Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Leeds dog attack: Man released on bail(Dogs kill pregnant woman)
Yorkshire Evening Post ^ | 12 December 2013 | Sam Casey

Posted on 12/12/2013 6:19:38 AM PST by Colonel Kangaroo

A man who was arrested under the Dangerous Dogs Act after a pregnant mother was mauled to death in Leeds has been released on bail.

The 33-year-old was arrested yesterday morning after 27-year-old Emma Bennett’s death on Tuesday.

Miss Bennett, a mother of four, suffered fatal injuries in an attack by at least one of a pair of dogs - thought to be American pit bulls - at her home on Dawlish Avenue, East End Park, on Monday afternoon.

A West Yorkshire Police spokesman said: “The man, who was arrested yesterday following the death of 27-year-old Emma Bennett, was released on bail last night pending further enquiries.”

It emerged yesterday that Miss Bennett was expecting her fifth child at the time of the attack.

Her boyfriend posted a message on Facebook saying “RIP Emma and our bump”, adding that she would “always be in my heart and on my mind to the day we meet again”.

In a statement, Miss Bennett’s family spoke of their heartache.

It said: “We are all very deeply upset at Emma’s death, not just because she has been taken from us so suddenly but because of the horrific circumstances and the fact she was on her own at the time she was injured.”

They said Miss Bennett “had some issues” but loved her children. The statement added: “She was a lively person who had a great sense of fun but she was also strong-headed and had her own opinions.

“We are all devastated at Emma’s death but the whole family has pulled together and are really supporting each other. We are grateful to everyone who has sent messages of sympathy and support.”

Officers believe the animals are American pit bulls, which are restricted under the Dangerous Dogs Act. But further tests were being carried out to establish their breed.

Neighbours told the Yorkshire Evening Post there was no indication the dogs could have turned violent.

Chris Roebuck, 42, said he had petted one.

“I still can’t understand why your own dogs would attack you,” he said.

“I stroked one of them and he was more interested in licking my face than anything else.”

He added: “It’s horrible to hear what happened.”

A woman, who did not want to be named, said one of the dogs was “playful”. “It wasn’t the sort of dog that would just attack you,” she said.


TOPICS: United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: doggieping; pitbull; pitbulls
Pitbulls strike again.
1 posted on 12/12/2013 6:19:39 AM PST by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

Its what they do.


2 posted on 12/12/2013 6:21:26 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
Miss Bennett, a mother of four,

Miss...?

Hmmmmmm...

3 posted on 12/12/2013 6:26:16 AM PST by Flycatcher (God speaks to us, through the supernal lightness of birds, in a special type of poetry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
thought to be American pit bulls

------------------

"thought" to be intelligent:


4 posted on 12/12/2013 6:30:39 AM PST by ChildOfThe60s ((If you can remember the 60s.....you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

Wow. What is up with her if people are sorta dissing you and you are dead?


5 posted on 12/12/2013 6:44:10 AM PST by autumnraine (America how long will you be so deaf and dumb to thoe tumbril wheels carrying you to the guillotine?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

I read where she was the owner of the dogs?


6 posted on 12/12/2013 6:49:57 AM PST by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

No, it was shitty owners teach them to do.

The pitbulls I know are dangerous only because of friendly enthusiasm.


7 posted on 12/12/2013 6:56:06 AM PST by Little Ray (How did I end up in this hand-basket, and why is it getting so hot?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Flycatcher
boyfriend posted a message on Facebook saying “RIP Emma and our bump”

Read that, and all of a sudden, I stopped feeling sorry for these people.

8 posted on 12/12/2013 7:00:16 AM PST by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

So, the dogs were running loose and killed the woman in her own home? The woman had a habit of having open door(s) (I concede, it could be open windows that said dogs went through)?

Either thing could have been prevented this death.


9 posted on 12/12/2013 7:14:56 AM PST by Sir Napsalot (Pravda + Useful Idiots = CCCP; JournOList + Useful Idiots = DopeyChangey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

Still waiting for a headline describing a pack of feral chihuahuas nipping someone to death.


10 posted on 12/12/2013 7:22:29 AM PST by Jack Hydrazine (Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; me = independent conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
Such a gentle, loving breed.

(They love your blood.)

11 posted on 12/12/2013 7:43:01 AM PST by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

Pit bulls will revert to their nature when stressed or are not given adequate training and control.

they dont need to be taught


12 posted on 12/12/2013 7:56:11 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot

She lived with her boyfriend and his dogs. One of the dogs is thought to have attacked her while she was having an epileptic seizure.


13 posted on 12/12/2013 8:11:03 AM PST by VanShuyten ("a shadow...draped nobly in the folds of a gorgeous eloquence.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray
The pitbulls I know are dangerous only because of friendly enthusiasm.

LOL. I've been banged around by their big blockheads when they are trying so hard to be near me. My daughter fosters pitty rescues. Does a great job with them. But says she wouldn't own one because they are too affectionate/needy. They want to be near you all the time. Her Ridgeback is affectionate by much more independent.

14 posted on 12/12/2013 8:11:18 AM PST by ChildOfThe60s ((If you can remember the 60s.....you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

Why was a man arrested? Was he the owner of the dogs? Was that the boyfriend/father of the unborn child? Was the woman attacked in her own home?

What a half ***** job of reporting a story!

obozo would blame it on AMERICAN dogs too!!! Or better yet, George W. Bush.


15 posted on 12/12/2013 8:17:53 AM PST by Thank You Rush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanShuyten

“”She lived with her boyfriend and his dogs. One of the dogs is thought to have attacked her while she was having an epileptic seizure.””

What article did you get that from?


16 posted on 12/12/2013 8:19:37 AM PST by Thank You Rush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: VanShuyten

OK, I didn’t get the information that the dogs belong to the live-in boyfriend from reading the story.


17 posted on 12/12/2013 8:35:32 AM PST by Sir Napsalot (Pravda + Useful Idiots = CCCP; JournOList + Useful Idiots = DopeyChangey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Thank You Rush
“Why was a man arrested? Was he the owner of the dogs?”

He was arrested because in Great Briton he is criminally responsible for his dogs. It is as if he had done the deed himself. The laws there acknowledge that this is a dangerous breed of dog and if you choose to own them you are choosing to have and keep a dangerous animal. Having made the choice to have these dogs he has demonstrated a disregard for others safety by not keeping them secured in a manner that prohibits them from harming people or animals. When they do attack, maim or kill, he will, by law, be held criminally responsible.

This is what their,"Dangerous Dog Act" is all about. Several countries have these laws. The breeds that statistics demonstrate that they have a much higher propensity for unprovoked attacks on humans and/or animals are listed by breed in this law. If you have, possess, or own them, you are completely responsible for what they do under criminal law. Under this law this is a homicide and he is the specific individual responsible for the death. This person is going to prison.

I totally support this law and believe that we need similar laws in every state of the USA. If pit bull owners are so sure that the dogs they own are harmless they will have no objections to being held responsible for their dogs actions under criminal law. If what they believe is true then they are at no risk in this issue.

Watch this thread and see just how much support this proposal gets from Pit Bull owners. They refuse to support personal criminal responsibility for the potentially vicious animals they freely chose to own.

18 posted on 12/12/2013 9:15:35 AM PST by oldenuff2no
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Thank You Rush

The Daily Mirror (UK) has this information. They don’t always do the most careful reporting, so whether or not it’s true, I don’t know.


19 posted on 12/12/2013 9:25:45 AM PST by VanShuyten ("a shadow...draped nobly in the folds of a gorgeous eloquence.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: oldenuff2no

Oh. You mean like how our loving and beautiful Akita should make it difficult and very expensive for us to get an umbrella liability policy?

Breed discrimination is real. German shepards and related breeds have higher attack numbers than Akitas, but aren’t discriminated against.


20 posted on 12/12/2013 9:33:05 AM PST by VanShuyten ("a shadow...draped nobly in the folds of a gorgeous eloquence.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

No, it was shitty owners teach them to do.

The pitbulls I know are dangerous only because of friendly enthusiasm.

God forbid that she was killed by “Staffordshire” Bull Terriers. They had to be “American” Pit Bulls! Brits like Obama are never responsible for their failures.


21 posted on 12/12/2013 9:46:09 AM PST by Mastador1 (I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

Pit Bulls just don’t have any idea how strong and dense they are - solid blocks of muscle!


22 posted on 12/12/2013 12:34:50 PM PST by Little Ray (How did I end up in this hand-basket, and why is it getting so hot?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: oldenuff2no
Dog responsibility laws should be uniform, not breed specific.

Do you feel it's reasonable that black on white crime is targeted less than white on black crime? Breed specific?

How about SUV owners getting $500 tickets and compact cars $50 tickets for the same offense? The SUV will cause more damage in an accident.

Dog poop laws. Poodles have smaller turds than Huskies. So maybe we should fine violators based on the size of the dog's turd. Or turds under a certain size should be exempt when left in your front yard.

Obviously I could go on and on. Yes, dog owners should most definitely be held responsible for their dog's behavior. ALL dog owners - equally.


23 posted on 12/12/2013 6:13:31 PM PST by ChildOfThe60s ((If you can remember the 60s.....you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s
"Dog responsibility laws should be uniform, not breed specific."

Every person should be held responsible for their animals, cat and dog owners in exactly the same way, but, and this is a big but, following your line of thought it should be exactly the same to own a .50 cal browning machine gun as it is to own a .22 revolver. A little ankle biter will not be able to do the same damage as a pit bull. Those who chose to own the animal/weapon with the much greater potential to do damage have to be held to a higher accountability. The alternative to this is to outlaw owning the .50 cal browning or the more dangerous animals.

24 posted on 12/13/2013 6:09:09 PM PST by oldenuff2no
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: oldenuff2no
Those who chose to own the animal/weapon with the much greater potential to do damage have to be held to a higher accountability.

You're not going to sell me on that line of reasoning. That is a very slippery slope that creates massive problems the further down it we go.

A Hummer runs a red light and kills another driver should get twice as much time in jail as a Prius owner that runs a light and kills another driver? The danger here is not the size of the car, it is the person piloting the vehicle. For all practical purposes that principle applies to dogs/owners. Although I admit a large number of FReepers would seriously disagree with me.

We are not allowed to kill people with a gun, regardless of the caliber. I don't know how you change the "accountability" aspect of my .22 rifle versus my 30-30.

Nonetheless, I imagine that more people would agree with you than me. But on this subject I won't change my mind.

25 posted on 12/13/2013 7:15:53 PM PST by ChildOfThe60s ((If you can remember the 60s.....you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s
"I don't know how you change the "accountability" aspect of my .22 rifle versus my 30-30."

Because we draw lines about guns with laws in this country and the line in my analogy is between automatic and semiautomatic weapons. This line was drawn according to the direct potential to inflict a lot of damage quickly. The 30-30 has a very limited internal magazine,comparably a very slow rate of fire and does not land on the other side of that line. It is a bad example to support your argument.

A small economy car is more likely to allow injury in a collision than a larger vehicle but most larger vehicles still meet all of the required safety standards and are allowed with the correct state certifications for both vehicle and driver. That does not mean all larger vehicles are legal on our highways. An 18 wheeler running over 80K is not legal without special permit and then is limited as to when, where, and by whom it can be driven. That line has also been established by law and is enforced every day.

It does not matter if you like it or not or agree with it or not these thresholds exist. We make those judgments in our society all the time with thousands of laws. Every day when you drive you must be covered by an insurance. Your policy charges/rates will vary according to age, type of vehicle you drive, and how moving citations you have received. All around you government, private companies and individuals make these judgments and define the lines of what risk we can accept and what risk we will not accept every day.

We decide what these risks are from collected data. The numbers in this discussion are from the CDC. The numerical facts on dog attacks and K-9 homicides by breed exist and are not going to go away. From this data risk will be assessed, policies and fees established, and laws will be passed just like in all other aspects of our lives.

26 posted on 12/13/2013 9:59:50 PM PST by oldenuff2no
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson