Cops refused to seize dog that savaged my little boy

Alice McKeegan

October 27, 2009

| Submit Comments | Comments (17) | Previous | Next

Kaydon with mum Amanda

A MUM whose young son was savaged by a dog says police told her they were powerless to seize the animal.

Kaydon Johnson, five, needed 40 stitches and spent four days in hospital after being attacked as he played at a friend's house in Benchill, Wythenshawe.

The dog, believed to be a bull mastiff great dane cross, bit his ear and back, leaving him with serious cuts.

His mum Amanda White, 28, believes he was lucky to survive but he is now suffering from haunting flashbacks of the incident.

Amanda, from Baguley, immediately reported the attack to police, but she says officers told her they were powerless to seize the dog as the incident happened on private property. She is now considering taking legal action against the dog's owner.

She said: "I felt sick when I saw Kaydon lying there in the hospital. I am totally disgusted and sickened that an animal could do this to him.

"I couldn't stop crying and my little boy kept saying he thought he was going to die.

"He must have been petrified but I feel he is lucky to be alive and I dread to think what might have happened had the dog carried on for another couple of minutes."

She added: "This dog attacked my son and I fear that it could do the same again but next time the outcome could be even worse.

"It just staggers me that a dog can do this and the police can't take it away to stop it from doing the same again.

"In my view, the dog should be put down before it kills a child."

A police spokeswoman confirmed that a report of the attack had been received and the owner of the dog had promised to destroy the animal.

Kaydon is said to be 'recovering well' at home and hopes to return to classes at Baguley Hall Primary School after the half-term break.

| Submit Comments | Comments (17) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 17 and replies | View All

j John (27/10/2009 at 11:14)

The Cops DID NOT refuse to, they simply COULD NOT. The change required is within the law not the cops.

Little note, take better care of your kids, always know where they are, YOU are responsible for their well being, not the owner of private propery nor the cops!!

David, North M/C (27/10/2009 at 11:21)

The police are not interested in dogs savaging little ,they are more concerned with more important matters like "hate crime".

Father Time, Elsewhere (27/10/2009 at 11:32)

There's a big difference between REFUSING to take a dog and NOT BEING ALLOWED BY LAW to take a dog. I'm sure if the police did take a dig illegally the MEN would be running a story about that instead. A misleading incorrect anti police headline from the MEN once again

Local lad, outsidethebox (27/10/2009 at 11:39)

j John
Youve got it in one mate..Its all down to parents looking after their children and knowing where they are at all times. Stop the blame culture. The parents are the ones in control.

fergiza, rse (27/10/2009 at 11:46)

i found a stray english bull last year, i took it to my local police station , they refused to take it in, even though i explained it was quite nasty, they also refused to phone a dog warden and suggested i just let it go. this was when the news was full of of bull-dog attacks. it seems the laws concerning dangerous dogs are quite bendy and vague, ask princess anne.

Steve an alternative view (27/10/2009 at 12:00)

Yes the dog should be destroyed, yes the law should be changed to allow the police to make this happen, No its not the fault of the police, yes it’s the fault of the law makers.
As Miss White’s case would be a private prosecution she won’t get legal aid to support her, yes the legal system is bias and unfair.

Yes David North M/C, your statement is as ridiculous as it sounds, get help!

The Man, Sat on a chair (27/10/2009 at 12:12)

Maby they should put down the dog, the police and the lawmakers.

nyb, ex manc (27/10/2009 at 12:42)

A police spokeswoman confirmed that a report of the attack had been received and the owner of the dog had promised to destroy the animal.

If this is the case, what is she going on about?

local_lass, Burnage (27/10/2009 at 12:43)

You can't blam ethe police - but nor do I think you can blame the mother.
Its not clear but it sounds as if she was there at the time and that is probably what saved him.

There needs to be more education about the risks all dogs pose so parents and children are aware of how to behave around their own dogs and those of others.
Two many of us assume that our friends dogs are perfectly docile, or don't ask our friends to take better control of their dogs so not to upset them.
There is always a first time for a dog to attack a person - don't let your child be the victim.

dessie, manchester (27/10/2009 at 12:56)

you see staffordshires and such like off leads in parks and fields and it scares me sometimes

j John (27/10/2009 at 14:42)

There needs to be more education about the risks all dogs pose so parents and children are aware of how to behave around their own dogs and those of others.

Local Lass Burnage, are you serious?

Angie33 , Manchester (27/10/2009 at 14:58)

local lass Burnage .I agree.For instance.Children running up to animals in their excitement can cause a dog to bite or snap,especilly older dogs who are losing their eyesight.Another rule,not to go near dogs who are eating or may protect their favourite toy.Let them check you out before you put your hand out to stroke them.Ask the owner is it ok to approach.There are lots of things to teach children about being safe around dogs,or cats for that matter.Horses and ponies can do a lot of damage and there are rules for approaching them too.Even small dogs being held in owners arms can be defensive when approached and are often on a level with faces.For all my teaching my little ones can still rush up to puppies and have to be told over and over.The responsibility goes both ways ,parents and owners.I think it would be a good thing to teach in schools as many children rarely meet with dogs and dont know the rules.If the parent/child/owner dont know the rules its a recipe for disaster.

Black Flag (27/10/2009 at 15:25)

Being presumed innocent until proven guilty might not suit everybody in every situation, but as a system, it's preferable to any of the alternatives.

Andanotherthing, Mcr (27/10/2009 at 15:57)

I would not have allowed my child to be in that house with that dog.
There is not a house in Benchill large enough to accomadate that dog, they are moderate three bed semis at best with pokey gardens.

jeffb, buxton (27/10/2009 at 22:16)

So working on that theory of police are powerless if it happens on private property, What happens if a police officer walks onto my property and i kick 6 barrells out of him am I immune from prosecution, I think not

Black Flag (28/10/2009 at 08:36)

jeffb: "So working on that theory of police are powerless if it happens on private property, What happens if a police officer walks onto my property and i kick 6 barrells out of him am I immune from prosecution, I think not"

There's no suggestion that there is any immunity from prosecution. The whole point is that the prosecution should come before the sentence.

charlie chan number 1 son, Hollywood (28/10/2009 at 09:47)

Benchill!say no more.Gone to the dogs.

()

Report

News