Inyo Sheriff Lutze explains decision on K-9 ‘Bady’

Statement from Inyo County Sheriff Bill Lutze regarding removal of K-9 ‘Bady’

On May 25, 2018 I made the difficult decision to remove K-9 “Bady” from his handler.  It appears that some individuals want to make this a political issue.  It is not.  As the Sheriff, I have a duty to keep all members of the Department and all members of the public safe, even if my decisions or acts are unpopular.

Inyo Sheriff Bill Lutze

Because there is an effort to taint my decision, I want to ensure the public and members of the Department that the decision to remove K-9 “Bady” was based on my concern about potential liability and misuse issues and only after consultation with the County’s outside legal counsel.

I acknowledge that the information that came to my attention was the video that has been posted and discussed in public forums.  The video clearly shows an on-duty Deputy, in uniform, allowing K-9 “Bady” to bite a civilian in the backyard of someone’s home.  The civilian is wearing a bite-sleeve.

K-9 “Bady” is an asset to the Department to be dispatched under specific law enforcement circumstances.

The activity depicted on the video was not a Department-sanctioned training exercise and therefore creates legal exposure to the County, just as there is liability for any unauthorized demonstration of any other asset used by the Department to fulfill our law enforcement duties.

I recognize that a K-9 and his handler (and members of their family) have a special bond; however, the K-9’s primary function is to assist in law enforcement.  He belongs to the Department and he can be removed if there is concern for liability and potential misuse.  Upon my receipt of the video on May 25, I felt it was incumbent to act immediately and I did so after receipt of advice from legal counsel.

I have directed that further investigation be conducted into the activities shown in the video.   Due to personnel confidentiality requirements, I cannot share any further information at this time.

(Editor’s note: The handler for ‘Bady’ is Deputy Bradley.)

, , ,

20 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jw
Jw
4 years ago

Lutz will get his karma…

stuffhappens760
stuffhappens760
4 years ago

The deputy needs to take responsibility for his actions. The reality is, he is the one who put this dog in the predicament of being removed from his care due to his lack of good judgement. Now his wife is on social media posting documentation, setting up interviews with t.v.… Read more »

James Smith
James Smith
4 years ago

The choice is clear. Vote for the deputy with ONLY 10 years experience, who has been disciplined, lost stripes, has zero leadership background, . He wins, starts promoting his buddies. Vote for the Undersheriff who has 30 years experience, and years of leadership behind him, and is backed by not… Read more »

Jeff Briggs
Jeff Briggs
4 years ago

I wore the bite suit or sleeve many times in the past with NO training or certification, had a blast. And this was with Inyo county. Could this just be poor timing, or maybe the sheriff also wants Josh to win the election.

James Smith
James Smith
4 years ago

The video posted after the K9 removed. No one can connect the two events, but we all making up conclusions. Maybe more to the story? How long did Inyo go without a canine, previously?

Charles O. Jone
Charles O. Jone
4 years ago

K9’s in law enforcement is a very effective tool when used properly. If there was a misuse of the tool then deal with that in the well established disciplinary process. Just getting rid of a useful department tool doesn’t make sense. If liability is the main concern, what about the… Read more »

Rick O'Brien
Rick O'Brien
4 years ago

It is a great loss for the county to go WITHOUT the dog and his handler,together as a team. What happens when you have a lost child, or a suspect runs into a dark warehouse or a field with chest-high brush ? What happens if there is a need for… Read more »

Retired LEO K9 Supervisor
Retired LEO K9 Supervisor
4 years ago

This is clearly a case of over reaction by the Sheriff in taking away the dog from the Deputy. The Deputy did show poor judgement in using someone who was not a trained K9 and certified Agitator to do sleeve work with his dog. Having said that, real Law Enforcement… Read more »

Voice of Reason
Voice of Reason
4 years ago

If you are in fact a retired K9 Supervisor then obviously you would know that all IAs are completely confidential and cannot be brought up to justify this situation that has been made far too public as it is. You are commenting based on the assumption that this is the… Read more »

Retired LEO K9 Supervisor
Retired LEO K9 Supervisor
4 years ago

Actually there is additional information available. The department has failed to send the K9 Deputy and his dog to the yearly POST Required certification course that was due in October 2017. For proof, simply file a Public Records Act request with the Sheriff’s Department for all the K9 training records… Read more »

InyoMatters
InyoMatters
4 years ago

“RLEOK9 Supvr”– What does the particular “fact” about the missed training have to do with this topic of the police dog being taken away from its handler? It training may have been missed for any number of perfectly good reasons…and perhaps, more to the point, it is unlikely to be… Read more »

Suze1942
Suze1942
4 years ago
Reply to  InyoMatters

Guess I’d give more weight to the sheriff’s comment that strict training protocols must be followed IF the department was diligent about insisting that the time, money was given, no insisted for 2017 Required certification course. Seems pretty selective about regs. And this is your only K9 team? And you… Read more »

395Guy
395Guy
4 years ago

Good move Sheriff bravo. Not very bright Deputies we have at the moment. Hope they start thinking a little bit about their actions and the role of the positions they are in. All we need is an unqualified Sheriff leading these guys. Hollowell for Sheriff!

logical local
logical local
4 years ago
Reply to  395Guy

Wait! Isn’t Hollowell the CURRENT supervisor? Things will obviously improve under his leadership.

395Guy
395Guy
4 years ago
Reply to  logical local

Well if we were being a “logical” knowledgeable person we would know that he is the Under Sheriff not the Sheriff. Last I checked the Sheriff is Bill Lutze and he is the leader and the one who makes the final decision not the Under Sheriff. And they will certainly… Read more »

InyoMatters
InyoMatters
4 years ago
Reply to  logical local

No, Hollowell is not Bradley’s immediate supervisor, which you likely already know. His immediate supervisor is a sergeant, not the Undersheriff. You might consider changing your online moniker from “logical local” to “convenient idiot.”

X
X
4 years ago
Reply to  InyoMatters

Hollowell is not his supervisor, however Connolly is?? Guarantee with no election or any other drama at ICSO this would be a minor verbal reprimand, if that at all! Major over reaction by the SO as a retaliatory gesture to an openly supportive Nicholson for sheriff employee!! Loss to both… Read more »

Brian Briggs
Brian Briggs
4 years ago

A) County Council is a contract service not an employee of official of Inyo County. B) Departmental policy is a matter of public record withstanding certain exemptions which K-9 training does not fall under. While the personnel record may be confidential no Departmental policy has been disclosed that Deputy Bradley… Read more »

Buzz Killington
Buzz Killington
4 years ago

When they say it isn’t political, it is!

InyoMatters
InyoMatters
4 years ago

Whoever posted the video on Facebook is responsible for having managed to pretty much “screw the pooch” and K9 Handler, Officer Reuben Bradly. If not for the posting, the dog would still be home and there would be no question of “politics.” Thankfully no one was hurt and hopefully Officer… Read more »