Status of dog shot at by police remains unknown

CAMDEN-WYOMING — The fate of a pit bull targeted by police gunfire during a Monday arrest remains unclear several days later, though new details did emerge.

A Delaware State Police spokeswoman said Friday a trooper was told by family that the dog had returned to the residence in the 7000 block of Westville Road.

“I cannot confirm the status of the dog as troopers did not personally see the dog after it had ran into the woods,” she said.

Master Cpl. Melissa Jaffe said a further update would be provided when available.

State police earlier reported the dog ran after a trooper’s weapon was discharged when it “charged at the officer in an aggressive manner” at approximately 1:10 p.m. Monday, according to Master Cpl. Jaffe.

Police said at the time it was unknown whether the dog was wounded when it fled from the scene and was not immediately located.

Authorities initially responded to a reported domestic incident that brought the arrest of John R. Slack on misdemeanor disorderly conduct, harassment and resisting arrest charges and the defendant pleaded not guilty to the counts. He was presented at Justice of the Peace Court 2 in Rehoboth Beach and released on $1,500 unsecured bail pending a court appearance on March 28.

According to state police on Friday, the “[t]rooper handling the case was informed by children at the residence that the dog had returned home.”

Police did not indicate whether the dog’s condition was discussed or when they were notified by the family.

According to officials, law enforcement officers are not required to report loose or potentially aggressive dogs to the Delaware Office of Animal Welfare,

Second arrest made

Mr. Slack was arrested again on Tuesday for supposedly violating bail conditions resulting from his arrest the day before during an alleged incident with his girlfriend, according to police in court documents. He pleaded not guilty to breach of release through JP Court 2 and was given a $500 unsecured bond with a March 28 arraignment date.

In the second incident, according to an arrest affidavit, Mr. Slack was contacted by troopers in the driveway and had “never called 911 or Troop 3 to request the assistance of a trooper, as stated in the bail conditions in the no contact order.”

The time of the alleged offense was listed in documents as supposedly happening between 8 a.m. and 2:15 p.m. Tuesday. He entered a not guilty plea.

“(Mr. Slack) questioned why the police were at his residence and didn’t understand that he was getting arrested for violating the no contact order. (Mr. Slack) stated this was his residence and he didn’t have to leave. …”

In court documents, police said the no contact order prohibited Mr. Slack from contacting the woman or the “property, residence, place of employment, school, church or at any other place.

Additionally, Mr. Slack was “issued to stay 100 yards or more away from (the woman, her residence or workplace).”

Police said Mr. Slack could return to the residence once, “only if accompanied by a police officer, for the sole purpose of obtaining clothes, health and/or personal grooming items.”

Reach staff writer Craig Anderson at canderson@newszap.com

You are encouraged to leave relevant comments but engaging in personal attacks, threats, online bullying or commercial spam will not be allowed. All comments should remain within the bounds of fair play and civility. (You can disagree with others courteously, without being disagreeable.) Feel free to express yourself but keep an open mind toward finding value in what others say. To report abuse or spam, click the X in the upper right corner of the comment box.

Facebook Comment