I mean really - let's stop and think about this for a minute. Do you suppose that out of the blue one day the ACO knocked on the landlord's door and said, "You must let me intro one of your rentals because my crystal ball tells me there is an injured animal inside that I must remove and put down" ?
Things don't happen that way. There has to have been a basis for all this to have happened. Let's look there before we start pointing fingers of blame.
My big question is what was the true condition of the dog at the time? While the vet speaks to diagnosis based on an old video, was he present to examine the dog in person when the ACO was there? We are taking the owner's word that the dog was fine, but the article alludes to photos in the sheriff's possession that depicts a terribly suffering dog, a vet was ready to put the animal down and the word of an ACO that in his years of experience, the animal was suffering enough that dispatch was warranted. Just a preponderance of what little we have so far does not weigh this in favor of the owner.
We all love animals, but take about 20 steps back and look at what OP has posted here. It is all assumptions and innuendo with absolutely no offer of proof. If the ACO screwed up then yes, appropriate action needs to be take against him, but not by a crazed internet lynch mob fueled by their own imagination and guesswork rather than cold hard facts.