ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21 Recording Uploaded, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

National

AR: Cop kills dog during sex offender compliance check at wrong home

[floridaactioncommittee.org – 11/17/20]

Officer James Freeman of Greenbrier, Arkansas was doing a sex offender compliance check on private property when the homeowner’s dog barked at him. So Freeman shot the dog.

Read the full article and watch the video

 

Join the discussion

  1. David⚜️

    Arkansas police detective shoots family dog while doing a compliance check AT THE WRONG ADDRESS!! 😡😡😡

  2. SR

    According to the comments in the article, the cop was already cleared of any wrongdoing. Which is to be expecting considering that what happened with Breonna Taylor. How can the system continue brushing these kind of things off as it’s no big deal? This country has shit for justice.

    • Bobby S.

      I know most people wouldn’t agree with me , but if he shot my dog, I would kick his ass up and down the street, exspecially after he went to the wrong address give me a break. Jail or no jail, I would of hurt him really bad, to where he would never make that mistake again ever.

      • Will Allen

        I completely agree with you.

        I care about any dog a hell of a lot more than I do anyone who has anything to do with the Hit Lists. These MFing criminal regimes and their law enforcement criminals have been harming my family for decades. Why should I give the first f*ck about what happens to them? Really?

      • James I

        I appreciate you very much, Bobby S, especially for all your great reporting on things in Michigan…but, let us be honest, let us be real…if you made any serious move against the officer, plain clothes, he would have killed you…he killed a dog, he’d kill you.

        And people would congratulate him.

        We, more than any other citizens, (sort of citizens more accurately said), have to be careful in regards to…everything. Sorry, just the truth. I value you too much to lose you over a dog.

        Best Wishes & Stay Healthy, James I

      • Timmmy

        The fact is is in plain clothes give you all the defense you need to “stand your ground”

        • TS

          @Timmmy

          So, are you saying that because the deputy was in plain clothes (with a badge on chain around his neck but undiscernable from a distance), driving an unmarked vehicle, and did not ID himself as LE (at least in the video), the dog owner could have shot/killed the deputy without repercussion through “stand your ground” after he fired upon the dog?

          It looks like at least 50-60 ft between the dog and the truck, so the dog’s dangerousness (if any) could have been mitigated.

        • Timmmy

          From that distance you cannot tell anything, but someone is discharging a weapon in harm. One cannot tell it is a police officer. That thing around his neck could be “bling” from fare away. Self defense. Case closed.

        • TS

          Thanks @Timmmy. I had the same thought when I read your reply but wanted to confirm.

    • @SR

      How can this happen? Ask SCOTUS, since it’s they who have given LEOs (un)qualified immunity. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of cases where cops shot have shot and killed someone but the courts let it go because of the split-second decision-making the LEO must do. Here’s a thought, how about hiring ones who can make better decisions and not the ones who can’t wait to use that new firearm?!?

  3. C

    How utterly infuriating. Hopefully these people successfully sue and hound that cop for the rest of his life, shaming him at every opportunity. What a sick, sadistic…ugh!

    And how must the registrant feel? What a shame.

  4. Brandon

    This pos needs to be prosecuted for his being trigger happy with a bloated ego. No damn it was a mistake he killed someone’s dog because he had false information and needs to be held accountable.

    • Anonymous

      I heard the same thing has happened when they were doing compliance checks at homes of felons with repeat DWI, Domestic Violence in view of children and drug dealers near school property… oh, wait..

      • Will Allen

        They don’t do compliance checks on those people for some odd reason! Further, Registry Supporters/Terrorists are just fine with people who have shot children with guns living right next door to schools. They are fine with shooters in schools!! But they think everyone is as stupid as they are and will believe their lies that “sex offenders” shouldn’t be living here, there, or wherever because of “public safety” and “protecting children”. Uh, nope, they are liars. The sex offense registries are for harassment and to make people $$$$$. It is quite the grift.

  5. Facts should matter

    So now the dead dog is also collateral damage as a result of this misguided crusade.

    “Promoting public safety….”

  6. Laura

    Utterly speechless.

  7. AERO1

    This isn’t funny at all but for some reason I can’t stop laughing at this stupid azz cop who was so focused on victimizing a registrant that he didn’t even double-check the address or wait till he had a visual on the person in question.
    No instead he walks on someone’s private property and shoots their dog. I bet that wasn’t the first time he went by that house and was scard off by that dog
    so he came back to teach that sex offender and his stupid dog a lesion.

    Good luck

    • Facts should matter

      He got the right trailer park, but the wrong trailer. The cop saw the dog and, using bias, assumed he had it as protection. The dog was probably doing nothing more than barking from defending his turf, so cop “feels threatened” and kills dog out of spite/malice trying to goad the guy into an altercation so cop could SHOOT HIM TOO.

      These laws are beyond unnecessary, the cop was an idiot and society remains brainwashed and willfully ignorant.

  8. H.B. v

    We need more REAL HERO cops like Christopher Dorner to come out of the woodwork to hold pigs like this accountable. The public can only stand so much.

  9. G4Change

    This country is over!

  10. Brandon

    “Duh chief, I was out on patrol while I was told I need to do a compliance check on them people. While I was at the address a doggy was barking at me scaring me and I fired a shot. I don’t read or comprehend to well; so not my fault I ended up at the wrong house. Please be easy on me.”

    Cops can kill innocent people, sexually abuse people, murder animals and get away with it. These asshats need to be held accountable for their crimes and get more than a demotion to desk duty.

  11. Brandon

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/faulkner-county-sheriffs-investigator-fatally-shoots-kids-dog-after-going-to-wrong-house/ar-BB1aTF

    Instigator needs to be charged with animal cruelty especially if he was at the right address before; yet shot the dog anyway.

  12. Worried in Wisconsin

    Makes you wonder what the actual registered person is thinking right now? Maybe how he can protect himself against being shot like the dog at some point in the future?

    Wonder if there is any law in that jurisdiction against registrants from putting up security fences around their property to protect themselves from rogues with trigger fingers?

    • Will Allen

      Do you think there could be such a law? In a free country like America? I hope not.

      Personally, I think all PFRs should put a wall or fence around their property. If it is not feasible for the entire property, then closer in around the home. If you don’t live in a place where that works, move.

      It is not just to keep you and your family from being murdered by LE. It is to keep you from being murdered by anyone. I’m sure you know that a lot of PFRs have been attacked and murdered at their homes. I recall not very long ago a PFR and his wife were murdered. Solely and only because of the Hit Lists. I’m sure I could find their names.

      You need to wall off your property to protect yourself and your family from LE and others. Then, if anyone is inside that perimeter, they can be dealt with by lethal force, if necessary.

      It is not very expensive to buy a decent amount of land and fence it in. You can have multiple homes on the land and have tenants who you trade some or all of the rent for their armed protection of the land. Write a contract and enforce it. You can have tenants who maintain the land. Frankly, it’s a simple, great way to live. You can live quite close to large cities also (maybe not in CA!).

      It really helps with “compliance checks” as well. You can control them completely. I don’t think any PFR should allow them actually. I think there are some states where LE is “required” to verify a PFR’s information at some times. However, I’m not aware of any case where a PFR has to do anything to help other than just give them the required information when required. I’ve only ever seen that requirement to give the information at an LE office and in writing. If LE is “required” to verify that the address that I gave them for my home is correct, that is THEIR problem. That is not my problem and it is not something that I help with. If they need help, let them talk to the neighbors who “need” the Hit Lists.

      If these criminal regimes want to try to force PFRs to allow “compliance checks” then the scumbags need to explicitly put that requirement in their “law”. I think they have not done that because they would get their asses beat in court. The criminal regimes have committed all kinds of crimes so I do find it a little shocking that they have not at least tried to require “compliance checks”. My guess is that they know they can just intimidate and bully most people to accept them and if they went to court, they’d lose the ability completely. They don’t want to lose their ability to bully. And shoot dogs or people.

      Everyone should be working to take the resource of big government and their law enforcement criminals. If they can afford Hit Lists, they obviously have too much.

      • Worried in Wisconsin

        But wait (he says, tongue in cheek)…

        If they can do the compliance checks without our participation, then doesn’t it follow that they should be able to gather all the registry information from the get-go without our participation?

        What, you ask?

        Really, does anyone really think that the authorities don’t already have the technology to gather all this information about us on their own? If the credit bureaus can tell you every detail about my life without any input from me, then I assume LEOs can do the same with very little effort.

        Don’t get me wrong – I’m not at all suggesting that I want them to have any of my information in a registry, regardless of where information comes from. I’m just saying that they don’t really need my help in doing so.

        We know we live in a Big Brother society, so let’s just call it what it is and have them stop pretending that we’re all voluntarily complying with the rules because we want to.

        • Will Allen

          I’ve been saying for probably 20 years that the Hit List have zero chance of even being considered as possibly legitimate or acceptable unless some things are done:

          1. All other Registries are created. There must be 100+ more Registries. Or just have one giant Registry and list all records on there. I don’t care which.

          2. PFRs are not required to do anything at all. They are not required to give any information to anyone. The criminal regimes must collect it themselves. In order to support their lies about “monitoring” people they have to fake “verify” the information anyway, so they should just collect it.

          3. PFRs have no restrictions in any way.

          All that has to be done or there must be war.

          It would not be easy for the criminal regimes to collect the information. I don’t care, of course. I can easily own more homes that credit bureaus and big government know nothing about. It’s easy. Same with vehicles. I’m confident that I could do it right now even. The only problem with that is that I’m legally supposed to tell big government about them.

          Big Brother is only omniscience in some limited areas/ways and if you don’t know how to avoid it. There are a LOT of ways to make mistakes and expose yourself, but it is not very difficult to remain hidden. People are a bit too worried about it generally. For example, I know people who think big government can read every e-mail that you send. They can’t (more correctly … they might be able to read it but it would be incomprehensible). Encryption works if you use it properly. But there are plenty of ways to trip up.

          I know big government loves to brag that “criminals” think they are so smart but they always “get their man”. They don’t. They only know about the people they catch. They don’t catch the best ones.

          Personally, I rarely worry about hiding from big government. I don’t see a need. I don’t care if they are wasting their resources “tracking” me. But I can hide if/when I need to. Which is another thing that makes the Hit Lists idiotic.

        • Tired of this

          Exactly. We shouldn’t have to do a damn thing. If they want to maintain their naughty lists, the onus should be on them. We are supposedly free citizens, right? Free citizens don’t have to jump through the hoops that we have to.

          I believe the real point of making us help them is so they have traps set out for us. It’s another way to trip us up and throw us back into the system if we fail to comply with any of the numerous, onerous, and often confusing requirements.

        • LPH

          @ Will: ” PFRs have no restrictions in any way.” We do and you know that.

        • LPH

          @ Worried: Yeah, “we” know that “they” know where we live. They have to justify their budget somehow. I once asked the sheriffs office why he had to visit me once a month as I am on supervision and DCS visits me twice a month; he said it was a federal law. I asked him which law, he had no answer. None the less, the last time the sheriff has seen me was over a year ago and has even stopped calling me. DCS has dropped their in person verification to once a month and succumbed the rest to phone/video calls due to Covid-19. Yay Covid-19 (not for the deaths though).

        • Dustin @ LPH

          For future reference, when an LE or parole/probation officer tells you what the law says, half the time it’s a lie and the other half a misrepresentation. Every third blue moon they might be honest and accurate, but that’s rare enough to call it never.

  13. TS

    He knew what he was doing and could get away with it without issue (damn qualified immunity). He was nonchalant (to say the least) about it with no remorse as seen in the video when he went about his business even after the shooting. No matter his thinking, he could have got back into his truck, protected himself, and talked to the guy through an open window to determine if he was where he needed to be and the dog would be still alive. That’s what he could have done if he truly felt threatened instead of pulling a weapon and using it. Not like the dog was within close proximity of physically attacking him. This scenario reeks of smugness.

    Lawsuit the dept and the individual with a civil suit. Just because he was cleared criminally, he and they can still be held liable civilly. Just ask OJ Simpson. I’d also ask the county commissioners to investigate their department. May not go anywhere (small town Arkansas), but it may get them to bring change either in commissioners if they don’t do anything, a sheriff, and/or the deputy into retirement.

  14. underdog

    This story cuts my soul for a few reasons:

    1) The blatant disregard for life displayed by the officer.

    2) The gut-wrenching loss experienced by the family whose dog was mercilessly taken from them.

    3) For twenty years prior to my crime, I was affiliated with Adopt-A-Dog in Connecticut and New York. I helped place dozens of doggies into loving homes. And I had as many as six adoptees of my own at one time. So, to see such a callous act against an innocent life is uber-disturbing.

    I now live in California and in September I had to sign my new batch of conditions. The following is the most notable change to the prior conditions: “You shall not reside in places where vicious or potentially dangerous animals impede access, pose a danger or interfere with parole supervision. Potentially dangerous animals include any animal that when unprovoked, engages in any behavior that requires a defensive action by any person to prevent bodily injury. It also includes any animal that is known to have bitten or injured any person or other animal in the past and animals that have not been properly registered, confined or controlled. If you reside in places where vicious animals are present you shall be directed to remove, register, confine or control the potentially dangerous animal in question or in the alternative shall be be directed to relocate to an acceptable residence as approved by the applicable chain of command.”

    Nowhere in the written stipulation does it indicate to shoot and kill. And that’s the condition for a registrant. It is NOT the condition for an innocent citizen whose premises were encroached by a mis-guided fu*k-nut.

  15. jw

    We need to compile a database of every officer that is involved with compliance checks so the public can be informed of the frightening and high risk they pose on the community.

  16. A.D.A.T.

    I would have no issues returning the favor and making his kids fatherless.

    • C

      That’s an easy gut reaction for a keyboard warrior, but when you think it through, I’m pretty sure it would do a great deal more harm than good for all involved. It’s what you call Lose/Lose.
      Instead I’d recommend the registered community chip in to buy that family a new puppy.

      • A.D.A.T.

        This “ Keyboard warrior” as you put it has been in a fire fight or two, seen people that have been tortured, and has had to fire on others to save myself. So stick your comments somewhere I bet your sitting on right now!

        • C

          You seem rather defensive and hostile. Clearly I struck a nerve.

        • Edward Abbey

          Relax, Francis. This isn’t the place to advocate making anyone’s kids fatherless.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

.