New Orleans police officer Derrick Burmaster, who fatally shot a puppy wagging its tail, now faces trial after a federal appeals court rejected his qualified immunity defense.
Key Takeaways
- Officer Derrick Burmaster shot and killed a 16-week-old Catahoula puppy named Apollo while responding to a noise complaint in 2021
- The puppy was reportedly wagging its tail and approaching the officer when shot, contradicting claims of threatening behavior
- A federal appeals court rejected Burmaster’s qualified immunity defense, allowing the case to proceed to trial
- The officer had previously shot another dog in 2012, raising questions about the pattern of behavior and proper training
- This case highlights the broader issue of “puppycide,” where officers shoot non-threatening dogs, damaging community trust
Police Officer Faces Trial for Killing Family Pet
A New Orleans police officer who shot and killed a 16-week-old puppy in 2021 is now heading to trial after failing to have the case dismissed on qualified immunity grounds. Officer Derrick Burmaster fatally shot Apollo, a 22-pound Catahoula puppy, while responding to a noise complaint at the home of Derek Brown and Julia Barecki-Brown. The Browns’ lawsuit alleges their puppy was wagging its tail and approaching the officer when Burmaster drew his weapon and fired, an action they claim was completely unjustified and violated their constitutional rights.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit delivered a significant ruling against Burmaster’s attempt to dismiss the case based on qualified immunity, which typically shields government officials from civil liability when performing discretionary functions. This ruling effectively sends a message that shooting a non-threatening pet may constitute an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment. The decision sets an important precedent in the ongoing national conversation about police accountability and the limits of officer discretion when dealing with family pets.
Pattern of “Puppycide” Raises Serious Concerns
What makes this case particularly troubling is that this wasn’t Burmaster’s first incident involving shooting a dog. Records show he had previously shot another dog in 2012, raising questions about potential patterns of behavior and inadequate training. The Burmaster case falls into a disturbing national trend that animal welfare advocates have termed “puppycide,” where law enforcement officers shoot dogs that pose no obvious threat. Similar incidents have been documented throughout Louisiana and in other states like Missouri, suggesting a systemic problem rather than isolated incidents.
The Browns filed their lawsuit against both Burmaster and the City of New Orleans in 2022, arguing that the officer unconstitutionally “seized” their pet by using lethal force without legitimate justification. The legal argument hinges on established precedent that pets are considered personal property under the law and thus protected from unreasonable seizure. The family’s loss has transformed into a fight for justice that could potentially change how police departments train officers to interact with animals during routine calls.
Implications for Police Training and Community Trust
Animal welfare advocates point to this case as evidence of the urgent need for comprehensive police training in animal behavior. Many law enforcement agencies across the country provide minimal or no training on how officers should approach and handle dogs, leaving officers ill-equipped to distinguish between genuinely threatening behavior and normal canine greeting behaviors. This knowledge gap creates dangerous situations where officers may resort to lethal force unnecessarily, damaging community trust and traumatizing pet owners.
The outcome of Burmaster’s trial could have far-reaching implications for police departments nationwide. A verdict against the officer might prompt departments to implement mandatory animal behavior training, establish clearer protocols for handling pet encounters, and create accountability measures for officers who use lethal force against animals without clear justification. The case highlights the growing disconnect between traditional police training focused primarily on human threats and the reality that officers regularly encounter family pets during routine calls.
