Child Mauled In Wa Park

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

I can only hope that this woman and her family are stopped from having any more dogs.

She has to have a serious disorder to know what her dogs are like, to go to a park with other people and presumably pets as well as children and let them run off. To let them attack a child and as they were ripping in to her, to tell her to be quiet and still. To stand back and just watch?

Maybe she's a sadist, maybe she's a psychopath but she needs to be controlled and sent for professional assessment/help so that she never does it again.

[Purdie]

I can only hope that this woman and her family are stopped from having any more dogs.

She has to have a serious disorder to know what her dogs are like, to go to a park with other people and presumably pets as well as children and let them run off. To let them attack a child and as they were ripping in to her, to tell her to be quiet and still. To stand back and just watch?

Maybe she's a sadist, maybe she's a psychopath but she needs to be controlled and sent for professional assessment/help so that she never does it again.

The problem is with some dog owners and i would presume this owner is they don't know what their dogs are capable of until a disaster happens .They purchase a dog with little if any researching about the breed or buy on looks or popularity alone and have a generic view of how dogs behave and think because their dog is well behaved at home it will behave well off lead in a dog park.

I feel this woman was in shock herself at the dogs attack and people sometimes do the wrong thing when in shock .

She still needs to be charged for her negligence.

I still feel strongly that like Greyhounds many more breeds if not all large dogs should be on leash at all times in public.

Councils could have secure runs like they do now in some areas for Greyhounds to run off lead so owners can exercise their dog throw a ball etc without the worry that their dog could get into trouble or cause trouble.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

I can only hope that this woman and her family are stopped from having any more dogs.

She has to have a serious disorder to know what her dogs are like, to go to a park with other people and presumably pets as well as children and let them run off. To let them attack a child and as they were ripping in to her, to tell her to be quiet and still. To stand back and just watch?

Maybe she's a sadist, maybe she's a psychopath but she needs to be controlled and sent for professional assessment/help so that she never does it again.

The problem is with some dog owners and i would presume this owner is they don't know what their dogs are capable of until a disaster happens .They purchase a dog with little if any researching about the breed or buy on looks or popularity alone and have a generic view of how dogs behave and think because their dog is well behaved at home it will behave well off lead in a dog park.

I feel this woman was in shock herself at the dogs attack and people sometimes do the wrong thing when in shock .

She still needs to be charged for her negligence.

I still feel strongly that like Greyhounds many more breeds if not all large dogs should be on leash at all times in public.

Councils could have secure runs like they do now in some areas for Greyhounds to run off lead so owners can exercise their dog throw a ball etc without the worry that their dog could get into trouble or cause trouble.

She did know, they'd attacked someone else previously, who knows how many more people/animals with someone like this. She knew because she would go through the park telling kids to "stand up" if they saw her dogs coming. She was not in enough shock that she couldn't ask this child to lie quiet and still whilst her dogs tore her apart. I doubt someone in shock would be giving instructions.

[Two Best Dogs!]

I can only hope that this woman and her family are stopped from having any more dogs.

She has to have a serious disorder to know what her dogs are like, to go to a park with other people and presumably pets as well as children and let them run off. To let them attack a child and as they were ripping in to her, to tell her to be quiet and still. To stand back and just watch?

Maybe she's a sadist, maybe she's a psychopath but she needs to be controlled and sent for professional assessment/help so that she never does it again.

The problem is with some dog owners and i would presume this owner is they don't know what their dogs are capable of until a disaster happens .They purchase a dog with little if any researching about the breed or buy on looks or popularity alone and have a generic view of how dogs behave and think because their dog is well behaved at home it will behave well off lead in a dog park.

I feel this woman was in shock herself at the dogs attack and people sometimes do the wrong thing when in shock .

She still needs to be charged for her negligence.

I still feel strongly that like Greyhounds many more breeds if not all large dogs should be on leash at all times in public.

Councils could have secure runs like they do now in some areas for Greyhounds to run off lead so owners can exercise their dog throw a ball etc without the worry that their dog could get into trouble or cause trouble.

Regardless of breed and temperament dispositions, all of this could have been prevented if the lady had obeyed the rules. She wasn't in an off lead dog park, she was in an on lead only multiuse park.

It was also, apparently, not the first time her dogs have attacked a person. So not only is she intentionally disobeying the rules, she was doing it full well knowing her dogs have attacked people previously.

Then to add insult to the serious injuries she grabbed her dogs and went into hiding. She didn't ask after the child, she didn't come forward when there was a widespread campaign for her to do so. She was only identified when someone else had suspicions she was the person.

She's staying silent, but her lawyer is downright shocking. She is not a responsible owner, she is not even close to responsible. She's careless, irresponsible and selfish. She is the reason we have so many rules and restrictions put into place!

Sorry for a bit of a rant (not directed specifically at you Purdie) but I just read all her lawyers crap. A little child was severely injured, from supposed repeat human aggressive dogs who belonged to a woman flouting the laws then goes into hiding to avoid the consequences. Look at this crap:

Her lawyer Terry Dobson told Radio 6PR on Thursday the woman had consented to her pets' destruction. He would not confirm if or when she had made herself known to authorities, but said she was well known locally and it was not an issue of fleeing the scene.

"The primary concern in relation to the dogs was to remove them. They had behaved in a way they had never done before, so given something awful had happened to the little girl, my client wanted to get the dogs out of there," he told Mornings host Gary Adshead.

"She grabbed both dogs by their collars and restrained them (..)"

"She wrote a letter of her own volition ... to the family. We wanted this kept private but we are speaking now because the only thing we would like is for the local Mayor to be quiet.

"He just keeps yapping on about it, no pun intended, but he's like one of those little fluffy white things that runs around yapping. My client is a responsible dog owner. She is horrified by what happened."

She "wasn't fleeing the scene" and is a responsible owner?! So responsible a viral media campaign was needed to find her. So responsible she was breaking rules. So responsible she tells people in advance to move away from her dogs. So responsible and "horrifed" she yells out instructions at the distance telling the child to stand still instead of HELPING. So responsible a child is severely injured and a family traumatised!

That young boy has more responsibility and care in his little finger than that woman has in her entire body.

:mad :mad :mad :mad

I hope they reveal her name, so I can track the court proceedings. She is a blot on the name of responsible dog owners. I'm struggling to think of something she DID do that was responsible!

Edited September 17, 2016 by Thistle the dog

[Purdie]

If the dogs attacked before why were the dogs not taken by the council.could they not be found after the first attack..?

Well i can't call her names here but she deserves a few choice ones. and jail time so over these dog attacks ;

eta Just read the link to the lawyers letter..Gosh it makes me feel sick,

Those poor kids,i hope they can recover

Edited September 17, 2016 by Purdie

[Pjrt]

I can only hope that this woman and her family are stopped from having any more dogs.

She has to have a serious disorder to know what her dogs are like, to go to a park with other people and presumably pets as well as children and let them run off. To let them attack a child and as they were ripping in to her, to tell her to be quiet and still. To stand back and just watch?

Maybe she's a sadist, maybe she's a psychopath but she needs to be controlled and sent for professional assessment/help so that she never does it again.

The problem is with some dog owners and i would presume this owner is they don't know what their dogs are capable of until a disaster happens .They purchase a dog with little if any researching about the breed or buy on looks or popularity alone and have a generic view of how dogs behave and think because their dog is well behaved at home it will behave well off lead in a dog park.

I feel this woman was in shock herself at the dogs attack and people sometimes do the wrong thing when in shock .

She still needs to be charged for her negligence.

I still feel strongly that like Greyhounds many more breeds if not all large dogs should be on leash at all times in public.

Councils could have secure runs like they do now in some areas for Greyhounds to run off lead so owners can exercise their dog throw a ball etc without the worry that their dog could get into trouble or cause trouble.

Regardless of breed and temperament dispositions, all of this could have been prevented if the lady had obeyed the rules. She wasn't in an off lead dog park, she was in an on lead only multiuse park.

It was also, apparently, not the first time her dogs have attacked a person. So not only is she intentionally disobeying the rules, she was doing it full well knowing her dogs have attacked people previously.

Then to add insult to the serious injuries she grabbed her dogs and went into hiding. She didn't ask after the child, she didn't come forward when there was a widespread campaign for her to do so. She was only identified when someone else had suspicions she was the person.

She's staying silent, but her lawyer is downright shocking. She is not a responsible owner, she is not even close to responsible. She's careless, irresponsible and selfish. She is the reason we have so many rules and restrictions put into place!

Sorry for a bit of a rant (not directed specifically at you Purdie) but I just read all her lawyers crap. A little child was severely injured, from supposed repeat human aggressive dogs who belonged to a woman flouting the laws then goes into hiding to avoid the consequences. Look at this crap:

Her lawyer Terry Dobson told Radio 6PR on Thursday the woman had consented to her pets' destruction. He would not confirm if or when she had made herself known to authorities, but said she was well known locally and it was not an issue of fleeing the scene.

"The primary concern in relation to the dogs was to remove them. They had behaved in a way they had never done before, so given something awful had happened to the little girl, my client wanted to get the dogs out of there," he told Mornings host Gary Adshead.

"She grabbed both dogs by their collars and restrained them (..)"

"She wrote a letter of her own volition ... to the family. We wanted this kept private but we are speaking now because the only thing we would like is for the local Mayor to be quiet.

"He just keeps yapping on about it, no pun intended, but he's like one of those little fluffy white things that runs around yapping. My client is a responsible dog owner. She is horrified by what happened."

She "wasn't fleeing the scene" and is a responsible owner?! So responsible a viral media campaign was needed to find her. So responsible she was breaking rules. So responsible she tells people in advance to move away from her dogs. So responsible and "horrifed" she yells out instructions at the distance telling the child to stand still instead of HELPING. So responsible a child is severely injured and a family traumatised!

That young boy has more responsibility and care in his little finger than that woman has in her entire body.

:mad :mad :mad :mad

I hope they reveal her name, so I can track the court proceedings. She is a blot on the name of responsible dog owners. I'm struggling to think of something she DID do that was responsible!

www.mgcelebrant.com/michele

Someone posted a link earlier in the thread. Her name is Michele Giblett

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

If the dogs attacked before why were the dogs not taken by the council.could they not be found after the first attack..?

Well i can't call her names but she deserves a few choice ones.I'm so over these dog attacks ;

They couldn't be found/identified. She's an absolute moron and that's being extremely generous. As for her lawyer - the attitude behind his statement says it all - he'd be taking her instructions after all.

She deserves to be publicly shamed for what she's done, that poor little girl will be scarred for life, physically and mentally. Your dogs or not - wouldn't your first instinct be to protect a child, especially as a woman?

[Purdie]

If the dogs attacked before why were the dogs not taken by the council.could they not be found after the first attack..?

Well i can't call her names but she deserves a few choice ones.I'm so over these dog attacks ;

They couldn't be found/identified. She's an absolute moron and that's being extremely generous. As for her lawyer - the attitude behind his statement says it all - he'd be taking her instructions after all.

She deserves to be publicly shamed for what she's done, that poor little girl will be scarred for life, physically and mentally. Your dogs or not - wouldn't your first instinct be to protect a child, especially as a woman?

Yes agree 100 %

[Tara and Sam]

Her lawyer Terry Dobson told Radio 6PR on Thursday the woman had consented to her pets' destruction. He would not confirm if or when she had made herself known to authorities, but said she was well known locally and it was not an issue of fleeing the scene.

seems as though she would have had no choice after what the dogs did , she didnt make herself known to start with , she had to be found

"The primary concern in relation to the dogs was to remove them. They had behaved in a way they had never done before, so given something awful had happened to the little girl, my client wanted to get the dogs out of there," he told Mornings host Gary Adshead.

"She grabbed both dogs by their collars and restrained them (..)"

Should have been restrained before so it couldnt happen again

"She wrote a letter of her own volition ... to the family. We wanted this kept private but we are speaking now because the only thing we would like is for the local Mayor to be quiet.

she wrote a letter only after found out who she was , hopefully the Mayor after being told to be quiet will be louder over this

"He just keeps yapping on about it, no pun intended, but he's like one of those little fluffy white things that runs around yapping. My client is a responsible dog owner. She is horrified by what happened."

so horrified by it all she left the park

what a stupid lawyer

[Two Best Dogs!]

Thank you Gruf :mad We will be able to see what happens to Michele Giblett when her case goes to court, whenever that is. Long slow proceedings.

Blessing in disguise she has such a shit lawyer already trying to put a spin on things, changing what was said and done :mad if she doesn't want to be seen as a bad person, she shouldn't have been so careless with her dogs! :mad

[_PL_]

That lawyer!!! They make quite a team.

[spikey]

If the dogs attacked before why were the dogs not taken by the council.could they not be found after the first attack..?

Well i can't call her names here but she deserves a few choice ones. and jail time so over these dog attacks ;

eta Just read the link to the lawyers letter..Gosh it makes me feel sick,

Those poor kids,i hope they can recover

Because the legislation in many council areas in WA is bl**dy useless. Try getting someone prosecuted and/or dogs seized and destroyed over here after an attack - been there, done that and it was all a complete waste of time, even though the owners had been in trouble with council before over the dogs roaming and displaying threatening behaviour. The owners ended up being fined in the end, so at least that was something, but then they just moved house to another council district and took the dogs with them, where they'd no doubt be free to attack someone else and their dog again.

Edited September 21, 2016 by spikey

[_PL_]

Thank you Gruf :mad We will be able to see what happens to Michele Giblett when her case goes to court, whenever that is. Long slow proceedings.

Blessing in disguise she has such a shit lawyer already trying to put a spin on things, changing what was said and done :mad if she doesn't want to be seen as a bad person, she shouldn't have been so careless with her dogs! :mad

I just google the lawyer and his cases, he's everywhere on google as a full on criminal lawyer. Ex detective. I'd never have guessed unless it's a different guy!

[Tara and Sam]

Any news on how the little girl going ?

[poochmad]

Poor kid and poor family. I'm sure everyone involved is traumatised.

[Two Best Dogs!]

Thank you Gruf :mad We will be able to see what happens to Michele Giblett when her case goes to court, whenever that is. Long slow proceedings.

Blessing in disguise she has such a shit lawyer already trying to put a spin on things, changing what was said and done :mad if she doesn't want to be seen as a bad person, she shouldn't have been so careless with her dogs! :mad

I just google the lawyer and his cases, he's everywhere on google as a full on criminal lawyer. Ex detective. I'd never have guessed unless it's a different guy!

That's not a method that occurred to me! I think usually I go with the person's name because the court cases tend to be something like GIBLETT vs COUNCIL OF WHEREVER THIS HAPPENED so easier to find because it's just a transcript, unless lawyers traditionally put all their cases online whether successful or not?

Edit:

I couldn't find an update on the poor girl but this article has more photos. If you thought the poor tradie was bad, do not click

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3790604/We-don-t-child-molesters-murderers-Lawyer-owner-two-vicious-Staffordshire-terriers-mauled-nine-year-old-girl-says-SHOULDN-T-killed.html

(it is not gory, just upsetting to see so much injury and bandages)

The nine-year-old girl was rushed to Princess Margaret hospital where she had surgery for injuries on her leg that exposed her muscles and tendons and was treated for multiple puncture wounds to her skull.

I would expect she be in hospital at least a week or two. Hopefully she is home now.

Edited September 22, 2016 by Thistle the dog

[Simply Grand]

I read about her injuries before and wondered whether "multiple puncture wounds to her skull" was accurate, or whether they meant scalp. If they punctured her skull multiple times god, she's lucky to be alive!