I represented Kurt Fahrney in his fight to save Diesel. I believe the City’s failure to provide medical records before the hearing denied us a fair chance to challenge its account of the injury.
Sources from my case records: Des Moines Police Department incident 2015-0028631, Officer Lori Kelly’s supplement entered October 8, 2015, describing her September 29, 2015 investigation, sections B–C, reproduced on page 26 of “PROPOSED EXHIBITS FOR HEARING”; and the district court ruling filed September 8, 2016, pages 14–15. The police report records what hospital staff told the officer; it is not the doctors’ original clinical report. The child’s name is replaced with “[the child]” below. Private identifiers and unrelated medical information are not reproduced.
“Blunck said that [the child] was first taken to Lutheran Hospital. Doctors at that facility did not believe that the child’s injuries were consistent with a dog bite.”
“Dr. Tonui said that the injuries are not typical for a dog bite but the explanation is plausible.”
These are the hospital accounts the officer recorded. My criticism is that we needed the underlying records in time to prepare our challenge to the City’s account.
“The ALJ did issue a scheduling order which contemplated this specific discovery issue and ordered the City produce the requested documents to opposing counsel prior to the hearing. At the time of the hearing, some of the requested medical documents had not yet been produced by the City to opposing counsel.”
“The documents sought by the plaintiff allegedly contained statements by treating medical staff indicating HP’s injury was not typical of a dog bite.”
“Despite the failure of the City to produce these documents in advance of the hearing, the plaintiffs were able to elicit testimony indicating that HP’s main injury was a laceration, not punctures—which are typical of dog bites. Thus, the plaintiffs suffered no prejudice from the City’s nondisclosure.”
The court upheld the dangerous-animal designation. I disagree that having some testimony about the wound made the missing advance disclosure harmless. I believe we should have had the records in time to prepare and present the full challenge.
The August 2, 2018 emails show Casini waiting for the City’s written direction and Haraldson directing euthanasia. When Casini challenged my reference to a stay, I answered him: I identified the orders I believed protected Diesel, told him to look at the hearing transcript, and urged him and his clients to keep Diesel alive. Haraldson’s reply reported that Diesel had been euthanized.
The 2020 Court of Appeals opinion records that Diesel was euthanized two days after the July 2018 ruling. It also records the denial of our contempt request. That appeal addressed sanctions against Bela and its attorney; it did not declare the killing unconstitutional.