# Court upholds $1.5 for LE K9 Bite......



## Carol Boche (May 13, 2007)

Got this from a LE friend of mine in Ohio (unfortunately he did not send it as a link.....)
*

Court upholds $1.5M award for man bitten by Wash. K-9 Dec. 26, 2008
Kristin M. Kraemer The Tri-City Herald. A Washougal man was justly
awarded more than $1.5 million after he was bitten in 2003 by a
Kennewick police dog, a federal appeals court announced Tuesday.The
2007 jury verdict in favor of Ken Rogers and a later decision to
increase the total tab to cover court costs were not "grossly excessive
or monstrous."The decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
upheld the federal case, brought by Rogers against the city of
Kennewick, Benton County and four law enforcement officers.Rogers sued
on the grounds that his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable
seizure were violated when the officers allowed a police dog to enter
the fenced backyard where the man was sleeping and attack him.The jury
decided that the officers acted maliciously or in reckless disregard
for his constitutional rights."Although Mr. Rogers was not the actual
suspect that the police officers sought, the police K-9's biting of Mr.
Rogers constituted a seizure under the Fourth Amendment," the six-page
decision said.Rogers and his wife, Mary Lou, were awarded nearly $1.1
million in compensatory and punitive damages.The appeals court said
substantial evidence supported the award for future economic damages,
while the amount for punitive damages "was not excessive considering
the officers' conduct and the amount and proportion of the damage
awards."Three months after the jury verdict in a Richland courtroom,
U.S. District Judge Ed Shea - who presided over the trial - increased
the award by $516,000 to pay court costs and attorney and paralegal
fees.The Rogers family has yet to receive any money as the city quickly
filed an appeal.Larry Ziegler, one of three attorneys for the Rogerses,
on Tuesday said maybe now his clients will get paid."There is a Santa
Claus, there really is a Santa Claus," he said. "This thing has dragged
on for so long."Ziegler, a longtime friend of Ken Rogers, said he never
had any doubts about the case."I knew it was a good case when we
started it," he said. "I knew that we were telling the truth, and I
thought that we had the law and the facts on our side."The appeal was
argued Nov. 21 in Seattle before three appeals court judges.Jerry
Moberg, an Ephrata lawyer hired by the insurance company that covered
the city at the time, could not be reached Tuesday afternoon.Kennewick
City Attorney Lisa Beaton told the Herald in August 2007 that the city
had already maxed out its $100,000 financial liability in the case. The
insurance carrier is on the hook to pay the rest, she said.The case
could be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.It all started with a minor
traffic case in the early hours of July 13, 2003. Police were looking
for a person riding a Moped without a helmet or headlight.Meanwhile,
Rogers was asleep in a backyard on West Victoria Street.Deke, a
Kennewick police dog, followed a wrong scent into the yard. Believing
Rogers was the suspect, Deke latched onto him and in the struggle bit
him several times on the hand, back, neck and face while three officers
beat him.Rogers said he fought back because he wasn't wearing his
glasses and thought he was being attacked by prowlers. His innocence
was never questioned during the lawsuit.The Kennewick native was in
town at the time to visit family and to fish.He suffered permanent
nerve damage to his left hand - and he is left-handed, hearing loss in
his right ear and mental anguish and anxiety. The attack also
aggravated a disabling back injury.At trial, one of his lawyers Diehl
Rettig said it was an illegal use of excessive force.Rogers told the
Herald after the 2007 verdict that if police administrators had called
him in the attack aftermath, it would have gone a long way. But when
nothing happened, he decided to file the lawsuit to make sure this type
of incident doesn't happen to someone else.The lawsuit accused the
agencies of unlawful imprisonment, false arrest, undue search and
seizure and of failing to get him adequate medical treatment.Rogers
sought punitive damages against Kennewick Sgt. Richard Dopke, police
officers Brad Kohn and Ryan Bonnalie and sheriff's Deputy Jeff
Quackenbush, but only Dopke and Kohn were ordered to pay.Dopke retired
in 2003 after an internal affairs review of the incident recommended
his demotion to a patrolman and relief of his supervisory
duties.Bonnalie was fired from the department in 2005 after he
brandished his loaded police gun while off duty during a road rage
incident.Deke retired from the force in early 2006."We think everybody
benefits on this," Ziegler said. "It just sends a damn strong signal
that this kind of stuff just is not going to be tolerated. There just
is a line that you don't cross.*


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Which is why; 1. We don't usually use the dog to pursue such a misdemeanant. 2. We don't track off-leash in a populated area. Murphy hides behind every tree.

DFrost


----------



## Phil Dodson (Apr 4, 2006)

> 9th circus court strikes again, the main reason why I left Washington!!

> David Washington has tracked (off) lead for decades and they have some of the highest if not the highest track capture rates anywhere, bar none!! I learned this method from two of the founders many many moons ago and use this method almost exclusively.

> Wrong applications happen on line as well as off line, I know from personal experience.

> Phil


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Phil, we do what we can. Our program would not survive such an ordeal. While "wrong applications" can indeed happen on leash, it's less likely. 

DFrost


----------



## Robert Blok (Jul 26, 2006)

David, Are you still "on the job"? I thought you'd be taking it easy by now.
Hope you had a good Christmas.

Robert


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

Robert, I had a great Christmas. I relented and told them I'd stay one more year. Probably a mistake, but they did ask.

David


----------



## Anne Vaini (Mar 15, 2007)

> Believing Rogers was the suspect, Deke latched onto him and in the struggle bit him several times on the hand, back, neck and face while three officers beat him


Officers beating the guy or a dog that won't out? First time I read it, I thought the dog didn't out. Second time, I thought they were beating the guy and then was wondering how much of the case had to do with the dog.


----------



## Phil Dodson (Apr 4, 2006)

> I have to disagre with you David, it is always a 50/50 chance when starting a track that he could start with the wrong scent unless the area has not been trampled or in the woods where foot traffic is unlikely.. mine was online, I was given a general location of departure from the assault location. as it was only a minor assault I went on line. Kanto immediatly picked up a scent and began running. I turned into a driveway and a subject was leaning on the wall. I ordered him down at gunpoint ad awaited back up. Upon further investigation it was the homeowner who had just finished jogging and was stretching before going into his home.

> After locating the perp he did leave in the same general direction, it just so happens Kanto picked up on the jogger and followed him instead.

> My second incident was also on line!

> Another year? Don't feel bad it looks like I am going to take a K-9 position in a larger city than I worked before. This retirement stuff just didn't work out.


----------



## kristin tresidder (Oct 23, 2008)

i can't say i blame the guy for suing. while understandable as a simple mistake from a canine POV, that's a hell of an error. also, why was a dog being used to track someone on a moped for not wearing a helmet - i mean, was that really even worth the time?


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

<<<I ordered him down at gunpoint ad awaited back up. Upon further investigation it was the homeowner who had just finished jogging and was stretching before going into his home.>>>

That's my point Phil, in this case, a minor misdeameanor, on-line, the guy didn't get bitten. We would have tracked as well, on line. Mistakes like that can and do happen. The dog didn't round a corner ahead of you and engage on an innocent person. No harm, no foul.

DFrost


----------



## Phil Dodson (Apr 4, 2006)

> If he was attempting to flee it was. If he crashed and fled on foot or just ditched it and ran if policy dictates same than you can. I would like to see the whole transcript inquestion before rendering a final judgement.


----------



## Joel Anderson (Apr 16, 2007)

http://www.tri-cityherald.com/kennewick_pasco_richland/story/425728.html


Actual story link.


----------



## Phil Dodson (Apr 4, 2006)

> When I can read the truthful facts and not prejudiced I will look anywhere but the newspaper or media, I have no use for either as I have been the receipant of their prejudice on more than one occasion!


----------



## Michael Breton (Aug 25, 2008)

All of the King County and Snohomish County LE I work with always track on-line. 

1) to make sure this kind of thing does not happen
2) to make sure the dog is not injured while tracking a suspect

There is no excuse for this on such a trivial pursuit. This kind of thing wipes a K-9 unit off the face of the earth and makes it hard for other units to maintain or expand. The deck is already stacked against K-9 in WA and stupid deployments like this really hurt. I have loads of respect for most of the K-9 handlers/units I train, but like everywhere else there are still caveman (and women) who count meat bites like they are badges. Make me get out of my car and my dog IS getting a bite.

Also, Kennewick has a reputation for cowboys. Same dept. that got video of an officer kicking a guy in the jewels during WTO. Right in front of the camera he knew was there, for basically no valid reason, oh and again another lawsuit. I've met some great LE from that area, but it doesn't take much to drag them down.

Phil instead of blindly supporting them you should be reaming them for not following SOP and putting thei K-9 unit at risk and everyone elses. Lots of people are trying to make it harder for K-9. I would have to assume the judge did see the facts not just the newpaper article and he put it to them.

And I can tell you this, if I was sleeping in my yard and a dog and three guys came on my property and attacked me (yes attacked me) I would damn sure fight back. Be real what would you have done. I'd like to see some posts on that. What if that had been a bunch of high pitched, sreaming little kids who got bit. No excuse.

I agree with David, it's dangerous and foolhardy to deploy the dog like that and could easiliiy put a K-9 unit out of business. Then when you need'e'm who you gonna call. I hate to see this stuff as I make my living selling K-9s.


----------

