Comments on: “Woman arrested after trying to reunite dog with owner”

By: biggM

biggM — Thu, 28 Jun 2012 02:07:30 +0000

Actually the dog owners did not comment so all the details were not told. Therefore as I see it, there are 2 sides to every story and should both be heard before passing judgement. I personally know the “rest of the story” and it was indeed justified as to why the deputy had the same rights as everyone else to use the law to obtain his dog back. When all details are released, I do believe people may change their thinking of how “good” this good samaritan really is.

By: NMissC (Tom Freeland)

NMissC (Tom Freeland) — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 20:46:09 +0000

Actually, Robert, it is more complicated yet. According to reports I’ve heard (I am in the same town), the dog owner is a deputy sheriff. He had posted himself on Facebook that the dog was missing. When the woman called him to attempt to return it, he went off on her, and she said she was going to leave it at a Vets. He then swore out a complaint at the office where he worked.

This one will, I think, get calmed down, but the charges should not have been brought.

By: wfjag

wfjag — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 18:47:08 +0000

@Jamie R: “The real surprise is that the cops didn’t shoot the dog when they arrested Mitchell.”

Shoot a hound, named Elvis, in Mississippi?
Damn Yankee!

By: leafs004

leafs004 — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 18:28:31 +0000

There’s an interesting comment in the comments section which could add an extra wrinkle if it is true, is that allegedly, the the dog’s owner is a police officer.

By: Robert

Robert — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:10:30 +0000

This is a little complicated. The people with the lost dog called the police and claimed this woman “stole” it, and the woman did have possession of the dog. At some point, it’s not for the Police to sort things out.

But surely the Police could have given one of those “appearance tickets,” or some other tool short of an arrest and taking into custody.

By: Jamie R

Jamie R — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 16:30:06 +0000

The real surprise is that the cops didn’t shoot the dog when they arrested Mitchell.

By: Mannie

Mannie — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:37:10 +0000

In this case, it seems to have nothing to do with competition with government. She had an argument with the owner, who maliciously pressed charges. I don’t know if a counter charge of malicious prosecution would stand.

By: DYSPEPSIA GENERATION » Blog Archive » “Woman arrested after trying to reunite dog with owner”

Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:28:59 +0000

[…] Read it. […]

By: mojo

mojo — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:24:44 +0000

Dog-snatching, a felony?

So much for the “serious crimes” label.

By: Robert Hewes

Robert Hewes — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 13:22:52 +0000

In other words, Stephanie Mitchell was competing with government services — can’t have the dog catcher unemployed, right?