate threat to human safety;
(5) Performing or conducting bona fide scientific tests, experiments or investigations within or for a bona fide research laboratory, facility or institution;
(6) Performing accepted veterinary medical practices or treatments;
(7) Dispatching animals in accordance with § 44-17-403(e);
(8) Engaging, with the consent of the owner of a farm animal, in usual and customary practices which are accepted by colleges of agriculture or veterinary medicine with respect to such animal;
(9) Dispatching wild or abandoned animals on a farm or residential real property; or
(10) Applying methods and equipment used to train animals.
(d) (1) A first-time conviction for aggravated cruelty to animals is a Class A misdemeanor.
(2) Any subsequent conviction for aggravated cruelty to animals is a Class E felony.
(e) In addition to the penalty imposed by subsection (d), the sentencing court may order the defendant to surrender custody and forfeit all companion animals as defined in Section 1(b)(2), and may award custody of such animals to the agency presenting the case. The court may prohibit the defendant from having custody of other animals for any period of time the court determines to be reasonable, or impose any other reasonable restrictions on the personís custody of animals as is necessary for the protection of the animals.
(f) In addition to the penalty imposed by subsection (d), the court may require the defendant to undergo psychological evaluation and counseling, the cost to be borne by the defendant. If the defendant is indigent, the court may, where practicable, direct the defendant to locate and enroll in a counseling or treatment program with an appropriate agency.
(g) If a defendant convicted of a violation of this section resides in a household with minor children or elderly individuals, the court may, within fifteen (15) days, send notification of the conviction to the appropriate protective
agencies.
(h) In addition to the penalty imposed by subsection (d), the defendant may be held liable to the impounding officer or agency for all costs of impoundment from the time of seizure to the time of proper disposition of the case.
(i) In addition to the penalty imposed by subsection (d), the defendant may be held liable to the owner of the animal for damages.
(j) If a juvenile is found to be within the court's jurisdiction, for conduct that, if committed by an adult, would be a criminal violation involving cruelty to animals or would be a criminal violation involving arson, then the court may order
that the juvenile be evaluated to determine the need for psychiatric or psychological treatment. If the court determines that psychiatric or psychological treatment is appropriate for that juvenile, then the court may order that treatment.
(k) This section does not preclude the court from entering any other order of disposition allowed under this chapter.
SECTION 2. (a) The provisions of this act shall not be construed to change, modify, or amend any provision of Title 70, involving fish and wildlife.
(b) The provisions of this act do not apply to activities or conduct that are prohibited by § 39-14-203.
(c) The provisions of this act do not apply to equine animals or to animals defined as livestock by the provisions of § 39-14-201.
The Tennessee animal cruelty statute was revised to introduce the felony charge of aggravated cruelty to animals on July 15, 2002.
39-14-205 Intentional killing of animal.
(a)(1) A person who intentionally or knowingly unlawfully kills the animal of another, with the intent to deprive the owner of the right to the animal's life and without the owner's effective consent commits theft of that animal and shall be punished under § 39-14-105.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Simona on 01/16/2003 12:07AM
(Poster IP:64.12.96.9) This entire story is so unbelievable & so disgusting. Now to add insult to injury, someone else is backing the actions of this officer. Anyone who isn't blind could clearly see that this dog was playfully bounding out of the car. Why couldn't this trigger-happy clown just have closed the door like the family begged him to? This being a felony stop is ludicrous. How many people commit felonies with their entire family in a green station wagon? Apparently there is no common sense here or by the police chief in Gaithersburg, MD who did the independent study. This officer needs to be fired immediately & never be allowed to have another law enforcement job in his life! I can't even begin to imagine the pain this family must be feeling, my heart goes out to them.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By B.D.Peters, Henrietta, NC on 01/16/2003 12:22AM
(Poster IP:208.61.248.213)
The whole Smoak dog incident is a sympton of a grave nationwide problem in law enforcement, It is the lack of sensitivity on part of officers and their administrators and that so called "Blue Wall" Anyone viewing the tape can see that the cop performed a very cowardly act....and the smiling state guy punctuated an outrageous atrocious screwup..If Hall had been decent, he would have inmmediately begged forgiveness and admitted he acted impulsively..Any attempt to rationalize what we saw is an insult to our intelligence as a nation. The police administrtors who are backing him up appear to be just as heartless, and they are indeed an embarrassment to the community that supports them. If Hall is returned to duty, I am sure he is going to suffer jeers and taunts from the people in your community. He ought to give it up....admit he is unfit and a poor representative of his community. By quitting, he would maybe diminuish the media generated revulsion in the eyes of the public for Tennessee law enforcement and his local community. He'll certainly never live down the events of New Year's Day no matter what wonderous accomplishments he might achieve in the future.....
My voice is ineffectual, but multiply my feelings by the thousands of others who share my view, and it should be mighty loud plea for some sort of adjustment or the addition of sensitivity training for all troopers, local cops and certainly their administrators.
I am comfortble in knowing I can always bypass your state in future travel. ...and if my neighbor's dog keeps me awake at night, I might even place a call to the cookeville police..maybe they'll dispatch Eric Hall, your answer to my state's Barney Fife. There are very few cops here who would shoot a pet dog with impunity.
Interesting to note; there didnt appear to be much contrition until the media got hold of it the next day
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By me on 01/16/2003 01:21AM
(Poster IP:208.147.202.106) I'm sorry but the officer who shot the dog should lose his job. I watched that tape over and over and over. The dog DID NOT show ANY signs of threatening him!! HE JUST WANTED TO KILL THE DOG!!!!!!!!! Poor Patton DIED because he was running back to the car. He had NO RIGHT to kill him , that was nothing but animal cruelty. I work at the Humane Society in Lincoln County , I hate people who abuse animals , so that should tell how I feel about the "man" who killed Patton. If the officer would have just shut the car door as requested , the dog would not have gotten out and the family would not have lost their baby.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Thomas Atkinson on 01/16/2003 06:33AM
(Poster IP:205.166.161.61) You are joking me when you say an independent report backs up when it was done by another cop.
I know the murders were shown to be justified when they were reviewed by an independent review. The independent reviewer was another murderer. The child molestation was justified when reviewed by another child molester. I quess you guys have to review something for her and say your independent not bias. This is why everyone who isn't a cop hates you guys. I really like when a cop does something wrong but gets backed up by every other cop on duty that night because they all saw it (not).. If everyone tells you the bullshit smells like roses I guess its roses. What a pile of crap and the sad thing is you really belive it.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Disgusted on 01/16/2003 06:59AM
(Poster IP:207.144.218.177) The fix is in. Did anyone expect different? How was the Gaithersburg, MD chief selected?
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Disgusted on 01/16/2003 07:09AM
(Poster IP:207.144.218.177) The fix is in. Did anyone expect different? How was the Gaithersburg, MD chief selected?
In reading the report, it didn't sound like a ringing endorsement. Many problems were brought to light, yet the chief says nothing will be done.
BTW, I live in Cookeville.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Vickie Sharp on 01/16/2003 07:50AM
(Poster IP:216.12.83.153) I am nothing short of apalled that anyone could conclude a police officer was justified in killing an innocent family's pet that the officer's own negligence in not closing a car door had caused to be endangered in the first place.
Another question--why in the world was this poor family handcuffed on such slender evidence? On what planet is a few bills flying from a car considered evidence of a crime? I once had a twenty sucked out my van window while I was driving down I-75, yet the GA State Patrol did not pull me over and search my vehicle--much less shoot my dogs. Good thing it didn't happen in Tennessee!
The police departments's quick vindication of a trigger-happy thug really makes me want to visit Cookeville.
Vickie Sharp
Fincastle, VA
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By R. L. Shell on 01/16/2003 09:14AM
(Poster IP:129.110.26.117) It is absolutely appalling that this trigger-happy thug of an officer is being returned to the streets of Cookeville. Does he suffer so much from testosterone poisoning that he couldn't allow the family to shut their car door, not only to protect their dog, but any passersby who may swerve to miss hitting a loose dog on the freeway? This horrid incident could have been prevented by some common sense, which seems to be sadly lacking in this P.D. as seen by the reinstatement of this menace in uniform.
God protect any friendly dogs with wagging tails once this man hits the streets again, with seeming impunity for his despicable actions.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Green Amp on 01/16/2003 09:32AM
(Poster IP:24.158.171.131) Officer Eric Hall is wrongfully receiving the blame for the events which led up to the shooting of the Smoak family dog on January first. The Cookeville Police officers were responding to a backup request by a highway patrolman. The Cookeville officers arrived at the scene with only the knowledge that they were providing assistance during a felony burglury stop/arrest. These officers had no knowledge of the family nor the probable cause leading to the tradgedy of their being wrongfully arrested. But I am in no way trying to defend the perpetraters of this inexcusable event event.<p>
The fault and responsibility for January first should be placed with the person or persons who decided that an anonymous phonecall from an uncredible source was probable cause enough to pursue a felony arrest trffic stop. Since when can a police officer arrest at gunpoint based on unclear heresay from an anonymous source????? What's next, will you be arrested for attempted burglury if someone sees you fumbling for your keys on your doorstep at night? Will a man be arrested for domestic assault because he swatted at a fly by his wife's face, and someone thought he was hitting her? <p>
Blamming officer Hall for January first is like blamming the toe on the foot of the clumsy elephant who stepped on and killed a mouse suspected of stealing a peanut.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By R.T. Ford on 01/16/2003 09:35AM
(Poster IP:66.191.237.74) To The Governor of TN and Mayor and Chief of Police of Cookeville TN
Below is a copy of the letter to the editors of several newspapers. However it does not convey the full brunt of my feelings in this case. Anyone that says this was not an unjustified over use of force is in the same category as this coward. That is to include the illustrious, illiterate, illegitimate members of THP and TBI. If wishes could come true, I would wish the worst wrath of hell to befall those involve with extensive wishes brought upon the cowardly so called officer in question.
This officer should have the worst of luck fall in his path with a guarantee of being the longest living person to ever be. This would include the loss of his job and all benefits he would normally receive. I would also say any V.A. benefits by the Veterans Administration but this coward probably never performed any duty to his country. Then he would live under the worst physical and emotional pain that could ever be thought of for every moment of his ever-lasting long life. He should also be placed in a facility such as West Tennessee High and not allowed to be placed in protective custody. Actually a better place would be Attica NY, Angola LA, or San Quentin CA.
As to the justification for the stop in the first place, probable cause was listed as being a possible crime having taken place such as a robbery. A family with kids and a dog? Had there been a report of an actual crime having taken place with the description match the people and vehicle? Give me a break. It’s not likely. But then on second thought we are talking about the Tennessee Law Enforcement, Justice System, and Political Regime.
Please send my thoughts to those involved. Especially the cowardly officer. Please send my deepest condolences to the family that lost their beloved family member through such felonious actions by a sniveling yellow bellied coward and his “good ol’ boy” friends.
Editor
I am writing in reference to the Cookeville Tennessee Police Officer that maliciously killed the family dog. In reviewing the official tape clipping from the mobile unit, I find this is a total disgrace. As a former career Military Working Dog Handler, Trainer, and Instructor, I find it appalling to find the officer was in justified fear of his life. The behavior shown by that animal was that of just looking for some attention and displayed no aggression what so ever. This act of cowardice should be dealt with in severest penalties to the officer. I would urge this case be forwarded to an independent investigator that has the expertise in Law Enforcement and animal behavior for evaluation. I doubt this will happen though because it will be covered up and forgotten. Forgotten by all but the family, animal lovers, and people like myself that that have a background in true professional law enforcement/working dogs that can weigh the facts in a non-partisan way.
R.T. Ford
Bristol TN/VA
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Jason Thompson on 01/16/2003 11:03AM
(Poster IP:208.61.168.78) I wonder if any of the animal right’s nut responders to this article, have ever faced down an armed criminal in a dark alley or made a stop like this not knowing the situation. How many of them would put their life on the line to protect the rest of us? The dog trainer responder might be able to read a dog’s mind, but I doubt the officer could. It is said that the dog was playfully running up to the officer, (wagging his tail). As a service employee, I once had a dog do the same thing. I thought, “what a nice dog” until he took a chunk out of my hand. I love dogs, hell I love most all animals, but I care much more for the people that are protecting mine and my family’s safety. I’m sure this officer was driving around all night to find a dog to shoot. Get real people. The next time you are robbed or have a serious accident, yell for your dog.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By P Cho on 01/16/2003 12:02PM
(Poster IP:209.219.209.72) This officer should be fired -- no ifs ands or buts. I've seen the video and heard his explanation and it doesn't wash with what can clearly be observed by the video. Eric Hall is a coward and his Chief a poor excuse for a human. My opinion of Tenn has been irrevocably changed by this incident. They need to take responsibility and stop trying to justify their stupidity!
Reply to this comment
-
Tennessee Cops are Nazis
By Dixie Normous on 01/16/2003 12:33PM
(Poster IP:216.151.77.6) This whole thing has just made me sick - I hope I am never in Tennessee - More than that I am ashamed that they are even a part of this country. Nazis is the best word to describe the officers involved. But, just like everything else this will fade into obscurity with the breaking of the next political scandal in Washington and everyone will go about their merry business and the Tennessee police force(s) will move forward and strive to violate their populations' rights by the day. I am not surprised in the least about the outcome of the investigation. It happens every day - everywhere and it will keep happening until We the People, of the United States of America become tired of it and take action the way our fore fathers did back in the 1700's - Yes Ladies and Gentleman the only way to stop a government out of control is through the tools given to us by our very own Constitution which was written so we wouldn't have to fear being dragged into the street sand having a beloved shot in cold blood!
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By David L. Lohr on 01/16/2003 12:51PM
(Poster IP:4.19.99.62) It does not surprise me that you back up one of your own. Here was a family, doing absolutely nothing wrong, and your officers help to detain them with absolutely no probable cause and "handcuffed" them as if they were criminals before your officers even investigated. The officer took the position thaey were quilty of some heinous crime and it was up to the Smoaks to prove they were innocent. Even after asking the officers to close the door so the dogs did not get outt. Were your officers thinking the dogs were so well trained that they took them to be part of the gang. There is no excuse. Just because they are policemen they are not immune from punishment even if they did not do it maliciously they still killed the dog. Not through the actions or inactions of the family but due to the inappropriate actions and then inaction of the officers. I guess if you are a policeman in Cookeville you are not responsible for you actions.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Michelle Bain on 01/16/2003 01:07PM
(Poster IP:64.238.99.145) I just want to say that I am so very hurt for the Smoak family. This was a horrible act of animal cruelty on the Officer's part. Until recently, I lived in Cookeville all of my life, I now live in Atlanta, and when I first heard about this story I had no idea it was in my hometown. I am embarrassed!!! This officer obviously does not have pets of his own or he would have known that this dog was not being aggressive! I am heart broken!
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Cameron on 01/16/2003 01:16PM
(Poster IP:149.149.6.117) First of all, the brunt of the blame should not reside on this one officer. The THP was at as much fault as anyone for not heeding the concerns and directions of the Smoak family. Whether or not Officer Hall took the correct action, I do not know, but the fact remains that the THP officers placed themselves and the CPD officers in this precarious situation.
Whether or not Officer Hall's actions were correct or not, I cannot say; I was neither present at the incident nor does the THP tape show the dog and it's intentions. My sympathy goes to the Smoak family for this terrible incident, and the THP should decide on clear directions if this event ever happens again.
Reply to this comment
-
Cookeville leaders please explain
By A. Romanello on 01/16/2003 01:37PM
(Poster IP:24.25.87.81) I am afraid to drive through Tennessee.
What about the second vehicle with grandparents and children - did any of the officers notice them?
What about the officer who grinned at Eric
Hall?
Why did no one apologize for killing the dog and for not shutting the door until the Smoaks were cleared?
Why did the officers show no emotions of sorrow on the video?
Why did no officer shut the door?
Why did no officer ask for identification?
Why was the license tag not called in?
What is the name of the person in charge at the scene?
Why did you not send the police chaplain or grief conselor to this family?
Did you offer to pay for their hotel stay and hospital treatment?
Why should I expect any different treatment if I were to drive through Tennessee? Simply saying you followed procedures is not enough. I need to know that you are human, and why this won't happen again.
Please, please answer.
Anne Romanello
Charlotte, NC
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Barbara Michalick on 01/16/2003 01:49PM
(Poster IP:205.188.208.172) Officer Eric Hall should be immediately fired from the Cookeville police force and then prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for unnecessarily murdering a dog. It is deplorable that a family pet could be murdered in front of the family by an individual, then a bogus report paid for by taxpayer dollars state that the actions were appropriate so that the dog murderer can continue to carry a firearm. The taxpayers of Cookeville and surrounding areas should be afraid...be very afraid! Who knows what Officer Eric Hall will shoot next.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Rebelwaclause on 01/16/2003 02:05PM
(Poster IP:12.232.174.45) As many posted here have expressed, I too was outraged when viewing the online video of the dog shooting. After viewing Officer Eric Hall's interview, I have decided this particular officer is in serious need of K-9 training. I have been informed that this officer has shot a dog before. This leads me to believe he has a fear of animals that should be rehabilitated before he kills again. Though it has been decided no disciplinary actions will be made toward Officer Hall, I'm sure rehabilitation is a minimal slap on the hand. Let him head a K-9 task force for a few months. Maybe this will help him become more comfortable with dogs.
I'd hate for this situation to happen again. Who knows if Officer Hall is mentally capable of displaying good judgment in light of this. He could "anxiously" kill a human being, as it appears he did with this seemingly harmless family dog. It could've been a poodle, seems like he would've shot it regardless.
What excuse will an "Investigative Team" comprised of protective peers give then?
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Micheal Heitman on 01/16/2003 02:53PM
(Poster IP:66.231.32.17) Those police officers should be ashamed of themselves. This whole thing, ending with the senseless shooting of a family, who way, by the way, running AWAY from the officer, should have been handled with a lot more reseve and intelligence. Don't think I will spend any time in Tennessee in the near future and certainly not with my dogs. And then to issue a two page report supporting such a foolish action? How about an apology and getting the family another pet?
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Sean Clark on 01/17/2003 04:13AM
(Poster IP:24.208.64.220) I'm not at all surprised, it's a matter of the brotherhood of the badge protecting one of their own regardless of the evidence against him. This sort of thing has happened in my hometown in Nebraska on several occasions, once with an officer chasing a loose dog into its doghouse in it's own backyard and blowing it away DESPITE a neighbor protesting in advance that the dog wasn't mean. We had another incident a few years back where an officer had to empty his clip into a Lab before it quite screaming and finally died, this also in the dogs own yard while the dog was trying to get away. On a final note, I called police a few months back to report gunfire in my neighborhood. I own an Am Staff female who is friendly and great with kids, She is kept in my yard with a 4' chainlink fence. She was sitting next to me barking as I was explaining to the officer where the shots came from when out of the blue the superviser sticks his hand over the fence into her face as he asks "does she bite". To make a long story short cops go out of their way time and again it seems to provoke an incident where they can get some unnecessary target practice in on somebodys pet. If the jerk had been bitten it would have been no more than he asked for but I have no doubt he would have killed my dog for it and that this was his intention. As it turned out she sniffed his hand and wagged her tail. What really sucks about the whole thing is he was there to investigate where gunfire within city limits was coming from, caompletely unrelated to my dog doing her job in her own yard regarding two strange people in uniforms with radios blaring.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By A Dew on 01/17/2003 07:51AM
(Poster IP:66.57.173.159) If Officer Hall felt threatened by Patton, He should not be a police officer. He was running from the dog like a scared little girl, and a police officer that scared of anything should not be carrying a shotgun. Isn't it common knowledge that if you think a dog is going to attack you, you stand still and don't run? Do you train your officer how to deal with animals? Officers carry mace on their gun belts don't they?
Deadly force was not needed and something should be done about it. Aren't there laws about discharging firearms? Officer Hall should have been sent home for a time until this was cleared up. Desk duty was a joke, right?
I have other issues with this whole incident but they do not involve the Cookeville officers. They are not the only ones to blame.
This is disgusting, your justification of it makes it worse, and causes law-abiding citizens to distrust the very people that are paid to “Serve and Protect” us. My heart aches for the Smoak’s family.
You should be thankful you had a family that listened to THP officers, because if it had been me you would be defending a murder (mine). I would have gotten to my dog or been shot myself. You just do not understand how strongly some people feel about their dogs. It is unconditional love. This might help you understand it:
Fifteen Minutes of Fame
By Marty Becker
"I dashed out an exit at O'Hare International Airport in Chicago and ran towards a waiting cab. I was greeted by a cab driver with a three-day-old beard, an old baseball cap and arms the size of tree trunks.
As he tossed my bags into the trunk, he spotted my luggage tags and said, "What kind of doctor are you?"
"A veterinarian," I said. Instantly, his grizzled face broke into a smile. This happens to veterinarians all the time, as people love to talk about their pets.
The doors slammed, he put the car into gear and hit me with this opening salvo, "My wife claims I love my toy poodle Missy more than I love her. Just once, she wants me to be as excited to see her as I am Missy. But Doc, it ain't gonna happen. Ya see, when I get home from a long day in the cab, dead tired, I open the door and there are the two of them looking at me, Ma and Missy. Ma has a scowl on her face and is ready to tear into me. Missy, on the other hand, is shaking all over, she's that happy - her face is grinning so wide, she could eat a banana sideways. Now who do you think I'm going to run to?"
I nodded my head in agreement because I understood his point only too well. He loved his wife, but he simply wanted permission to savor his fifteen minutes of fame.
Everybody gets fifteen minutes of fame once in his lifetime. We pet owners get our fifteen minutes every time we come home - or even return from the next room.
A few days after I saw the cab driver in Chicago, I returned home. I was tired from my travels and looking forward to seeing my family.
Pulling into the driveway, I peered through the windshield, straining to catch a glimpse of my loved ones. My two children, Mikkel and Lex, are very close to good ol' dad, but I didn't see their faces pressed against the window looking for me. Nor did my beloved wife, Teresa, come running in super slow motion across the yard, arms open wide ready to embrace me.
But I didn't despair. I knew I was still wanted, a Hollywood heartthrob, hometown hero to my two dogs: Scooter, a wirehaired fox terrier, and, Sirloin, a black Labrador retriever!
As soon as I exited the pickup, Sirloin and Scooter charged to meet me. Their love-filled eyes danced with excitement, and their tail turbochargers whipped them into a delighted frenzy of fur.
Was this affection-connection routine, or ho-hum for me? Was I cool, calm and collected?
Heck no. I turned into a blithering idiot as I got out of my truck and rushed to meet the hairy-princess, Scooter, and Sirloin, the fur-king.
There I stood, all these false layers stripped away, masks removed and performances cancelled. It was my true self. Extra pounds, bad-hair day, angry people, travel strains, no matter. Scooter and Sirloin came to the emotional rescue and allowed me to drink in the sheer love and joy of the moment. I was drunk with contentment.
I was glad this took place in the privacy of my own home. What happened next might have spoiled my polished professional image. I immediately smiled, and raised my voice an octave or two, exclaiming, "Sirloin, yuz is daaaaddy's boy, aren't ya?" And, "Scooter have you been a good girl today? Yeah, you have, you've been a goooood girl!!"
They responded by turning inside out with delight, pressing themselves against my legs and talking to me. I felt as if I could tap directly into their wellspring of positive, healing energy. Gee, it was great to be home!
I bounded up the steps to find the rest of the family, heart open, stress gone and spirits restored by my fifteen minutes of fame."
God Bless the Smoak Family, and take special care of Patton.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Jim Heath on 01/19/2003 08:58PM
(Poster IP:24.136.163.151) Hmmm. Read the report. Basically it says that the Cookeville policy allows the use of deadly force pretty much whenever they want to. And that being the policy, only the killer cop has the final say since he is the only one who knows what he was thinking (assuming he has a brain and is capable of thought).
Sickening
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Thomas Paine on 01/21/2003 06:03AM
(Poster IP:12.77.101.33)
You know, if only you had watched the Andy Griffith show, you could have avoided all this terrible publicity.
Sheriff Andy Taylor of Mayberry would never allow his deputy, Barney, to have more than one bullet, and he made him carry it in his shirt pocket.
Maybe you should have issued this guy a Super Soaker so he'd have something harmless to play with. Give him one bottle of water.
And make him keep it in his shirt pocket.
Suggested new city motto: "Hey, that kind of stuff hardly ever happens."
Suggested alternative city motto: "Most of our cops are NOT cowards with shotguns."
Suggested alternative city motto: "Just don't bring your pets, and everything will probably be okay."
Suggested alternative city motto: "Hey, come on, it was only a dog, for God's sake!"
Suggested alternative city motto: "Whaddya expect? We're hillbillies!"
Suggested alternative city motto: "Those people were lucky. In New York, the cops shoot innocent PEOPLE."
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By Jeff Motes on 01/23/2003 06:40AM
(Poster IP:66.82.112.1) Wow. "We are terribly sorry for killing your dog but we are not going to change anything." What a slap in the face to the Smoak family. In essence Chief Terry is saying "If we had to do it all over again we would still kill your dog and point shotguns with the safetys off directly at your head."
This whole situation is just unblievable. I hope Cookeville takes a long time to live this down.
Reply to this comment
-
Re: Independent report backs up Cookeville Police conclusions in Smoak family case
By UNKNOWN on 09/30/2005 12:07PM
(Poster IP:12.108.135.82) AN INNOCENT FAMILY PET DIED FOR A MISCOMMUNICATION ERROR AND FOR THE POLICE, IN MY OPINION, OVER REACTING TO THE SCENE. WHY DIDN'T THE OFFICERS LISTEN TO CLOSE THE DOOR?? I THINK THE FAMILY SHOULD SUE THE CITY, HP AND OFFICER WHO SHOOT THEIR DOG, IF IT WAS ME I WOULD. MAKES ME WONDER HOW THESE SO CALLED POLICE OFFICERS GET THEIR BADGES?!
Reply to this comment
|
 |