,
4 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
11th Cir.: It's not clear that a police officer holding a 10-year-old bystander at gunpoint violates the child's 4th Amendment rights when he shoots the child in the leg, if in fact the officer was attempting to shoot a nearby dog. 
11th Cir.: "With the benefit of hindsight," maybe that could have been handled better. "The firing of a deadly weapon at a dog located close enough to a prone child that the child is struck by a trained officer's errant shot hardly qualifies as conduct we wish to see repeated."
Dissent: AYFKM? "No competent officer would fire his weapon in the direction of a nonthreatening pet while that pet was surrounded by children."
Here's the decision: media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/f…
