Toddler badly bitten over 15 times by feral kids at play centre.

First topic message reminder :

Its what kids do!!

"A toddler was scarred for life after being bitten more than 15 times by kids at a soft play centre.
Seventeen-month-old Willow-Ivy Doherty suffered the “nightmare” during a day out with her mum Becky, brother Tucker, six, and sister Aurora, three.
Becky, 33, said: “She looks like she’s been savaged by a dog, not a child.”
The single mum of six took her three youngest to Little Bees in Seacroft, Leeds, and sat watching from a table overlooking the indoor play area.
She was looking at Aurora when she heard another mum scream: “Oh my God, whose baby is this?”
She said: “She had pulled the boy off Willow. He had hold of her neck. Becky raced over to find Willow-Ivy blue and not breathing and the boy standing “with a big smile on his face, with blood all around his mouth”.
She said she believed he was two and was with his brother, aged four.
She said she shouted “where is your mum?” but the boy’s mother did not come forward until staff were giving Willow-Ivy first aid.
Becky said: “She kept shouting ‘That’s what kids do, that’s what kids do!’ over and over.”
Becky took Willow-Ivy to hospital where she was given injections for Hepatitis B and treatment for her cuts.
She suffered four to her face, two to her fingers, three to her back, several to her head, one to her ear, one to her shoulder, one to her wrist and one to her leg."


Distressing pics on link.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/toddler-scarred-life-after-being-13553253

Syl wrote:I dont agree Didge. You watch a 17 month old like a hawk when they are in places where older  kids are dashing about playing.
You certainly watch a 2 and a 4 year old if they are in the habit of biting other kids.

If you dont they stand a good chance of getting hurt or hurting some other kid.

A parent can be blamed for neglect, they dont have to abuse the child themselves.

Bullshit and many others will agree you do not, as you can never keep two eyes on them constantly

You are still missing the point

How is it, that this child, clearly with painful scars never screamed out?

I have not ruled out the parent on neglect here byt for different reasons

Phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:I dont agree Didge. You watch a 17 month old like a hawk when they are in places where older  kids are dashing about playing.
You certainly watch a 2 and a 4 year old if they are in the habit of biting other kids.

If you dont they stand a good chance of getting hurt or hurting some other kid.

A parent can be blamed for neglect, they dont have to abuse the child themselves.

Bullshit and many others will agree you do not, as you can never keep two eyes on them constantly

You are still missing the point

How is it, that this child, clearly with painful scars never screamed out?

I have not ruled out the parent on neglect here byt for different reasons

It's not bullshit, and I am sure many other people would agree with me.
Young kids should always be watched like a hawk if there is a chance they could get hurt, yes accidents can happen, but they tend to happen a lot more to kids whos parents are neglectful.

Not that this was an accident, it was a deliberate attack.

didge, why does this story not add up to you.

what is it that you think happened then?

Syl wrote:

Phildidge wrote:

Bullshit and many others will agree you do not, as you can never keep two eyes on them constantly

You are still missing the point

How is it, that this child, clearly with painful scars never screamed out?

I have not ruled out the parent on neglect here byt for different reasons

It's not bullshit, and I am sure many other people would agree with me.
Young kids should always be watched like a hawk if there is a chance they could get hurt, yes accidents can happen, but they tend to happen a lot more to kids whos parents are neglectful.

Not that this was an accident, it was a deliberate attack.

You are avoiding the points Syl and why I call it bullshit

An argument from authority, ie people in agreement with you is not valid

You require evidence

You cannot watch kids all the time, as countless parents often requiore taking a shit for example. Unless you place them on your lap taking a shit. Then you simple cannot have eyes on them 24/7 and you certainly cannot when you are asleep. Its also not a reality of how parents raise children, as they can never keep two eyes on them all the time.

My view though on this, is that the story simple does not add up

The claim was she was found not breathing and blue. The only things that would cause this are as follows

A heart attack
A stroke
Hyperthermia
Asthma
Strangulation, which would cause bruisning to the neck, mouth etc

There was no such bruising on the neck of face, just bite marks

You simple cannot watch kids like hawks, as every can and is distracted at times. My view again is based around the injuries and why this never raised alarm. As she had countless injuries. Such injuries would cause a child to scream and writhe in distress and yet nobody even noticed this. Not all the adults there, her brother etc.

Something does not add up here

gelico wrote:

didge, why does this story not add up to you.

what is it that you think happened then?

To be honest Gelico, I really do not know, but the claims made in the article, simple do not add up to me

I wish I could expand more here, but they simple do not add up

I mean does it sound credible, that she was found not breating and blue?

Or has this been embellished for the media?

Phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

It's not bullshit, and I am sure many other people would agree with me.
Young kids should always be watched like a hawk if there is a chance they could get hurt, yes accidents can happen, but they tend to happen a lot more to kids whos parents are neglectful.

Not that this was an accident, it was a deliberate attack.

You are avoiding the points Syl and why I call it bullshit

An argument from authority, ie people in agreement with you is not valid

You require evidence

You cannot watch kids all the time, as countless parents often requiore taking a shit for example. Unless you place them on your lap taking a shit. Then you simple cannot have eyes on them 24/7 and you certainly cannot when you are asleep. Its also not a reality of how parents raise children, as they can never keep two eyes on them all the time.

My view though on this, is that the story simple does not add up

The claim was she was found not breathing and blue. The only things that would cause this are as follows

A heart attack
A stroke
Strangulation, which would cause bruisning to the neck, mouth etc

There was no such bruising on the neck of face, just bite marks

You simple cannot watch kids like hawks, as every can and is distracted at times. My view again is based around the injuries and why this never raised alarm. As she had countless injuries. Such injuries would cause a child to scream and writhe in distress and yet nobody even noticed this. Not all the adults there, her brother etc.

Something does not add up here

The mother wasnt on the loo was she? She was in the middle of a play centre where older kids are rough housing around.
Many mothers do take their toddlers into the bathroom with them....or they leave them somewhere safe where they cant hurt themselves.

Do you think the parent or the little girls siblings hurt the child and the mum is blaming some random kids at the play centre?

Syl wrote:

Phildidge wrote:


You are avoiding the points Syl and why I call it bullshit

An argument from authority, ie people in agreement with you is not valid

You require evidence

You cannot watch kids all the time, as countless parents often requiore taking a shit for example. Unless you place them on your lap taking a shit. Then you simple cannot have eyes on them 24/7 and you certainly cannot when you are asleep. Its also not a reality of how parents raise children, as they can never keep two eyes on them all the time.

My view though on this, is that the story simple does not add up

The claim was she was found not breathing and blue. The only things that would cause this are as follows

A heart attack
A stroke
Strangulation, which would cause bruisning to the neck, mouth etc

There was no such bruising on the neck of face, just bite marks

You simple cannot watch kids like hawks, as every can and is distracted at times. My view again is based around the injuries and why this never raised alarm. As she had countless injuries. Such injuries would cause a child to scream and writhe in distress and yet nobody even noticed this. Not all the adults there, her brother etc.

Something does not add up here

The mother wasnt on the loo was she? She was in the middle of a play centre where older kids are rough housing around.
Many mothers do take their toddlers into the bathroom with them....or they leave them somewhere safe where they cant hurt themselves.

Do you think the parent or the little girls siblings  hurt the child and the mum is blaming some random kids at the play centre?

OMG, you are still missing the point and centering on this one poor point

No parent can keep two eyes on their children 24/7

That is a fact Syl

I seriously am unsure what happened

All I know is this. That this poor little girl has many bites and bruises

I am simple questioning the account that is claimed

I have no doubt that a couple of boys bit the girl, but why was nobody aware of this, as such mrks, would cause pain. So much pain, a girl would cry out and be very uncomfortable. Hence my earlier point to whether she has little feeling in regards to pain and that she might have a condition

My point has been very simple. The story makes very little sense

Phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

The mother wasnt on the loo was she? She was in the middle of a play centre where older kids are rough housing around.
Many mothers do take their toddlers into the bathroom with them....or they leave them somewhere safe where they cant hurt themselves.

Do you think the parent or the little girls siblings  hurt the child and the mum is blaming some random kids at the play centre?

OMG, you are still missing the point and centering on this one poor point

No parent can keep two eyes on their children 24/7

That is a fact Syl

I seriously am unsure what happened

All I know is this. That this poor little girl has many bites and bruises

I am simple questioning the account that is claimed

I have no doubt that a couple of boys bit the girl, but why was nobody aware of this, as such mrks, would cause pain. So much pain, a girl would cry out and be very uncomfortable. Hence my earlier point to whether she has little feeling in regards to pain and that she might have a condition

My point has been very simple. The story makes very little sense

but didge we've all acknowledged that she couldn't possibly keep her eye on all three kids. we know that much

all of these bites could well have occurred in less than one minute.

as for the baby crying out. she probably did at first but there is so much racket going on in those places that you wouldnt hear it above all the noise.

she may have stopped breathing due to going into shock. we cant possibly tell

but the doctors at the hospital would certainly know if these wounds were fresh and all done at the same time or if some of them were older.

i dont know what it is that's going through your mind. it seems like you've got some kind of hunch about it that you cant fully explain

gelico wrote:

Phildidge wrote:


OMG, you are still missing the point and centering on this one poor point

No parent can keep two eyes on their children 24/7

That is a fact Syl

I seriously am unsure what happened

All I know is this. That this poor little girl has many bites and bruises

I am simple questioning the account that is claimed

I have no doubt that a couple of boys bit the girl, but why was nobody aware of this, as such mrks, would cause pain. So much pain, a girl would cry out and be very uncomfortable. Hence my earlier point to whether she has little feeling in regards to pain and that she might have a condition

My point has been very simple. The story makes very little sense

but didge we've all acknowledged that she couldn't possibly keep her eye on all three kids.  we know that much

all of these bites could well have occurred in less than one minute.

as for the baby crying out.  she probably did at first but there is so much racket going on in those places that you wouldnt hear it above all the noise.

she may have stopped breathing due to going into shock.  we cant possibly tell

but the doctors at the hospital would certainly know if these wounds were fresh and all done at the same time or if some of them were older.

i dont know what it is that's going through your mind.  it seems like you've got some kind of hunch about it that you cant fully explain

We have, sly has not, she expects parents to be able to do this 24/7

I disagree on these happenning in less than one minute. Not that this makes any difference to how there was a claim she was found not breathing. Let alone she never cried out. Explain to me, what it is here, how they so forcefully within a minute in multiple places bit here?
You are not making any sense gelico and making very subjective poor claims

Look at her injuries?

Do you think for a toddler these are extreme pain or light pain?

Seriously

As to your point on racket, again makes no sense. Do you think a child would comply to such pain or kick out and scream?

Parents look up when kids scream. You know this. Even if its just fun. They still look up, its a naturl instinct

Sorry but your next point was dumb. So your are claiming her heart stopped due to shock?

Correct?

Which would mean she woulod have a heart condition

I am not denying the wounds were fresh

The point is how fresh

I have no doubt some of these injuries were caused by other kids

Again I question aspects of the story, which you are not addressing

So lets address the cause of  child not breathing going into shock

How do you think that would happen and not leave any traces of this

I think personally the story about her not breathing and looking blue is bullshit, as there is countless more symptoms to shock

I put it to you this way Gelico

Does the story sound more dramtic that its claimed the young girl was blue in the face and not breathing or not?

It maybe the case, but I question the integretity of the realiability of the witnesses

As bruises can look blue as well

How on earth do we know she was not breathing?

Its simple a claim made not bcked up with any checks

It does not say her pulse or heart was checked.

Its claimed she looked like she was not breathing

Can you see my point Gelico?

Of course I know you cant watch 3 young kids at once. So why take 3 of them to a place where you know you cant supervise them properly?

I have sat in these places and watched parents utterly oblivious to what their kids are up to. Some expect the staff to watch them...thats not their job.

I take the story at face value, the child was hurt because the parents were neglectful....no one would be reading this news item had the parents been watchful....thats it really..

Syl wrote:Of course I know you cant watch 3 young kids at once. So why take 3 of them to a place where you know you cant supervise them properly?

I have sat in these places and watched parents utterly oblivious to what their kids are up to. Some expect the staff to watch them...thats not their job.

I take the story at face value, the child was hurt because the parents were neglectful....no one would be reading this news item had the parents been watchful....thats it really..

Your first point is so ridiculous syl. I come from a family of 11 children. Should my parents have never taken us on holiday to ireland? Or the seaside?

You are making the most ridiculous statements here and sorry to say you are

Again no pareant can keep eyes on a child 24/7. Its why sadly children end up having accidents

Your next point is even more silly

How was the parents to blame here?

In a centre where toddlers play?

It seems, you think parent responsibility means, walking hand in hand with in my case 11 children. How do you accomplish that Syl?

Considering, I lost a sister to illness at a young age and had one accident prone brother. Are you then going to blame my parents for the fact my older brother was simple spiderman?

I hate it when people are prejudge  against the parents, without a shred of evidence and look to cast blame on the parents of this girl

You have no evidence but a poor instinct to prejudge

The child was hurt because of two rough boys

If this happened at school or nursery, would you blame the parents?

No

Hence your argument is warped

These days I would expect the noise level in soft play places to be considerable, I imagine those areas with coloured balls along with the noise could conceal such an activity as appears to have happened here.
Even the climbing areas have bits and pieces which can't be easily seen from the other side of the room, if you haven't got supervision in place and the parents are perhaps in a group talking, you don't actually know what's happening all the time, the only way you can do that is follow your child around. The bites look quite nasty for the age of the children but I would think two children could deliver that many bites in a very short time. Maybe the little girl did scream but children are screaming all the time in such environments
Obviously I don't know the lay out of this particular place.

Phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:Of course I know you cant watch 3 young kids at once. So why take 3 of them to a place where you know you cant supervise them properly?

I have sat in these places and watched parents utterly oblivious to what their kids are up to. Some expect the staff to watch them...thats not their job.

I take the story at face value, the child was hurt because the parents were neglectful....no one would be reading this news item had the parents been watchful....thats it really..

Your first point is so ridiculous syl. I come from a family of 11 children. Should my parents have never taken us on holiday to ireland? Or the seaside?

You are making the most ridiculous statements here and sorry to say you are

Again no pareant can keep eyes on a child 24/7. Its why sadly children end up having accidents

Your next point is even more silly

How was the parents to blame here?

In a centre where toddlers play?

It seems, you think parent responsibility means, walking hand in hand with in my case 11 children. How do you accomplish that Syl?

Considering, I lost a sister to illness at a young age and had one accident prone brother. Are you then going to blame my parents for the fact my older brother was simple spiderman?

I hate it when people are prejudge  against the parents, without a shred of evidence and look to cast blame on the parents of this girl

You have no evidence but a poor instinct to prejudge

The child was hurt because of two rough boys

If this happened at school or nursery, would you blame the parents?

No

Hence your argument is warped

Had the two rough boys been watched the little girl wouldn't have been hurt would she....it all goes back to parental supervision.

Vintage wrote:These days I would expect the noise level in soft play places to be considerable, I imagine those areas with coloured balls along with the noise could conceal such an activity as  appears to have happened here.
Even the climbing areas have bits and pieces which can't be easily seen from the other side of the room, if you haven't got supervision in place and the parents are perhaps in a group talking, you don't actually know what's happening all the time, the only way you can do that is follow your child around. The bites look quite nasty for the age of the children but I  would think two children could deliver that many bites in a very short time. Maybe the little girl did scream but children are screaming all the time in such environments
Obviously I don't know the lay out of this particular place.

Exactly. I have been in these places recently, and they are exactly as you describe, which is exactly how I described them earlier in the thread.

Maybe Didge hasn't been to play centres like this, depending on how many children are there at any one time the noise can be extremely loud. Unless you are watching your child closely they can soon be out of sight, hidden in all the tubes and various apparatus.

Vintage wrote:These days I would expect the noise level in soft play places to be considerable, I imagine those areas with coloured balls along with the noise could conceal such an activity as  appears to have happened here.
Even the climbing areas have bits and pieces which can't be easily seen from the other side of the room, if you haven't got supervision in place and the parents are perhaps in a group talking, you don't actually know what's happening all the time, the only way you can do that is follow your child around. The bites look quite nasty for the age of the children but I  would think two children could deliver that many bites in a very short time. Maybe the little girl did scream but children are screaming all the time in such environments
Obviously I don't know the lay out of this particular place.

That has to be the biggest load of colluded bullI have ever heard Vintage

Do you have any evidence to back up any of the claims you made

I will give you an example. All of my siblings were at an aventure plaground in Crystal Palace. It was famous. I fell through a gap and landed and only had my armpits stop my fall. When I was 8 years old. My parents were about 200 meters from me. I tore so badly on each side that I needed 8 stitches under each arms. As I fell through one floor. My parents heard my scream. One thing parents recognise is the painful cry of their own children. My dad was there in 30 seconds.

So to me, you and others are being poor pontificating and in hindsight hypocrites. You were not there

I only questiones the validity of the story and yet you and others use this as a view to promote yourself about how to be the best snowflake parents

Let me let you into a secret

Children have accidents

The injuries on her face don't look like bites to me - more like scrapes.

Syl wrote:

Phildidge wrote:


Your first point is so ridiculous syl. I come from a family of 11 children. Should my parents have never taken us on holiday to ireland? Or the seaside?

You are making the most ridiculous statements here and sorry to say you are

Again no pareant can keep eyes on a child 24/7. Its why sadly children end up having accidents

Your next point is even more silly

How was the parents to blame here?

In a centre where toddlers play?

It seems, you think parent responsibility means, walking hand in hand with in my case 11 children. How do you accomplish that Syl?

Considering, I lost a sister to illness at a young age and had one accident prone brother. Are you then going to blame my parents for the fact my older brother was simple spiderman?

I hate it when people are prejudge  against the parents, without a shred of evidence and look to cast blame on the parents of this girl

You have no evidence but a poor instinct to prejudge

The child was hurt because of two rough boys

If this happened at school or nursery, would you blame the parents?

No

Hence your argument is warped

Had the two rough boys been watched the little girl wouldn't have been hurt would she....it all goes back to parental supervision.

And that is the most daft point made in hindsight

So how do you watch a hundred kids a playground Syl and predict who may cause harm.?

This all goes back to you thinking you are Mary fucking Poppins

As there is multiple kids here, and thus why center on two boys?

Phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

Had the two rough boys been watched the little girl wouldn't have been hurt would she....it all goes back to parental supervision.

And that is the most daft point made in hindsight

So how do you watch a hundred kids a playground Syl and predict who may cause harm.?

This all goes back to you thinking you are Mary fucking Poppins

As there is multiple kids here, and thus why center on two boys?

I quite liked Mary Poppins....she made sure kids didn't get hurt on her watch.
The focus is on the two boys because they are the ones who acted like bloody animals....thanks to their neglectful parent.

Syl wrote:

Phildidge wrote:


And that is the most daft point made in hindsight

So how do you watch a hundred kids a playground Syl and predict who may cause harm.?

This all goes back to you thinking you are Mary fucking Poppins

As there is multiple kids here, and thus why center on two boys?

I quite liked Mary Poppins....she made sure kids didn't get hurt on her watch.
The focus is on the two boys because they are the ones who acted like bloody animals....thanks to their neglectful parent.

Yes that was because it ws make belief bullshit and not real

People who try to wrap children up in cotten wool, are setting them up for a world of bullying and pain

You want to mollycuddle children?

Not allowing them to play and have fun?

Then you turn them into insecure needy people

And i doubt mary Poppins thought of that

Phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

I quite liked Mary Poppins....she made sure kids didn't get hurt on her watch.
The focus is on the two boys because they are the ones who acted like bloody animals....thanks to their neglectful parent.

Yes that was because it ws make belief bullshit and not real

People who try to wrap children up in cotten wool, are setting them up for a world of bullying and pain

You want to mollycuddle children?

Not allowing them to play and have fun?

Then you turn them into insecure needy people

And i doubt mary Poppins fought of that

I think milions of people (me included) manage to find the right balance in bringing up kids with care and letting them find their own feet when the time is right.
Closely watching a 17 month old and a 2 year old to ensure they dont come to harm is hardly wrapping them up in cotton wool is it?

Going round in circles now....laters.

Syl wrote:

Phildidge wrote:


Yes that was because it ws make belief bullshit and not real

People who try to wrap children up in cotten wool, are setting them up for a world of bullying and pain

You want to mollycuddle children?

Not allowing them to play and have fun?

Then you turn them into insecure needy people

And i doubt mary Poppins fought of that

I think milions of people (me included) manage to find the right balance in bringing up kids with care and letting them find their own feet when the time is right.
Closely watching a 17 month old and a 2 year old to ensure they dont come to harm is hardly wrapping them up in cotton wool is it?

Going round in circles now....laters.

!) Argument from authority again, which has no bases. Its simple the Mary poppins argemnet and insulting my parents in raising me

2) hence there is no fine balance, that is simple bullshit Syl. As each child is different and to smother them does not help them at all in the real world

3) Again your argument is in hindsight. So lets put this to the test. You have 35  toddlers to look after with 6 helpers. How do you keep two eyes on them all the time?

Sorry hun, you are talking boll0ocks

And do you know why you are talking bollocks?

You have never looked after so many children in such a situation. You simple bitch about this with no idea what it is like

Phildidge wrote:

Syl wrote:

I quite liked Mary Poppins....she made sure kids didn't get hurt on her watch.
The focus is on the two boys because they are the ones who acted like bloody animals....thanks to their neglectful parent.

Yes that was because it ws make belief bullshit and not real

NO, IT WASN'T

Keep your eyes peeled, step in time

gelico wrote:

Phildidge wrote:


Yes that was because it ws make belief bullshit and not real

NO, IT WASN'T

Keep your eyes peeled, step in time

 ha ha ha

This is why I can never get annoyed with you Gelico 

I am seriously still laughing  

First, Didge, you weren't there either, everyone's opinion is valid.
We don't have to agree. This is not a court of law I don't need to present evidence I am expressing an opinion based on what I have seen. You are free to offer your own opinion and to disagree with others. but don't start with the 'great I am' act, you are not judge and jury but just one of us.

Vintage wrote:First, Didge, you weren't there either, everyone's opinion is valid.
We don't have to agree. This is not a court of law I don't need to present evidence I am expressing an opinion based on what I have seen. You are free to offer your own opinion and to disagree with others. but don't start with the 'great I am' act, you are not judge and jury but just one of us.

Actually, nobodies opinion is valid . Including mine, because we were not there.

I am sorry, but if you present a view, you have to prensent evidence, as your argument lacks any validity

Its you turning this onto me, to deflect from how idioctic your point was

I think I am a dick, so how does that pan out on your argument?

It means your point was utterly retarded and stupid

Eiether you grow some balls and stop being a snowflake, using me to deflect away from your utter ignorance here

Or you actually take on my points

As you avoided every single one

oh don't be ridiculous, evidence, what evidence can anyone offer except testimony, if you like, if they've express an opinion on something they have experienced in their everyday lives such as a soft play area. What do you do, take a record of everywhere you go, take measurements and sound recordings in case something happens so you can present evidence?

Vintage wrote:oh don't be ridiculous, evidence, what evidence can anyone offer except testimony, if you like, if they've express an opinion on something they have experienced in their everyday lives such as a soft play area. What do you do, take a record of everywhere you go, take measurements and sound recordings in case something happens so you can present evidence?

Vintage

You made views and thus you have to back them with evidence

What poeople claim is an invalid argument

Do you understand that?

I hold an open mided view on this

My view is the story does not make sense

To claim as you did, parents have to keep eyes 24/7 on children is absurd

Its not a reality

Maybe it doesn't make sense.
How can anyone discuss anything with anyone else and have evidence to back it up for every opinion they might have on any particular subject at any particular time? An opinion is not a fact, I think this is where you may be going wrong. Ever heard of hypothetical for instance? If everyone has to back up their opinion with evidence all conversation would end.

No, I said unless you follow your child around, even at one of the soft play places, you are not able to keep an eye on them at all times, too many nooks and crannies so to speak.

Phildidge wrote:

Vintage wrote:First, Didge, you weren't there either, everyone's opinion is valid.
We don't have to agree. This is not a court of law I don't need to present evidence I am expressing an opinion based on what I have seen. You are free to offer your own opinion and to disagree with others. but don't start with the 'great I am' act, you are not judge and jury but just one of us.

Actually, nobodies opinion is valid . Including mine, because we were not there.

I am sorry, but if you present a view, you have to prensent evidence, as your argument lacks any validity

Its you turning this onto me, to deflect from how idioctic your point was

I think I am a dick, so how does that pan out on your argument?

It means your point was utterly retarded and stupid

Eiether you grow some balls and stop being a snowflake, using me to deflect away from your utter ignorance here

Or you actually take on my points

As you avoided every single one

Why don't you quit your abuse and bullying? Vintage is being very dignified in the face of your horrible posts

Raggamuffin wrote:The injuries on her face don't look like bites to me - more like scrapes.

Oh, those are bite marks all right - I was bitten by a grown man once, in a fight (not for the sheer pleasure of it) and they look just like that.

*THE Ben Reilly* wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:The injuries on her face don't look like bites to me - more like scrapes.

Oh, those are bite marks all right - I was bitten by a grown man once, in a fight (not for the sheer pleasure of it) and they look just like that.

If you say so.

I think one of the most shocking things about this is the mother of the two boys, who was nowhere near her kids and didnt even make herself known till the staff were giving the little girl first aid, stood there shouting repeatedly "It's what kids do".
I find that almost as scary as the actual attack.

Either the mother is a complete idiot or she has a couple of budding psychos on her hands and should get some help either way. I dread to think what the average day in her house is like.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Phildidge wrote:

Actually, nobodies opinion is valid . Including mine, because we were not there.

I am sorry, but if you present a view, you have to prensent evidence, as your argument lacks any validity

Its you turning this onto me, to deflect from how idioctic your point was

I think I am a dick, so how does that pan out on your argument?

It means your point was utterly retarded and stupid

Eiether you grow some balls and stop being a snowflake, using me to deflect away from your utter ignorance here

Or you actually take on my points

As you avoided every single one

Why don't you quit your abuse and bullying? Vintage is being very dignified in the face of your horrible posts

We may well be in for a melt down again this evening and maybe even a flounce!

Vintage wrote:Either the mother is  a complete idiot or she has a couple of budding psychos on her hands and should get some help either way. I dread to think what the average day in her house is like.

Nature or nurture?
Maybe psychopaths are born that way, but if nurture has anything to do with it condoning the unatural behaviour these two little boys display might ensure they end up with very serious problems.

Its always the mother apparently.

Vintage wrote:Maybe it doesn't make sense.
How can anyone discuss anything with anyone else and have evidence to back it up for every opinion they might have on any particular subject at any particular time?  An opinion is not a fact, I think this is where you may be going wrong. Ever heard of hypothetical for instance? If everyone has to back up their opinion with evidence all conversation would end.

No, I said unless you follow your child around, even at one of the soft play places, you are not able to keep an eye on them at all times, too many nooks and crannies so to speak.

Wel many opinions also have facts and this one has little facts but opinions

Off this people have made also some piss poor vioews in my view

So you agree its basically impossible to keep two eyes onm a child 24/7?

Vintage wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Why don't you quit your abuse and bullying? Vintage is being very dignified in the face of your horrible posts

We may well be in for a melt down again this evening and maybe even a flounce!

You may well be in for me now treating like a lump of shit for shit stirring

The next move is down to you and wthether you need toilet roll to wipe your arse

Phildidge wrote:

Vintage wrote:

We may well be in for a melt down again this evening and maybe even a flounce!

You may well be in for me now treating like a lump of shit for shit stirring

The next move is down to you and wthether you need toilet roll to wipe your arse

You're already treating her badly. You're a nasty bully.

Vintage wrote:Its always the mother apparently.

Ignore Didge he is being a prat.

Mothers do seem to have the biggest influence on their sons lives....but it was a man who said "Give me a child till he is seven and I will show you the man"....or something similar.

Syl wrote:

Vintage wrote:Its always the mother apparently.

Ignore Didge he is being a prat.

Mothers do seem to have the biggest influence on their sons lives....but it was a man who said "Give me a child till he is seven and I will show you the man"....or something similar.

Oh wow, so now I am a prat

How about you are cunt?

If this is now a new word association?

Answer my points or expect to be treated as you treat me

Raggamuffin wrote:

Phildidge wrote:

You may well be in for me now treating like a lump of shit for shit stirring

The next move is down to you and wthether you need toilet roll to wipe your arse

You're already treating her badly. You're a nasty bully.

Apparantly I am a prat

But at least I back my views

I think you are an ignorant dummy

Does that help?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Phildidge wrote:

You may well be in for me now treating like a lump of shit for shit stirring

The next move is down to you and wthether you need toilet roll to wipe your arse

You're already treating her badly. You're a nasty bully.

Yeah I am a cunt, so basically, why are you stupid enough to engage me?

Dont come crying then when you do

Another Didge meltdown. How boring.

Raggamuffin wrote:Another Didge meltdown. How boring.

Yet again rags acting like a bicth

You want to shit stir like a bitch

No problem

I'll just sit here and laugh at your meltdown, and the subsequent account deletion.

Vintage wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Why don't you quit your abuse and bullying? Vintage is being very dignified in the face of your horrible posts

We may well be in for a melt down again this evening and maybe even a flounce!

You will certinaly be treated in kind if you continue with your present stupidity

So you want to shit stir, expect the consquences of your stupidity Vintage

Hence its now down to you

Syl wrote:I think one of the most shocking things about this is the mother of the two boys, who was nowhere near her kids and didnt even make herself known till the staff were giving the little girl first aid, stood there shouting repeatedly "It's what kids do".
I find that almost as scary as the actual attack.

Subjective and not based on any real evidence

Well what do you expect?

Would you not defend your own son?

That is called human nature, as many people and animals do

So there is nothing scary about that, unless you think parents should now disown their children for what they do or who they are.

Her children were two and four. And you blame her for their suppsoed actions?

Why bother with a jury eh?

Phildidge wrote:

Vintage wrote:

We may well be in for a melt down again this evening and maybe even a flounce!

You will certinaly be treated in kind if you continue with your present stupidity

So you want to shit stir, expect the consquences of your stupidity Vintage

Hence its now down to you

No, not pandering to your egotistical needs tonight, you'll have to talk about yourself to yourself.
Have fun.