register for free
View our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Jackie
Dogsey Veteran
Jackie is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,122
Female  Diamond Supporter 
 
03-07-2010, 01:19 PM
Originally Posted by DevilDogz View Post
ahh but JB - If you read my post after that one (I think it was responding to Hali) You would have seen that I changed my mind and agreed with Hali's story.

I dont believe anything I was not there, as you werent only them parents know what went on, I said along I believe it to be a fox, although I have said things in the parents story sounded odd to me, I have a right to comment on it if i think things sound fishy.
That's just it, by saying things sound "fishy" implies you dont believe them.

So you have gone from disbelieving to believing them now back at it being fishy I see!!
Reply With Quote
inkliveeva
Dogsey Veteran
inkliveeva is offline  
Location: Stirlingshire
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,203
Female 
 
03-07-2010, 01:21 PM
Why keep a carpet with signs of blood splatter on it, if they were my kids they would have had a room swap and a new carpet...
Reply With Quote
DevilDogz
Dogsey Veteran
DevilDogz is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,891
Female 
 
03-07-2010, 01:24 PM
Originally Posted by Jackbox View Post
That's just it, by saying things sound "fishy" implies you dont believe them.

So you have gone from disbelieving to believing them now back at it being fishy I see!!

Never said I believe them Said I blieved a fox did attack, There are holes in the parents story, for what ever reasons. Your getting it confused, I have always believed it was a fox attacked, and have always believed the parents story sounded fishy.
Reply With Quote
Jackie
Dogsey Veteran
Jackie is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,122
Female  Diamond Supporter 
 
03-07-2010, 01:32 PM
Originally Posted by DevilDogz View Post
Never said I believe them Said I blieved a fox did attack, There are holes in the parents story, for what ever reasons. Your getting it confused, I have always believed it was a fox attacked, and have always believed the parents story sounded fishy.
Yep, you are right I am confused

You beleive the fox did attack the twins,

But you beleive the parents story is fishy having holes in the story, would suggest they may be covering something up.

So what would they be covering up, if you beleive the fox attacked the twins!!
Reply With Quote
DevilDogz
Dogsey Veteran
DevilDogz is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,891
Female 
 
03-07-2010, 01:38 PM
How the fox got in, where they were at the time, how comes they didnt hear the first child scream and took them till the second child was attacked to realise something was wrong, from what i can make out the little boy was in the girls bed room not sleeping, playing or something, thats not normal? (correct me if i have that bit wrong though).
Like i said she saw blood in the dark before seeing the boy hiding and the fox stood there.
I have'nt said they covered anything up, I said there story sound fishy things sounded odd to me. Maybe they dont remember what exactly happened? who knows!
Reply With Quote
chaz
Dogsey Veteran
chaz is offline  
Location: South Oxfordshire, England
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,386
Female 
 
03-07-2010, 10:48 PM
Originally Posted by DevilDogz View Post
The animal rights fanatics who waged a hate campaign against the fox attack family can be revealed today by the Daily Mail (and, oh yes, they're almost all on benefits).

More here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...rotection.html
Animal right fanatics like this IMO are generally people in need of some strong medication, just look at PeTA I will write a post, I will though admit I didn't watch the show as I didn't know it was on.

Originally Posted by Mahooli View Post
I think they are lying.
Well good job that you are not the judge and jury then.

Originally Posted by Mahooli View Post
There is no way a 4 month old cub could have caused the injuries claimed. The puncture woounds were deep and relatively large, a cub at 4 months would still have baby teeth or losing them.
Four months is a guess, unless the right fox was caught and identified through DNA tests no-one will know what Fox it is, so no-one can give the correct age of the Fox.

Originally Posted by Mahooli View Post
The wounds also seem only to carry an impression of the canines (if we believe they are animal bites) yet not any of the other teeth, again very odd. If an animal grabbed an arm and bit down so hard as to cause the damage seen then there would have been a complete set of teeth marks on the top and bottom of the arm yet the damage was only on the top. I defy anyone to bite deeply into something without using both top and bottom jaw.
Well looking at my own hand where I was bitten mainly on the fingers, guess what you can only really see where the canines went through, I have one large scar on the bottom of one of my fingers and a smaller one on top, guess I'm lying and it wasn't a dog or anything canine the childs arms would be small, so IMO its easy for the wounds to carry most of the canine teeth in them as again IMO based on personal experience with a dog where my skin was sliced by the canine teeth, but we wasn't there, we can't tell how the animal bit the poor children, but experts who can look at them have a lot better idea about identifing the bites, are they lying too?

Originally Posted by Mahooli View Post
Also, as you say, the fox apparently walked past food left lying out, that simply wouldn't have happened, foxes would take the easiest way out.
They never mentioned that the fox they saw was covered in blood, which there must have been some evidence of given the injuries.
The fact that a young cub was scratching at the door to come in I believe that they may have been raising a cub and it was an easy scapegoat when the incident occured.
The Fox could of looked at the food, the Fox might of also smelt more food in the house and gone investigating before finding two young children who were vunerable.

Originally Posted by Mahooli View Post
I personally think that their other child may have been involved and they made this story up to prevent them being investigated by social services. It is well known that sibling rivalary occurs to a greater or lesser extent. After all why was a 4 year old still up at 10pm. Surely he should have been in bed at the same time as the babies? Why also did he 'hide' from the fox which he had no idea was there? Why did the parents leave him downstairs to attend to the other children, why were both mauled before the parents took note, surely, given the severity of the injuries one would have been screaming it's head off before the fox went for the other one.
I think that the doctors would of looked at the marks on the children if there was any concern they would of called socail services whether they were told they were from a Fox or not , also the parents could of just thought that the children were stirring and gone up to settle them back down to begin with, I mean who would imagine that their children were screaming because a Fox was attacking them? The boy could of then been left down there in the panic of the moment.

Originally Posted by Mahooli View Post
The father is apparently also an employee of the production company that did the film so was all one sided. I have put in my complaint to the BBC about that bit!
As for 6 foxes dying then that isn't so. They were apparently all vixens so if they all had cubs as well then a lot more than 6 died!
Becky
I think its sad how you think, IMO it doesn't matter where the father worked, it was a story that they would of investigated anyway.

Originally Posted by Mahooli View Post
I don't believe it was a dog either. I think they were stabbed with something. Too much doesn't add up.
Becky
That is vindictive, offensive to the family, and said without any substance, you've seen photos, and already think that the family is lying. I just hope that no-one you know and love is attacked by a wild animal and you don't have people saying that you are lying about it.

Originally Posted by rune View Post
Doctors can tell the difference between bite wounds and stab wounds!

rune
Didn't you know medical degrees mean nothing compared to a biast person looking at photos

Originally Posted by werewolf View Post
I did not watch it. I do not know if it was a fox or not but I still stand by the fact that living where they live it was stupid to keep their back door open like that, at that time of night. Of course people should be able to keep doors open etc but in OUR WORLD it does not work like that, unfortunately. It is unsafe out there and anything could've happened to those children and SOMETHING did.
If I lived in a house my doors would be open right now, nice to know that would be stupid, should I also shut my windows in my flat?

Originally Posted by Moobli View Post
I also meant to say that the couple in no way deserve the abuse they are obviously receiving though They have been through enough trauma without strangers accusing them of staging the attack themselves
I agree, I think anyone who is causing more stress to the family and starting conspiracy stories should hang their head in shame.

Originally Posted by Mahooli View Post
I've just had as close a look as I can at the scars left on the children, not many pictures available, and I'm still not convinced.

ETA I don't agree with the abuse the parents recieved but I still have a right to question the validity of what they say.
Becky
No-one at that point I believe would think of grabbing a camera, I think that the childrens welfare is more important at that point!

Also I think that if you don't agree with the abuse the parents are getting you should apoligise for all that you have said, that they are lieing, that their children have been stabbed, that they are trying to keep social services off their backs, IMHO you are no better then those who have been writing abuse to them, infact maybe worse, as you are writing things with no way of backing up what you are saying on a public forum, where anyone can read what you write, about a family who have just been through a terrible experience, and seem to see nothing wrong with it?
Reply With Quote
rune
Dogsey Veteran
rune is offline  
Location: cornwall uk
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,132
Female 
 
04-07-2010, 07:33 AM
Originally Posted by DevilDogz View Post
How the fox got in, where they were at the time, how comes they didnt hear the first child scream and took them till the second child was attacked to realise something was wrong, from what i can make out the little boy was in the girls bed room not sleeping, playing or something, thats not normal? (correct me if i have that bit wrong though).
Like i said she saw blood in the dark before seeing the boy hiding and the fox stood there.
I have'nt said they covered anything up, I said there story sound fishy things sounded odd to me. Maybe they dont remember what exactly happened? who knows!
Consider yourself corrected, he was watching BGT downstairs with his parents.

I can't believe how many people are reading the same reports or watching the programme and not taking in what is actually written or said.

They did hear the first child scream---they went upstairs 2 flights---which gave the fox a chance to have the second as well.

rune
Reply With Quote
Jackie
Dogsey Veteran
Jackie is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,122
Female  Diamond Supporter 
 
04-07-2010, 09:21 AM
Originally Posted by DevilDogz View Post
How the fox got in, the doors were open where they were at the time,downstairs how comes they didnt hear the first child scream and took them till the second child was attacked to realise something was wrong, they did hear the first child scream , and by the time they got upstairs the fox had attacked the second from what i can make out the little boy was in the girls bed room where did you hear that ?? not sleeping, playing or something, thats not normal? (correct me if i have that bit wrong though).whats not normal a child playing ??

Like i said she saw blood in the dark before seeing the boy hiding and the fox stood there. please post were you have seen that account of the event I have'nt said they covered anything up, I said there story sound fishy things sounded odd to me. Maybe they dont remember what exactly happened? who knows!

Or maybe you are reading what you want to see,

I am still confused by your replies, when someone says a story is fishy, or odd, it usually implies you dont beleive said story, yet you have admitted yourself you believe the fox attacked the children, so if you do beleive the attack took place, cant see why you are then questioning the integrity of their parents story??

Let me tell you something about parents, if and when something terrible happens to your child, you remember every detail, for the rest of your life

Originally Posted by rune View Post
Consider yourself corrected, he was watching BGT downstairs with his parents.

I can't believe how many people are reading the same reports or watching the programme and not taking in what is actually written or said.

They did hear the first child scream---they went upstairs 2 flights---which gave the fox a chance to have the second as well.

rune
People will only see what they want to see, and no amount of accurate reports will deter them away from that!!
Reply With Quote
aerolor
Almost a Veteran
aerolor is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,114
Female 
 
04-07-2010, 10:53 AM
Originally Posted by Mahooli
I don't believe it was a dog either. I think they were stabbed with something. Too much doesn't add up.
Becky


Oh Becky - how can you say something like that. You don't know. Forensics would have gone over the evidence found in the house and believe me paediatrics certainly have the skill and experience to distinguish animal bites from knife or human bite wounds.
Clinical Psychology (paediatric/family) would also probably have been involved and reached conclusions on the families integrity.
From what I saw of the photographs those wounds, along with puncture wounds were ripping and tearing wounds. You admit that you only saw indistinct pictures (? from press photographs) so how can you judge and make such unfounded statements.
You just don't know. You can be certain that paediatrians and A & E consultants do know how to identify injuries and wounds - animal bites are a daily occurrence passing through A & E. departments and can be quickly identified. They are quite different from human bites or knife wounds. They may also have taken swabs to identify saliva.
Reply With Quote
DevilDogz
Dogsey Veteran
DevilDogz is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,891
Female 
 
04-07-2010, 01:19 PM
Originally Posted by Jackbox View Post
People will only see what they want to see, and no amount of accurate reports will deter them away from that!!
NO JB some of us can see out the box and dont believe everything printed in the media!

well then Rune im corrected, Cant even remember where I heard the other child was playing in the bedroom.
JB I never said it wasnt normal for a child to play I said its not normal for a child to be playing in the room of his sleeping sisters ( not that it matters because I have it wrong )!

Ohh and JB, the doors were open because they said so, they were sat down watching TV because they said so, ohh and everything else was because they said so, you have no proof, no one does. SO you have your opinions and follow everything the media says to a T and I will carry on to have an opinion to because I have a right, just like I have a right to questions things if I wish! end of really, nothing much else to say.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 6 of 13 « First < 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 > Last »


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


© Copyright 2016, Dogsey   Contact Us - Dogsey - Top Contact us | Archive | Privacy | Terms of use | Top