Safford dog owner upset at use of deadly force


Published on Sunday, July 27, 2008 4:22 PM MST

Dear Editor:

Saturday (July 12) was my birthday. It should have been an occasion for happiness. Unfortunately, this Saturday, a close friend of mine was murdered in his own yard.

It happened right here in Safford. My friend and I had become very close over time. In fact, he had become part of our family. Many of my friends and neighbors knew him well and will also miss his presence in their lives. Saturday, I buried my best friend in my back yard.

The family member’s name was Diamond. He was my close companion; he was my dog. He came into my life on my birthday three years ago when he was 6 weeks old. Together we have shared many happy times. He brought a lot of joy into my life. I will miss him terribly.

Early Saturday morning, a jogger was passing by our yard, and Diamond was startled and taken by surprise. According to the police report, the jogger “put his right hand out to let the dog know it was OK. The dog bit his hand, leaving a puncture wound on the top of his hand and a small mark on the palm of the hand.” This happened in front of my house.

The paramedics checked out the jogger and found him to be OK. My dog was safely in his yard lying down near the front door to the house, not a threat to anyone, when a Safford Police officer purposefully strode into my yard and shot him point blank.

Bleeding terribly from the mortal wound, Diamond tried to escape into the house for safety. My wife, witness to this, cried hysterically, and I rushed home. We took Diamond to the veterinarian, who did everything possible. A short time later, Diamond died in my arms. I couldn’t help him.

What has happened to our community? My dog was inside his own yard when Officer Reynolds entered my yard and opened fire on him. If Diamond appeared to threaten the policeman, it was only because he was protecting his own yard, which is normal dog behavior.

Diamond was a dog. Reynolds was supposed to be a highly trained professional who should have known better than to provoke a stable situation and escalating it to the use of deadly force.

As a professional, Officer Reynolds should never have entered my yard. Instead, he should have had Dispatch contact my wife, who was inside the house, and request that the dog be taken indoors until the Animal Control officer arrived. He is the one trained and equipped to handle animal situations; he understands animal behavior.

Officer Reynolds has clearly shown a lack of professional judgment. What if that bullet had ricocheted and hit my wife or a neighbor?

Would you want this officer responding to a call at your residence? The mayor and council should call for an independent investigation to determine if any laws or policies were violated with the use of deadly force.

If Chief Griffin is unable to control his officers, it may be time for Safford to implement a Civilian Police Commission Review Board to discipline improper police behavior and to establish policies governing the use of deadly force.

We have excellent officers in our city; unfortunately, Officer Reynolds is not one of them.

Tony Montoya

Safford

Editor’s note: According to police reports, the dog was out of its yard when it bit the jogger, and the police officer shot the dog as it leapt at him, barking.

Copyright © 2009 Eastern Arizona Courier

Comments

203 comment(s)

    Support the Police Officer wrote on Aug 31, 2008 5:49 PM:

    " When a dog kills a chicken it will continue to kill chickens and must be put down. When a dog attacks a HUMAN, it will continue and WELL I rest my case!!!!!! IT SHOULD BE PUT DOWN!!!!! "

    To Concerend wrote on Aug 29, 2008 9:04 PM:

    " Or however you are spelling it. That is a pretty obnoxious comment. I bet you don't know what Officer Reynolds is about. You are sirring the pot. I guess that is the new thing for for those who care more about a threatening dog than about innocent people. "

    concerened wrote on Aug 29, 2008 7:38 AM:

    " A house at the corner of 8th ave. and 20th street has a wood image of a black dog in front as a decoration. (It is on Northwest corner.) I hope officer Brad Reynonds does not drive by and shoot at it. That seems to be what he is about! "

    Diamond wrote on Aug 28, 2008 3:33 PM:

    " Let this story "die" already. "

    wow wrote on Aug 26, 2008 3:45 PM:

    " how does "reynolds city" or "city of reynolds" sound this keeps up he will own this place. good luck officer reynolds hold ur head up more people respect you than you think. "

    New to Town wrote on Aug 26, 2008 1:01 PM:

    " I am Shocked to read some of these stories, and even more concerned to think this is where I will be relocating to soon. I certainly hope that action is taken and not just words spoken. "

    Ridiculous wrote on Aug 26, 2008 10:21 AM:

    " Its a dog...seriously...there aren't nearly as many concerns when children in the community die. "

    Walker wrote on Aug 25, 2008 6:39 PM:

    " To Concerned,
    Yes, it is hard for me to understand. And what cover up are you talking about? "

    wuz it fun wrote on Aug 25, 2008 1:20 PM:

    " i'll bet brad pulled wings off flys for fun when he was a kid and shot kittens with his bb gun too "

    concerened wrote on Aug 24, 2008 12:57 PM:

    " 'to walker - the officer should not have entered the yard. is that so hard to understand? I too have been attacked by a dog and nothing was done even though I reported it. This is yet another cover up by out police department! "

    Walker wrote on Aug 23, 2008 9:47 PM:

    " To: Conserned,
    When a dog is running toward you in attack mode it is not excessive force to protect yourself. Office Reynolds did not use excessive force. "

    Have been attacked wrote on Aug 23, 2008 5:41 PM:

    " I had a dog nearly kill me when it came in MY yard & attacked me. Had to have plastic surgery, but I don't trust cops in general & have witnessed many that would change a story & pad or lie on their reports to cover things up. I have had empty promises made to me by Graham County cops that had no intentions of taking care of a matter. They are going to take care of their own first. Cops have a code of silence. They are the ones who do the investigation, so you know the out come. "

    concerened wrote on Aug 23, 2008 1:48 PM:

    " To Walker
    The issue is not that Mr. Montoya should have had his dog confined. I agree with that. He should have been cited or whatever action was required taken. The REAL issue is that Officer Reynolds used EXCESSIVE force! The dog should not have been shot! Apparently Officer Reynolds shoots first - asks questions later! Scary!!! Also - is Mayor Green trying to cover up his cousins inapporiate action??? "

    Walker wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:29 PM:

    " To: HHH
    I don't enter peoples yards while I am on a walk and I expect to be safe from a dog owner's dog when I am walking down the street. The problem here is that Mr. Montoya did not secure his dog like so many other dog owner's in town. Officer Reynolds would never have had to respond to this situation if this man would have been a responsible dog owner. I don't fault Officer Reynolds for his actions. I love dogs and I have a huge problem with people who have no regard their neighbors. "

    Dog Lover wrote on Aug 21, 2008 4:44 PM:

    " It is about time someone took some action about the dogs in Safford.

    I have been bitten by one dog and attacked by the same dog months later and the dog is still around.

    Is their an animal control officer in town and if so is he out patrolling early, early in the morning when the dogs are let out to roam the streets?

    Hello Randy????? "

    HHH wrote on Aug 21, 2008 9:23 AM:

    " To Walker

    Do what Officer Reynolds did, if he can do it so can you. Carry a gun and shoot the dogs. Lets all follow Reynolds lead and enter the owners yards and shoot dogs or, if we are smarter than Reynolds lets wait and see how Officer Reynolds and the City of Safford comes out of this mess first. "

    Ive got it wrote on Aug 21, 2008 6:26 AM:

    " The anly REAL solution is to ban dogs and atvs from the entire county. Then we won't need leashes or helmets anymore and everyone can rest easy. "

    Walker wrote on Aug 20, 2008 9:59 PM:

    " It is wrong that people walking in this City have to fear that a dog will come running out from it's yard and bite them. I have been threatened many times by dogs running freely in and out of their yards. I live in fear also that I will have to beat someone's dog with the big stick that I have to carry to protect myself. This is a big problem. Dog owner's need to insure the safety of their pets as well as the safety of people walking by. "

    Taxpayer wrote on Aug 20, 2008 9:42 PM:

    " An Independent Study for this incident? GET REAL! I have read so many blogs written by snide,angry, sarcastic conspiracy theorists. I would like to see how each of you Monday morning quarter backs would have handled this situation. It would be hilarious!! An independent study on this matter is the last thing we need. What a huge waste of our tax payer dollars. "

    CHUCK NORRIS wrote on Aug 20, 2008 8:56 AM:

    " Stop it, just stop it before I roundhouse kick all of you in back of the head, your all acting like children. Don’t you all know that every time you post a comment on this story, I punch a kitten in the face, just stop it!
    Thanks, Chuck Norris "

    Casual Observation wrote on Aug 19, 2008 5:51 PM:

    " Unless you were there, your opinion means nothing.

    Would a police officer pad his report? You bet they do. Even in Safford. Did this officer pad his report to insure no one would bother about "just a dog"? Why not? Is that so hard to understand?

    This blog and its comments are a reflection of Safford to the rest of the world.

    Did the dog bite rise to the level of violence that mandated being shot? I highly doubt it. "

    PimaTwo wrote on Aug 19, 2008 2:13 PM:

    " When a person is cited by the police it is because there is probable cause on a misdemeanor violation. When the City/County Attorney files charges it's because it's more serious as in Criminal. This is standard procedure but does not happen until after the initial investigation is complete. Why is there such a conspiracy attitude about this situation? Mainly because the Courier published the story before the person or persons were either cited or had charges filed against them.
    I personally don't think that the SPD officer did anything wrong. And I love animals to boot. Sorry "

    Quit whining wrote on Aug 19, 2008 1:40 PM:

    " I believe anyone that would like an independent investigation should feel free to pay for it. I'm happier with my tax dollars continuing to support my local police force. "

    To Pima Two wrote on Aug 19, 2008 11:47 AM:

    " The dog owner was NOT cited, instead he was charged by the city prosecuting attorney on criminal charges. WHY? Simple because someone wants to make him look like a public criminal to discredit him and protect the actions of the Officer. Who do you think is behind this??? Think! This brings into question a COVER UP. About the leash law, it has not been determined where the dog and jogger were when the so called bite occured. Only an INDEPENDENT investigation can make that determination AND NOT ONE CALLED FOR BY THE POLICE. REMEMBER INDEPENDENT, INDEPENDENT, INDEPENDENT!!! "

    To all posters wrote on Aug 19, 2008 11:29 AM:

    " It has not been determined that the dog was vicious nor that the dog leaped at the Officer. That needs to be established by a independent investigation before any postings based on those assumptions can have any creditablity. The Police Report is in question and until the facts of the report are determined it is all personal hip serving only the ignorance of the writer. Fact: Officer shoots and kills dog. Required: Independent investigation to determine facts. Closure: Release of the complete investigation report to the public. Then we can make postings on the facts! "

    PimaTwo wrote on Aug 19, 2008 11:09 AM:

    " Was the Dog owner cited? This should be the outstanding question. If the owner was not cited for the dog bite alone then why? Then there's the leash law. If my dog was out and animal control was able to pick him up I would still have to pay to get him out of the pound. Is this not true in Safford Az.
    Don't forget about the "If a dog bites a human it has to be dealt with thing". Sorry but a 1 way ride that's the only responsible thing. The dog will bite again. "

    Aimee Staten wrote on Aug 19, 2008 10:07 AM:

    " The newspaper has rules concerning the comments section of the Web site. Vulgar words, even ones with dashes to indicate the remainder of the letters, will not be allowed. "

    concerened wrote on Aug 19, 2008 9:59 AM:

    " I see that my comment about Mayor Green and his cousin Reynolds was not posted. That tells me alot. Lets cover up for the SPD and mayor. So much for FREE SPEECH. "

    independent observer wrote on Aug 19, 2008 9:04 AM:

    " Why would anyone out there argue against a independent investigation? What is wrong with truth? Don't the citizens of the community have a right to know the truth? Only those that want to hide the truth would not support it. All these postings are meaningless when the facts are unknown. Safford has a disfunctional political climate that has created distrust from the citizens to the government. "

    Politically Correct wrote on Aug 18, 2008 9:06 PM:

    " It is the responsibility of officers to respond to vicious animal calls in the best interest of public safety, of which they themselves are part. I don't anyone that would not react to being challenged by an agressive animal especially when they have already bitten one person. If the dog had actually bitten the officer and then was shot everyone would be sympathizing w/the officer. Why would it take that action to generate that response. Would you all have preferred him to be actually bitten first. Officers shouldnt have to be injured before reacting to the threat of bodily injury "

    Politically Correct wrote on Aug 18, 2008 9:00 PM:

    " I can't believe what I am reading. People are taking this unfortunate situation and turning into a forum for perosnal prejudicial opinion rather than intelligently and responsibly commenting on the story. It is always easier to be the Monday morning quarterback and give an opinion on how it should have happened. In all honesty none of us know what it is like to be out there on the front lines of law enforcement every day and the split second decisions that are made in the name of personal & communal safety. Remember Rev. "judge not". "

    Diamond wrote on Aug 18, 2008 3:55 PM:

    " Who cares anymore? "

    concern citizen wrote on Aug 16, 2008 8:05 PM:

    " The image of Safford politics has become an embarrasssment to the citizens of Safford. Safford needs a clear vision, a plan to accomplish that vision, and the leadership capable to achieve it. This dog issue is only another example of poor leadership. The council should call for a independent and through investigation to end the matter instead of having the citizens debate it in the blogs. It has now become public spectacle. Again our leadership has let us down. "

    To My Cousin Vinney wrote on Aug 16, 2008 7:48 PM:

    " You May wish to check with Mr. Montoya, Yes he did support Mayor Green during the last two elections. However, I believe you would find him in a differnt position now, as other who also supported the Mayor in the past. Mr Montoya is calling for a complete and independent investigation into this matter. Mayor Green appears to be supporting the cover up. Safford Politics is very strange. Until Safford gets a functional Mayor and council, it will remain a joke. It needs vision, leadership, and conviction. The citizen of Safford will continue to suffer until then. "

    non resident attorney wrote on Aug 16, 2008 11:02 AM:

    " The City Council should call for an independent investigation to determine if the police report has been falsified in an attempt to justify the shooting of the dog, and the involvement of the Mayor and the Chief of Police in matter. The only ones that would have any reason to oppose an independent investigation are those that may be involved in what appears to be a cover up. The citizens of the community should demand this from their elected representives. Failure to investigate this matter is but another reason for Safford's poor image through out the state. "

    My Cousin Vinney wrote on Aug 16, 2008 10:44 AM:

    " I hear that Mr. Montoya is a BIG supporter of Ron Green. Hanging up election signs and campaigning for him. So no wonder why the Mayor is going overboard with this situation. He has to have at least one friend. "

    concerened wrote on Aug 15, 2008 10:44 AM:

    " You don't know the whole story. It is not right when the mayor tells these citizens that the story has to be hushed up. In my opinion the city and police department are just trying to cover their you know what! This is not Russia during the "COLD WAR" "

    To Concerned wrote on Aug 15, 2008 9:15 AM:

    " Concerned, NO, that isn't unusual for a mayor to go around asking questions to people. That is what politicians do so they know what the people want to hear. This is a perfect event for a mayor to tell the people what they want to hear. That doesn't mean he will say or do what is right, but what ever wins the votes. "

    concerened wrote on Aug 15, 2008 7:40 AM:

    " The story about the mayor was in Berwyn Heights, Maryland.You can see the story on CNN.com/crime. Tragedy! Sounds like the same thing Officer Brad Reynolds did. Shoot first - ask questions later. The officers in both cases should be fired. Does anyone out there have a comment on Mayor Green soliciting information from private citizens? "

    Tumbleweed in Alabama wrote on Aug 14, 2008 4:19 PM:

    " Didn't catch what city this happened in...but hey, I have 2 dogs and I can't imagine losing them... "

    The Mayor was from a small town called
    Berwyn Heights Mayor Cheye Calvo. He came home and found a package that had been delivered to his house brought it in Officers broke down the door, shot the two dogs and kept Calvo and his mother-in-law bound for nearly two hours. "The deputies opened fire and executed our dogs the very second they broke down our front door," Calvo, 37, said at a news conference" "

    Not concerned wrote on Aug 14, 2008 1:26 PM:

    " Concerned---Why would anyone ask the dog's owner about the incident? He seems to have skewed the facts to portray himself as the victim. The important thing to remember here is that officer Reynolds did us all a favor by dispatching a vicious and dangerous animal that was a threat to everyone. I applaud his bravery. "

    To CT wrote on Aug 14, 2008 12:28 PM:

    " I saw the report on the news also. It was last weekend. It was I think back east. The mayor had just come home, got out of the shower heard the commotion and gun shot. And the police did not have a search warrant. Sure sounds kind of like what was going on here. "

    Sarah wrote on Aug 14, 2008 10:14 AM:

    " Mr. Montoya,
    If you loved your dog so much you would teach it not to bite people whether it's in the yard or not. I highly doubt that a jogger is going to stop and reach his hand into a yard with a barking dog. Our officers risk their lives for us everyday, have some respect. "

    concerened wrote on Aug 14, 2008 9:25 AM:

    " The story is out that the mayor of our fair city is going around talking to citizens trying to find out what is going on about the dog who was shot by a police officer. Is this not a bit unusual and in very poor taste. If he has any questions he should go to the dog's owner. "

    CT wrote on Aug 14, 2008 9:07 AM:

    " hey did anyone see on the news where the cops busted into a mayors house because someone had mailed marijuana to the mayors home as a prank. The mayor wasn't home but his 2 black labs were and the cops shot & killed them both. One dog was shot in the back fleeing. Mayor is very upset..Wonder if theres a lawsuit there. Didn't catch what city this happened in...but hey, I have 2 dogs and I can't imagine losing them... "

    Silly Rabbit wrote on Aug 13, 2008 11:28 AM:

    " What about Trix? Sorry, I forgot. Those are for kids. "

    Right on wrote on Aug 13, 2008 6:12 AM:

    " Cops stink, we should fire them all and hire vicious dogs to protect us all. "

    We people wrote on Aug 13, 2008 6:11 AM:

    " To you people---Truthfully no one REALLY cared from the beginning. It's just fun to attack the police in any forum. That way we can feel superbad without ever risking anything. "

    Why not this wrote on Aug 13, 2008 6:09 AM:

    " Maybe the officer could have offered the dog a bowl of Lucky Charms. They are "magicaly delicious" after all. Then he could have distracted him from biting anyone else with a nice game of pinocle until the owner arrived home. "

    Here it is wrote on Aug 13, 2008 6:04 AM:

    " To not really---you obviously don't know what "impounded" means or have any clue about tazers. Proving once again that stupid people's opinions are completely worthless. "

    YOU PEOPLE wrote on Aug 12, 2008 4:12 PM:

    " COME ON PEOPLE GET REAL NOBODY CARES ANYMORE LETS CHANGE THIS STORY "

    not really here it is wrote on Aug 12, 2008 12:36 PM:

    " You cite the law: "...and shall be taken up and impounded"

    Close the gate = animal impounded until animal control can arrive and owner can manage his dog.

    There was NO self defense to this shooting when the officer did not have to enter the yard; could have used his tazer; or could have phoned the property owner AND CLOSED THE GATE. "

    REALLY wrote on Aug 12, 2008 11:23 AM:

    " Come on, sorry you lost your dog but he did bite someone. "

    Here it is wrote on Aug 12, 2008 7:10 AM:

    " That sums it up. Self defense or not the officer had a duty to impound the dog under the law and made a determination that the dog could not safely be taken. He destroyed the dog onder the same provision. That renders most of the points here invalid. "

    Here it is wrote on Aug 12, 2008 7:09 AM:

    " Under Safford 6.08.060 Leash Requirements: "No dog shall be allowed to run at large within the city. Any dog found running at large is in violation of this chapter and shall be taken up and impounded; provided, however, that if any dangerous, vicious or fierce dog cannot, in the discretion of the designated officer, be safely taken up and impounded, such dog may be immediately slain, and further provided, that any designated officer may, at his or her discretion, for any humane reason, immediately kill any dog found at large within the city that is in violation of this chapter.” "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 11, 2008 7:57 PM:

    " I bear no anger or animosity towards the police or the officer in question. I see two critical mistakes in the matter.

    The first mistake was for the property owner to leave his gate open. The second mistake was for Officer Reynolds not to close it thus insuring that the dog was contained and not a danger to anyone else.

    The essential question comes down to this: Was it absolutely necessary for the officer to enter the yard at the point in time he did? I don't believe it was. "

    M. Kempton wrote on Aug 11, 2008 7:40 PM:

    " I think I remember Brad arresting Rev. Wright for DUI and posession of a dangerous substance for sale. Now we know why the rev. hates Brad. "

    To Dog Owner wrote on Aug 11, 2008 4:16 PM:

    " You should only be worried if you let your dog run loose and it bites someone. Be a responsible dog owner (unlike Diamond's) and keep your dog on a leash. "

    dog owner wrote on Aug 11, 2008 1:03 PM:

    " Officer Quick Draw McGraw, I'm sorry, I mean Officer Brad Reynolds used VERY POOR JUDGEMENT! Yes the dog should not have bitten the jogger. That is not the issue here. The issue is that brute force was used. Animal Control is supposed to be trained to deal with these issues. Officer Reynolds took it upon himself to take care of it. He took care of it all right but should be fired for that very bad judgement he used. I am afraid he is a loose cannon! "

    Turn About wrote on Aug 9, 2008 12:12 AM:

    " Hey Tony, I quote you, "If Chief Griffin is unable to control his officers," I think that "If Tony Montoya is unable to control his dog", it may be time to cite him or sue him. Unfortunately, a Police Officer has to suffer from your biting words and a jogger from your biting dog and your own negligence started the whole thing. "

    Turn About wrote on Aug 9, 2008 12:03 AM:

    " We have excellent people in our city, unfortunately, Tony Montoya is not one of them. Tell us, Tony how does a comment like that feel? "

    Oh Yeah wrote on Aug 8, 2008 11:55 PM:

    " OH! Rev Wright, you are so angry. Have you talked it all out YET? You have a vendetta again SPD. It is obvious. SEEK HELP. "

    JRB wrote on Aug 8, 2008 11:45 PM:

    " I have an idea! Let's kick a dead horse! Come on- everyone join in and take your turn! See, it's fun! Kick it, kick it again- WAIT! IT'S MOVING! Nope, it really is dead... just kick it one more time, just for good measure. Woohoo! What fun!! "

    Rev. STFU wrote on Aug 8, 2008 2:01 PM:

    " Rev. Wright, I was joking with the "yer kind" comment. Fact is, I don't know you from Adam, nor do I even live in the Safford area.

    I think the points have been presented, and they will be decided in a court of law, if not already in the court of public opinion. In the meantime, I'm going to stop egging you on. Thanks, it's been fun! "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 8, 2008 12:31 PM:

    " Animal Control could have obtained that paperwork, or simply looked it up from the animal owners address. Officer Reynolds did not have to do this paperwork (and thus did not have to enter the yard in the first place).

    And thank you for your kind words, and as for liking "my kind" around here, we've been here from the beginning - so get used to it. "

    Anonymous wrote on Aug 8, 2008 8:03 AM:

    " It's over and done with, old news. Move on and find another topic to give your opinions about. "

    Reverend STFU wrote on Aug 8, 2008 7:43 AM:

    " Mr Wright, I'm curious to know what city you work for, where you've worked, or how you're supposedly an expert in police procedure, because CB is actually quite accurate in his assessment.

    By state law, a dog that bites someone has to be impounded if vaccination cannot be proven. Reynolds approached the residence to obtain that paperwork, not to confront the dog. So your broken record about "he shouldn't have been there in the first place" is moot. Go find another tangent to go on...

    We don't like yer kind around here. "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 7, 2008 5:24 PM:

    " You said, "they both would have went in to contact the owner" Actually CB, that's not quite accurate.

    The officer could have simply closed the gate and, when animal control arrived turned the matter over to him and left.

    Animal control would have contacted the owner (freeing up Reynolds to attend to other police business), waited for the owner to arrive and secure the dog and write the ($50) citation for a leash law violation - leaving the jogger's first aid bill to the insurance company.

    Simple no brainer "

    Rev. CB wrote on Aug 7, 2008 2:58 PM:

    " Rev. Write- Apparently you are not aware that Animal Control is an extension of the Police Department.If Reynolds would have waited for the animal control officer, they both would have went in to contact the owner.The result would have been the same, the dog would have attacked and subsequently been shot.Find a new point.If you want to blame someone, blame the owner.You can not have a biting dog in the city, let alone let it run loose biting people. It is against the law! What is so hard to understand?Put your bible down and read the law. "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 7, 2008 10:57 AM:

    " Another comment from earlier needs to be addressed:

    "...the duties of a Rev. which is to be peaceful, compassionate"

    Wrong. The duties of a Rev. are to teach the Truth through God's Word and to speak truth to injustice.

    I will repeat, I am not impugning all LEO's, only those who don't know the difference between being assertive and being aggressive. "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 7, 2008 10:54 AM:

    " Some earlier comments to the Rev. require comment:

    "...the police are whats keeping someone from taking your rights away."

    What if the *someone* taking away your rights are the police? In this case, did the property owner have the "right" to face his accuser or the right to hear the charges before sentence was executed?

    Is it the right of the state to enter your property without cause and kill the family pet? Who's rights are being protected?

    Reynolds would not have faced the dog had he waited for Animal Control. "

    Rev. STFU wrote on Aug 7, 2008 10:47 AM:

    " Tony, I'm upset that YOU let your dog become aggressive.

    I'm upset that you left him unrestrained and let him bite a jogger.

    Furthermore, I am upset that you had the audacity to fire off a letter of self-righteous indignation stemming from an incident that YOU could have prevented by obeying the leash law and taking care of your animal.

    I hope the jogger sues you for his medical expenses. I hope Officer Reynolds sues you for libel and defamation of character.

    Wake up. Your attitude is what's wrong with this country today. "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 7, 2008 8:21 AM:

    " People please understand, there is a huge difference between *aggressive law enforcement* and *Officer of the Peace*.

    The law without compassion and good judgment yields tyranny and death. How many of you go to church? Look it up. That's exactly what the Bible teaches: in un-restrained law (with its accompanying enforcement) there is death.

    Death of many things, among which is respect, trust, and a community of harmony.

    Read what the Bible has to say about Law without mercy. Now, did Reynolds have to enter the yard in the first place? "

    Rev. Chuck fan wrote on Aug 7, 2008 6:41 AM:

    " I bet Chuck Norris would make a great reverend. "

    Rev. Tonk wrote on Aug 7, 2008 6:39 AM:

    " I think we should all start putting Rev. in front of our names. It makes a person look a lot more smarter. "

    Retarded Reverend wrote on Aug 7, 2008 6:37 AM:

    " Obviously there is no written test to become a reverend. "

    Rev. yeah right wrote on Aug 7, 2008 6:35 AM:

    " Your last comment can just as easily apply to the clergy. Even the pretend clergy. "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 6, 2008 11:35 PM:

    " Randy, there are some fine officers with SPD - but there are some that don't make the bar of professional.

    They are Peace Officers not "enforcers" and their attitudes towards the community they "protect and serve" should be one of respect. Such an attitude would in turn produce respect.

    Unfortunately it only takes the aggressive actions of a few bad apples to sour the entire image of a department. "

    randy wrote on Aug 6, 2008 10:24 PM:

    " Rev y do you hide behind ur screen name? because ur a coward? these officers wear their names on their uniforms. but you, u hide behind an alias. you sit back and have had weeks to comment on this officers actions. in the mean time he has helped our community not caring what u write about him. he has more than likely made ur life a little safer. "

    Ron wrote on Aug 6, 2008 8:13 PM:

    " To the dog-owner, what part of leash law do you not understand? If you value your pet as "part of the family", take precautions to see that it is restrained. Your pet is not a part of my, or Brad's, family. "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 6, 2008 1:45 PM:

    " Had this incident happened on 5th Avenue just north of Relation, would Reynolds have taken it upon himself to enter the yard knowing the situation was stabilized?

    I see there are those who want me silenced. That is good. Evil often wishes to silence the truth. I speak of earning someones respect and the responses are what they are. What sort of men write such hate? "

    Diamond wrote on Aug 6, 2008 9:27 AM:

    " Enough already. Stop arguing or I'll come back and bite you again. Grrrr. "

    The Truth wrote on Aug 6, 2008 8:29 AM:

    " SPD - under trained and proud of it! Looks like the "good ole boys" have to stand together again. "

    Shoot em all wrote on Aug 5, 2008 8:55 PM:

    " I just spent over $300 paying for my dog's healthcare.
    If my dog bites someone and then even acts like it is going to bite a police officer please shoot my dog. "

    Thanks wrote on Aug 5, 2008 2:40 PM:

    " My comments are funny, you better start posting them. "

    All The Good Cops wrote on Aug 5, 2008 2:39 PM:

    " Rev. Wright, I'm with you man. You don't hear anyone compaining about Walker Texas Ranger, or the "A" Team, or the boys on Chips. I never heard of Starski or Hutch shooting a dog either.

    Follow the Rev. the the real world. "

    Complaints wrote on Aug 5, 2008 2:20 PM:

    " Rev. Wright, Good observation on the lake of complaints on DPS, County, Thatcher PD and Pima PD. Unfortunately Safford is under the jurisdiction of Safford PD and not the others, so all of the other Agencies are irrelevant at this time. But thanks though, really. "

    Chuck Fan wrote on Aug 5, 2008 2:12 PM:

    " I think Rev. Wright could use a visit from Chuck Norris. "

    What the wrote on Aug 5, 2008 2:07 PM:

    " Rev. Wright---"don't hear those same LEO's griping about how hard done by they are either." What????? "

    Citizen of Safford wrote on Aug 5, 2008 11:25 AM:

    " It is easy to see which postings come from the police and which come the the citizens. This Courier blog is becoming a battle ground for; CITIZENS OF SAFFORD vs SAFFORD POLICE DEPARTMENT. "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 5, 2008 11:11 AM:

    " general observations,

    don't hear the citizens griping about the county mounties, or DPS, or the Thatcher and Pima police officers like they do about SPD.

    don't hear those same LEO's griping about how hard done by they are either.

    Professionalism is not about the exterior, its on the interior. "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 5, 2008 11:04 AM:

    " supporter, great argument and great way to convert believers to your cause. Attitude, its all in the attitude and you expressed it well. thanks. "

    supporter wrote on Aug 4, 2008 10:37 PM:

    " rev u need to shut your mouth. u do not understand what these officers go through on a daily basis to protect people like u "a victim" if you dont like our law enforcment theres several ways out of town. kick rocks "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 4, 2008 9:22 PM:

    " "... which consequently I don't trust anything you say."

    That's fine with me. But be careful when you trust anything they say.

    As for respect, don't know where you learned your ethics, but respect is something earned. And Officer Reynolds actions certainly didn't earn my respect.

    The *last* thing an officer should resort to is force when they don't need to. A policeman should be worthy of respect by his actions not his costume and toys. "

    To Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 4, 2008 6:44 PM:

    " I don't know where you get your world perspective from, but it's obviously not from living in Safford. This makes you an outsider.

    I don't appreciate your disrespect or your downgrading our hard working law enforcement officer which consequently I don't trust anything you say. "

    To Reality Check wrote on Aug 4, 2008 11:44 AM:

    " You state on your posting that, "the officer says the dog was not in sight and he knocked on the door", where do you get that information according to the police report, Officer Reynolds states, "The dog was against the house. As I was approching the front door... The dog stood up.." Officer Reynolds never got to the front door. The dog was shot about 20 feet from the front door, with the dog between the front door and Reynolds. Please respond to this! "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 4, 2008 10:25 AM:

    " I'm old enough to remember when police officers were looked up to as models of behavior. Children were taught that the police officer was your friend and you could trust them.

    How times have changed. To a cop today, you are either a snitch or a perp, and everyone is a suspect.

    And every time they cross the line, the story they tell is the same. Unfortunately the public rarely hears the other side of the story. "

    Reality Check wrote on Aug 4, 2008 10:16 AM:

    " To Tony Montoya,
    Did your dog bite someone outside of your yard? Then it is your fault you had an unrestrained animal that had obviously BIT someone.
    You say that the dog was lying quietly beside the house, the officer says the dog was not in sight and he knocked on your door with no answer when the dog approached him growling.
    But I guess I'll believe you, the person with a dog the bites people instead of the officer who shot a viscious dog that attacked him. "

    The real Bill wrote on Aug 4, 2008 10:01 AM:

    " I was there and saw everything. After bitting the jogger Diamond went and layed down and while licking the blood off himself officer Reynolds showed up. As he entered the yard to do his investigation Diamond ducked behind the car. I noticed some foam around his mouth like he just drank a cappachino and as Brad was tying his shoe Diamond attacked. The report was false because Diamond was like one foot away when he leaped not two Brad sidestepped drew down and blasted saving his life Good Job Brad. "

    To Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 4, 2008 12:09 AM:

    " You're WAY WRONG.

    I'm surprised you're a REV.

    Do you actually perform the duties of a Rev. which is to be peaceful, compassionate, etc.

    AS a Rev. DO YOU NOT PREACH RIGHTEOUSNESS, Judgment & Sin is wrong?

    If you answered "Yes" You're Judgment is also meted out on you & YOU ARE A Hypocrite.

    By the way, to answer your question, the Officers accomplished their purpose: closed investigation by stopping the threat of bodily harm from a very aggressive dog. "

    THought you should now wrote on Aug 3, 2008 11:19 PM:

    " Go to the Arizona Republic website to read about the safford mess. That reporter found the same things the courier has been reporting. Maybe the mayor should send his brother to pheonix to start the threats about bombing their cars. Hurry, Mayor Green, somebody else is having a hard time swallowing your crap. Its out of control "

    It is simple wrote on Aug 3, 2008 11:18 PM:

    " What was the first harmful event that set everything in motion? Oh, I remember the dog left it's yard. Then what happened? Oh, I remember it bit a jogger. Hmmm, that sort of set things in motion didn't it. That may be to much for some simple minds to understand so I'll put it this way. See Spot run. See Spot bite. You know the rest of the story. :) have a nice day... "

    Another Officer wrote on Aug 3, 2008 10:09 PM:

    " For those of you who think cops are not compassionate.I ask, have you ever had to comfort someone you dont know while they take their last breath, perform cpr on a dying child, tell someone their loved one is dead, pull someone out of a burning car, not to mention the 100's of times you risk your life for the sake of someone else?How could we do these things day after day without having compassion.Don't worry-while you spit in our faces we will still protect you! "

    To REV Wright wrote on Aug 3, 2008 9:58 PM:

    " In reference to your "law enforcement with out compassion is Tyrany" comment.You sir are out of line.In no way shape or form does this incident have anything to do with tyrany.You must have forgot that the police are whats keeping someone from taking your rights away.I am sure you sleep good and night under the blanket of protection given to you by these brave men and women.Preach for peace but dont do anything to provide it.All talk and no show. Using deadly force to save yourself is not uncompassionate.It is justified and proper. "

    To Officer Ryenolds wrote on Aug 3, 2008 7:23 AM:

    " You are a good officer and a great guy. Don't let people who have no idea what it takes to be an officer get to you. You have much more support in the community than you think. I want officers like you out there proteting my family and friends. "

    to officer cont wrote on Aug 2, 2008 10:56 AM:

    " I think that officer Reynolds took a minor situation that could have easily been dealt with without this out come and with POOR judgement on his part truned this into a violent and dangeroius situation. Officer need to be sharp and calm and thinking at all times and not allow these situation to get out of hand. It apears not to be the case here. And that is what people are upset and outraged about. This needs to be looked into and if Reynolds was in the wrong and made this worse then sheould be dealt with "

    to officer cont. wrote on Aug 2, 2008 10:53 AM:

    " the officer says it was lunging to attack. If what is said it true and it was two feet away I have to agree with posters who say it would he next impossible if it was charging for this officer to draw his weapon as he stated, before the dog reached him. Then you have the fact that this dogs wound was in the side. Seems not to match what is reported. As you say officers do alot of good, but there are those who are of the opinion they are above the laws. This maybe the case here. "

    To Officer wrote on Aug 2, 2008 10:49 AM:

    " I think many if us are thankful for the police. As in any profession ther are those who take ther position to extremes, I think this is the case here. From all I have read and heard ther was no reason for this to have escalated to the point this did. The dog bit the jogger yes, but as some have posted it was minor more likely a fear bit. The dog did not maul the jogger. It was at its front door laying down,when the officer entered the yard. Yes it barked and may have come "

    Now we are blaming the jogger wrote on Aug 2, 2008 9:06 AM:

    " I can't believe we now are even blaming the jogger for the initial bite.You people are idiots--The dog shouldn't have been out of the yard!
    Also, Kudos to the Officer postings. Unless you've been there don't judge. "

    jogger wrote on Aug 2, 2008 8:49 AM:

    " I only wish that the jogger carried a weapon and would have shot the dog before it bit him. Solved the problem right off. If your "peaceful companion" would have been secured like the LAW requires it would have never happened. Throw that man in the slammer and sew the pants off of him. "

    Officer wrote on Aug 2, 2008 4:10 AM:

    " Where were you when two of your local officers performed mouth to mouth on a young drowning victim and can still taste the orange soda at night? Where were you the numerous times your local officers have held a crash victim's head until they could extricated from a mangled vehicle? No thanks or glory is necessary but how about a little compassion for those officers who still come to work 24/7 with those haunting memories. "

    Officer wrote on Aug 2, 2008 4:06 AM:

    " I have deliberately stayed away from the blogs due to the nature of my work. I also know and realize as officers we are under public scrutiny no matter what duty we peform. I comes with the job we are paid for. I did feel it necessary to respond to Reverand Wrght's comments concerning "Law Enforcement without compassion is tyranny..." I have several questions for you Mr. Wright. Where were you when one of your local officer held a towel to young girl's neck after she pulled a fish tank over on her, slicing her neck from chin to ear? "

    To dog body language wrote on Aug 1, 2008 8:36 PM:

    " Exactly you nailed it. If a STRANGE dog is barking at you you DO NOT reach out to it, you do just as you said. As others have posted, IF and that is a BIG if this dog was actually vicious then I also agree with posters that this dog would not have just bit the jogger once. He would have most likely mauled the jogger. This dog instead ran to it yard. Probably a dog that unfortunately got out of its yard ( this happen) and was returning to his safe zone. "

    Afraid of Police not Dogs wrote on Aug 1, 2008 7:17 PM:

    " Dog owner is the one who needs to be held accountable for their pet. The bite injury was minor. Jogger has right to seek restitution from dog owner for the injury. Officer needed to confront the dog owner NOT the dog and cite him for violation of any pet containment laws. Instead officer chose to destroy dog owners property (the dog). Of course he is able to justify his action by penning the right words in his report. Conclusion: Minor incident escalated uncessarily by a loose cannon officer. Far more dangerous to a neighborhood than an aggressive dog. "

    ANON wrote on Aug 1, 2008 4:43 PM:

    " The only reason there is a big deal is because it involves a police officer. they go out to protect everyone and when he has to protect himself everyone goes insane. Reynolds is a very good person and officer. It is also obvious the owner did not care as much as he says. the gate was wide open and the dog was not tied up. He is lucky that the dog did not attack a young child. This is becoming way out of hand he had to use deadly force for his safety, if you cannot understand..your helpless and confused. "

    dog body language wrote on Aug 1, 2008 4:38 PM:

    " Moral of this story...if a dog barks at you, don't reach out to him. Divert your eyes and stand still until he decides you are no threat. Problem solved! "

    libertarian conservative wrote on Aug 1, 2008 3:41 PM:

    " Police officers lie, like all humans. Observation of the wound channel should make it obvious if the police officer shot a leaping dog or one that was lying down. If the evidence shows that the dog was lying down, the police officer should be disciplined, preferably dismissed: 1. too quick to use deadly force and 2. willing to lie about it. If the evidence shows that the dog was charging or leaping, then I'd support the officer in the use of force. But the case should definitely be investigated, not glossed over. "

    outspoken wrote on Aug 1, 2008 3:35 PM:

    " Itchy trigger finger needed exercise, only it came at a high price. Time for the black suited thugs to pay up and pay up big time. "

    Rev. Wright wrote on Aug 1, 2008 1:28 PM:

    " PEACE OFFICERS
    are Sworn to PROTECT AND SERVE.

    SPD seems to have a SWAT mentality and, thanks in part to their Chief, appears to have forgotten that they're not the law, they're not above the law, and that they are to protect and serve the community.

    How did entering a private yard and shooting someones dog - AND WALKING AWAY - accomplish what officers of the peace are sworn to do?

    Law enforcement without compassion is tyranny friends, remember that. It only gets worse. "

    Bambi you are right wrote on Aug 1, 2008 1:23 PM:

    " You are so right IF IN FACT this dog had been in attack mode, that jogger would have had MORE than a minor bite. He would most likely been mauled. I think the dog barked at a stranger, the jogger put out his hand and the dog nipped him. This was not a vicious attack buy the dog. It went BACK to the yard. If it were going to attack it would not have gone to the yard but most likely continued with the attack and the wounds more severe. "

    Guadalupe wrote on Aug 1, 2008 12:13 PM:

    " You should stick to chihuahuas. If they bite someone, it's on the ankle and they can easily be kicked back over the fence. "

    Jewer wrote on Aug 1, 2008 12:03 PM:

    " Wendy, can you explain, jew making no sense. "

    Duc wrote on Aug 1, 2008 11:30 AM:

    " Years ago people said they became cops to help people. Now they apparently become cops so they can shoot people's dogs. "

    Monday Quarterback wrote on Aug 1, 2008 11:28 AM:

    " Tony Montoya I have decided that you are mildly retarded as well. An officer is allowed to fire his weapon any time he feels that he is at risk of serious bodily injury or death. So yes, you should waste a lot of money on a personal investigation, just to find out that the Officer did not violate any rules or policies. "

    VOICE OF REASON wrote on Aug 1, 2008 11:18 AM:

    " Tony Montoya, your dog was obviously very unprofesional. What if he would have bit my wife, or mangled my daughter. You should just be happy the joger has not threatened to sue you. Like you needed a dog anyway. "

    Mans Best Friend wrote on Aug 1, 2008 11:10 AM:

    " Tim Mayhugh rise up and realize that you are sofa king we todded. "

    Silly Billy wrote on Aug 1, 2008 11:08 AM:

    " Bill, Bill, Bill, in some cases a judge has ordered that a pet owner have an animal put down for biting or attacking a HUMAN. So I would guess that the Officer did have a reason to enter the property. As far as shooting the dog, you nor I were there so we should not say what he should have done. We should all be glad that no PEOPLE were injured seriously. Besides Walt Disney taught us that "All Dogs Go to Heaven". "

    WMR wrote on Aug 1, 2008 11:05 AM:

    " You guys are so stupied. You sit hear make rude comments about our police force who protects us. Your lucky that next time you need the police they will come whether your an idiot or not. The dog attacked him, he defended himself. I'm glad the officer was uninjured. Maybe next time you guys need an officer we will send a viloent dog to your aide instead and see what happens. So shut up! We should back up our officers action, they protect and serve us. "

    CN wrote on Aug 1, 2008 11:01 AM:

    " I think Officer Reynolds should have challenged Diamond to a no weapons cage match. I wonder if you can put a dog in a Peruvian necktie.... "

    Legal eagle wrote on Aug 1, 2008 11:00 AM:

    " Mr. Montoya, you should be thanking Officer Reynolds for saving you from future lawsuits. You will be lucky if you escape this first one. "

    Monday Quarterback wrote on Aug 1, 2008 11:00 AM:

    " Tim Mayhugh I can't decide whether you stupid or just mildly retarded. If this would have been your dog, just what would you have done? And to his family? Wow, you are one tuff son of a gun. Besides everyone likes to bad mouth the cops until they're the ones that need help. "

    Wendy Weinbaum wrote on Aug 1, 2008 10:44 AM:

    " It appears this cop WAS trigger-happy. Nothing new there! Nevertheless, as a Jewess in the US, I want to remind everyone that America wasn't won with a registered gun! And, that criminals are stopped by FIREARMS, not by talk. That is why all REAL Americans put our 2nd Amendment FIRST! "

    Willy wrote on Aug 1, 2008 10:42 AM:

    " Dogs are silly. I like dogs. I had one named sparky. He was nice. "

    Timmy two wrote on Aug 1, 2008 10:40 AM:

    " The officer was responding to a call. He has the "right" to go wherever the investigation leads him. If a domestic animal is involved it is his "right" and his duty to make contact with the owner. He doesn't have to tiptoe around their feelings and try to call on the cell. The bottom line here is that if the Montoyas had secured their dog it would still be alive. If you want to point fingers start at the beginning. "

    Franky wrote on Aug 1, 2008 10:35 AM:

    " Is anyone surprised that the "victim" here has a hispanic last name. If these people would learn to follow the laws of the land, things like this could be avoided. "

    NQ wrote on Aug 1, 2008 10:32 AM:

    " I wonder what Chuck Norris would do. "

    Bill wrote on Aug 1, 2008 10:16 AM:

    " You people are disgusting. I am sure a lot of you will be singing a different tune when it happens to you. Defending the indefensible is now par for the course in dumbed down, public school Amerika. All of you are more than willing to defend the cops no matter what. The end result of this line of reasoning is a police state. There was NO reason to shoot the dog, did the cop have any reason to enter the property? NO! This mentally defective "cop" should be fired. "

    Tim Mayhugh wrote on Aug 1, 2008 9:40 AM:

    " You people are really stupid. The cop had no right to come onto the property and shoot the dog. I wish i lived in your area. I think "Officer" Reynolds would find himself and his family in a very unpleasant situation if this was my dog.
    Rise up people. The "thin blue line" are not here to protect you. "

    BambiB wrote on Jul 31, 2008 10:59 PM:

    " You people who write that the dog got what he deserved obviously know nothing about dogs.

    The bite the jogger got is the sort of bite dogs take when they think they're under attack, but don't intend injury. Note, the dog bit once, it was a very minor injury and it did not display any aggressive tendencies.

    Then the cop shows up and apparently does what he can to rile the dog so he can shoot it.

    I would have been predisposed to return fire. This bad cop doesn't belong on any police force. "

    wonderwoman wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:49 PM:

    " Get over it!!! Loose a spouse and then you will have reason to whine. Containing your animal would have prevented this.
    WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH "

    To JP wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:40 PM:

    " Your claim that the police department is turning into the new gestapo sounds like a personal problem of your own. Our police serve and protect and there will be mistakes made but they are human beings in sometimes high stress situations. We can use hind sight to criticize Officer Reynolds or we can realize that an irresponsible dog owner didn't take the steps needed to contain and protect his dog and that because of that someone going by his house was hurt. That is the cause of Mr. Montoya's loss. Officer Reynolds protected himself from an attack. "

    My two cents wrote on Jul 31, 2008 8:38 PM:

    " To: Slade,
    Go ahead and ignore the facts and make your silly exagerations about the Police. I think you would be saying something different of it you were in the jogger's shoes or even in the Police Officer's shoes. You should maybe think about it a little and then if you can still make your smug exagerations then there is something wrong with you. "

    WMR wrote on Jul 31, 2008 7:51 PM:

    " Well I am sure next time he will just ask the dog politley to stop attacking him so he can call for back up. Then we can all sit down and chat..... I'm sorry you all live in an imaginary world, but in the real world the dog attacked a citizen and an officer. The officer did what he had to do, he did the right thing. "

    Chong wrote on Jul 31, 2008 6:54 PM:

    " its to bad that after Diamond the angelic dog, attacked the jogger that when he ran back across the road to his yard he wast run over by a string of vehicles.That way the jogger could of pealed Diamond of the road, stuck him in an envelope and mailed the dog along with the law suit to the owner who obviously doesnt get it.The dog was in the wrong the owner was in the wrong. The jogger and the officer was in the right. Kudos to Safford Police Department. "

    Just asking wrote on Jul 31, 2008 4:47 PM:

    " Mr. Montoya, I am sorry you lost your dog, but your dog had already bit one person and lunged at the police officer. He had to shoot to protect himself and others .It could have very well been a member of your family that your dog attacked. Would you then feel the same way then? You say your dog wasnt mean , Then why did he attack twice in one morning? "

    Slade wrote on Jul 31, 2008 2:51 PM:

    " I did not know entering private property and executing a dog was the job of the police? Are people next? Usually there is a hearing before a dog is put down when it is deemed a threat. I'm surprised Officer Reynolds had the guts to shoot the dog without calling in the swat team for back-up. "

    WMR wrote on Jul 31, 2008 1:13 PM:

    " Are you guys kidding? A dog bit a person, I would of shot the dog myself. Officer Reynolds is a doing his job protecting the citizens of Safford, I'm sorry that Mr. Montoya isn't happy, but get over it. That is one person and think how many people Officer Reynolds may have prevented from being bitten. In my opinion it's the owner's fault, if you can't control your dog then I am sorry. Where was the owner when the owner when the dog bit the jogger? "

    Sorry wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:51 AM:

    " It is unfortunate that the dog was shot but what if the jogger hadnt been bitten and the cop wasnt called,

    but what if little Timmy from across the road threw his ball into the Montoya's yard and scurried in after it,

    WHAM!!! there's Diamound! and now there is a dead child and a dog that has to be put down.

    Wrong place wrong time maybe, but dogs dont just attack people for fun.... "

    Lily wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:11 AM:

    " Has any body ever wondered if officer Reynolds has a fear of dogs? maybe he's had a bad experience sometime in his life that no one knows. Does he own a dog? "

    Bill koehler wrote on Jul 31, 2008 6:20 AM:

    " Sounds like the guy just won the lottery. I wonder this idiot will cost the city of Stafford. Every cloud has a silver lining. "

    JP wrote on Jul 31, 2008 3:06 AM:

    " Officer Reynolds is lucky. If that was my dog, Reynolds would be next to go underground. Can't you people see that our police forces are slowly but surely turning into the new Gestapo? Wake up people! Andy Griffith is long gone. Your current police officers grew up on Grand Theft Auto video games and Terminator movies. They don't care aout you. "

    huh wrote on Jul 30, 2008 10:31 PM:

    " incidents of humans being shot by dogs? what are you talking about man? "

    Judgement wrote on Jul 30, 2008 9:33 PM:

    " I like how everyone can make judgement on the situatuion when they were not there to know what exactly happen. "

    BILL wrote on Jul 30, 2008 9:19 PM:

    " Everyone is saying that Diamond was only defending his domain like if Brad was the Russians invading mr. Montoyas house. Come on now, the dog bit once and liked it. Then someone also said the bite was ONLY MINOR on the jogger like its o.k. and Brad was trespassing. You are dumb "

    My two cents wrote on Jul 30, 2008 9:00 PM:

    " Mr. Tony Montoya's letter was full of emotion but left out several important facts. Bottom line is that his dog bit a jogger. It does not matter that the dog did not maul the jogger. Mr. Montoya should own up to the responsibility of his dog's actions. Set a good example to the youth who read these blogs and stop trying to point blame at the responding police officer. I wonder how many more joggers would have gotten nailed by this dog. Mr. Montoya had a responsibility to his dog and to passers by. "

    Dogs kill too wrote on Jul 30, 2008 1:28 PM:

    " Perhaps the owner was negligent in his duties as the dog's master as he never taught the dog not to attack someone with a gun if you don't want to get shot. With the incidence of humans being shot by dogs on the rise (see USA Today 10/30/2007) I would have shot the offending K9 as well. Good work Officer Reynolds. "

    Outsider looking in wrote on Jul 30, 2008 1:22 PM:

    " Im much more prone to believe the officer who was there than an over-emotional dog owner who neither was present during the event nor responsible enough to follow leash laws and keep his dog from biting an innocent citizen.

    Clearly the letter is full of inaccuracies - if the wife would truly had witnessed the entire event why didn't she inquire as to why an officer was in her yard with a man whose hand was bleeding? Pretty suspicious if you ask me... "

    Yes wrote on Jul 30, 2008 12:13 PM:

    " Is there a leash law in Safford? "

    also afraid of reynolds wrote on Jul 30, 2008 11:57 AM:

    " DJ sounds like a SPD defending one of their own who has no defense.

    Brad had no right to enter the yard. He simply escalated the level of violence.

    This isn't the first time Brad has chosen to shoot a dog in Safford. How many more will he shoot?? "

    DJ wrote on Jul 30, 2008 9:47 AM:

    " TO ALL of you who keep harping on the POLICE, THE POLICE DID RIGHT.

    TONY BROKE THE LAW & COMMITTED A CRIME BY NOT HAVING HIS DOG CONTAINED.

    THE DOG BIT AN INNOCENT VICTIM - TONY SHOULD BE CITED FOR HIS IRRESPONSIBLITY TOWARD HIS DOG - NO LEASH.

    THE DOG ATTACKED OFFICER REYNOLDS - HE HAD EVERY RIGHT TO BE IN THE YARD TO ATTEMPT TO SEE IF ANYONE WAS HOME.

    GREAT JOB BRAD & SAFFORD PD. "

    Need to know dog behaviour wrote on Jul 29, 2008 8:37 PM:

    " You all who keep harping that a dog should be tied or chained. Have you EVER read about dog care and behavior that chaining is NOT aceptable and only can make a dog prone to behaviour problems more violent. SO that would not be the answer. The Officer should hahve waited to hear from Animal control the Vet or the Owners as to if this was a problem with this dog. Dogs buy nature will bark and attempt to protect there people, property. Diamond was only trying to protect the family he loved. Just as they loved him.RIPDiamond "

    To All Knowing Orb wrote on Jul 29, 2008 7:24 PM:

    " A neighbor reported to Tony that three Officers were present when the dog was shot. When Officer Reynolds shot the dog two of the officers left imediately. The police report does not mention the other two Officers being present. I believe this is an important point that should be persuited and should be official addressed by the police. Without a Police Review Board where do you go with this information??I understand the witness is willing to come forward if necessary. Where?? Not the police who want this covered up. To whom?? Think about this. "

    David wrote on Jul 29, 2008 4:50 PM:

    " Maybe he should have called the family first. Why did he enter the yard? Did he absolutely HAVE to enter the yard? Was he placing himself in danger by entering the yard? Interesting story. "

    TO Safford Citizen wrote on Jul 29, 2008 3:44 PM:

    " If things occured as you state in the report, I also do not see how this could have gone down as the officer says.People need to wake up. If an officer with no real reason to be on the property can trespass and then shoot the owners dog who is just protecting property and owners. Police need to held accountable for there actions also, just as the citizens need to be. I hope they do not brush it under the rug "

    Long Memory wrote on Jul 29, 2008 1:00 PM:

    " Notice to SPD, if you want us to respect you then earn our respect. Most of you do and we are thankful, but in this case Officer Reynolds actions did not earn the community respect.

    The County Sheriff's don't have the reputation SPD has. Pima and Thatcher officers don't have the reputation Safford cops have. Why is that?

    Maybe SPD should be less gung-ho and more service minded.

    Reynolds mistake was deciding to enter the yard when he didn't have to. This set the chain of events in motion. Bad call Brad. "

    Safford Citizen wrote on Jul 29, 2008 12:47 PM:

    " Also it has not been established that Diamnond actually attacked Officer Reynolds. The police report states, "THE DOG STARTED TO RUN AT ME, THE DOG LIEAPED AT ME BARKING. iT WAS APPROX. 2 FT. AWAY FROM ME. I TOOK A SIDE STEP TO MY LEFT. I UNHOLSTERED MY DUTY POSTAL AND SHOT THE DOG." I believe it would be impossible for it to have occured in that manner. "Diamond would have had the Officer down before he could have shot him! Diamond was shot from the side not from the front. I question the police report! "

    Safford Citizen wrote on Jul 29, 2008 12:37 PM:

    " If "Diamond" the dog had attacked a burglar in the middle of the night for entering the property, as the Montoya's slept in bed, some of these postings would be much different and Diamond would be a hero. Diamond did not know the difference between a policeman and a burglar Diamond was doing what all dogs do, they protect their yards. Officer Reynolds is suppose to be a trained professional, once he entered the yard Diamond was as good as dead. Because Diamond was going to do what dogs do, protect there yards. "

    The All Knowing Orb wrote on Jul 29, 2008 11:21 AM:

    " Ultimately it was the pet owners who caused his demise. If you can't keep your front gate closed, perhaps you should't put your dog in the front yard where it can roam free throughout the neighborhood. Tony, why lie to people. You were not there, your wife did not see anything until after the dog was shot. How can you contradict what the officer reported when the only witnesses were the officer and the bite victim? I understand you are in mourning over your pet as I would be, but you have to face responsibility, not blame others. "

    RESPSONIBILITY wrote on Jul 29, 2008 9:57 AM:

    " This is a sad story. The dog a much loved pet had to be put down.

    THE OWNERS SHOULD'VE BEEN RESPONSIBLE & THEY ARE.

    THE DOG CAUSED THIS WHOLE THING, NOT THE OFFICER.

    THE DOG BIT ONE PERSON OUT OF IT'S YARD & WAS GOING TO DO IT AGAIN.

    UNFORTUNATE, IT NEEDED TO BE PUT DOWN.

    OFFICER REYNOLDS, NO DOUBTS HERE. YOU DID THE RIGHT THING. GOOD JOB SAFFORD PD.

    PET OWNERS, BE RESPONSIBLE. KEEP YOUR DOGS ON A LEASH, OR MAKE SURE THE YARD IS CLOSED. "

    Neighbor to the Dog wrote on Jul 29, 2008 9:57 AM:

    " I am shocked at the personal attacks to the Montoya's. Mr & Mrs Montoya are wonderful thoughtful loving people who have made me feel welcomed in the neighborhood. This is a bad situation, it shows bad judgement 3 ways, by the police, the gate being left open and the jogger.

    Calmer heads should have prevailed. The Police deptartment are trained to handle difficult situations, Does this incident shows lack in training?
    Respecting the law and officials is not the problem, but wondering why such a violent end to a dog is. "

    Jason wrote on Jul 29, 2008 6:35 AM:

    " What a load of bunk. Maydbe the officer should have called. Maybe he should have left it to some one else to do the job. THAT IS BUNK. Brad Good Job. SPD is doing a fine job. Officers dont go to work to get shot, bit, punched, spit on they go to do a job most folks WONT do. So Brad keep on going and doing your job. The majority of us support you and the PDs. In the valley. "

    in tongues wrote on Jul 28, 2008 11:32 PM:

    " Writ Hearsay Answer Trial. Allegation Nolo contendere. Appeal Statute Statement. The Officer Not Yorkshire. In Sequester. "

    Frustrated wrote on Jul 28, 2008 10:37 PM:

    " Once again a sitution gone wrong let's blame the SPD right? Wrong...First off the dog should have been tied up. 2nd the jogger bitten should have sued and 3rd the owner states his wife witnessed it all if thats the case why didn't she call the dog away or put the dog inside so that none of this would have happened I'm sorry for the loss of there pet but animals that are dangerous like this one need to be tied up. SPD Officers do a great job day in and day out. "

    Latisha S. wrote on Jul 28, 2008 8:28 PM:

    " don't know who the jerks are that keep saying that the Montoya family is attacking the rogue cop - their not.

    i agree, Brad-boy is a Bad-boy and i hope he transfers to south phoenix soon. "

    Do not see it wrote on Jul 28, 2008 7:42 PM:

    " I do not see that the Montoyas have been nasty to the officer nor the paper. They have state the FACTS as they know it. Same as the officer. Stating what he says is the FACTS. But come down to it I would bet my money the Montoya side is more close to the truth. Seems odd that if the dog was in the yard not a threat why did the officer see fit to go in the yard. This could have been solved alot less violently IMO. "

    Get Real wrote on Jul 28, 2008 5:05 PM:

    " To: people need to be kind, Yet it's OK for the Montoya family to be nasty to the officer and paper... Double standards don't you think.. Like when your kid is expelled from school you would blame the school instead of your kid for breaking rules. The perfect kid syndrome spills out to their nasty dog. "

    Michele wrote on Jul 28, 2008 4:28 PM:

    " The dog was in his yard - why not call the homeowner? Dogs are supposed to protect their territory - and the officer was in his territory. Try a Tazer next time - maybe it won't kill someones family member! "

    deadeye wrote on Jul 28, 2008 4:07 PM:

    " cross rhodes wrote on Jul 28, 2008 12:48 PM:

    "

    The facts are: animal control should have been waited for; Officer Reynolds should never have entered the yard; and, the bite was very minor. None of which warranted the level of violence Officer Reynolds escalated the matter to. "

    Cross roads

    If the dog came out of his yard and started to rip the cops throat out and then he shot it.....you would still blame the cop.....its just your nature. "

    People need to be kind wrote on Jul 28, 2008 4:03 PM:

    " Some of these posts are out of control. The Montoya family lost a beloved pet and family member to make light or cruel jokes is very much in bad taste and shows how unprofessional the paper is to allow some of these comments.To the Montoya family I feel for you and as much as I can I apologize to you for these rude people and there rude unthinking unkind remarks. "

    My opinion wrote on Jul 28, 2008 4:00 PM:

    " The jogger stated the dog came barking he put out his hand to show he was not a threat. I am thinking perhaps this was all a unfortunate accident. The guy was accidentally bitten. If that dog was really in attack mode out to hurt this guy would have been mauled. Not this case here. I think this gungho officer escalated the situation . As many have stated he should have waited on animal control. The jogger did not want medical attention. Obviously he was not that badly injured. I feel for the Montoya's and Diamond "

    sonny wrote on Jul 28, 2008 3:39 PM:

    " If you cared so much for your family pet that you loved so much, you would have made darn sure it couldn't escape your yard. And most people who do have a beware of dog sign posted usually do this because they know their animal can be vicious. I'd almost bet that wasn't the first time that dog has run loose, fortunatly it wasn't a small child that startled your friendly dog, they might have reached out to pet him also, and could have got bit in the face. I doubt they would have been "OK" "

    Diamond the Dead Dog wrote on Jul 28, 2008 3:23 PM:

    " Shame on you Tony. I was a violent dog and you didn't chain me up. Now all you can do is blame others. Time to take responsibility for getting me "murdered". "

    Dawn wrote on Jul 28, 2008 2:37 PM:

    " Mr Montoya,
    Your are lucky the bite was minor. 2 people were attacked in Tucson days apart requiring major operations, including a 7 year old bitten by the family dog! Where is your logic? Your dog bit someone outside of your yard and then went after Officer Reynolds. What would be your excuse if the person your dog attacked was a child or a delivery person coming to your door, who wasn't able to protect themselves? The dog bit once and intended on biting again. You should be thankful no one else was hurt in this situation. "

    Sympathetic wrote on Jul 28, 2008 2:25 PM:

    " My heart DOes go out to yoU for your loss. It is diffiCult Have to lose a furry friEnd, companion, family memeber, and protector no matter what the circumastances. "

    deadeye wrote on Jul 28, 2008 1:09 PM:

    " " Mr. Montoya what do you think the Animal control (Barney Fife) guy was going to do? There was no traffic to control or funeral going on. He probably would of put on his Safford Police jacket on with his lasso and flashlight and the dog would of looked at him and bit him and took his wallet. "


    Thats funny. "

    cross rhodes wrote on Jul 28, 2008 12:48 PM:

    " If the dog had a history of biting then the case would warrant being put down in a humane way. Diamond died of a 9mm gunshot wound made at less than 2 feet from his body, he then bled to death.

    The facts are: animal control should have been waited for; Officer Reynolds should never have entered the yard; and, the bite was very minor. None of which warranted the level of violence Officer Reynolds escalated the matter to. "

    To Bill wrote on Jul 28, 2008 12:41 PM:

    " Bill, your contempt of our Animal Control professional is disgusting. Maybe you should try his job for a week and lets hear your tune then. "

    think about it folks wrote on Jul 28, 2008 12:37 PM:

    " You said it Bill: "Brad had every right to go into the yard and defend himself from a second attack."

    I didn't know trespassing into someone's yard was necessary to defend yourself.

    Point made. If Brad had waited outside the yard a few minutes for Animal Control he wouldn't have had to "defend himself"

    Sounds like the dog tried to defend itself in its own yard from Brad's trespass. "

    dog bite info wrote on Jul 28, 2008 12:08 PM:

    " http://www.hsus.org/pets/pet_care/dog_care/stay_d

    See the Humane Society likn as to how this dog bite issue SHOULD have been handled animal control SHOULD
    have been called. And the owners contacted to verify rabies vaccination.This is how it is recommended these things be handled. Seems to me the officer was overly zealous in going in the yard. As I recall there was a beware of dog sign on the fence that should have been a clue not to enter, officer or not.I am in agreement with Mr Montoya and Aguilar, very poor judgment and actions on this officers part. "

    PimaTwo wrote on Jul 28, 2008 11:21 AM:

    " The reality of Dog Ownership is: If a dog bites a human, any human, then it is the owners responsibility to put the dog down. This duty will not change. Once a dog is agressive enough to bite a human it's only a matter of time until something worse(a child perhaps) will happened.
    Startled or not. The owners would have been responible to put the dog down themselves. Now they don't have to make the 1 way trip to the desert with the dog and the 357. Sorry to be so blunt. Everyone must be responsable dog owners. "

    Geez wrote on Jul 28, 2008 10:31 AM:

    " Hasnt this been beaten to death (no pun intended) in the article. Move on with your lives people. Buy a new dog.......Reload your gun........ but leave it alone already. Everyone has heard about it, everyone has stated their opinion several times on here. honestly a lot of people would rather hear real news rather than whining. "

    totally annoyed wrote on Jul 28, 2008 8:46 AM:

    " wow. I am shocked at the amount of heartless people in our community. Can the owner of his pet express his feelings about this situation without being slammed? People: What if Officer Reynolds had been an intruder and Mrs. Montoya was alone? Is is different then? How is a dog to distinguish the difference? All he knows is to protect against strangers. Personally, I'd be glad to have an animal that could protect me. I understand that the pet was out of the yard when he bit a jogger. Was it necessary for Reynolds to SHOOT him?NO!have a heart folks. "

    bwana wrote on Jul 28, 2008 5:49 AM:

    " It's all your fault Mr. Montoya. If you had kept your dog inside your fence, none of this would happen! Why don't you accept responsibility for that chain of events instead of trying to blame everyone else involved? "

    Leo Aguilar wrote on Jul 28, 2008 4:16 AM:

    " Hey fellow officer, be careful about having Brad "watch your six". It sounds to me that he has poor descretionary skills, has poor officer safey skills, poor search and seizure skills, poor investigative skills, does not know how to use agencies available to him and to put it mildly, he acted like a rookie cop with no street experience. Remember, he should have realized that the crime was a dog bite. Its obivious that he never paid attention to his back drop, a residence. There was no need to effect an immediate arrest, the suspect was going nowhere. "

    Leo Aguilar wrote on Jul 28, 2008 4:01 AM:

    " The police know who the owners of the dog is and know they are not going to flee. Time was on the officers side, step back, and block pedestrian traffic from passing by. Call animal control and have them use their training in capturing the dog. Once the threat is gone, make contact with the owners. The officer is very lucky that no person was hit by gunfire. Officer, imagine expaining those actions in a Coronors Inquest. I truely believe if the officer had used common sense and not pushed the issue, none of this would have happened. "

    Leo Aguilar wrote on Jul 28, 2008 3:46 AM:

    " I've read alot of comments and also the editor who says the dog was out of yard and the dog leaped at the officer, according to the police report. When an officer responds to a emergency call, he must render aide, slow the action, contain the situation and the suspect. In this case, medical did arrive to treat the victim, he did not slow the action by going into the yard; the situation was contained by a fenced in yard; and the suspect was a dog. He was not going to flee, nor was the owner. "

    Bill wrote on Jul 27, 2008 11:20 PM:

    " Mr. Montoya what do you think the Animal control (Barney Fife) guy was going to do? There was no traffic to control or funeral going on. He probably would of put on his Safford Police jacket on with his lasso and flashlight and the dog would of looked at him and bit him and took his wallet. "

    Bill wrote on Jul 27, 2008 11:14 PM:

    " Come on now the dog bit one innocent person and would of bit Brad if he didn't shoot him. All this is a sad story but using an excuse that the dog was startled is why the dog bit the runner is pathedic. The dog should have never been able to get outside the yard. Brad had every right to go into the yard and defend himself from a second attack. "

    think about it folks wrote on Jul 27, 2008 10:24 PM:

    " Why did Brad go right to his gun first? He is trained in use of his taser or his OC spray.

    Why did Brad enter the yard in the first place? Why force an issue. Why not simply wait the few minutes for Animal Control to arrive and for the owner to secure the animal?

    Brad's poor judgment escalated a stable situation into a use of lethal force.

    too much gung-ho and not enough seasoned judgment. "

    Arizonan wrote on Jul 27, 2008 7:52 PM:

    " Liz, If I were the Jogger, I would have called the police just the same. As a police officer, how is he to know the phone number Home or Cell numbers to reach people. NOT EVERYONE HAS A LAND LINE with the Advent of CELL PHONES. I would've attempted to watch my back & knock on the front door to reach someone. The OWNER IS LIABLE for any ATTACK made by their pets NO MATTER THE CIRCUMSTANCE.

    GOOD JOB OFFICER REYNOLDS!!:-) "

    fellow officer wrote on Jul 27, 2008 7:46 PM:

    " Brad is an outstanding officer, he can get my 6 any time. I'd do the same for him. "

    Liz wrote on Jul 27, 2008 7:33 PM:

    " Mr Montoya my heart goes out to you. I also love my pets dearly and can feel for you. God Bless Diamond and your family.And know that there are many who feel your pain and totally understand.Sadly this whole thing could have been avoided by a simple call to your home asking someone to come out and take the dog inside so they could speak to the owners and verify that it had had its rabioes vaccination. "

    Maria wrote on Jul 27, 2008 5:04 PM:

    " Mr. Montoya,
    I believe the jogger has the better case than any others involved here, and it's a case against you, as the dog owner. I wonder if the jogger will sue you. The jogger is the victim.

    And, yes, I would want this officer responding to a call at my residence. "

WRITE A COMMENT

READER COMMENTS
* Be respectful of others, the writer and the subjects in the story.

* Be relevant. Keep your comments pertinent to the story that is being discussed.

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All reader comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The Eastern Arizona Courier is not liable for messages from third parties. IP addresses can be subpoenaed and your identity established by individuals who have been hurt by your comments.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity: You can be prosecuted for identity theft.
* Comments unrelated to the story.

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in www.eacourier.com reader comments represent the individual's own views and not those of the Eastern Arizona Courier. The Courier does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than Eastern Arizona Courier spokespersons.

Thank you for your comments!

(optional)
Current Word Count:
   

Popular Searches

More Enhanced Listings >>

Classifieds

  • View All Ads
  •  
  • Place a classified ad online!
  •  
  •  
  • Call: (928) 428-2560
  •  
  • Fax: (928) 428-4901
  •  
  • Write: 301 East Highway 70, Suite A, Safford, Arizona 85546

Jobs

View All Jobs

Homes

View All Homes

Autos

View All Autos

Copper Era
1 Wards Canyon
Clifton, AZ 85533
928-865-3162