Here’s a story that just came out of left field, as the SDSU police chief has apparently been charged with 5 counts of animal cruelty:
The Chief of Police at South Dakota State University has been arrested and charged with five felony counts of animal cruelty after Brookings Police found dogs living in a home he owned in horrendous conditions.
Read that here in the Brookings Beacon.
Update: there’s more from the Brookings Police Department:
The Brookings Police Department arrests subject for felony cruelty to animals
On Friday, Dec. 5, 2025, the Brookings Police Department arrested Timothy A. Heaton, age 59, of Brookings for five felony counts of cruelty to animals. The arrest followed an investigation that resulted in five German Shepherds being seized from a residence located in the 1000 block of Third Street. Heaton was remanded to the custody of the Brookings County Detention Facility, awaiting court proceedings.
Additional Update: South Dakota State University has issued a statement on the arrest of UPD Chief:
South Dakota State University has been made aware of the arrest of University Police Department Chief Tim Heaton earlier today. The university is cooperating with the appropriate authorities.
SDSU is working through the process to name an interim University Police Department chief.
Given this is an active legal and personnel matter, the university will not comment further at this time.
SDSU’s priority remains committed to ensuring safety, integrity, accountability and the continued operation of our university community.
Maybe he thought they were coyotes?
And the center free space was dog poop one foot deep in the house, according to The Brookings Beacon.
Well, I was going to eat breakfast, but I think I will wait for a bit.
Hope the poor dogs find loving owners. How awful
The main question would be WHY did he keep dogs in that house? Did he live there, or did he live at a place that would not accept dogs? If he wanted dogs, why didn’t he care for them? This is just infuriating!
People claiming to be Heaton’s former neighbors are saying on Facebook that the house has been a nuisance property since Heaton was raising his kids there, and that the Brookings police refused to act on their complaints for years. Power-tripping egomania might explain both the desire to own five German shepherds and the failure to care for them.
sounds like a systemic corruption problem
It looks like the Argus Leader has published the probable cause statement. These are excerpts.
“Timothy’s son, Kyer Heaton, admitted that the dogs urinate and defecate indoors, do not go outside, and that the residence has no active heat source. Moreover, Kyer said that his dad did not want law enforcement in his house.
The residence had no heat (thermostat reading 10°F), frozen water pails, unusable kitchen and bathroom areas, and structural damage from a prior fire.
A veterinary evaluation revealed multiple indicators of neglect and abuse, including gingivitis, broken and fractured teeth, feces matted in the hair, malnourished conditions, sores on the feet, abscess in one’s ear and other concerning medical issues.”
https://embed.documentcloud.org/documents/26343811-heaton-pc-form
The Brookings Regional Humane Society has also posted a statement.
“Because this situation is part of an active law enforcement investigation, BRHS will not be discussing case details publicly. Additionally, due to the overall medical status, they will not be available for visitation, adoption, or any public interaction until they receive full medical clearance.”
So for legal reasons, the society says it won’t be telling us that the medical status of the dogs precludes letting the public see them.
Treating innocent animals this way is deplorable. I hope he gets the maximum as an example. We’ve had too many cases of this in Brookings. It’s time to take a stand. I’ve watched this property and wondered where in the h@*& is our building inspector. A lot of things need to be cleared up here!
Surprising it took so long for the real cops to hold the toy cops accountable.
Can you elaborate on that a bit more?
It’s difficult to elaborate because I have relatively little firsthand information, but I’m a 1993 SDSU graduate, and Chief Heaton banned me from the campus on September 5, 2003. He cited reports by his officers that alleged “stalking-type behaviors” toward an SDSU senior, which apparently prompted her to make similar accusations in an application for a restraining order the same day. I’d talked to her twice and seen her around campus five or six times that summer, but she’d told me she had a boyfriend, and by the time she accused me of stalking her, I had trouble even remembering when I’d last seen her.
I subpoenaed the cited reports from Heaton on September 12, and he said he’d provide them on September 15. He never did provide them, but he apparently provided an officer to escort my accuser to the hearing on September 22. The officer testified only that the SDSU police had observed me on campus several times and determined that I wasn’t currently enrolled, but his presence seemed to prejudice the judge, who merely listed facts I’d acknowledged and granted the restraining order with no further explanation.
After two of my friends told me Heaton had conducted telephone interviews with them about me, my attorney sent SDSU a formal request for information about those contacts on October 8. The university’s lawyer replied that he was unaware of any such information and claimed Heaton had provided us with “all the information maintained by the UPD” related to any investigation. I moved to Mitchell in early October and appealed to the state supreme court on October 21.
On November 25, an agent from the Division of Criminal Investigation contacted me by telephone and interrogated me for roughly fifteen minutes in pursuit of criminal charges. He said he’d come to Mitchell to interview me in person, but I declined mainly because I was preparing to go back to my hometown for a memorial service for my grandpa later that day. At one point the agent indicated he’d received evidence forwarded to him by Heaton, but to this day I don’t know what that evidence was. The Brookings County state’s attorney declined to file criminal charges and declined to grant me access to the DCI report.
On February 12, 2004, the attorney general’s office filed a motion requesting to represent my accuser at taxpayer expense in the appeal, arguing that the case involved “protection of a victim of stalking, where there was no prior relationship of any sort between the stalker and his victim.” The motion explained that personnel of SDSU had personally contacted the attorney general’s office, but it didn’t identify the SDSU personnel by name.
Although I’d never been criminally charged with stalking, much less convicted, the supreme court granted the request on March 12. The attorney general’s office proceeded to overwhelm me with more lies than I could afford to answer, and I notified the court that I didn’t intend to file a reply brief or take any further action in the appeal. My attorney said that essentially guaranteed the supreme court would uphold the restraining order, which it formally did a few weeks later.
The restraining order expired roughly 20 years ago, but over the years Heaton has explicitly denied or simply ignored multiple requests to lift the campus ban, which remains in place even now with no explanation ever given. There’s much more to the story and its nightmarish aftermath, but hopefully this is a coherent introduction.
That sounds very Brookings law enforcement-like. I’m fortunate enough to not have gone to SDSU. It appears their goal is to make sure every college student leaves with a criminal record. I don’t know any of my friends who made it out without an underage consumption charge. I have to admit, I drank too at my college, but the cops would just bust the party up and say go home, they didn’t surround the house with a swat team to hand out 200+ underage tickets. I’ve heard kids don’t drink as much as they used to, so maybe this guy was just taking his rage out on something else he could control, poor dogs.