Doggone Confusing

Headlines can be interesting to read, especially if the reader has no clue what the story is about.  Take this headline from a local newspaper:  LQ couple found dead ID’d; dog safe. What would a reader expect the content of the article to be?

Someone tried to harm a couple’s dog, but the criminal was halted in his/her efforts to kill the dog by the couple, who then died from injuries inflicted during the fight over the dog's life.   Or, a couple was accosted by a criminal, who killed them but left the dog to survive the crime. Or, the couple committed suicide/murder, but didn't kill their beloved dog.   We'll never know what happened, but we know for certain that the dog is safe.

Of course I can fill in the blanks and feel reasonably comfortable with thinking that a couple was killed—somehow, and the dog, which was in the house, was not involved in the … murder, murder/suicide … , and the couple has now been identified by the process that is used to determine who the victims of a violent crime are. It just tickles me not only that the dog became part of the story, but it shares the headline with a double-death report.

Not to mention the "LQ couple" teaser.  Any ideas what that could be?

Back in the day, a good copy editor would rewrite the headline to focus on the death of the victims and omit the dog as not really relevant. What is a copy editor, you may ask?  One who has a reasonable command of the language in which the newspaper is written so s/he can read what is in the paper before it is published, thus avoiding embarrassing and/or confusing and/or just plain incorrect content (copy).

UPDATE: the couple, who lived in La Quinta, were victims of a murder/suicide and the dog was not killed in the commission of the crime.