PDA

View Full Version : Man shoots dog in self defense. Police press charges, confiscate guns, try to search home




Xenliad
08-23-2013, 11:43 AM
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/north-dakota-man-arrested-after-using-gun-to-defend-himself-against-pit-bulls/




I’ve had several readers email me about a case in Valley City where a man is suing to get his firearms back after they were confiscated by police. The man had used them to shoot at two pit bulls that were attacking himself and his girlfriend at their home.


From the Valley City Times-Record on August 19th:

Preston and his girlfriend were in Preston’s yard enjoying a fire when the dogs wandered in. “Two pit bulls came by started barking a little bit. My dog started barking a little bit telling them to go away,” said Preston. The couple was able to shoo them away he said. “Then our neighbor comes over and said ‘those pit bulls just attacked our dog.’” said Preston. “Just in case, I went in and got our handguns.”

When the dogs returned, after Preston had been asleep for a while. He heard his girlfriend shouting and hitting a stick around; the dogs left again, he said. Thinking they were safe, Preston went to his boat to get a sleeping bag when he saw the dogs again, ears up and tails up, they were barking and growling. He jumped into the boat with the dogs right on his heels.

“I looked around for help, couldn’t see anybody to help,” Preston said, then he looked around for a phone. Finding none, he called out to his girlfriend, “Gun, gun, gun!” he said. She replied she couldn’t because she had the couple’s dogs.

Once again, the dogs retreated, Preston said, so he decided it would be a good time to get everyone (the couple and their dogs) and drive to the police station.

“I went back and I grabbed a gun from my girlfriend and all of a sudden I heard her holler, ‘get away! I turned around and the pit bull was pistol distance away. I chose to fire because they were showing teeth, growled, barked and everything else. That was a sign for me. It was either me and my girlfriend or the dogs, I chose to fire at that time,” said Preston.

According to Preston, when the police showed up he turned over both his gun and his girlfriend’s gun. He admitted to shooting the dog in self defense, but refused to allow officers to search his home. The officers then confiscated the guns and sought charges against Preston by way of the local state’s attorney.

Yesterday my good friend Jay Thomas at WDAY in Fargo interviewed Preston who, at the time, hadn’t been charged with any crimes but still hadn’t gotten his guns back (the incident with the dogs occurred in July). Preston has been pursuing a lawsuit against the city to get back his guns.

According to a WDAY television report, Valley City Police Chief Fred Thompson is arguing that the guns were seized for the purposes of investigation and won’t be returned until the investigation is concluded.

Last night, after the interview on the Jay Thomas Show, Preston was arrested for alleged disorderly conduct. He is currently out on bond.

Today at 2:10pm state Rep. Dwight Kiefert (R-Valley City) will be on the Jay Thomas Show today at 2:10pm to discuss the issue. Kiefert is not pleased with law enforcement’s handling of the situation.

aGameOfThrones
08-23-2013, 12:09 PM
InB4 BlackTerrel

jkr
08-23-2013, 12:29 PM
I AM IN FUCKING BIZZARO WORLD



and I want OUT

The Bavarian
08-23-2013, 12:44 PM
I'm surprised they didn't hire him.

Then again they might be pissed about the fact that, if everyone shot dogs then the police wont have any to shoot.

Brian4Liberty
08-23-2013, 12:45 PM
Silly mundane. Only Police can fire in self defense!

cjm
08-23-2013, 12:49 PM
According to a WDAY television report, Valley City Police Chief Fred Thompson is arguing that the guns were seized for the purposes of investigation and won’t be returned until the investigation is concluded.

I see an increase in "cold cases" on the horizon.

James Madison
08-23-2013, 12:54 PM
In North Dakota of all states...

Don't even want to think about what would have happened in New York or Massachusetts.

heavenlyboy34
08-23-2013, 01:14 PM
Lesson to all-put on your LEO costume before committing a crime, and no one will care.

AFPVet
08-23-2013, 01:44 PM
Why the fuck did they want to search his house. He shot in self defense... take the report and move on. Were they just pissed because he shot the dogs and the cops didn't get the chance to? WTF....

Disorderly conduct is one of those 'anything' charges (contempt of cop...) that they like to charge when you haven't actually done anything wrong. I guess the only people who are allowed to shoot dogs (in self defense :rolleyes:) are the 'cops'.


IC 35-45-1-3 Version a
Disorderly conduct
Note: This version of section effective until 7-1-2014. See also following version of this section, effective 7-1-2014.
Sec. 3. (a) A person who recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally:
(1) engages in fighting or in tumultuous conduct;
(2) makes unreasonable noise and continues to do so after being asked to stop; or
(3) disrupts a lawful assembly of persons;
commits disorderly conduct, a Class B misdemeanor.
(b) The offense described in subsection (a) is a Class D felony if it:
(1) adversely affects airport security; and
(2) is committed in an airport (as defined in IC 8-21-1-1) or on the premises of an airport, including in a parking area, a maintenance bay, or an aircraft hangar.
(c) The offense described in subsection (a) is a Class D felony if it:
(1) is committed within five hundred (500) feet of:
(A) the location where a burial is being performed;
(B) a funeral procession, if the person described in subsection (a) knows that the funeral procession is taking place; or
(C) a building in which:
(i) a funeral or memorial service; or
(ii) the viewing of a deceased person;
is being conducted; and
(2) adversely affects the funeral, burial, viewing, funeral procession, or memorial service.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.5. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.70; P.L.92-1988, SEC.8; P.L.123-2002, SEC.40; P.L.3-2006, SEC.1.

IC 35-45-1-3 Version b
Disorderly conduct
Note: This version of section effective 7-1-2014. See also preceding version of this section, effective until 7-1-2014.
Sec. 3. (a) A person who recklessly, knowingly, or intentionally:
(1) engages in fighting or in tumultuous conduct;
(2) makes unreasonable noise and continues to do so after being asked to stop; or
(3) disrupts a lawful assembly of persons;
commits disorderly conduct, a Class B misdemeanor.
(b) The offense described in subsection (a) is a Level 6 felony if it:
(1) adversely affects airport security; and
(2) is committed in an airport (as defined in IC 8-21-1-1) or on the premises of an airport, including in a parking area, a maintenance bay, or an aircraft hangar.
(c) The offense described in subsection (a) is a Level 6 felony if it:
(1) is committed within five hundred (500) feet of:
(A) the location where a burial is being performed;
(B) a funeral procession, if the person described in subsection (a) knows that the funeral procession is taking place; or
(C) a building in which:
(i) a funeral or memorial service; or
(ii) the viewing of a deceased person;
is being conducted; and
(2) adversely affects the funeral, burial, viewing, funeral procession, or memorial service.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.5. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.70; P.L.92-1988, SEC.8; P.L.123-2002, SEC.40; P.L.3-2006, SEC.1; P.L.158-2013, SEC.522.

Gunshots could qualify, but only after being asked to stop shooting.

jkr
08-23-2013, 01:46 PM
there must
have been
a doorway in
the wall

when

...i
......came in?