Who is in the wrong?

Interesting posts up on FB at the moment from an incident that happened in town today.

A 4 year old girl has been attacked and bitten by a dog that had been tied up outside a shop in the town centre. Mum (who wasn't there) has posted pics of the cuts across the girls nose and looks like there could possibly be permanent scarring

Now she has also posted that police asked if the girl had approached the dog which hasn't really been answered excpt for saying why should that matter so I'm guessing it could be the case

Naturally it is post after post saying destroy the dog....aggressive dogs....all dogs muzzled in public blah blah blah. Now I wouldn't tie Ledger up on a busy Saturday because he might get nicked but more that you can't trust that people not to go up to him. It's bad enough that parents let their kids approach without my permission in the street/in pets at home anyway when I am with him. He would be very likely to jump up for cuddles, I don't think he would bite but faced with a child starring into his eyes nose to nose, not reading his nervous and 'back off' signals he could!

I want to reply how has she been allowed to get close enough to a strange dog? But figured I'd get a better more reasoned response on here

the dog was under control so it be the girls fault

Difficult Jules, obviously if the dog was tied up and on lead surely the parents should have had the sense not to let the little girl approach a strange dog.   

I wholly believe that the child should not have been allowed to get close enough

But playing devils advocate Steve if you are not on the other end of the lead/out of sight is the dog under control?

Yes there is that Jules though I do probably feel it is the parents fault   

jshrew wrote:I wholly believe that the child should not have been allowed to get close enough

But playing devils advocate Steve if you are not on the other end of the lead/out of sight is the dog under control?

the dog is tired up it's under control it's not loose

Just thought of lots of replies but thats a tough one! I am not sure.... has the dog ever been left before or was it a one off as the child was in is face....

Steve wrote:

jshrew wrote:I wholly believe that the child should not have been allowed to get close enough

But playing devils advocate Steve if you are not on the other end of the lead/out of sight is the dog under control?

the dog is tired up it's under control it's not loose

By law....Out of control
Your dog is considered dangerously out of control if it:

injures someone
makes someone worried that it might injure them
A court could also decide that your dog is dangerously out of control if:

it injures someone’s animal
the owner of the animal thinks they could be injured if they tried to stop your dog attacking their animal


Unfortunately I don't have much more info than is on the mothers FB at the moment I don't know her but it's an open profile will update if I find out more

a dog only needs to jump on someone to be class out of control to me an dog that is tired up is under control. if an kid goes upto a dog then it the kids/parents fault IMO

I have never or ever while leave any of my dogs tied up anywhere,

staffs being the most stolen breed

I still get phone calls today from people whose dog has been stolen    

The child should have been under control then this wouldn't have happened equally if the dog owner hadn't have tied up the dog then it wouldn't have happened either.

I'm inclined to say child/parents for going up to a strange dog but that is assuming that the dog owner had a dog that was safe to be left unmuzzled in public, as we know not all dog owners are responsible!

Tricky one, both parties at fault, the dog owner should not have left the dog unattended, the parent should not have let the child approach it.

What proof does the parent have any dog did the damage ?