NOPD officer acted unreasonable in fatal puppy shooting says jury
A jury found that a New Orleans Police Department officer acted in an “unreasonable manner” when he shot and killed a 18-week-old puppy while responding to a noise complaint call in 2021. Although the court ruled that Officer Derrick Burmaster violated the dog owners’ constitutional rights, he will not face punishment due to a legal defense known as “qualified immunity.”
Incident details from court documents
According to the initial complaint filed in 2022, Burmaster and his partner responded to a noise complaint at the home of Derek Brown and his wife, Julia Barecki-Brown, on April 10, 2021.
When the officers arrived, the Browns allowed their two dogs out of the house and into the yard. The dogs ran toward the officers, prompting Burmaster’s partner to retreat. Burmaster then pulled out his gun and shot a 22-pound, 18-week-old Catahoula puppy named Apollo, who “had not yet developed the ability to bark,” according to court documents.
The Browns rushed outside to find their puppy, Apollo, “bleeding on the ground” and held him until he died. The couple was later diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder as a result, their attorney, William Most, told The Associated Press.
Officer defends his actions
Burmaster defended his actions, saying he feared the dog and thought it was going to attack his genitals. Burmaster’s defense attorney argued that the officer “acted in accordance with his training” and that his actions were “reasonable under the circumstances he faced,” the AP reported.
However, the NOPD Use of Force Review Board then reviewed the shooting and found it was not justified. The board also concluded Burmaster failed to take appropriate steps to de-escalate the situation, according to court records.
A divisive legal doctrine
Qualified immunity is a legal doctrine that protects police officers and other government officials from being held personally liable in civil lawsuits for violating someone’s constitutional rights unless they have violated a law that was clearly established at the time of the incident.
The doctrine is often a point of controversy in civil litigation. Critics argue that it allows law enforcement officers to act without accountability, even in cases involving serious rights violations. Supporters, however, contend that qualified immunity is necessary to shield public officials from frivolous lawsuits and to allow them to perform their duties without fear.
City held liable for lack of oversight
In this case, the jury determined the City of New Orleans was liable for violating the dog owners’ rights because it failed to properly train, supervise or discipline Burmaster, according to the plaintiffs’ attorneys, The jury awarded the Browns $10,000 in damages, which the city is responsible for paying, Most told the Associated Press.
The jury also found the Browns and Burmaster’s partner had some liability in the dog’s death, attorney Most said.
“We are so glad to have justice for Apollo,” Most said. “We hope that this trial will achieve lasting change in the way the New Orleans Police Department trains its officers to handle animals they meet in the field.”
History of use-of-force incidents
The Browns filed a civil lawsuit in 2022, alleging Burmaster had been involved in 30 documented use-of-force incidents since 2011. Among those incidents was the fatal shooting of another dog in 2012 during a response to a property damage complaint.
In response to the lawsuit, Burmaster’s attorney stated, “The allegation concerning Officer Burmaster previously shooting a dog is admitted. Officer Burmaster was exonerated for this action.”
Ella Rae Greene, Editor In Chief
