Oxnard Hits Back Against Legal Attacks on K-9 Unit

When two figures fled the scene of a burglary in the wee hours of one morning last month, Oxnard police officers yelled a warning and then let loose a dog from the department’s K-9 Unit.

One of the suspects froze in his tracks and surrendered without a struggle. The other did not. The dog, a highly trained malinois, sped past the first suspect and tackled the second one, who whipped out a knife and stabbed the animal five times before being apprehended, police say.

Two weeks later, the hearty dog’s wounds were healed and it was back at work, tracking thieves, protecting officers and, some say, deterring crime with its mere presence.

The Oxnard Police Department cites the case as evidence for the effectiveness of its 7-year-old K-9 Unit, which is five dogs strong.

Officer Escaped Harm

“That stabbing could have happened to one of the officers,” explains Assistant Police Chief William Cady.

But not all cases involving canine units end as neatly. A series of recent lawsuits against the city raises questions about the practice of using what one kennel official acknowledges is “basically an animal of prey” in law enforcement.

Four lawsuits filed over the past two years in Ventura County Superior Court accuse the department of misconduct in tracking or apprehending suspected criminals with dogs. They ask for up to $750,000 in damages for dog bites inflicted by members of the city’s K-9 Unit. A fifth suit, which was settled in 1986 for $12,000, involved an attack by an off-duty police dog.

Now the Oxnard officials are fighting back. They are pressing for a bill, which has been introduced by Assemblyman Jack O’Connell (D-Carpinteria), that would limit a city’s liability in instances when police dogs inflict injury in the line of duty.

Council Supports Bill

In a unanimous motion Tuesday, the City Council voted to urge Oxnard’s lobbyist to support AB 2973, an amendment to the state’s current dog-bite statute.

“The problem is that a fleeing suspect is doing wrong or they wouldn’t be getting bit in the first place, and it’s high time that people realize that,” said council member Ann Johs, a longtime supporter of the city’s K-9 Unit.

The unit is funded solely through contributions, most of which are raised at an annual Chamber of Commerce dance.

Introduced at the request of Oxnard Deputy City Atty. Charles Wessler, the bill would require the victim of an attack by a police dog to demonstrate negligence on the part of the dog’s handler before receiving compensation for damages.

The test for negligence in these cases would be the same as with such “instruments of justice” as batons and guns--reasonable force, Wessler said.

Loophole in the Law

The bill’s supporters, which include the Riverside kennel where Oxnard has bought its dogs in the past, say AB 2973 merely closes a loophole in existing law, which holds the owner of any dog--whether it’s a pet or the member of a police canine unit--automatically liable for any damages inflicted by the animal.

They hope the proposed legislation would make it more difficult to collect damage awards, which can prove a financial burden to the cities and counties that manage the law enforcement agencies. To even file a response in any suit against a police force costs the public between $1,000 and $2,000 per case, says Alva Cooper, the legislative advocate for the California Peace Officers Organization.

“This is going to eliminate frivolous lawsuits which cost the taxpayers money,” said O’Connell.

But opponents say the bill would do more than eliminate frivolous lawsuits. They say that it would unjustly complicate the process of obtaining restitution in legitimate cases of police brutality involving dogs.

The opponents, who include the Channel Island Legal Services Assn., complain that it would unfairly shift the burden of proof in cases that already are difficult to try.

“I think it’s wrong in any situation to put the burden on the victim,” said Channel Counties Executive Director Carmen Ramirez.

And instead of pointing to a need for legislative reform, the abundance of suits against Oxnard’s canine unit points to a problem within the city’s Police Department, said the bill’s detractors.

Dogs ‘Out of Control’

“I think the dogs are out of control,” said Lawrence Schulner who is representing clients in two of Oxnard’s five suits. “They come down heavy as hell.”

Schulner points to a suit he has filed on behalf of Alfonso Simon Valdez. Police pulled over Valdez after he ran a red light at an Oxnard Boulevard intersection two years ago and attempted to take him into custody for what appeared to be drug intoxication.

Schulner maintains that his client was submitting “peacefully and calmly” to a frisking when a police dog charged at him from the police car that the officers had been driving. Valdez stuffered numerous, unwarranted dog bites, Schulner said.

“The officers just didn’t care enough to contain the animal.”

The attorney said the proposed law would make it more difficult for his client to sue. Proving that the police were negligent, he said, would be no easy matter because his client, while not charged with a crime in this instance, had served prison time on drug charges.

‘A Slam-Dunk’ Case

“If you’re a jury, who are you going to believe,” he asked, “a Chicano with a record or one of Oxnard’s finest?”

But under current law, the Valdez case is “a slam-dunk,” he said.

Oxnard officials also put stock in the Valdez case, but for another reason. Wessler said it demonstrates how the truth can be twisted in the pursuit of a damage award. Oxnard police maintain that Valdez provoked the attack by raising a clenched fist near the head of an officer. The dog, they maintain, was doing only what it was trained to do--protecting its handler.

“It isn’t like we sic the dog on a suspect as a first resort,” Cady explained. “We use the dog if it’s the choice between that and an officer getting hurt.”

Handlers initially train for four weeks with their dogs and then complete a weeklong refresher course every other year, he said. In addition, they have to master between 15 and 20 words in either Dutch or German because Adlerhorst International, the kennel that supplies Oxnard and other police agencies, buys its German shepherds from trainers in Germany and its malinois from trainers in Holland.

Public Relations Value

Police maintain the dogs are worth the effort because of their public relations value--the city gives more than 80 demonstrations annually to schools and clubs--and their ability to fight crime.

“There are times,” said Randy Coates, the department’s canine coordinator, “when just the presence of the dog has caused a person to surrender and prevented what would have been an assault on a police officer.”

Still that record is little consolation for Nancy Kay Partin, a pregnant mother who was staying with her boyfriend one October night four years ago when Ventura police raided his trailer.

A police dog attacked Partin’s 17-month-old daughter, Taryn, and caused the mother, who was three weeks pregnant, to miscarry, a lawsuit filed by Partin alleged. Police officials said that the couple had been growing marijuana, but no charges were ever filed, said Ventura City Atty. Donald Greenberg.

$5,000 Settlement

The Partins asked for $250,000 in damages but ended up receiving a $5,000 settlement, which is slightly higher than the city usually awards for nuisance cases, Greenberg said.

The case was the only one that Greenberg has seen in his years as the city’s attorney. But Wallace D. Dingman, the attorney for Adlerhorst, said he knew of at least 10 California cities where police dog-bite cases are pending, including San Diego, Montebello and Santa Ana.

However, officials in other Ventura County cities and in the county’s risk management division, which handles cases against the Sheriff’s Department, downplayed the need for the legislation.

The Sheriff’s Department, which polices not only the county’s unincorporated areas but also the cities of Camarillo, Ojai, Thousand Oaks and Fillmore, has only one case pending, said Robi Klein, director of the county’s Risk Management Unit, which purchases insurance and hires attorneys to represent the county in litigation.

Not Seen as Problem

And in the last year, Simi Valley City Atty. John Torrance has handled only one “very minor” claim involving a police dog bite. “It has not been a problem in this city,” he said.

An official with the League of California Cities, a lobbying group and informational clearinghouse for the state’s 448 cities, said that the problem of legal exposure from police dogs “doesn’t ring any bells with me.”

“I’m not aware of it being a problem,” explained league staff attorney Paul Valle-Riestra, “But that doesn’t mean that it’s not a problem.”

As for the discrepancy between the number of dog-bite cases in Oxnard and in other Ventura County cities, local law enforcement officials blame the city’s criminal activity.

“We have the highest crime rate in the county, and we have the most active police department,” said Randy Coates, Oxnard’s chief dog handler.

Questions Remain

But questions remain about the effectiveness of the proposed legislation.

If it were enacted, government agencies could still be the victims of unnecessary suits, according to Dingman, the kennel’s attorney. Without statewide standards for police-dog training, police departments cannot point to steps they have taken to prevent negligence on the part of handlers.

“You have no basis to show how the public has been protected from the use of improper force,” he said.

The bill would not even protect government agencies from all frivolous dog-related suits, said Klein, the county’s risk manager.

He pointed to an instance last December when one of the Sheriff Department’s dogs bit a burglar, who tracked blood through the Ojai house he was looting. Although the burglar did not file a claim for damages, the owner of the home did. The county ended up turning over $112 in carpet-cleaning fees.

“We just wanted to get rid of the claim,” Klein explained. “We probably still would pay it. There’s the nuisance value.”