Houston Cop Who Lied To Justify a No-Knock Drug Raid Says He Is Not Responsible for the Resulting Deaths
Former narcotics officer Gerald Goines faces two murder charges for instigating the home invasion that killed Dennis Tuttle and Rhogena Nicholas.

This week, nearly six years after Houston cops killed a middle-aged couple falsely accused of selling heroin, a jury began considering the murder case against Gerald Goines, the former narcotics officer who instigated the deadly raid. His lawyers concede that he fabricated the basis for the no-knock warrant that authorized him and his colleagues to break into the home of Dennis Tuttle and Rhogena Nicholas on January 28, 2019. But they argue that he is not responsible for their deaths and therefore should not have been charged with murder.
Goines, a 34-year veteran who retired after the raid, also faces a charge of tampering with a governmental record, a felony punishable by two to 10 years in prison. That charge is based on a search warrant affidavit in which Goines claimed a confidential informant had purchased heroin from a middle-aged "white male, whose name is unknown," at 7815 Harding Street, where Tuttle and Nicholas lived. The informant supposedly saw a 9mm semi-automatic pistol and a "large quantity of plastic baggies" containing heroin at the house.
As Goines later admitted, none of that was true. Goines, who was shot in the neck during the Harding Street raid, was taken to a hospital, where he confessed that he had invented the "controlled buy" he described in his affidavit. But he claimed that he personally had bought heroin from Tuttle.
That was not true either, defense attorney Nicole DeBorde admitted during her opening statement at Goines' trial on Monday. "While it's true you're not going to be happy with Gerald Goines for some of the things that he said that were not true in that affidavit, and later in that hospital, he didn't murder anybody," she told the jurors. "He is not legally responsible for murder. This is a case of the wrong charges being filed. There are other consequences for him."
The two murder charges are based on a statute that applies when someone "commits or attempts to commit a felony" and "in the course of and in furtherance of the commission or attempt…commits or attempts to commit an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual." That charge is inappropriate in this case, DeBorde argued, because Goines' underlying felony—producing the fraudulent search warrant affidavit—did not cause the deaths of Tuttle and Nicholas.
In DeBorde's telling, that outcome resulted from the couple's decision to resist the invading police officers instead of surrendering. According to DeBorde, Tuttle and Nicholas both knew the men who broke down their door and immediately killed their dog with a shotgun were police officers. She said Tuttle nevertheless grabbed a revolver and came out shooting, injuring Goines and three other officers, while Nicholas tried to grab a gun from one of them. "Nicholas' choices to not respond to instructions by police and to try and grab the gun of a fallen officer is the cause of her death," DeBorde said.
According to this account, Tuttle and Nicholas got what they deserved. Prosecutors told a different story.
When the cops charged into the house around 5:30 p.m., Harris County Assistant District Attorney Keaton Forcht said, Nicholas, a 58-year-old cancer patient, was sitting on a couch watching TV while Tuttle, a disabled 59-year-old Navy veteran, was asleep in a bedroom. According to the prosecution, Tuttle responded to the tumult with gunfire because he thought he was defending his home against violent criminals.
"Evidence will show Gerald Goines was legally responsible for every shot in that house, whether it was from officers or Dennis Tuttle," Forcht said. "Mr. Tuttle reacted as anybody would, any normal person, hearing guns ring out in their house, their doors blown in, his wife on the couch, the dog is dead in the living room. He grabs his pistol and comes storming out."
Although the officers were not wearing uniforms, Goines' lawyers argued that the word police on their tactical gear would have made it clear who they were. The defense also claimed the cops verbally identified themselves as police officers. But no such announcement can be heard in the available audio record, which includes a neighbor's cellphone recording and video from a body camera worn by Officer Richard Morales, who arrived just before the cops entered the house.
Morales testified that he did not hear the officers announce themselves. But defense attorney Mac Secrest pointed out that Morales had told internal investigators he heard someone shout "police" as the door was breached. According to the account that Art Acevedo, then Houston's police chief, gave at a press conference the night of the raid, the cops "announced themselves as Houston police officers while simultaneously breaching the front door."
Like Goines' lawyers, Acevedo put the blame for the ensuing violence squarely on Tuttle and Nicholas, whom he described as dangerous criminals who were operating a locally notorious "drug house" where police had "actually bought black-tar heroin." He hailed the cops—Goines especially—as "heroes" and claimed that neighbors were grateful to the officers for their brave intervention.
"Immediately upon breaching the door," Acevedo said, "the officers came under fire." But as he revealed during a press conference the next day, it was actually the police who fired first, killing what he described as "a very large pit bull," whose body can be seen near the front door in photographs of the scene.
According to the story that Acevedo told, shouting "police" while "simultaneously breaching the front door" gave Nicholas and Tuttle ample notice that the men who had just broken into their home and killed their pet were officers of the law. Goines' attorneys are telling the same improbable story in arguing that Nicholas and Tuttle caused their own deaths.
After Goines' deceit was revealed, Acevedo stopped calling him a hero. But he continued to describe the other officers that way and even insisted they "had probable cause to be there," which plainly was not true.
Nor was it true that Tuttle and Nicholas were known locally as drug dealers, as Acevedo initially claimed. While police found personal-use quantities of marijuana and cocaine at the house, they did not discover any evidence of the drug dealing that Goines had described. The investigation that he supposedly conducted prior to the raid was prompted by false reports from a neighbor, Patricia Garcia, who had a grudge against Nicholas. "She was always fighting with Rhogena, always jealous of Rhogena," another neighbor, Sarah Sanchez, testified on Monday. "She was very hateful."
As Houston Public Media notes, Garcia "told police that her daughter was doing heroin inside the couple's home and that the couple were drug dealers and had guns inside their home." But "investigators eventually found that Garcia had no daughter and that her other claims were also false." In March 2021, Garcia pleaded guilty to federal charges based on her fraudulent 911 calls. Three months later, she was sentenced to 40 months in prison and three years of probation.
The raid that killed Nicholas and Tuttle was "based on lie after lie after lie," Forcht noted on Monday. "But for the actions of Gerald Goines," he said, "those two homeowners would still be alive." In disputing that causal link, Goines' lawyers are relying on a narrative that depicts his victims as the real aggressors.
If the jury accepts that narrative, what "other consequences" might Goines face? DeBorde essentially conceded that he is guilty of document tampering, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. But that is not the only possibility.
Goines also faces federal charges in connection with the Harding Street raid. "While acting under color of law," according to a November 2019 indictment, Goines "prepared an affidavit for a search warrant that contained numerous material false statements, presented that affidavit to a State of Texas judicial officer, swore under oath to the truthfulness of the contents of that affidavit, obtained a search warrant based on that affidavit from that judicial officer," and "executed that search warrant."
In doing so, the indictment says, Goines "willfully depriv[ed] Dennis Tuttle of the right, secured and protected by the Constitution and laws of the United States, for people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures." That offense "involved the use, attempted use and threatened use of a dangerous weapon" and "resulted in the death of Dennis Tuttle and Rhogena Nicholas." If prosecutors can prove that last allegation, which is also the central point of contention in Goines' state trial, he could face a life sentence, which is also true in the state case.
The federal indictment also accused Steven Bryant, a former Houston narcotics officer who backed up Goines' phony story of a heroin purchase that never happened, of falsifying records "with intent to impede, obstruct, and influence the investigation and proper administration of [a] matter within federal jurisdiction." Bryant pleaded guilty to that charge in June 2021.
In addition to the criminal charges, Goines faces federal civil rights lawsuits filed by relatives of Tuttle and Nicholas. One of those lawsuits also names Acevedo as a defendant.
The Goines scandal prompted Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg's office to review thousands of drug cases. Those investigations revealed a "pattern of deceit" going back years. "The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has overturned at least 22 convictions linked to Goines," the Associated Press reports.
Acevedo has insisted that the Harding Street raid did not reflect "a systemic problem with the Houston Police Department." But Ogg saw things differently. "Houston Police narcotics officers falsified documentation about drug payments to confidential informants with the support of supervisors," she said in July 2020. "Goines and others could never have preyed on our community the way they did without the participation of their supervisors; every check and balance in place to stop this type of behavior was circumvented."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Aren't they charging people with murder by association these days ? Why wouldn't they do it here , too ? His lie directly put everybody in harm's way.
They are doing it here, aren't they? He has been charged with murder.
Felony murder?
Yes, Goines is being charged with felony murder
"Felony Murder?"
Is there any other kind?
Felony murder is a particular crime in which you are held responsible for the death of someone who dies because you committed a felony. You don't have to have had intent to kill anyone or to have even been at the homicide scene.
Two examples from recent years: Two NYPD officers were shot in a holdup in a mobile phone store. (This one is personal, I was on a gurney in the lobby of the emergency room where they were taken to after they were being shot and in fact I was the last patient the hospital emergency room saw that night other than the officers.) One of the officers didn't make it. The robber turned out to have been using a toy gun and the officers had shot each other. The robber and his getaway driver are now doing long prison sentences for felony murder even though they went out of their way not to harm anyone -- professional robbers will tell you that killing someone is bad for business.
Breonna Taylor was killed after a cop lied to a judge to get a no knock warrant in Louisville, KY 4 1/2 years ago today. Her boyfriend opened fire on the intruders with his legal firearm. Two officers, neither of whom had been the ones who lied, returned fire and killed Taylor. They had the chutzpah to charge her boyfriend but the charges were later dropped. The cop who caused all this suffering through his lie can not be charged with felony murder because Kentucky repealed its felony murder statute. Progressive activists have been trying to get them repealed in the rest of the US.
More often known as the felony murder rule.
Maybe, actually probably. I find the arguments by his lawyer interesting, though. Looks like splitting hairs but that's the defense lawyer's job.
I may have missed it but why did that clown go to that extent for a search warrant in the first place? That seems very strange.
The extent of making stuff up instead of actually doing his job? That doesn't sound like extra effort to me, it just sounds like laziness and complete indifference to the danger he was putting innocent people (as well as his fellow cops) in by not fulfilling his duties.
The lax magistrate (Markham) who issued the no-knock warrant testified yesterday that he was lied to. He said that if he had known that the affidavit was false he would not have issued. What is left unspoken here is that such magistrates routinely accept unconstitutional boilerplate affidavits without even a cursory look at the reliability of the officer - in this case one who had only ONCE in over a hundred searches actually found the weapon claimed at the scene that justified the no-knock warrant. Markham is STILL a judge in Harris County despite this negligence and should be fired or perhaps charged.
Judges have immunity for official acts. And he'll continue to rubber stamp search warrants.
The judge honored the affidavit the officer produced, under penalty of perjury. The Judge is not expected to challenge sworn statements presented to him/her, they don't investigate officers claims.
So what's the point of having a magistrate issue the warrant then? If they don't do anything except sign off on everything given to them? In fact, the Supreme Court disagrees with your opinion. They have said that it is unconstitutional for a Magistrate to issue a search or arrest warrant based on a boilerplate affidavit, so there is at least the expectation that Magistrates will do some due diligence. In this case the same Magistrate issued a no-knock warrant based on almost exactly the same affidavit generated by this Narcotics Officer over a hundred times, so he certainly knew - and ignored - the suspicious nature of the Squad's activities. Minimum due diligence in this case should have been to check and see if the hundred previous no-knock raids had produced the dangerous firearms alleged in the previous hundred affidavits. In Goine's case, NONE of the hundred previous raids documented the recovery of such weapons as alleged.
To diffuse the responsibility if shit goes wrong. The cops aren't responsible because they're enforcing a "duly issued warrant." The magistrate isn't responsible because he relies on the cops, plus he doesn't personally enforce the warrant.
Victims have nowhere to seek a remedy.
"KHOU 11 Investigates examined 109 drug cases Goines filed based on a search warrant between 2012 and present day. In every one of those cases in which he claimed confidential informants observed guns inside, no weapons were ever recovered, according to evidence logs Goines filed with the court."
https://www.khou.com/article/news/investigations/khou-11-investigates-issues-with-embattled-houston-police-officers-past-no-knock-warrants/285-13b94210-449c-4406-b843-f24a45c814ce
In the famous Breonna Taylor case, the cop who lied to get the no knock warrant claimed that the Postal Inspector service had tipped him off about deliveries of suspected illegal drugs. The local Postal Inspector chief confirmed that that was an actual lie.
A judge who starts questioning the integrity of police warrant requests will quickly lose his next re-election. He will attacked for being soft on criminals.
Speaking of lawyers... as the perpetrators of January 6 “We Wuz Robbed” vandalism of tax-maintained buildings are rounded up and tried, does that arraignment entitle them to “a free lawyer” at the expense of a State or Federal Government? The Fourteenth Amendment literally says no.
Not mentioned anywhere in this useless summary is that NONE of the evidence available indicates that either Tuttle OR Nicholas fired any shots with ANY weapon at any time. The HPD covered up evidence, lied about evidence, botched what evidence collection there was and to this date they refused to produce documents or evidence to anyone for review. What might have been useful here would have been a list of the evidence produced at Goines’ trial that shows who shot him. All of the evidence to date suggests that the police officers shot each other and Tuttle; and that an officer whose charges have been bungled and finally dropped shot Nicholas blindly from outside the house through a wall and if he didn’t shoot any of the other officers inside it was a miracle. It’s too bad that even supposedly unbiased reporters can’t get this story straight after six years of not really trying. For SHAME, Sullum!
Can you give some links about the evidence indicating they didn't shoot any weapons (Tuttle & Nicholas that is)? Honestly, not trying to troll. I've been somewhat following this case, and I haven't heard that there no evidence showing Tuttle fired any rounds...which I suspect is pretty easy to establish given that he had a revolver.
https://web.archive.org/web/20220809095554/https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/5986464/KPRC2-Watermark-Dennis-Tuttle-Autopsy.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20221108145811/https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/5986463/KPRC2-Watermark-Rhogena-Nicholas-Autopsy.pdf
Ok, but those are just autopsy's showing both got shot the hell up. What are you trying to get at with these? There is no proof that the victim didn't have a firearm. Is your assumption that the coroner didn't test the hands for powder residue proof he had no gun? That's just proof that the hands were not tested. They probably should have been.
There was no gunpowder residue on the suspect that the police claim to this day shot four of them with a pistol not found on the evidence list. I still haven't found the link to the independent forensic investigation report from November 2019 but I will provide it when I find it.
"HPD Chief Art Acevedo said, "I stand by our investigation, and I can tell you there is no evidence of friendly fire in this case."
Maloney’s reaction? "It's easy to say there is absolutely no indication of friendly fire but for transparency's sake, when you have such a debacle at the doorway, with shots raining in against the house that aren't being aimed at individuals but are just shooting a structure and everything else, you would think that rather than just state 'There is no evidence,' we would see that evidence."
https://www.click2houston.com/news/2019/11/07/debacle-forensic-investigator-reveals-his-findings-on-the-harding-street-raid/
Wow that's a lot of details that didn't make it to Reason. I'm pretty ignorant about this stuff but I always thought that every bullet could be matched to the gun that fired it. Why have we not seen that evidence? Wouldn't that solve the friendly fire question? With multiple federal, local and civil investigations going on it's seems that would have been done within days. But HPD is still stonewalling?
re: "I always thought that every bullet could be matched to the gun that fired it"
No, that's a hollywood/CSI fiction. Most bullets get damaged when they hit, well, whatever. And even for the ones that don't, the "matching striations" are at best a very, very rough match. A little dirt in the barrel (like from the previous round you just fired) can change the striations. Cleaning the gun after firing can completely change them.
Striation matching is like bite-mark identification - it can be used to exclude an obvious mismatch (like the bite shows a missing left canine but the suspect has a full complement of teeth) but it's cannot make an affirmative match.
This is only partially true. We should have had no more than five or ten of the raiders' firearms to try to match to bullets and the suspect's firearm has never been produced, tested or even listed on the collected evidence documents. It should be possible to get a reasonably reliable match on at least one of the bullets and one of the guns.
Thanks for the clarification.
In this disastrous case they didn't even do any ballistics testing at all. They were either incompetent crime scene investigators or they were afraid of what the examinations would have revealed and didn't want to do them. The independent investigation team did their job for them and, in fact, revealed what the City and County didn't want revealed.
I don't think Reason has ever mentioned that Tuttle weighed 112 pounds and had one arm bandaged and a leg in a brace when he was killed. Dude was in rough shape. The claim that he got four shots off is just not credible.
With a gun that has never been produced in evidence.
I'm wondering the same thing. It wouldn't be the first time officers shot each other during a raid but I've seen nothing mentioned of this.
Even to this day the party line toed by the Houston press is that they entered the house, shot the dog and then four of them were wounded in "a hail of bullets" that they allege came from Tuttle's revolver, which so far has miraculously disappeared from the scene and subsequent reports. Unbelievable!
This is the officer who shot blindly into the house, killing Nicholas.
https://www.click2houston.com/news/local/2021/08/18/harris-county-district-attorney-update-in-harding-street-matter/
This was such an example; I discussed it in another comment above:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/nypd-2-officers-shot-during-apparent-robbery-in-queens
The robber had had a toy gun and one of the officers died.
I finally found the document with the independent forensic evidence:
https://media.click2houston.com/document_dev/2019/07/25/Rhogena%20Nicholas%20independent%20investigaton_1564082245083_22129341_ver1.0.pdf
WHY DOES THE BLACK MAN ALWAYS HAVE TO BE THE ONE HELD ACCOUNTABLE?!!
I know. It's like I have to relive Night Of The Living Dead over and over again.
Or all of side one and songs 1, 3, and 4 on side two of Thriller.
Fuck. Now I have to dig through my vinyl to figure out what you're talking about. Thanks a lot buddy.
"But they argue that he is not responsible for their deaths and therefore should not have been charged with murder."
Yeah, that's something Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot would say at their trials too.
What's Dick Cheney? Chopped liver? Oh that's right he's supporting Harris. What's a few war crimes between friends.
Charles Manson come to mind? He wasn't there at the time.
"I was only giving the orders!"
I don't care what they convict the cop on so long as he gets shivved in prison.
So, not a fan of 8A then, huh?
Gosh, I feel so sorry for the lying snitch and narc. But never fear, he'll have lots of old pals there his lies convicted on victimless prohibitionist raps.
The ‘felony murder’ definition is a horrible law. The mens rea requirement is supposed to mean that a murder charge requires an intent to kill, not merely an intent to do something entirely else (even though still illegal). But did Goines ever protest its use? Or did he gleefully apply it to others when throwing charges against the wall? I’d love to see the law changed but I will lose no sleep seeing it applied to the very people who lobbied for then abused it.
The string of false affidavits up to and including the one that blew up in his face undermines your "mens rea" theory severely. The defense says he thought he was apprehending a dangerous felon but all the evidence falsifies that narrative. He murdered those two innocent people for no good reason except for another notch on his gunbelt.
I'm not saying he didn't have mens rea - my complaint is that the crime he's charged with doesn't even require it. And that's a very bad thing.
The felony murder charge doesn't require mens rea because the underlying felonies do.
But that does not mean he got the false search warrants and broke down the door with a crew with the intent to murder them. I think the charge of felony murder made in the politics of the fall out and backlash will come back to haunt the State. Remember that clown Mosby up in Baltimore? Overcharged and got nothing.
I've read about some fucked up felony murder charges, so like anything legal it can be abused. However, in my estimation of this situation, it appears the felony murder charge is appropriate.
(Extremely rare): Agreed.
When a gamer calls SWAT on someone that's attempted murder without touching a gun. This is no different.
Send him to prison, tell all the other inmates that he was a cop, and don't give him access to lube.
If he goes to prison it will be pampered solitary. They look out after their own.
Unfortunately, that’s true.
The devil made him do it!
Goines' defense is correct, if for the wrong reasons: Tuttle et al. deserved what they got because their home was suddenly invaded by violent gunmen and they failed to defend themselves effectively, and that's all there is to that.
When I bought my body armor I could have gotten a free patch that says POLICE on it.
Did Sullum expect the cop’s lawyer’s defense theory to be that his client IS responsible for these deaths?
>In DeBorde's telling, that outcome resulted from the couple's decision to resist the invading police officers instead of surrendering.
This person, this *lawyer* is saying that if me and a buddy kicked down someone's door, demanded they surrender, they fight back, someone is killed, that I would not at least face a felony murder charge?
A *lawyer* said this?
You'd think cops would be able to afford someone who actually went to law school.
The two murder charges are based on a statute that applies when someone "commits or attempts to commit a felony" and "in the course of and in furtherance of the commission or attempt…commits or attempts to commit an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual."
OK, so that's what's called Felony Murder. Basically, if you're in the middle of committing a felony, and somebody dies as a result (not by homicide or manslaughter), that can turn your felony into a murder charge. The two big things in play are Intent and Causation.
Intent is easy - if you intended to commit the felony, it'll trigger felony murder if someone dies. Our boy here clearly had intent to falsify that warrant.
Causation is a little tricker. The death has to be But For and Proximate. But For is exactly what it sounds like. But for the felony, the death wouldn't have occurred. If you rob a bodega at gunpoint and the clerk has a heart attack and dies - even though you didn't shoot him, but for your robbing him that likely wouldn't have happened. Proximate cause basically means it was a foreseeable and probable consequence of committing the felony - basically, a close relationship between the committing of the felony and the resultant death. If you're robbing the bodega, and suddenly/randomly a car loses control and slams through the front window killing the guy, that won't put you on the hook for felony murder. Your robbery was removed from his actual cause of death.
So with that in mind... what I suspect is that defense is making the argument that the death is too far removed from the actual felony (falsifying the warrant) to be considered proximate. I would also guess that they're going to argue an intervening action that broke the causal chain.
Of course, Jakey Jakey's News Is Fakey, muddles this point. "According to this account, Tuttle and Nicholas got what they deserved." No, they didn't "get what they deserved." The defense is arguing that Tuttle and Nicholas' actions were the intervening cause of their death.
I'm a little hard pressed to believe that a Texas jury will go for that, but that'll depend on whether they believe that Nicholas and Tuttle acted in self-defense, or if they came out blindly blasting prepared to retaliate against the cops to fend off a drug bust. And yes, even their minimal amounts of weed and coke might serve that latter narrative. At that point, the argument would be that even if the warrant had been 100% legit and proper, opening fire on the cops serving it because they didn't want to get busted for drugs would be an intervening act.
It's a smart defense. Again, I don't know if a Texas jury would go for it. But it's a smart defense.
Nicholas, a 58-year-old cancer patient ... Tuttle, a disabled 59-year-old Navy veteran
Why is it Reason authors always feel compelled to include these utterly meaningless details. Their age, health problems, and veteran status have nothing to do with the issue being discussed. Why do you distract your audience with these superfluous and irrelevant details?
killing what he described as "a very large pit bull,"
He should be given a medal for that just on general principle. I will never object to ANYONE - cop or civilian - shooting a pit bull on sight. Reimburse them the cost of purchasing the dog (if they adopted, tough nuggets), and call it a day.
Yea, I said it. Kill all the pit bulls. Exterminate the entire breed. Fight me.
Pit Bull dogs got nothing on mosquitoes. Maybe pit bulls are a little scary to some, sort of like cops, but really, exterminate all mosquitoes.
Every write up that remotely has something to do with cops, I expect AT to say something profoundly retarded, and every time, AT doesn't disappoint. Someone should have probably exterminated his entire previous family line, so we could have all been spared this constant retardation.
You don't like an explanation of felony murder where I explain what Fake Sullum chooses not to in his ACAB bent, and speculate that a jury isn't going to buy the defense that the cop is going to try and establish?
Is there some particular reason why, or is it just a personal animus?
Pit bulls who are not mistreated can be very sweet animals. It's the humans who mistreat some of them that should be put down.
*eyeroll*
https://i.imgur.com/cw1CQD5.png
Your cite means nothing. Pit bulls are shown as most likely to be killers, but of course most likely to be made into a vicious animal by scumbag humans. Please show data demonstrating decently treated pits are killers.
Dude, they were selectively bred exclusively for dogfighting. They are hardwired to kill, and no amount of domestication and care can completely prevent that murder switch from going off in their head. They're like 5% of the canine population, and yet somehow responsible for 3/5ths of fatal dog attacks.
And it's not like they're feral dogs just roaming the streets without masters. These are people's pets that are bred/adopted, fed and cared for and given homes - and then they snap. They mistake playfulness for aggression. Or they scent something that triggers them. Or sometimes they just go berserk because that's a thing pitbulls are prone to do. You immediately want to chalk that up to some malfeasance on the part of the owner - but it's not. Because the majority of pit bull owners aren't horrible neglectful abusive people - indeed, they're the ones that defend their musclebound killing machines against these very accusations - yet, their breed is far and away the most likely one to hurt/maim/kill someone.
And let's also not forget that many pit bull owners decently treat their vicious killing machine, but still intentionally choose it for self/home-defense purposes due to its aggression and killing power. They may imprint in a way that makes the beast be kind and gentle among their household, but still encourage that aggression and snap-violence for anyone outside it.
These dogs have no place in modern society, it's that simple. If you want to advocate for dogfighting, then advocate it - but that's the only reason the pitbull exists in the first place, and it's a brutal and cruel thing that we rightfully did away with. Now, with the pitbulls that remain - the data speaks for itself.
Somebody do something! ATF is trying to pal up to me by cherrypicking an obvious fact sane people agree on so he can boast their endorsement while advocating for rape, girl-bullying and Aryan racial laws.
This. This is your stsggering retardation. Advocating for the extermination of millions of dogs because your cop buddies enjoy shooting them.
It has nothing to do with cops shooting them. It has to do with the fact that breed of dog should not exist. It was bred for killing.
Unless you support dogfighting - which, shame on you if you do - you have no reason whatsoever to support the continued existence of the pit bull.
Guns kill people too, but neither you nor I are advocating to destroy or outlaw them, nor do most Libertarians. You are criminally fucking stupid.
Guns don't get up of their own accord and start shooting people, doofus. Pit bulls do. Frequently, and with alarming pattern and regularity.
You're not walking down the street or sitting in your home when all of a sudden someone's firearm sprouts a pair of legs and murderous eyes and goes berserk and starts blasting at you The same is not true for pit bulls.
Kill all the pit bulls. All of them. Every single one. You give me a newborn litter of baby pitbulls, and I would personally put them all into a sack with a couple bricks and drop it in the river, and know it was a net positive for society.
Kill all the pit bulls. There is ZERO counterargument to this.
Wow. You are seriously fucking deranged. I have owned two and been around countless others and they are no more "bred to kill" than any other large breed dog. You are clearly more wired for violence than any dog.
Language.
And you can deny the stats all you want. You're literally being the meme here. "Well MY pitbulls have never ripped anyone's throat out, so pitbulls must be ok! Never mind all the fact and evidence to the contrary, my idiotic prejudice towards pitbulls outweighs reality."
I would have shot your two on sight, as well as those "countless others." And the world would have slept better at night knowing they're all dead.
You just demonstrated why your entire family should have been exterminated so you never would have come to exist. I get it.
My family has never ripped the throats out of a little girl because there's a murder-switch hardwired in their brains as a result of centuries of selective breeding for extreme violence and fighting.
You can't say the same for your should-be-dead pit bulls.
THAT goes a long way toward explaining how girl-bullying mystical bigots are the product of child abuse by superstitious parents' efforts to brainwash them into ignoring reality.
https://i.imgur.com/cw1CQD5.png
"The defense is arguing that Tuttle and Nicholas’ actions were the intervening cause of their death."
There WAS no action taken by Tuttle and Nicholas that could even be remotely construed as an intervening cause. Tuttles revolver has never been listed as evidence from the scene and, unless body camera footage shows Nicholas lunging for a wounded officer's shotgun after being killed by two shots fired blindly from outside the house by Officer Felipe Gallegos. So the defense narrative is completely fabricated.
There WAS no action taken by Tuttle and Nicholas that could even be remotely construed as an intervening cause.
I think you'll find that a jury will agree. I said as much my post.
"Why is it Reason authors always feel compelled to include these utterly meaningless details."
So why are the details about Nicholas and Tuttle irrelevant, but the breed of the dog police exterminated somehow not meaningless?
Well, it’s a tangent that I used to bring up a separate point from the overall story. They make it out like it’s some kind of “sad” thing that the dog got shot. But… it should have been shot on general principle.
If the story was about a girl scout selling cookies, I would have expected the girl scout to pull out a blaster and end the dog just the same, and praised her for doing the right thing.
Kill all the pit bulls.
If you don't see why the victims' age and health are relevant when the defense is those two violently attacked police entering their home...well, you're too stupid for words.
As for Pit Bulls, I think those who want to kill them all should be fed to wood chippers.
If you don’t see why the victims’ age and health are relevant
Notice how you stated it was relevant, but then couldn’t explain how or why.
As for Pit Bulls, I think those who want to kill them all should be fed to wood chippers.
https://blog.dogsbite.org/2024/01/2023-fatal-dog-attack-breed-identification-photographs.html
Tell it to their families.
The law should be: any American who kills a pit bull for any reason will receive a medal and certificate of thanks from their local city/township.
"According to the prosecution, Tuttle responded to the tumult with gunfire because he thought he was defending his home against violent criminals."
And he was. Giving the criminals badges didn't change what they were.
Totally fabricated in the aftermath of this debacle! There was no handgun attributable to Tuttle listed in the inventory of evidence collected at the scene and no evidence subsequently that any shots were fired towards the front of the house from the direction where Tuttle was killed with at least nine gunshot wounds. Also there is video almost a half hour after the end of the action of two shots fired from inside the house and two bullet holes in the wall next to Tuttle's body that correspond. Why would police officers fire shots at a wall a half hour after the incident was over during the purported crime scene investigation? Give me a break!
Sounds like an execution.
I had not heard that the woman who called in the complaint didn't even have a daughter. I wouldn't have beleived that I could be any angrier about this case than I already was, but here we are.
I agree that this is over-the-top anger-making. I've been angry for almost six years on and off about this case. If I had written this as a fiction novel no one would have been able to suspend their disbelief, and it would have flopped.
Also, if you dig a little deeper into the case, two officers responded to the Tuttle and Nicholas residence in response to the phone complaint from the neighbor with no daughter, found no one home and reported that there was no sign of suspicious activity there or any need for additional investigation. Their superior officer who reviewed the report wrote the complaint down on a sticky note and handed it unofficially to her lover on the Narcotics Squad, and then she handed it unofficially to Goines who then started the chain of lies.
It because he's black, that's why they are prosecuting them.
It's probably part of it.
It's a start. Aryan narcs, snitches and informers are next... Then, like Mexico, we might vote nazi judges off of the Suprema Corte.
No-knock entry, breach the door, immediately shoot the dog - what could go wrong?
Sure he isn't. And Prohibition laws have nothing to do with financial crashes, economic depressions and Republican Hoovervilles where people actually DO eat pets!