Family dog kills one-year-old boy


Recommended Posts

A one-year-old boy has died after being attacked by a pet rottweiler at his grandparents' home, police have said.

Archie-Lee Andrew Hirst was snatched from his seven-year-old aunt's arms in the yard of the house in Chald Lane, Wakefield, West Yorkshire, on Friday.

He was taken to hospital with serious injuries but died later.

The dog was shot at the scene by a police marksman. It was destroyed to ensure the safety of others at the address, a police spokesman said.

The boy's family, including his teenage mother, are now receiving support from specially-trained officers, he said.

Det Supt Steve Payne, from West Yorkshire Police, said the boy was staying with his grandparents during the Christmas holidays.

He said: "What we know at this time is that the dog was a family pet, a two-and-a-half year old female rottweiler, which the family had owned for about six months.

"Although the dog lived in the yard of the premises, it had interacted with members of the family including children, and another dog and cat at the house, and had shown no previous signs of any aggression."

Mr Payne said the boy's aunt, aged 16, was caring for him and her two sisters, aged six and seven, in the house.

The 16-year-old girl was upstairs when the seven-year-old carried the baby outside to stroke the dog.

Mr Payne said: "Without any warning, the dog snatched the baby from the youngster's arms and carried him into the yard."

He said the 16-year-old tried to rescue the baby but was unable to do so, despite striking the dog several times.

Paramedics and police arrived within six minutes following an emergency call to police at 1530 GMT, he said.

The baby was taken to Pinderfields General Infirmary where he was pronounced dead.

The boy's parents were at a nearby property at the time.

A post-mortem examination has shown Archie-Lee died from multiple injuries consistent with a dog attack.

The death follows the unlawful killing of five-year-old Ellie Lawrenson who was killed by her uncle's dog in St Helen's on New Year's Day 2007.

The illegal pit bull terrier called Reuben attacked Ellie at the home of her grandmother, Jackie Simpson, who was later found not guilty of manslaughter through gross negligence.

Ellie's uncle Kiel Simpson, 24, was jailed for eight weeks at Liverpool Magistrates' Court in May after admitting owning a dog banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.

Chris Window, from the Rottweiler Club, said it was very uncommon for attacks of this nature to take place.

But he said young children should never be left alone with any large breed of dog.

"All breeds of dogs are animals. They do revert to animal instincts. If a dog is confronted with a situation they are not used to, they can react unexpectedly."

WHAT HAPPENED

Archie-Lee is at grandparents' Wakefield home

Aunt, 16, is looking after him and two sisters, six and seven

Seven-year-old takes Archie to kitchen to stroke the dog

Dog snatches Archie, takes him into yard and attacks him

The seven-year-old goes upstairs to tell the 16-year-old

The 16-year-old strikes the dog several times but cannot separate it from Archie

1530 GMT: Aunt phones 999

1536 GMT: Paramedics arrive

1539 GMT: Armed police arrive

Dog shot by police marksman

Archie-Lee dies in hospital

[Source]

Edited by Lt-DavidW
Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/609984-family-dog-kills-one-year-old-boy/
Share on other sites

Rottweilers aren't illegal as I know quite a few people that own them. It's American Pit Bulls that are banned in the UK.

Is there some other dog that looks exactly like them then that is legal? When I get the bus to uni and it goes through a fairly rough area, there are dogs that look exactly like pit bull's on practically every corner.

Rottweilers aren't illegal as I know quite a few people that own them. It's American Pit Bulls that are banned in the UK.

There are Staffordshire Bull Terriers from England, and then their two american cousin breeds, the American Staffordshire Terrier and the American Pit Bull Terrier. The American Staffordshire (Amstaff) Terrier is nothing more than a sub-category of Pit Bull in which breeders select certain characteristics they find appealing. The breeds get an unfair reputation and most raised by any responsible owner are safe pets. The breed also has a reputation for being exceptionally well adjusted to playing with children, many people often mistake "well adjusted for children" to mean infant safe, bad adult supervision and poor socialization between the dog and baby is the fault of the owner if an attack occurs.

An infant or small child should never be anywhere rear a large dog, even if supervised by adults. Period.

I agree, I have a 8 months daughter and a Labrador mixed with pit-bull and I never let the dog touch her, I always take her in my arms when the dog is present, keeping always the distance. The dog is very friendly but that's not enough with infants, they are animals and you never know when they going to act weird.

Why not, that's just rediculous.

Because when it all comes down to it, these are predatory animals. How many times have you seen this story? The family dog suddenly kills the baby or child. No history of violence or any other previous indication that it would do such a thing. It's just irresposible to have a large dog around a baby.

Personally I don't like dogs, but you'd better believe if I had one and had kids over, it would be locked up in the yard for the duration of the kids stay with the kids not being allowed anywhere near it. No matter how "sweet" it seems to be.

I agree, I have a 8 months daughter and a Labrador mixed with pit-bull and I never let the dog touch her, I always take her in my arms when the dog is present, keeping always the distance. The dog is very friendly but that's not enough with infants, they are animals and you never know when they going to act weird.

Personally I'd say get rid of the dog. It's not worth risking your daughter for. All it takes is one lapse in judgement or not paying close enough attention, and it's all over. Best case scenario is your daughter is scarred for life. Like you said, you never know what an animal could suddenly do.

Because when it all comes down to it, these are predatory animals. How many times have you seen this story? The family dog suddenly kills the baby or child. No history of violence or any other previous indication that it would do such a thing. It's just irresposible to have a large dog around a baby.

Personally I don't like dogs, but you'd better believe if I had one and had kids over, it would be locked up in the yard for the duration of the kids stay with the kids not being allowed anywhere near it. No matter how "sweet" it seems to be.

Personally I'd say get rid of the dog. It's not worth risking your daughter for. All it takes is one lapse in judgement or not paying close enough attention, and it's all over. Best case scenario is your daughter is scarred for life. Like you said, you never know what an animal could suddenly do.

That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard of. You don't like dogs, therefore, you don't think children should be around them. I'm glad I don't know anybody like that. Also, I haven't heard of the family dog killing the children very much. Every once in a while I hear about some random dog mauled somebody who was walking by or whatever, but not the family dog hurting somebody in the family.

I have three small children and had a Saint Bernard and he was very gentle with the kids. They would climb all over him and he would do nothing, he wouldn't even aggressively play with them. He used to lay in the bottom of my son's exersaucer while he was sitting in it, he loved the kids.

One of the lasses I work with has 2 staffies, and she treats them like kids. They sleep in bed with her, her b/f sometimes has to sleep in the other bed. She is now pregnant. I wonder what her dogs will be like when she has the kid. They could get envious of the attention the kid will get.

The one in the news is only about a mile from my house.

That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard of. You don't like dogs, therefore, you don't think children should be around them. I'm glad I don't know anybody like that. Also, I haven't heard of the family dog killing the children very much. Every once in a while I hear about some random dog mauled somebody who was walking by or whatever, but not the family dog hurting somebody in the family.

You are probably a pretty responsible person though, these cases are always to do with the owner leaving it unattended etc. As much as owners might 'know' their dog, you can't ignore the fact that they are animals and are not 100% predictable, especially when it's a breed that is only around for the purpose of fighting and in my opinion they shouldn't be around. If a random dog mauls a person walking by, or a family dog hurting someone in the family, it doesn't really change the argument.

That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard of. You don't like dogs, therefore, you don't think children should be around them. I'm glad I don't know anybody like that. Also, I haven't heard of the family dog killing the children very much. Every once in a while I hear about some random dog mauled somebody who was walking by or whatever, but not the family dog hurting somebody in the family.

I have three small children and had a Saint Bernard and he was very gentle with the kids. They would climb all over him and he would do nothing, he wouldn't even aggressively play with them. He used to lay in the bottom of my son's exersaucer while he was sitting in it, he loved the kids.

It has nothing to do with the fact that I don't like dogs. It's about keeping your kids safe. As far as you not hearing of the family dog killing kids, I don't know what news you watch, but it happens all the time.

For the record my mom has a big Rottweiler. I like the dog a lot, even though I don't like dogs in general. It's a really sweet, gentle dog. She still locks her outside on the deck when my brother's 3 small children go over to visit though, and they aren't allowed near the dog. It's just the prudent thing to do. You never know what a big dog like that will do.

It has nothing to do with the fact that I don't like dogs. It's about keeping your kids safe. As far as you not hearing of the family dog killing kids, I don't know what news you watch, but it happens all the time.

For the record my mom has a big Rottweiler. I like the dog a lot, even though I don't like dogs in general. It's a really sweet, gentle dog. She still locks her outside on the deck when my brother's 3 small children go over to visit though, and they aren't allowed near the dog. It's just the prudent thing to do. You never know what a big dog like that will do.

The only thing that I'd be worried about with a big dog around little kids would be the dog getting excited and running the child over. Other than that, as long as I'm around I'm not worried at all. Now obviously, if it was a dog I didn't know I would be more cautious, but not with a family pet.

It has nothing to do with the fact that I don't like dogs. It's about keeping your kids safe. As far as you not hearing of the family dog killing kids, I don't know what news you watch, but it happens all the time.

So with that in mind, let's start isolating children from each other - after all if you look at the statistics they are more likely to harm or kill each other than a pet dog.

For the record my mom has a big Rottweiler

For the record I've been raised up since day 1 with more or less large dogs and never in my life has one of them bit me, threatened me in any way - on the contrary every dog I've had or I've been around has always been the epitome of kindness towards either me when I was a child or those around me. Heck, I used to pull their tail, ears, spanked them and done all sorts of stupid childlike stuff and none of them responded with aggressiveness.

"He said: "What we know at this time is that the dog was a family pet, a two-and-a-half year old female rottweiler, which the family had owned for about six months."

They only had the dog for about six months so they did not know what kind of training or experiences around small children this particular dog had for the 2 years previous to coming to live with this family. For all they know the dog could had been previously abused or teased by small children and reacted accordingly to what he perceived as a threat. When I was little we had a female Rottweiler named Venus and she was raised by us since she was a month old and NEVER tried anything aggressive against any member of the family even though there were 5 of us and sometimes we played very rough with her. Dogs aren't born bad it is people who turn them bad either by mistreating them or teaching them the wrong stuff. I'm not saying this was the case but maybe it was. :no:

Bio

What it comes down to is the owner. If he/she cannot handle this type of dog, then they should give it. I don't believe in banning any type of dog is right because it hurts real owners, which can handle that type of dog. I have a friend who breeds Rottweiler for a living. He has four kids, youngest is three years old, and nothing has ever gone wrong.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
    • Did you see their FAQ, its quite good. Have a look in the Advanced section. https://delta.chat/en/help
    • Just install Linux Mint that is a real blessing and many times cheaper because you can continue using your old Windows computer/laptop with the latest Linux updates.
    • Interesting share -- however it does not make sense: Email messages get stored somewhere, so how is Delta Chat "based on email" and decentralized without actually storing anything? By Web3 standard practices, the various Relays would require dedicated storage to make messages available to the recipients (like a large series of message queue channels, akin to racks of traditional post office boxes)... and Contacts must be two-way confirmed in order for encryption keys to be exchanged (ostensibly every key-pair is uniquely bound between sender and recipient) and the Relays would preserve the public keys in order to facilitate message carriage... or every device stores all sorts of keys and contact info. All of this to say, decentralized messaging is like running Bluesky nodes except instead of discovering/browsing public feeds by various posters (at the given node) these Delta Chats would be relaying encrypted messages (via Relays) that only trusted recipients would have the appropriate decryption key (their own private key) to read it. But this doesn't solve the "it's like email" sales pitch. The only way it's like email is that there's encrypted binary stuff being transported from your app into the federated ether of Delta Chat Relays for others to decrypt (hopefully only the intended recipient)... but outside of this federated relays framework, it is absolutely nothing like email.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      160
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!