Don Hesseltine didn't get to finish his prepared speech at Davenport City Council Aug. 28. The council chambers were cleared to cool the commotion that occurred when Hesseltine was halted.
There's a three-minute speaking limit for members of the public. It's not clear whether Hesseltine knew that. What is clear is that Hesseltine's dog, Myst, was killed a week earlier by a Davenport Police officer. At the meeting, Hesseltine was upset and was asking the council for accountability for the officer, who he believed murdered his dog. Other people spoke that night, many agreeing with Hesseltine that the dog did not need to be shot. Some people who spoke backed the officer.
Earlier that day the city of Davenport released the results of its investigation, finding the officer's actions were justified. The city release said the officer “expressed his sincere fear that he would be seriously injured, and we believe the officer's body worn camera supports his statements.” The release offered condolences to the family.
People are also reading…
Davenport Police Department issued a separate statement saying the shooting was lawful.
Body cam footage showed the dog baring his teeth and barking at the officer, who was backing up and then shot the dog twice. Two kids, Hesseltine's son and his son's cousin, witnessed the shooting, along with Brandy Russell, his son's mother. They watched their dog die in their backyard.
The officer had been called because a neighbor reported four dogs at large and being aggressive. That's what led the officer to the alley where he saw the two boys and Myst unrestrained in the alley.
Davenport's municipal code requires dogs be leashed or restrained unless fenced in on private property. He told the boys to leash their dog. As the dog returned to the house, the officer began walking toward Russell to explain why he'd spoken with boys. That's when Myst ran toward the officer.
There are at least four different videos that show the shooting, including the body camera. Social media was abuzz within hours with posts showing the video of the officer shooting the dog. An ember quickly became a fire.
The city released a statement the day after the shooting saying the police were investigating the incident. The statement began with: “The Davenport Police Department is aware of a public video showing an incident involving an officer discharging his firearm in an encounter with a dog, as family members are present.”
The statement sounds like a response to the video circulating, rather than the officer shooting the dog.
Hesseltine said that by the afternoon of the next day he still hadn't heard from the city or police. An apology and an explanation of what was happening with the investigation, how to file a complaint and the rules for speaking to the council might have helped de-escalate the situation. The condolences a week later didn't really hit the spot.
One thing not made clear at the conclusion of the city's investigation was whether a non-fatal option exists for officers who come upon aggressive dogs and why that wasn't chosen. Would pepper spray be an option or a Taser? What is the protocol for dealing with dogs. That's a question that could still use an answer.
People have interpreted the videos, using their experiences and judgment to decide whether the officer was justified in using deadly force. But they couldn't know what it was like to stand in that officer's shoes that day. We can try to imagine, but we don't know. It's important to remember that.
On the flipside we can't know what Hesseltine, Brandy and the boys felt in the shooting's aftermath. Having lost pets, we likely have a better understanding of Hesseltine's emotions and why he would say the officer murdered his dog. And we may understand why people threatened and harassed the officer on social media, but we know that behavior only causes hurt and is extremely inappropriate. We can do better.
Our world is brighter when we start by believing the best in people. The worst may still come out, but we choose to believe the officer did not want to kill Myst. Unfortunately, the same officer ran over an unleashed dog in an alley a month prior to the shooting. While that was clearly an accident, and appears to be a horrible coincidence, the officer appeared callous, saying over the radio he'd “smoked” a dog. The officer could do better.
In hindsight, we wish both dogs were leashed. If they were, they'd both be alive. The video shows Myst being aggressive toward the officer. The officer could have been anyone.
About the incident with the squad car, we wish the officer had responded with empathy after running over the dog (he did apologize after the initial reaction).
Finally, we wish the officer had chosen a less deadly option when Myst became aggressive toward him.
In both incidents the dog owners say they were not contacted by police or the city in the day following their dogs being killed. A kind word would have worked better than an absence of communication.
