Durham police add second charge against Foster’s Democrat photographer
    By DAMIAN J. TROISE
    Foster's Daily Democrat
    December 1, 2004

    DURHAM— Police have added a second misdemeanor charge against a news photographer who was arrested after taking a picture of a State Police dog attacking a University of New Hampshire student.

    Aaron Rohde of Foster’s Daily Democrat will now be arraigned on both a disorderly conduct and "willful interference with a police dog" charge Thursday in Durham District Court at 8:30 a.m. Both charges stem from his involvement with state police trooper Mark Hall after Rohde took a sequence of pictures of Hall’s German shepherd attacking Alex Klotz as crowds of people moved down Main Street after the Red Sox won the World Series.

    "Upon review of the case it was deemed that in addition to the disorderly conduct charge that the appropriate charges would be interfering with a police dog," said Durham Deputy Chief Rene Kelley.

    Rohde said he was initially threatened by police with a charge of assaulting an officer after he repeatedly asked the name of the handler, Trooper Mark Hall, who was in violation of state law by not wearing a name tag on his uniform. After several attempts at gaining the officer’s identification, Rohde was thrown to the ground by several officers and arrested.

    State Police Director Col. Frederick Booth has acknowledged that officers from the special unit were without identifying name tags that night, but also contends that they are not legally obligated to verbally reveal their identity to a citizen; it is only a policy. Several civil rights lawyers disagreed, arguing that in the absence of any identifying name identification on the uniform, an officer is required to give his or her name when asked by a citizen.

    "You can’t have accountability if officers are going to go around and refuse to identify themselves," Boston-based civil rights lawyer Howard Friedman has told Foster’s.

    Booth has said that the uniforms did not come with a place to put a name tag and it could take several months to reorder uniforms for the Special Emergency Response Team. He also contends that it is not known whether Hall purposely kept his identity from both Rohde and Klotz. Several state police captains have also said they doubt whether Hall realized his dog bit Klotz, though a series of photos show Hall pulling his dog off the student.

    The Attorney General could not be reached for comment on whether they are looking into the violation of state law stemming from the lack of identification on Hall’s or any of the other four K-9 officers uniforms. Booth will not say whether they are investigating Hall’s conduct that night.

    The incident began when Klotz, walking at the tail end of a large crowd, was bitten from behind, he said. He then turned to ask the officer to control his dog and was bitten again, this time on the leg, leaving a visible gash. He informed the officer he wanted to file a complaint and asked for a name. Hall refused, according to Klotz.

    Klotz said several weeks ago he is setting up a meeting with Durham Police in early December to discuss his case. Kelley said that any complaint would go through Durham police first, and would then be forwarded to the proper department, in this case, State Police.

    According to state law, Hall was required to file a report in regard to his dog biting Klotz. Police will not return phone calls to say whether Hall followed state law by doing so.

    Rohde approached Hall after the incident and also asked for a name. As in Klotz’s case, Hall refused to give his name, Rohde said. Hall’s identity was publicly revealed to the Portsmouth Herald a week after the incident.

    When Hall refused to give his name, Rohde said, he began taking pictures of the officer. That’s when Hall pushed him away. He was then tackled by several officers and threatened with a charge of assaulting an officer. He said he could here officers in the background saying "yeah, I saw him hit you," as he lay face down on the ground with his camera equipment.

    Foster’s photographers are told that in the absence of gaining a name from any official, including police officers, they should take a photo, said Rod Doherty, Foster’s Daily Democrat executive editor.

    Durham police would not say why they are adding the second charge on top of disorderly conduct to Rohde. Kelley said that the case was initially forwarded to state police to prosecute, but after the paperwork was gathered, it was sent back down to Durham for prosecution. State Police Director Booth has said the case never left Durham’s hands.

    Witnesses to the incident said they only saw Rohde attempting to speak with the officer, who along with four other State Police K-9 handlers, were in violation of state law by not wearing identification, therefore, remaining unidentifiable. Those same witnesses also spoke of other K-9 officers attempting to take cameras away from students for taking pictures on the street.

    "I was over on the side of the building and my friend was taking a picture of a police dog and the officer who was holding him a came over and said something like ‘if you do that again I’m going to smash your camera,’" student Andrew Smeltz previously told Foster’s.

    A reporter could also see other K-9 handlers that night allowing their dogs to move into crowds of students as they walked away and snap at them. It is not known whether anyone else was bitten that night.

    No official has commented on the series of photos and will not say whether Hall lost control of his dog or was in complete control of his dog when it attacked Klotz. Klotz was never charged with a crime


    FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. NoNonsense English offers this material non-commercially for research and educational purposes. I believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, i.e. the media service or newspaper which first published the article online and which is indicated at the top of the article unless otherwise specified.

    Back to Repression and Police Dog Abuse