Man's best friend

Mar 3, 2013

The unfortunate incident in which a Sandusky police officer shot an killed a dog in a Sandusky neighborhood last month has certainly stirred many among us. 

At last count, there were more than 1,500 comments from readers at on various stories about the incident posted at the newspaper's website. That comment count dwarfs the number of comments left by readers below stories about the March 2, 2012, killing of 19-year-old Jacob Limberios. The fact that a video of the dog killing was available probably has a lot to do with the enormous response from readers. 

Click here to read past articles about the killing of Jacob Limberios.

It seems readily apparent there might have been a better way to respond to the loose dog complaint. It's a good thing when readers express their opinions on any matter, regardless of how uncomfortable that might make city officials, or anyone else. It also seems the Sandusky Police Department is attempting to address the concerns by being pro-active in reviewing what happened and developing better response protocols for loose dog complaints.

But when it comes to the killing of Jacob Limberios, it seems Sandusky County officials, and special prosecutor Dean Henry, only know one way to investigate: Stonewall.

The Limberios family contracted to have an autopsy done after county officials refused to conduct their own. Dr. Cyril Wecht, a forensic pathologist, concluded there was no way Limberios was holding the gun that killed him. In a phone interview with Henry and Sandusky County sheriff Kyle Overmyer during a "Between the Lines" program Feb.7, we asked Henry about Wecht's autopsy. (Click here to watch the program. The interviews with Overmyer and Henry begin at about the 20-minute mark in the program.)

Question: Have you reviewed Dr. Wecht's autopsy?
Henry: I have.
Question: Did you have any thoughts on the autopsy report?
Henry: I have lots of thoughts on his autopsy report.
Question: Could you share any of those with us?
Henry: Do you have a specific question?
Question: Could you share any of your thoughts with us on the autopsy report?
Henry: No.

A year and a day after he was killed, Henry does not appear anywhere close to wrapping up the probe and filing a report. The Limberios family has been asking for 12 months, "Who killed our son?" The best answer from Henry, so far, has been, "We may never know exactly what happened."

But Sandusky County sheriff's investigators seemed to know within two hours after Jacob was killed. They appear to have wrapped up that initial investigation before midnight on March 2, 2012, determining that Jacob committed suicide but it might have been accidental. There was no need for the coroner at the crime scene, and there was no need to preserve evidence, apparently, because the investigators decided an autopsy was not necessary and it was OK, apparently, to throw away clothing and blood-spattered shoes worn by witnesses to the killing.

Family pets are beloved. They're dependable.  It's understandable why the killing of "Lucy" the dog has stirred so much emotion in the community. 

It's more difficult, however, to understand why the killing of Jacob Limberios has not stirred a similar level of concern. 





you sir, are the epitome (look it up cuz i know u don't know what it means) of white trash.

when you interject the word 'glad' in a comment about destroying dogs and hurting people=sociopathic behavior.

how many bodies do you have buried in the crawl space of your house mr. bundy?


I want to clear up some of the events of the night Jacob was killed to possibly make people more comfortable talking about, especially if you take the position that vicariouslyAlive has suggested. Jacob received the handgun as a gift at the age of 19, which I believe is legal but I may be wrong. Jacob took pride in gun safety and knowledge and was also interested in antiques and collecting as stated in an article posted today on Jacob took the gun to the home to make a potential legal sale to one of the witnesses who was over 21 and a former member of the U.S. Navy. After they all took practice shots outside in a field Jacob reentered the home and completely emptied the revolver, including the live round. At this point he was making phone calls to myself and another friend. If you feel he was being irresponsible by letting the other witnesses look at the gun again after reentering the home remember why he was there and why he brought the firearm. It is likely that he thought only the over 21 year old, former Navy member, who was interesting in purchasing the gun was the only one handling it again, and he was probably on the phone with myself or our other friend when the gun was passed around to other witnesses and reloaded. He was also planning to leave the home when he was on the phone with myself. Just thought that might change some of the thinking for people who were reluctant to comment.


knowing the facts really doesn't help bmg... it's still a taboo topic... what questions can i ask as arguing points to not make it sound like the kid deserved to die? because in this argument, that's what the opposing side is basically doing... they'd basically be saying that he brought it upon himself... now what demented and twisted person would want to take that stance on this issue? there really is no way to go about it bud... not without sounding like Satan's left hand...

any kind of peculation to the event has to put the blame on some one... and in a situation where careless seems to have been abundant, some of the blame goes on the victim as well... it's sick to say, but true... i do own a gun. a few of them in fact, and the last thing i'd do is turn my back on a stranger with a weapon... loaded or not... and even just me saying that implies that Jake holds some sort of fault in the situation... which is why most people wont comment on it...