District Attorney Says Dog Shooting Was "Not Criminal" - KTEN.com - No One Gets You Closer

District Attorney Says Dog Shooting Was "Not Criminal"

District Attorney Says Dog Shooting Was "Not Criminal"


ARDMORE, OK-- The Carter County District Attorney's office says an Ardmore police officer who shot and killed a pit bull last week, acted appropriately. District Attorney Craig Ladd released a statement Wednesday saying police Sgt. Brice Woolly shot the dog last Wednesday near Broadlawn Park after he received approval from his superiors.

The District Attorney goes on to say, police received a number of reports that day about the dog acting aggressively towards a woman and later towards a mail carrier.      

Ladd says, after investigating the incident, "There appears to have been sufficient reason to believe that the dog represented a threat to public safety."      

He says, under the circumstances, Sgt. Woolly's action was not criminal.


Here is the press release District Attorney Craig Ladd released in its entirety:

"Last Friday afternoon I received an investigative report pertaining to the killing of a pit bulldog running at large in the 400 block of 15th Avenue NW, which is in close proximity to Broadlawn Park, by the Ardmore Police Department during the week of spring break on March 19, 2014.  The report revealed that Ardmore Police Sgt. Brice Woolly responded to the area at 9:31 that morning.  Upon arrival, Sgt. Woolly was briefed by two animal control officers and a mailman.  Sgt. Woolly was informed that animal control had received several calls about the dog being aggressive towards area residents during the past few weeks.  In fact, a call from a female had been received earlier that morning about an aggressive dog in the area matching the description of the dog in question.  The mailman, who was present, confirmed that the dog had been aggressive with him earlier that morning as well as on a prior occasion.  The dog had a collar but no tags.  The animal control officers maintained they had asked several people in the neighborhood to whom the dog belonged but were unable to learn who owned the animal.  The animal control officers attempted unsuccessfully to capture the dog with a catch pole several times that morning and during these attempts the dog was aggressive with the officers.  Due to the number of calls on this particular dog, large dog traps had actually been set up in Broadlawn Park previously by animal control.  After Sgt. Woolly was briefed on the situation, he received approval from his superiors to "euthanize" the dog, and Sgt. Woolly used a shotgun to kill the dog.  The Ardmore Police Department policy pertaining to the use of force against an animal permits the discharge of a weapon "to euthanize an animal that represents a threat to public safety" and requires that officers "must receive permission from a supervisor when practical."  Based upon the information provided to Sgt. Woolly on the morning in question, there appears to have been sufficient reason to believe that the dog represented a threat to public safety.  Furthermore, Sgt. Woolly received permission from a supervisor to proceed with the "euthanasia".  Under these circumstances, Sgt. Woolly's action of shooting the dog was not criminal in my opinion."