The Florida Event:
In Florida, a 31-year-old man resided at a home owned by his mother. Despite his mother’s protest, for several days the man charitably took care of his ex-girlfriend’s Pit Bull.
As you read on, you will agree the mother was more prescient than her forlorn, temperamental, and disobedient son. When the ex-girlfriend arrived to pick up the dog, the rationale for why she was an “ex” soon became apparent.
While eating dinner at the kitchen table, an argument ensued. During the increasingly heated verbal quarrel, the Pit Bull impulsively disregarded the man’s caretaking largesse. Resultantly, the Pit Bull defended his female owner by nipping the man on the leg.
The man responded with fear (if you believe his claim) or rage (if you believe the girlfriend’s claim), whereby to protect himself and his young son he progressed to his bedroom. Once inside the bedroom, to further enhance safety he closed the door.
Readers may ponder that a closed bedroom door should be sufficient to protect he and his son from the dog. Moreover, a departure to the bedroom should interrupt the squabble. That would be a logical conclusion. However, the man said he was concerned his son may open the bedroom door and suffer an attack from the dog.
Therefore, he did what any loving, concerned father would do (note sarcasm). He exited his bedroom with a loaded AK-47 semiautomatic rifle. One may surmise he could have more effectively protected himself and his child by simply keeping the bedroom door closed. Yet, the man was not going to allow his ex’s dog to make him a prisoner in his own house (technically, his mother’s home, but perhaps one day he will inherit title).
The ex-girlfriend observed the paternally concerned (enraged?) man storm out of the room like he was hunting gators in the Florida Everglades. Thinking rationally, she sapiently became distressed regarding her impending welfare, not to mention the longevity of her dog. Thus, she locked herself and the dog inside a guest room.
As readers are likely aware, dogs are well known to shape-shift like the “Red Lady” from Game of Thrones. While shifting, they may become vaporous, transport themselves underneath a door, and then re-solidify on the other side (note sarcasm).
Therefore, the man acted as would any logical, valiant person trying to protect a 3-year-old child. He heroically shot through the guest bedroom door in an attempt to save the world (or at least he and his son) from the vicious animal he boarded without incident during the prior 2 days.
Furthermore, since the man had x-ray vision, he believed he could accurately aim through the door. Resultantly, he would injure or kill only the dog, while leaving his ex-girlfriend unscathed.
Except, he didn’t really have x-ray vision. And he certainly didn’t have good aim. Consequently, he permanently maimed the ex-girlfriend, while only grazing the dog.
Uh oh! Maybe using the rifle wasn’t a wise plan.
The Tallahassee, Florida Police Arrive:
Neighbors called 9-1-1 once hearing the military rifle shots. With their red lights flashing in the hot Florida night, law enforcement rapidly arrived upon the scene.
Despite the man’s solicitations for sympathy and understanding, Tallahassee, Florida police detectives didn’t find his plan cerebral or valorous. Moreover, they failed to empathize with his communicated predicament.
A vicious dog may have supported the man’s position. However, the Pit Bull dog behaved amicably with the cops, EMTs, and an animal control officer. Therefore, the man’s argument lost credibility.
It didn’t take long for law enforcement to formulate an opinion. Once viewing his exsanguinating, disfigured girlfriend, who would never regain full use of one arm, the police didn’t require extensive strategizing or scrutiny before arresting the man for aggravated battery with a deadly weapon.
Florida Criminal Defense Obstacles:
The man acquired a creative defense attorney, which doesn’t often happen on an appointed, indigent case. Nevertheless, despite his creativity, the defense counsel faced several formidable roadblocks.
First, the ex-girlfriend’s story was very different from the man’s description of the event. In her version, the event started when eating dinner. During dinner, the man imbibed excessively. He then started a kerfuffle about personal issues. As the disagreement evolved, the man became increasingly irate. He then threatened to get a gun. To enhance her safety, the ex-girlfriend locked herself and her dog inside the guest bedroom. She hoped temporary absence would make his heart grow fonder- or at least provide the man time to reach a calmer emotional state.
Unfortunately (according to the woman’s version) isolating to the guest bedroom did not work as she hoped. Since nothing beats louder than the heart of a man who feels scorned, her escape further agitated his dudgeon.
To appease his umbrage and teach the disobedient woman that a man is always king of the castle, even when the castle is legally owned by his mother, the man attempted to pry the guest bedroom door off its hinges with a screwdriver and butter knife. Once realizing his attempt to use rudimentary tools would not achieve objectives, he employed more modern weaponry. Unfortunately for the woman, a wood door is insufficient to stop a speeding bullet shot from close range by a powerful AK-47 assault rifle.
- In his description, the man admitted to using a butter knife and screwdriver. However, he stated he engaged the implements to safely extricate his injured ex-girlfriend from the room after employing the rifle. Moreover, his version emphasized his passion and love for the woman. Additionally, his version highlighted his courageousness, since he was simultaneously releasing the vicious dog.
Second, the woman and dog were behind a door at the time he pulled the trigger. Therefore, the dog did not present an imminent threat warranting the use of a high-powered firearm.
Third, all the professionals present after the 9-1-1 call (detective, patrol officer, EMTs, animal control officer) stated this was a friendly Pit Bull. Accordingly, they did not believe the man was inappropriately threatened or bitten by the dog. Therefore, they remained incredulous that the man was defending the safety of he or his child.
The CPT Expert:
To surmount these obstacles, the Defense attorney wished to validate the man’s claim that his actions were legitimate and were intended solely to defend he and his child from the ferocious dog. Consequently, he had the judge approve an appointment for a CPT expert.
CPT expert Mark Spivak reviewed the physical evidence and all witness statements. The expert then authored a written report.
In the report, the expert opined that it is highly probable the dog was friendly to the Defendant while he conducted caretaking duties, but defensively aggressive while the Defendant argued with the dog’s owner. The report included footnotes to peer-reviewed scientific studies corroborating the plausibility.
To balance the scientific explanation, the report also included a germane analogy, where a homeowner is typically friendly when interacting with a neighbor, but exhibits defensive aggressive behavior if/when the neighbor threatens the man’s wife. Loyalty toward an intimate party combined with the perceived presence of a threat of harm to the party may catalyze defensive aggressive behavior. This phenomena is true regardless of whether the relevant species is a dog or a human. That is why in the statutory code of many states dogs are exempt from classification as vicious, dangerous, or potentially dangerous if a bite originates in defense of an owner. To further validate the man’s story, there was a photograph documenting what most probably was a minor dog bite injury upon the man’s leg.
The CPT expert also opined that in such a situation, if the event persisted the Defendant had reason to be fearful of more severe injury from the large Pit Bull dog. To further rationalize a fearful emotional state, the man knew of a prior incident when in a similar context the dog inflicted wounds upon a former boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend. The former boyfriend required emergency room treatment.
Nevertheless, CPT experts are advocates for the truth, rather than unprincipled, biased advocates for a client. Consequently, the CPT expert would not extend support to validating a rationale for opening a closed master bedroom door to shoot the dog with an assault rifle. Neither would the CPT expert provide rationale for shooting blindly through a closed guest bedroom door with an assault rifle.
The Outcome:
The attorney asked the CPT expert to testify in Tallahassee, Florida, to which the CPT expert agreed. However, 2 weeks before the scheduled trial, the man accepted a plea deal for 10 years of incarceration.