Most of the nearly 73,000 dogs living in Seattle provide love and companionship to their families as their primary function. However, many dogs have jobs, and that fact changes their legal protections.
If an animal victim is characterized as property owned by the Department, it might be possible to argue that the abuse qualifies as destruction of property. It would be easier and wiser to amend the Seattle Municipal Code and add language protecting these selfless workers from intentional harm and neglect.
Police K9 units are not covered by the Seattle Municipal Code chapter on animals, including abuse and neglect. SMC 9.25.010 states that “animals owned by the Police Department are exempt from this Chapter”. ( “Animals” is used to include horses ridden by the horse patrol unit). Police dogs and their handlers have various responsibilities, including detection and capture of suspects, finding drugs and electronic equipment, bomb and arson detection, and wellness support. The Revised Code of Washington imposes criminal penalties on bystanders or suspects for harming police dogs. RCW 9A76.200. It is also unlawful to interfere with a dog or horse while on duty. RCW 12A.16.060. The Seattle Police Manual covers deploying police dogs in various situations and what to do about dog bites. See, for example, the SPD Policy Manual 8.300-POL-1. Nowhere in the state, city, or police department materials are there protections for these dogs. What happens if the handler is observed being abusive or criminally negligent to the animal? It would be difficult to prosecute a handler even with strong evidence of guilt as there is no statutory recourse for the prosecutor.
Fire marshals and fire departments make use of accelerant detection dogs to help identify arson cases. While these animals would not fall under “owned by the Police Department” exclusion, they do perform a police function. Would these animals be protected by SMC Title 9?