Jury finds New Orleans police officer who shot and killed puppy violated rights but has immunity
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A jury in federal court ruled that a New Orleans police officer who shot and killed a puppy had violated its owners' constitutional rights but was shielded from punishment under qualified immunity because of his government role, according to the plaintiffs' attorney William Most.
The jury awarded $10,000 in damages for emotional distress to the puppy's owners, to be paid by the city, Most said. An additional $400 was awarded for the rescue dog's market value.
The jury found that the city held a degree of liability tied to the officer's actions but was not ultimately responsible for the killing of Apollo the puppy, Most said. The jury ruled the officer violated state laws of negligence and wrongful destruction of property. The jury also found the owners and Burmaster's police partner had some liability in the dog's death, Most added.
'We are so glad to have justice for Apollo,' Most said in a text message. '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.'
The city and police department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Derrick Burmaster, the police officer, declined to comment.
The civil lawsuit arose after the 16-week old, 22-pound (10-kilogram) Catahoula Leopard puppy ran up to Burmaster when he and a police partner entered the couple's yard in response to a report of a domestic disturbance in 2021.
Burmaster, who has said he feared Apollo would bite him in the genitals, fired three shots at the puppy with one hand while covering his crotch with the other, court records show. Another larger adult dog had barked and moved toward Burmaster's colleague, who stepped out of the yard before it reached him.
Police body camera shows Apollo died in the arms of his distraught owners, who later were diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, according to their lawyer.
'How could you shoot a puppy?' screamed Apollo's owner, Julia Barecki-Brown, immediately after the incident, footage shows. 'This is the love of our lives.'
In footage, Burmaster repeatedly apologized but also asked why they had let the dogs out.
Multiple internal police investigations found Burmaster's actions violated department policies. The department's Use of Force Review Board unanimously ruled the shooting was unjustified. Police investigators stated that Apollo did not pose a threat.
Burmaster did not consider alternative options such as kicking the dog or using a Taser, investigators noted. In violation of department protocol, he was not wearing body armor or equipped with a baton. This is the second time he has fatally shot a dog, court records show.
Apollo's owners, Barecki-Brown and her husband Derek Brown, sued Burmaster and the City of New Orleans in 2022. In July 2023, after a federal judge ruled that the lawsuit could move to jury trial, department leadership cleared Burmaster of wrongdoing for his use of force during the final step in the internal review process.
The city's Independent Police Monitor Stella Cziment criticized the department's reversal and told The Associated Press that she disagreed with the decision to clear Burmaster of misconduct in the aftermath of a civil lawsuit.
'The claim that the NOPD 'reversed' in response to the civil lawsuit is spurious,' the City of New Orleans said in a Wednesday statement. 'Prior to the filing of the lawsuit, the NOPD had not reached a final decision regarding disciplinary action for Officer Burmaster.'
The city noted that Sgt. David Duplantier, a police training academy instructor, issued a report on Oct. 12, 2021 — after the first two internal reviews — finding that Burmaster 'acted properly' because he believed he was at risk of imminent harm.
Long-standing federal oversight of the city's police department put in place after a decades-long history of misconduct and culture of impunity is in the process of winding down. Department leaders have sought to reassure the public that they have built a system of transparency and accountability.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Thailand announces measures to crack down on Cambodia-based cybercrime as border tensions soar
BANGKOK (AP) — Thailand's Prime Minister announced heightened measures to crack down on cybercrime that target neighboring Cambodia, including barring travel by casino tourists and cutting internet services to Cambodian military and security agencies. Relations between the countries have deteriorated following an armed confrontation May 28 in which one Cambodian soldier was killed in a relatively small, contested territory. Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra said Monday that officials will tighten border restrictions by stopping cars and individuals attempting to cross into Cambodia with exceptions for students, medical patients or others who need to purchase essential goods. Thailand will block tourists who intend to visit Cambodia's casinos and impose stricter screening measures on air passengers who wish to fly to Siem Reap, Cambodia, to gamble. She did not elaborate on how authorities will separate casino tourists from people visiting the country for other types of tourism. Cambodia has blocked internet services, electricity and fuel supplies from Thailand in response to the border dispute, which could have economic implications for both nations. The average monthly imports of gasoline and other fuel to Cambodia from Thailand is 85,426 metric tons (94,166 tons), which is 30% of all national imports. The average monthly liquid natural gas import from Thailand is 1,848 metric tons (2,037 tons), which is 4% of the national total, according to the Cambodian Ministry of Commerce. An April U.N. report says transnational organized crime groups in East and Southeast Asia are spreading lucrative scam operations across the globe. Scam centers bilking victims out of billions of dollars through false romantic ploys, bogus investment pitches and illegal gambling schemes are now being reported in Asia, Africa and Latin America. The report mentions Cambodia as one of the world's major cybercrime hubs. Paetongtarn said Thailand will consider blocking exports of goods that could facilitate scam operations in Cambodia and will coordinate with other countries and international agencies for operations to crack down on cybercrime based in Southeast Asia. Cambodian and Thai authorities have engaged in saber-rattling since the deadly clash in May. While the two countries said afterwards they have agreed to de-escalate the situation, they continue to implement or threaten measures short of armed force, keeping tensions high. Paetongtarn has been attacked over her perceived soft stance toward Cambodia, especially by right-wing nationalists who are longtime foes of her father, former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. A phone call leaked last week between Paetongtarn and Cambodian Senate President Hun Sen, the former prime minister who ruled over four decades, sparked outrage and calls for Paetongtarn's resignation. Critics said she tried to appease Hun Sen, a longtime friend of her father, and made Thailand look weak by calling a Thai army commander in charge of the disputed border area as 'an opponent.' Several nationalist activist groups have planned a rally this week to demand Paetongtarn's resignation. ___ Sopheng Cheang in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, contributed to this report.
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Mideast governments condemn Syria church bombing as death toll jumps to 25
DAMASCUS, Syria (AP) — The death toll from an attack on a church in Syria has gone up to 25, state media said Monday. The attack Sunday on the Mar Elias Greek Orthodox church during a Divine Liturgy in Dweil'a near Damascus was the first of its kind in Syria in years, and comes as Damascus under its de facto Islamist rule is trying to win the support of minorities. As President Ahmad al-Sharaa struggles to exert authority across the country, there have been concerns about the presence of sleeper cells of extremist groups in the war-torn country. The ministry and most witnesses said a gunman entered the church, and started firing at the people there before detonating his explosive vest. SANA, citing the Health Ministry, said 63 other people were wounded in the attack. Father Fadi Ghattas told The Associated Press after the attack that some 350 people were praying at the church. The United States, the European Union and governments across the Middle East condemned the attack, decrying it as a terrorist attack. No group immediately claimed responsibility, but the Syrian Interior Minister has blamed the extremist Islamic State group. Since the toppling of Bashar Assad and his family's decades-long dictatorial rule of Syria last December in a lightning insurgency, al-Sharaa has been pushing to win the support of Syria's non-Sunni-Muslim minority groups who are concerned about life under Islamist rule. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
How covering your face became a constitutional matter: Mask debate tests free speech rights
CHICAGO (AP) — Many of the protesters who flooded the streets of Los Angeles to oppose President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown wore masks or other face coverings, drawing scorn from him. 'MASKS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED to be worn at protests,' Trump posted on his social media platform, adding that mask-wearing protesters should be arrested. Protesters and their supporters argue Trump's comments and repeated calls by the Republican president's allies to ban masks at protests are an attempt to stifle popular dissent. They also note a double standard at play: In Los Angeles and elsewhere, protesters were at times confronted by officers who had their faces covered. And some U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have worn masks while carrying out high-profile raids in Los Angeles and other cities. All of which begs the question: Can something that covers your mouth protect free speech? Protesters say the answer is an emphatic yes. Several legal experts say it's only a matter of time before the issue returns to the courts. 'What do these people have to hide, and why?' Trump's post calling for a ban on masks came after immigration raids sparked protests , which included some reports of vandalism and violence toward police. 'What do these people have to hide, and why?' he asked on Truth Social on June 8. The next day, Trump raged against the anti-ICE protests, calling for the arrest of people in face masks. It's not a new idea. Legal experts and First Amendment advocates warn of a rising number of laws banning masks being wielded against protesters and their impacts on people's right to protest and privacy amid mounting surveillance. The legal question became even more complicated when Democratic lawmakers in California introduced legislation aiming to stop federal agents and local police officers from wearing face masks. That came amid concerns ICE agents were attempting to hide their identities and avoid accountability for potential misconduct. 'The recent federal operations in California have created an environment of profound terror,' state Sen. Scott Wiener said in a press release. Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin called the California bill 'despicable.' 'While ICE officers are being assaulted by rioters and having rocks and Molotov cocktails thrown at them, a sanctuary politician is trying to outlaw officers wearing masks to protect themselves from being doxed and targeted by known and suspected terrorist sympathizers,' McLaughlin said in a statement. State restrictions on mask-wearing At least 18 states and Washington, D.C., have laws that restrict masks and other face coverings, said Elly Page, senior legal adviser with the International Center for Not-For-Profit Law. Since October 2023, at least 16 bills have been introduced in eight states and Congress to restrict masks at protests, the center says. The laws aren't just remnants of the coronavirus pandemic. Many date back to the 1940s and '50s, when many states passed anti-mask laws as a response to the Ku Klux Klan, whose members hid their identities while terrorizing victims. Amid protests against the war in Gaza and Trump's immigration policies , Page said there have been attempts to revive these rarely used laws to target protesters. Page also raised concerns about the laws being enforced inconsistently and only against movements the federal government doesn't like. In May, North Carolina Senate Republicans passed a plan to repeal a pandemic-era law that allowed the wearing of masks in public for health reasons, a move spurred in part by demonstrations against the war in Gaza where some protesters wore masks. The suburban New York county of Nassau passed legislation in August to ban wearing masks in public. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost, a Republican, last month sent a letter to the state's public universities stating protesters could be charged with a felony under the state's anti-mask law. Administrators at the University of North Carolina have warned protesters that wearing masks violates the state's anti-mask law, and University of Florida students arrested during a protest were charged with wearing masks in public. An unresolved First Amendment question People may want to cover their faces while protesting for a variety of reasons, including to protect their health, for religious reasons, to avoid government retaliation, to prevent surveillance and doxing, or to protect themselves from tear gas, said Tim Zick, law professor at William and Mary Law School. 'Protecting protesters' ability to wear masks is part of protecting our First Amendment right to peacefully protest,' Zick said. Geoffrey Stone, a University of Chicago law professor, said the federal government and Republican state lawmakers assert that the laws are intended not to restrict speech but to 'restrict unlawful conduct that people would be more likely to engage in if they can wear masks and that would make it more difficult for law enforcement to investigate if people are wearing masks.' Conversely, he said, First Amendment advocates oppose such laws because they deter people from protesting if they fear retaliation. Stone said the issue is an 'unresolved First Amendment question' that has yet to be addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court , but the court 'has made clear that there is a right to anonymity protected by the First Amendment.' Few of these laws have been challenged in court, Stone said. And lower-court decisions on mask bans are mixed, though several courts have struck down broader anti-mask laws for criminalizing peaceful expression. Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, said the right to speak anonymously has 'deep roots in the nation's founding, including when anonymous pamphlets criticizing British rule circulated in the colonies.' Federal agents wearing masks 'The right to speak anonymously allows Americans to express dissenting or unpopular opinions without exposing themselves to retaliation or harassment from the government,' Terr said. First Amendment advocacy groups and Democratic lawmakers have called the masks an attempt by ICE agents to escape accountability and intimidate immigrants. During a June 12 congressional hearing, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, criticized ICE agents wearing masks during raids, saying: 'Don't wear masks. Identify who you are.' Viral videos appeared to show residents of Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts confronting federal agents , asking them to identify themselves and explain why they were wearing masks. U.S. Rep. Bill Keating, a Democrat who represents Cape Cod, decried 'the decision to use unmarked vehicles, plain clothed officers and masks' in a June 2 letter to federal officials. Republican federal officials, meanwhile, have maintained that masks protect agents from doxing. 'I'm sorry if people are offended by them wearing masks, but I'm not going to let my officers and agents go out there and put their lives on the line and their family on the line because people don't like what immigration enforcement is,' ICE acting Director Todd Lyons said. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
