Police dog's bite 'not excessive'
    By Neal Hall
    Vancouver Sun
    May 6, 2003

    A B.C. Supreme Court judge has ruled that the use of a Vancouver police dog, which bit a Kerrisdale man hiding under a car in a West Side carport, did not amount to excessive force.

    Richard Robinow suffered serious injuries to his right arm, including extensive loss of tissue, nerve damage and scarring.

    He filed a civil lawsuit against the City of Vancouver and Constable Kirk Star, who was the handler of a dog named Justice, which bit Robinow while he was hiding under a car in a darkened carport in the early hours of July 3, 1998.

    Robinow was attempting to evade police and although he had committed no crime he testified he had just smoked heroin with a friend.

    At the time of the incident, Robinow was 18 and living with his parents in Kerrisdale. He had smoked some marijuana and contacted a friend, David Wu, who came and picked him up in a van sometime after 1 a.m.

    Robinow and Wu drove to a secluded spot bordering the University Endowment Lands, where they smoked some heroin. They left about 10 minutes later.

    On Crown Street near 22nd, Wu noticed a police car a few blocks away. Someone in the neighbourhood had complained about auto break-ins and two officers had been dispatched to the 3900-block West 23rd.

    The officers saw Wu's van turn from West 23rd Avenue onto Crown and pursued it south to 31st Avenue, where the two occupants "bailed out."

    Robinow hid under a car in a carport, where the police dog grabbed him by his right arm and held him until Star gave a command that caused the dog to release him.

    Robinow alleged the use of Justice constituted an assault and battery on him. But B.C. Supreme Court Justice Marion Allan concluded April 29: "The force used did not become excessive, unreasonable or inappropriate."


    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