ailsas mum Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 I have a couple of grandbrats one of 4 months and one that's 7 months, they are never left unattended with the dogs, if during the day they are asleep they do it in their buggy's which are in the middle of the floor with no furniture nearby where the dogs could jump up and get to them, if I have them overnight I sleep in another room with the baby who sleeps in the travel cot ( which cost about £40 which is a lot less than a night out costs ) we bought for them, the dogs sleep with oh in our bedroom. Most dogs could get onto a table, Abby has on occasion jumped up on one of our dining room tables to clean up any crumbs, she gets on a chair then on to the table. Terri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sproggie14 Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Sorry but it infuriates me that the grandmother left a baby on a table and went to sleep and faces no charges. The dogs, who probably just thought it was a toy, die Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumpole Posted February 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Sorry but it infuriates me that the grandmother left a baby on a table and went to sleep and faces no charges. The dogs, who probably just thought it was a toy, die agree totally, but that said at least the dogs were not beaten with sticks or shot by the police they were removed and humanely pts, the poor baby must have suffered terribly even if only for a split second when it looks like all of them died needlessly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizzie Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 A dining table isn't exactly a safe place for a baby to sleep, what the hell were they thinking? I feel for the family, it is a terrible tragedy, one that should not have happened if the person taking care of the child acted responsibly with safety in mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KathyM Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 I would imagine if the baby fell off the table, there would be some physical evidence to show for it, although that's not always the case I know, just more likely than not from that sort of height. I would also trust the report of the coroner, they have no reason to bias things against the dogs even if the press like to. However like others I am appauled that the grandmother faces no comeback for leaving a baby in a dangerous situation with no supervision. I can only assume if the legal system was fair (and I concede it's far from!) that the grandmother had some sort of mitigating factor/s affecting the situation that was/were unavoidable. I cannot see what they could be though, and regardless of the way in which the baby died, he died because he wasn't being supervised. You can't put the sole blame on the dogs, because it simply wouldn't have happened if he was supervised properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranirottie Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 I would imagine if the baby fell off the table, there would be some physical evidence to show for it, although that's not always the case I know, just more likely than not from that sort of height. I would also trust the report of the coroner, they have no reason to bias things against the dogs even if the press like to. However like others I am appauled that the grandmother faces no comeback for leaving a baby in a dangerous situation with no supervision. I can only assume if the legal system was fair (and I concede it's far from!) that the grandmother had some sort of mitigating factor/s affecting the situation that was/were unavoidable. I cannot see what they could be though, and regardless of the way in which the baby died, he died because he wasn't being supervised. You can't put the sole blame on the dogs, because it simply wouldn't have happened if he was supervised properly. I agree with that x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackmagic Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/a...r_2n8swaO7YQdyA This report on the Press Association site says 'apparantly by the dogs' Detective Chief Inspector Jon Williams of Gwent Police told the inquest in Merthyr Tydfil: "His grandmother placed him on a dining table, as had happened before with the agreement of his parents, within the front living-dining room. "She would appear to have dropped off to sleep and upon waking found Jaden had been taken from the table, apparently by the two dogs, and sustained serious injuries." But at the bottom of the report he is quoted as saying the baby was lying on a large pillow on the dining table when the dogs took him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fee Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 The grandmother has lost a grandchild, her child has lost a child and she is responsible. Whatever we think about placing the baby on a table (and maybe it was all secured/protected so the child couldn't fall, we don't really know) this woman and her family must be going through the worst kind of hell imaginable. Unless there is a lot more to it I can't see it is in the public interest to drag her through the courts and punish her further. Awful that this poor baby lost his life in such a horrific way. RIP little one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazydaisy Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 A friend of mine visited last weekend with her 4mth old grandson. When I opened the door Roly (chi) started barking at the baby! Harri (lab) joined in with the barking = one crying baby (understandardably!) I put both dogs in the kitchen and shut the door. I did not want the baby being upset, and it was safer for the dogs to be out of the way. I trust Harri, but would not have let him into the room as he may have trodden on the baby (who was lying on the floor on a blanket) My point is - a baby and dogs should not be put into a hazardus situation. What the hell was the grandmother thinking of by placing the baby on a pillow on a table? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cycas Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 The grandmother has lost a grandchild, her child has lost a child and she is responsible. Whatever we think about placing the baby on a table (and maybe it was all secured/protected so the child couldn't fall, we don't really know) this woman and her family must be going through the worst kind of hell imaginable. Unless there is a lot more to it I can't see it is in the public interest to drag her through the courts and punish her further. Awful that this poor baby lost his life in such a horrific way. RIP little one Fee has summed up what I think of this. The world must be full of people who make potentially dangerous mistakes and get away with it: this time the mistake had disastrous consequences, but it was a mistake. I feel very sorry for the family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyMalc Posted February 14, 2009 Report Share Posted February 14, 2009 I agree with Fee and cycas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KathyM Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 Drunk drivers kill people by "mistake" every day. Lack of intent to kill/injure/neglect doesn't absolve them of responsibility for their actions. The grandmother should be prosecuted, if she isn't it basically okays everything she did wrong, and leaves the blame squarely on the dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helly Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 Drunk drivers kill people by "mistake" every day. Lack of intent to kill/injure/neglect doesn't absolve them of responsibility for their actions. The grandmother should be prosecuted, if she isn't it basically okays everything she did wrong, and leaves the blame squarely on the dogs. In all fairness, getting into a car pissed up knowing you shouldnt be driving and nodding off on the couch while a baby sleeps cant really be placed in the same category for intent to kill or maim or injure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K9Fran Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 In all fairness, getting into a car pissed up knowing you shouldnt be driving and nodding off on the couch while a baby sleeps cant really be placed in the same category for intent to kill or maim or injure. But not making sure the baby was safe and sound before you nodded off can be equated with getting in a car that's not roadworth - has faulty brakes for example........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kats inc Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 She did not place the baby there with the intent on him being hurt.It was a mistake.I'm sure everyone makes mistakes.Hindsight is a wonderful thing isn't it.It makes perfect parents/people/pet owners of us all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts