Lift versus Out. - Page 2

SO back to the topic.

How is this dog's grip improved by being "lifted" up off of the sleeve?

Its a FACT Hans, there are attorneys who specialize in this. The topic was outing or lifting the dog off, dont try to guide it where you want it to go so you can argue.

Success! Gigante! Apprehension ratio indicates success of the team. Success of the team indicates prosperous training skill.

Gigante: Apprehension ratio or  another one is a  bite ratio,  is a mathematical ratio between total number of  apprehended perpetrators and perpetrators who got bitten by specific LEK9 team.   Understand that legally  the dog can bite a suspect when it is legally reasonable. Dog, same as any other instrument or tool or weapon,  used by LE may inflict injury . This injury needs to be legally reasonable and necessary according to what ever scenario the LEO is dealing with. 

 However these ratios are used by shyster defense attorneys to a priory and preventively discredit the K9 LE team by the mere fact that  they may have statistically and in comparison to other LE K9 teams too many bites in comparison to total apprehensions.

 This is a bogus logical sophistry and logical slide of hand which in court of law and in front of jury or judge puts the K9 team often underserved on the heels - on defensive.  That is unfair because if you are fair then each scenario must be judged on its own merit  and if the officer is operating in bad, drug infested  part of town he will have more bites per apprehension then team  operating in upper upper class gated community neighborhood.  The defense lawyers are asking this question of bite ratio of the team in order to  establish and  to show that the K9 team who have apprehended the  client with bite  is generally reckless, and or does not have dog under control. They do this in order to  make jury to believe that such logic is correct and unfortunately they often succeed.  The truth of the scenario is then glazed over by judge and  jury since the first impression which the defense lawyer established is that the LE team is using too much force too often,... never mind that the use of such force was more then necessary and reasonable in each such case. That does not matter. Basically they use broad generalized statistics (and as you know you can proof anything with statistics) to discredit the K9 team. It does not matter then  that the person resisted arrest , run , fought the officer,..... you name it, as long and the K9 team has high bite ratio then it is assumed he "must have been"  using excessive force at his scumbag client too. 

 This then  leads LE to be apprehensive to use properly their dogs and second guess themselves. I have heard of cases where team with relatively high bite ratio called team with low bite ration from long distance away to take over the situation.  Judges allowing this type of a  shyster who uses such  unscrupulous, fraudulent, or deceptive methods of argument  in their court,  then are  indirectly endangering lives of officers and of  their dogs and citizens they serve. And they do it in name of  getting off their scum back client. I say this in such a harsh way because if the officer would do something truly wrong then such logically  fraudulent argument would not be necessary. Thus this argument is used automatically or in situations where otherwise correct logical defense would fail the scumbad client.  

Prager Hans

 P.S.:http://www.uspcak9.com/caselaw/patrol.html

http://www.policek9.com/FTPResearch/florida_study.pdf

Thanks bee, I was afraid of that. You dont ask questions in court you dont know the answer to..... You would only ask that question when the dog could be compromised by its ratio, so if this is the hot first question... well then. 

 

 

 

 

 

According to USPCA - "apprehation ratio is a ratio of bites to total number of aprehentions".

It has nothing to do with success and training per se.

It is legal statistic used often used against the K9 LE team in court of law.   

Prager, that makes sense in my mind, 
"fair then each scenario must be judged on its own merit" More foolproof!

The angle was hard to follow, but never, ever rely on the lawyers to honer the real, only the could be. :)

Bite ratio sums it up cleaner for me Thanks

 

 

 

Hired dog!!! you can not even understand when I agree with youand you see it as an attempt  to  argument? Wow.  I asked you an honest question. I am on your side!!!!! Jeez. I was trully curious if attorneys know more about dog training  then handlers and in what way theoretically or practically. You made the statement and you seem to know more about this then I do thus I asked. I am soooooorry.  Is that such a  bad of a question  that it is  guiding the topic to an argument,...as you state? I do not think so. 

 Prager Hans

Hans, that second comment on my last post was fot bzcz, not you, stop taking everything personally.

Too bad the best, real

expert is not available for comment.