The article says the dog showed no signs of finding the scent of drugs other than the office saying he kind of sat a bit.
No other signs.
Such as a wagging tail. The wagging tail doesn't appear to be the determining factor. The article doesn't say it was, but does sensationalize one aspect.
Now I'm no expert on drug sniffing dogs. You know who is?
The expert witness in the trial.
This story is 100% written to get a rise out of people.
If the police did their job properly, and didn't leave the search and seizure up to a quick, off camera partial signal, then this wouldn't be an issue.
The crime is immaterial.
We live in a society. A just society of laws.
The police who investigate crimes, and the attorneys who prosecute are held to a high standard of proof, as they should be.
__________________
"Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
|