Police Dog Home Page
Police Dog Home Page
  • Home
  • About
  • Our Team
  • Services
  • Courses
    • K9 Supervisors Program
    • K9 Conference
    • Advanced Tactical K9
    • Problem Solving/Muzzle
    • Tracking
    • Hosting Guide
  • K9 Administrators
    • Agency Liability
    • Basic Training Syllabus
    • Bite Out Of Crime
    • City Risk Management
    • K9 Records Management
    • K9 Unit Administration
    • PSD - Asset or Liablity?
    • Vendor vs Agency Training
  • Archives
  • Articles
  • Resources
    • Resources
    • Bark & Hold Study
    • Reward Based K9 Training
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Home
    • About
    • Our Team
    • Services
    • Courses
      • K9 Supervisors Program
      • K9 Conference
      • Advanced Tactical K9
      • Problem Solving/Muzzle
      • Tracking
      • Hosting Guide
    • K9 Administrators
      • Agency Liability
      • Basic Training Syllabus
      • Bite Out Of Crime
      • City Risk Management
      • K9 Records Management
      • K9 Unit Administration
      • PSD - Asset or Liablity?
      • Vendor vs Agency Training
    • Archives
    • Articles
    • Resources
      • Resources
      • Bark & Hold Study
      • Reward Based K9 Training
    • Contact Us
  • Home
  • About
  • Our Team
  • Services
  • Courses
  • K9 Administrators
  • Archives
  • Articles
  • Resources
  • Contact Us

Concerns Involving Risk Management In Canine Unit Decisions

Case Study by Sgt. Ted Atlas, Santa Clara County Sheriff's Department

 Jim Collins, the noted business author,  must have been thinking of the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Department  when he wrote, “The purpose of bureaucracy is to compensate for  incompetence.” 


Bureaucracy raised its ugly head in the  incident discussed below. In the aftermath a perfectly good dog was  removed from the unit, his handler suffered a year of misery and  uncertainty and the head of the unit was removed. Readers will find a  story that could not be concocted by a writer of fiction and contains a  clear warning to other canine units.


Scooby was a 5-year old German Shepherd  police dog imported from The Netherlands and handled by Dep. Julie  Wilbanks, a 6-year veteran of the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s  Department. Scooby was purchased by the Sheriff’s Advisory Board and  then donated to the department. Wilbanks had handled Scooby for two  years when this incident occurred. They had an exemplary record as a  team.


On Jan 12, 2003, while at home, Scooby  came from the backyard, through an unsecured door and started a fight  with a male Labrador mix that was being walked on a leash by his owner.  Scooby didn’t respond to verbal commands to stop fighting and he was not  wearing a collar at the time (not required by department policy).  At  Wilbanks direction, a neighbor who came to assist hit Scooby with a 4 X 4  board. Wilbanks used this opportunity to grab Scooby by the scruff of  his neck. In an act of redirected aggression, he bit Julie, causing a  laceration to her hand.  She let go and Scooby reengaged. The neighbor  hit him again and Wilbanks pulled him away by the tail. The other dog  had some puncture wounds to his neck and was treated by a vet at a cost  of $400.00. Scooby was checked by a vet but not injured. The other dog’s  owner suffered a bruised hand from pulling on the leash. Wilbanks  required 12 stitches to suture her hand. The on-duty patrol supervisor  was notified and Wilbanks completed an internal report the next day.  Both the local police and animal control were notified and both did the  appropriate reports. Dep. Wilbanks also called Sgt. Ted Atlas, the  Canine Unit Supervisor and author of this article, who was on his days  off.


For reasons that have never been made  clear, County Counsel and the County’s in-house insurance company (ESA)  took an interest in this case as did the command staff of the Sheriff’s  Department. What should have been a minor issue began to take on a life  of it’s own. Because he was going on vacation, Sgt. Atlas received an  assurance from the Field Services Commander; no decision would be made  in his absence.

 

While on vacation, Atlas received a call  that Scooby was “gone,” although it was not specific whether that meant  gone from the unit or taken from Wilbanks. The commander was contacted  and agreed nothing would be done until they could meet after Atlas’s  return. Dep. Wilbanks was off due to her injury so Scooby was not  working at the time. 


A meeting took place on Feb 18 with  members of the command staff and representatives for County Counsel and  ESA. Atlas and his immediate supervisor, Lt. Luther Pugh, presented  documentation that Scooby was an excellent police dog and that his  behavior, although unfortunate, was not unusual for a police dog. Scooby  had over 200 deployments without a single bad bite. They explained the  drive to protect their property, be it their home or car, is highly  desirable in a police dog. They also said Wilbanks had taken measures to  ensure that Scooby would not get out again. Among a number of  suggestions they made was that the department’s contracted trainer  should do an evaluation of this team. No decisions were made at that  meeting.


Atlas and Wilbanks heard nothing until  another meeting was held on March 19. The commander told Wilbanks,  Scooby was going to be sent to the Air Force to become a military dog.  Needless to say Wilbanks was shocked and upset that her partner and  family member was being taken from her. She also knew that due to an  arthritic condition, Scooby could be euthanized by the Air Force. By the  end of this meeting, the commander backed off that idea and said  further consideration would be made. He asked Atlas for a letter  outlining his ideas on how to deal with this situation and Wilbanks for a  letter from her homeowners insurance stating they are liable for the  dog while at home. Both letters were given to him within two days.


In May, Atlas met with the commander and a  County attorney who said Wilbanks should have been able to control the  dog and stop the fight. He based this opinion (none of the decision  makers had ever watched this team work and no one ever contacted the  trainer) on some telephone conversations with the training sergeant for a  large unit in Southern California. Atlas pointed out the handlers were  never trained in this or any other techniques to break up a dog fight.  To further illustrate their total ignorance of working dogs, the  department pointed to two prior incidents, which they said showed that  Scooby was uncontrollable. The first incident was when he killed a  rabbit during an area search and the second was when he would not  immediately release the sleeve during a canine demonstration. Trying to  get them to understand that both of those are quite common occurrences  was an exercise in total futility.


During this time period, the owner of the  other dog wrote letters to the department demanding the dog be removed  from their neighborhood. Nobody from the Sheriff’s Department addressed  their concerns, although Atlas had suggested to the commander that they  should do so together.


On May 27, after staying with Wilbanks  for 4 1/2 months, Scooby was taken from her and placed in a boarding  kennel pending sending him to the military. 


The media picked up this story creating  an outpouring of support for Wilbanks and the dog and anger toward  Sheriff Laurie Smith. One columnist entitled her article, “How Sheriff  mishandled dog attack.” The membership of the Deputy Sheriff’s  Association (DSA) gave overwhelming support to Wilbanks and printed up  “Free Scooby” t-shirts.


The DSA filed three grievances in behalf  of Wilbanks. One of those grievances alleged a violation of the past  practice, which allows a handler to purchase the dog at the end of its  service life for the sum of $1.00. The County rejected all three  grievances.


The DSA enlisted the assistance of Gary  Messing of Carroll, Burdick, McDonough. On June 17 a TRO was sought to  stop the transfer to the Air Force. The Superior Court issued an  injunction pending arbitration and the grievance. Atlas signed a  declaration in support of the DSA’s arguments. When he returned to work a  few hours after appearing at the hearing, the commander told him he was  being removed as the Canine Unit Sergeant and demanded all of the unit  files.


Atlas called the department in Southern  California on whose information the department based their opinion. Two  sergeants told Atlas they never talked to anyone from his department and  in their opinions; there was no reason to remove Scooby from the unit.  They also told Atlas the technique referred to by County Counsel is not  used to end dog fights and there is no accepted practice of doing so.  Atlas wrote the commander about these conversations but never received a  response.


Ron Yank, also of CBM, entered the case  and filed a federal lawsuit in behalf of Atlas, Wilbanks and the DSA.  Sheriff Laurie Smith, the commander and three captains were named in the  suit, which alleged, among other things, a violation of Atlas’s First  Amendment rights of freedom of speech, freedom of association and  retaliation for participating in union activities. The suit sought  reinstatement of Atlas and Wilbanks back to status quo. Global mediation  was held in October. The Sheriff refused to discuss the sale of Scooby  to Wilbanks. The federal case was settled. Atlas dropped his request to  return to the Canine Unit as he no longer had a working relationship  with the command staff and couldn’t be effective as head of the unit. He  was given a two-year exemption from transfer from patrol in return.  Wilbanks was allowed to return to the unit with a new dog, which she  purchased herself.


In December the matter of the sale of  Scooby went to Arbitration. Gary Messing argued that every dog in the  past was sold to the handler at the end of its career. None of these  sales was ever questioned, regardless of their behavior while in the  unit. For example, several dogs had multiple unprovoked bites of humans  but this did not prevent their sale to their handlers. 


The DSA brought  in Constable Bob Eden of the Delta, B.C. Police Department and an  internationally recognized expert in police canines, to testify that  Scooby’s behavior was nothing more than a territorial drive and he is  well within the standards and expectations for a police dog.  Mr. Messing  even subpoenaed Scooby to the hearing, which made for an emotional,  although short, reunion with Wilbanks who had not seen him since May.  


Sheriff Smith, in a highly unusual appearance, took the stand to defend  her decision to refuse to sell Scooby to Wilbanks. She had difficulty  explaining why nobody ever talked to the trainer and why she never met  with Atlas or Pugh prior to making this decision. She said she relied  upon the advice of her command staff, only one of which had ever been a  canine handler or supervisor. The DSA not only based their case on the  past practice where every dog was sold to the handler at the end of it’s  career but also a written procedure enacted in 1998 which set a  procedure for selling the dogs. 


The County argued against this procedure  as it had a two-year sunset clause and was never replaced. They also  argued the Sheriff had the right to decide whether a dog was to be sold  or not. They based their refusal to sell Scooby to Wilbanks on their  fear that since he attacked another dog, he might attack and severely  injure a child. Scooby had been used at many school demonstrations and  pictures were entered into evidence showing kids hanging on him while he  stood motionless. 


The County brought in a “expert” in an attempt to  discredit the testimony given by Bob Eden. The Sheriff asked the  Vancouver, BC Police Department to send Sgt. Gordon McGuiness to San Jose ostensibly to testify as to the VPD policy of including Risk  Management in the decision to sell a dog to its handler. McGuiness tried  to embellish himself as being more qualified than Eden. He was forced  to retract that stance when it was pointed out that his resume indicated  he attended numerous seminars put on by Bob Eden and was in fact, a  student of Eden’s. 


McGuiness testified there was a handler control issue  in this team and would have reassigned Scooby to another handler. This  went against the County’s stance that Scooby was unfit for duty but that  point was not being argued in arbitration. McGuiness went on to defy  all credibility when asked whether he would want to see this team work  together before making such a decision. He said there was no need as he  could tell from reviewing the reports (all written by civilians or non  canine people) on this case. Incredible that a person purporting himself  to be an expert would make such a decision without ever watching the  team work together.


In March, the arbitrator rendered his  decision that Sheriff Smith violated the MOU in not selling Scooby to  Wilbanks and she was allowed to purchase him for $1. Wielding their  bureaucratic power one final time, the department stalled the paperwork  for a number of days while Wilbanks anxiously awaited the return of her  partner and family member.


This was a case in which bureaucracy and  the ego of a department head overrode rational thought and common sense.  The appropriate experts were not consulted and those who had no  training and experience in the subject at hand made decisions. There was  no reason to remove Scooby from the unit, much less refuse to sell him  to Wilbanks.


All canine handlers and supervisors  should take heed of this case and ensure that the right to purchase a  dog, whenever it can no longer work, is written specifically in your  MOU. The right to purchase should be with the handler, not the  department.


Ted Atlas


Ted Atlas is a sergeant in the Santa  Clara County Sheriff’s Department where he has worked for 25 years. He  has served as a canine handler and was in charge of the Canine Unit from  July 2002 until his forced removal. He holds a BA degree from UCLA.

Niagara Shield Drill

Niagara Shield Drill

Copyright © Eden K9 Group - All Rights Reserved.

  • Home
  • About
  • Our Team
  • Services
  • Archives
  • Articles

This website uses cookies.

We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.

DeclineAccept