Ex-cop’s domestic violence charges dropped Former Gridley officer convicted of animal cruelty for abusing dachshund

by Dave Waddell
posted Aug. 19

Felony domestic violence charges resulting from disturbing allegations against a former Gridley police officer were dropped because the alleged victim, herself a police officer, refused to testify.

However, the defendant, 31-year-old Devin Pasley, was convicted Aug. 7 of misdemeanor animal cruelty after a three-day trial in Butte County Superior Court. He is scheduled to be sentenced at 1:30 p.m. Aug. 29. Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey said the judge is expected to put Pasley on probation for three years.

At sentencing, “we will be asking that the current temporary domestic violence restraining order be extended through the three-year probationary period that we expect to be ordered,” Ramsey said. “Such a restraining order will prevent him from possessing firearms.”

Ramsey said the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, aka POST, would determine “whether such a conviction would prevent him from being a police officer” again. POST has the authority to decertify peace officers for serious misconduct.

“But frankly, since he was fired from Gridley Police Department and now has an animal abuse conviction, I don’t believe any future police agency will be hiring him,” said Ramsey.

Seth Stoughton, a law professor at the University of South Carolina and one of the nation’s foremost experts on police practices, is not so certain.

“Unless and until an officer is stripped of his certification, I think there’s a pretty good chance that he’ll be able to find another job as an officer,” Stoughton said. “Statistically, it will likely be with a smaller, less well-funded agency that does not pay as well; those agencies are too often in such desperate need of manpower that they either do not do background checks or are willing to overlook what you’d think would be disqualifying factors.”

Pasley was arrested at Gridley PD in May 2022 after his domestic partner reported 15 alleged abusive incidents over the previous 13 months. She described each incident in notes on her cell phone shortly after it occurred, according to Chico police. The woman was pregnant during much of that time with their son. She told investigators Pasley restrained her in various police holds, including the “twist-lock,” the “C-clamp,” and the “carotid control position.” She described being slammed and pinned on several occasions and in various ways, according to police reports.

Ramsey said that unlike with the domestic violence (DV) charges, the alleged victim could be made to testify against her will about Pasley’s abuse of her dog, named “Weenie Dog.”

“We proved the case through a cell phone video taken by the reluctant victim and that ‘victim’s’ testimony,” Ramsey wrote in an email response to questions about the Pasley verdict. “The DV victim, during one of the several DV incidents between her and the defendant, used her cell phone to film an incident where the defendant had picked up her Dachshund dog with one hand around its neck and the other hand on a large kitchen knife moving toward the dog’s neck. (It was not the first time he had choked or abused the dog during DV incidents.)

“Prior to trial, we had to dismiss the DV charges against the female victim, because we could not, under the law, force a DV victim testify in a DV case, and only she could give the necessary testimony/evidence against the defendant to sustain the DV charges.

“However, once the DV charges were dismissed, the judge ruled the case was no longer a DV case, and the victim was no longer a DV victim who could refuse to testify. Therefore we could force her to testify as a regular witness to dog abuse and introduce the cell phone video she had taken. She did try in her testimony to minimize and excuse the defendant’s actions shown in the cell phone video, but the jury didn’t buy it, and used the video to convict the defendant.”

Pasley’s attorney, Kevin W. Harris of Sacramento, did not respond to a request for comment on the case.

A case management conference is scheduled in Superior Court for Sept. 18 on Pasley’s petition for the return of his personal weapons, which were confiscated by Chico PD when he was arrested. The weapons include a shotgun, an assault rifle, three semi-automatic handguns, a revolver, and brass knuckles.

“City of Chico alleges that they seek to take his guns to prevent him from having guns around the alleged victim,” says that petition, filed in September 2022, four months after Pasley’s arrest. “However, there is a distinct possibility that [Pasley] and the Victim would reconcile. Since the alleged victim is a Police Officer she would have guns in their home also. The proposed order in this case is a clear attempt to sever the domestic relations between his significant other as well as his son. This is an overreach of State Power.”

Stoughton, the expert on police practices, was asked how the alleged victim’s employer, a local police agency, should view her refusal to testify about the purported crimes she had reported to law enforcement.

“Oh, that’s a hard question,” Stoughton said. “I wouldn’t expect an agency to have a lot
of patience for an officer hiding or facilitating another officer’s crime, but victims are a different story. The victim’s rights movement has for decades fought to get police agencies to be more respectful of victims’ wishes, including the desire to not cooperate with an investigation or prosecution. I think most agencies would be reluctant to push a victim, even if that was an officer, to assist in ways that they did not want to.”

Dave Waddell is a contributing writer to ChicoSol on criminal justice issues.