Downham fox attack: First pictures of baby Denny Dolan (From This Is Local London)

zooloo wrote:
How the hell did the fox get in the house int he first place???

banjo8 wrote:
Keep the number down - trap them, kill them - problem solved.
And maybe prosecute the silly tart down my road who keep cooking tasty titbits and leaving them out for the nasty vermin.

Eagles_Man wrote:
Anyone running a book on how long before the NS has to close the comments section for (ahem) 'legal reasons'?

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

Eagles_Man wrote:
Anyone running a book on how long before the NS has to close the comments section for (ahem) 'legal reasons'?

What happens to "Freedom of Speech"? If they do close down the comments section it could it be because people are getting closer to the truth of what really happened?

banjo8 wrote:
Keep the number down - trap them, kill them - problem solved. And maybe prosecute the silly tart down my road who keep cooking tasty titbits and leaving them out for the nasty vermin.

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

Eagles_Man wrote:
Anyone running a book on how long before the NS has to close the comments section for (ahem) 'legal reasons'?

What happens to "Freedom of Speech"? If they do close down the comments section it could it be because people are getting closer to the truth of what really happened?

the wall wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

Eagles_Man wrote:
Anyone running a book on how long before the NS has to close the comments section for (ahem) 'legal reasons'?

What happens to "Freedom of Speech"? If they do close down the comments section it could it be because people are getting closer to the truth of what really happened?

Are you having a laugh ?

You're the one who not long ago was reporting anything you didn't like.

You also said you don't use the internet much, but have have posted more in the last month than the whole of 2012.

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

Eagles_Man wrote:
Anyone running a book on how long before the NS has to close the comments section for (ahem) 'legal reasons'?

What happens to "Freedom of Speech"? If they do close down the comments section it could it be because people are getting closer to the truth of what really happened?

PaulErith wrote:

banjo8 wrote:
Keep the number down - trap them, kill them - problem solved. And maybe prosecute the silly tart down my road who keep cooking tasty titbits and leaving them out for the nasty vermin.

We continue to build and build, so the amount of countryside diminishes. Obviously this will lead to more foxes living in the city. They have the right to live somewhere. I'll happily feed the foxes as I think they're nice creatures.

Eagles_Man wrote:
Anyone running a book on how long before the NS has to close the comments section for (ahem) 'legal reasons'?

dee2009 wrote:
Hmmmm forget the comment there a poor little who has been HURT by SOME THING,poor little boy,get well soon little manxx

bnorther wrote:

the wall wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

Eagles_Man wrote:
Anyone running a book on how long before the NS has to close the comments section for (ahem) 'legal reasons'?

What happens to "Freedom of Speech"? If they do close down the comments section it could it be because people are getting closer to the truth of what really happened?

Are you having a laugh ?

You're the one who not long ago was reporting anything you didn't like.

You also said you don't use the internet much, but have have posted more in the last month than the whole of 2012.

Freedom of Speech and the right for NewsShopper to do what they want with their property (this website) are not the same thing.

NS will shut down comments usually when the story relates to someone being charged with a crime. This is to stop them, or a poster, being liable for contempt. They may also shut down comments when things get out of hand. They have a brand image to worry about.

There is still freedom of speech. Setup your own website, and say what you want. But also be prepared to face any consequences if what you say is illegal.

PaulErith wrote:

banjo8 wrote:
Keep the number down - trap them, kill them - problem solved. And maybe prosecute the silly tart down my road who keep cooking tasty titbits and leaving them out for the nasty vermin.

We continue to build and build, so the amount of countryside diminishes. Obviously this will lead to more foxes living in the city. They have the right to live somewhere. I'll happily feed the foxes as I think they're nice creatures.

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

bnorther wrote:

the wall wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

Eagles_Man wrote:
Anyone running a book on how long before the NS has to close the comments section for (ahem) 'legal reasons'?

What happens to "Freedom of Speech"? If they do close down the comments section it could it be because people are getting closer to the truth of what really happened?

Are you having a laugh ?

You're the one who not long ago was reporting anything you didn't like.

You also said you don't use the internet much, but have have posted more in the last month than the whole of 2012.

Freedom of Speech and the right for NewsShopper to do what they want with their property (this website) are not the same thing.

NS will shut down comments usually when the story relates to someone being charged with a crime. This is to stop them, or a poster, being liable for contempt. They may also shut down comments when things get out of hand. They have a brand image to worry about.

There is still freedom of speech. Setup your own website, and say what you want. But also be prepared to face any consequences if what you say is illegal.

I quite agree.. When I had posters who were using inappropriate language and were only on here to insult or humiliate me or others then yes, I asked for comments to be removed. But when NS openly invite readers to leave comments it should be more of a debate, NOT singleing a person out because they don't share the same views as yourself and behaving inappropriately!!

the wall wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

bnorther wrote:

the wall wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

Eagles_Man wrote:
Anyone running a book on how long before the NS has to close the comments section for (ahem) 'legal reasons'?

What happens to "Freedom of Speech"? If they do close down the comments section it could it be because people are getting closer to the truth of what really happened?

Are you having a laugh ?

You're the one who not long ago was reporting anything you didn't like.

You also said you don't use the internet much, but have have posted more in the last month than the whole of 2012.

Freedom of Speech and the right for NewsShopper to do what they want with their property (this website) are not the same thing.

NS will shut down comments usually when the story relates to someone being charged with a crime. This is to stop them, or a poster, being liable for contempt. They may also shut down comments when things get out of hand. They have a brand image to worry about.

There is still freedom of speech. Setup your own website, and say what you want. But also be prepared to face any consequences if what you say is illegal.

I quite agree.. When I had posters who were using inappropriate language and were only on here to insult or humiliate me or others then yes, I asked for comments to be removed. But when NS openly invite readers to leave comments it should be more of a debate, NOT singleing a person out because they don't share the same views as yourself and behaving inappropriately!!

That's your version of events, the rest of us know the truth.

the wall wrote:

dee2009 wrote:
Hmmmm forget the comment there a poor little who has been HURT by SOME THING,poor little boy,get well soon little manxx

Translation anyone?

old nick wrote:
I have foxes living in my garden,yes I feed them,they have been there for years.2 of them became so tame we could hand feed them,they played with our cats and came indoors,no attacks or damage,loved to have their head scratched.dont try to tame them now but they know us and dont run off.I wonder if these people have a DOG,know what I mean.

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

the wall wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

bnorther wrote:

the wall wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

Eagles_Man wrote:
Anyone running a book on how long before the NS has to close the comments section for (ahem) 'legal reasons'?

What happens to "Freedom of Speech"? If they do close down the comments section it could it be because people are getting closer to the truth of what really happened?

Are you having a laugh ?

You're the one who not long ago was reporting anything you didn't like.

You also said you don't use the internet much, but have have posted more in the last month than the whole of 2012.

Freedom of Speech and the right for NewsShopper to do what they want with their property (this website) are not the same thing.

NS will shut down comments usually when the story relates to someone being charged with a crime. This is to stop them, or a poster, being liable for contempt. They may also shut down comments when things get out of hand. They have a brand image to worry about.

There is still freedom of speech. Setup your own website, and say what you want. But also be prepared to face any consequences if what you say is illegal.

I quite agree.. When I had posters who were using inappropriate language and were only on here to insult or humiliate me or others then yes, I asked for comments to be removed. But when NS openly invite readers to leave comments it should be more of a debate, NOT singleing a person out because they don't share the same views as yourself and behaving inappropriately!!

That's your version of events, the rest of us know the truth.

...and so does NS!! Would you like me to prove it, because I still have it ALL logged.. and they probably have too!?

Inspirationalady28 wrote:
Someone is getting their facts wrong somewhere..unless I'm reading this wrong? (1) So the Mum goes upstairs because she heard a noise coming from the bedroom. (2) The fox apparently drags the baby out of his cot and onto the floor and continues to attack him. (3) Then the Aunt says; She said: “Hayley had just gone upstairs when she heard a bang and came running down and the fox was dragging the baby towards the back door.”? If that baby had of been dragged down the stairs it would have serious head injuries surely! Either the newspapers are getting the story wrong or someone is definitely lying about what really happened!!!!

Inspirationalady28 wrote:
Please everyone, I wish to apologise to you and NS because some people on here who are trying to divert your attention away from the topic in hand to one of which is trying (yet again) to belittle me and others.

Inspirationalady28 wrote:
Please everyone, I wish to apologise to you and NS because some people on here who are trying to divert your attention away from the topic in hand to one of which is trying (yet again) to belittle me and others.

Louise Richardson wrote:
I think this story is bullsh*t. None of it adds up. Their back door lock was broken "for ages" and Lewisham council refused to fix it. Why did they refuse to fix it? How did the fox get in? Did they leave the door open then, with an unattended baby in another room? Or we've tamed them so much they use handles nowadays?!  What sort of people would not at least try and fix the lock themselves, with a new baby in the house, leaving it open for all and sundry to come in?! Especially in Downham (NOT Bromley!) And, now the family have apparently been moved to different accommodation?! Seriously?!! I wouldn't mind betting there was a jealous family dog involved, not a fox, and this is all down to their irresponsibility and they're covering something up. The police won't comment as to whether or not they had a dog and enquiries are still ongoing. Hope the little boy gets well soon..

banjo8 wrote:
Keep the number down - trap them, kill them - problem solved.
And maybe prosecute the silly tart down my road who keep cooking tasty titbits and leaving them out for the nasty vermin.

Louise Richardson wrote:
I think this story is bullsh*t. None of it adds up. Their back door lock was broken "for ages" and Lewisham council refused to fix it. Why did they refuse to fix it? How did the fox get in? Did they leave the door open then, with an unattended baby in another room? Or we've tamed them so much they use handles nowadays?!  What sort of people would not at least try and fix the lock themselves, with a new baby in the house, leaving it open for all and sundry to come in?! Especially in Downham (NOT Bromley!) And, now the family have apparently been moved to different accommodation?! Seriously?!! I wouldn't mind betting there was a jealous family dog involved, not a fox, and this is all down to their irresponsibility and they're covering something up. The police won't comment as to whether or not they had a dog and enquiries are still ongoing. Hope the little boy gets well soon..

KentFromKent wrote:
Maybe the fox was already living there and panicked when he couldn't get out after the new doors and windows were fitted!

reasonable75 wrote:
Gets stranger all the time, heard on radio it's now being claimed fox got in through a cat flap

But can't see one in the photo

reptiles wrote:
personally it all seems a bit strange! on the news it showed a video WHICH is also stated was 10 yrs old, of a fox in a house!
Sorry but with a 4 week old baby would you not make sure especially in this cold weather that doors windows were closed! on the news it said the fox had the babys hand in its mouth and bit of finger, lucky thne that the mother managed to get the finger from the fox's mouth and save it. Also is there not a hospital much closer to bromley or where ever it was than st thomas's
Glad the baby is doing well - poor thing - what an ordeal. But as said story does not all add up! news also mentioned door was damaged and could not be closed, meaning anyone or anything could get in the house at any time - would you not secure the door with a new born baby in the house especially with this cold nasty weather we have had

reptiles wrote:
no mention of any dog is any story ive seen? do thy have a dog then - what type? interesting if they do and its never been mentioned

Inspirationalady28 wrote:
Maybe there's more to this story..I do think that seeing they've put it in every newspaper and on the National Tv/Radios, the public deserve to be told the truth.

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

reasonable75 wrote:
Gets stranger all the time, heard on radio it's now being claimed fox got in through a cat flap

But can't see one in the photo

I heard that it may not even be a fox or dog... Very strange indeed!

reptiles wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:
Maybe there's more to this story..I do think that seeing they've put it in every newspaper and on the National Tv/Radios, the public deserve to be told the truth.

agreed! we need to know IF it was actually a fox, dog or anything else for that matter.
From what i read above the mother apparently kicked the fox " She kicked the fox a few times before it would release him. "- so it would be harmed somewhere hiding??? or if it was a dog even and it was kicked the dog would be hiding, so why are rspca or someone not looking for the injured animal

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

reptiles wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:
Maybe there's more to this story..I do think that seeing they've put it in every newspaper and on the National Tv/Radios, the public deserve to be told the truth.

agreed! we need to know IF it was actually a fox, dog or anything else for that matter.
From what i read above the mother apparently kicked the fox " She kicked the fox a few times before it would release him. "- so it would be harmed somewhere hiding??? or if it was a dog even and it was kicked the dog would be hiding, so why are rspca or someone not looking for the injured animal

Good point! If it was any animal it would be covered in blood either from the baby or from any injuries it received during the attack.

Marty1979 wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

reasonable75 wrote:
Gets stranger all the time, heard on radio it's now being claimed fox got in through a cat flap

But can't see one in the photo

I heard that it may not even be a fox or dog... Very strange indeed!

Not a fox or dog ?

Whatever next, an escaped lion?

A wolf?

The beast of Bodmin got a bit lost?

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

Marty1979 wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

reasonable75 wrote:
Gets stranger all the time, heard on radio it's now being claimed fox got in through a cat flap

But can't see one in the photo

I heard that it may not even be a fox or dog... Very strange indeed!

Not a fox or dog ?

Whatever next, an escaped lion?

A wolf?

The beast of Bodmin got a bit lost?

I wish I knew...

Oldchap wrote:
There are more twists to this than a corkscrew!

In the Evening Standard (stating it happened in Bromley) there's another quote from the aunt that "the fox was shaking the baby by his hand in its teeth and hitting him off the door frame. There was blood everywhere"

This article also reveals the baby has a black eye from where "the animal had hit him against a door frame"


But initial stories were that the fox was dragging the baby out of the house

Marty1979 wrote:
Freedom of speech is one thing, but threatening physical violence even a death threat is completely different

JuliaM wrote:
"The council should get rid of them." File this with "The council should have fixed my back door." Why is it always 'the council' who has to do something, with these people? More foxes and fewer benefit-dependent chavs and it'd be a better world...

banjo8 wrote:
Some of you are just untrusting, uncompassionate people who never believe anything.

banjo8 wrote:
Some of you are just untrusting, uncompassionate people who never believe anything.

Eagles_Man wrote:
"Our inquiries are continuing."

And so they should, if you know what I mean.

Pleased the little lad's recovering though.

banjo8 wrote:
These may all be reasonable points, but in that case how did the finger become detached? You're not suggesting this was a price worth paying to get a new council house are you?

reptiles wrote:
yh i seem to have had a few comments removed. ones about the so called dog in particular! some say there was a dog involved. I really cant believe that the fox would have managed to let go of the finger and drop it if it had the whole of the babys arm in its mouth thrashing it about!
Of course maybe if the story was correct and didnt keep changing people wouldnt be making all the comments they are! but the media itsself seem to keep changing whats happened. Plus does the father really think that culling foxes ( say in his area) will stop this happening again - if it happened). story is very confusing with the door and whether it was open closed, broken etc. Weather has been horrid last few weeks and if your at home with a new born baby - ok 4 weeks then would you have the door open? or if its broken would you not get it fixed, would you not be more protective of your precious baby and make sure before you left it downstairs near a back door that the door was securly closed especially if you know there are foxes in the area and your worried, i am the man next door said he saw 25 foxes in the road later that night. with a new born baby a midwife would be calling every day for the 1st 4 weeks, would they not do something to get the broken door fixed?? if the door was left open due to being damaged as already said anything could get in fox, dog, cat burglar. But then on saying that in another story there was no broken door.. let hope the police and social services get to the bottom of this story - even just for the sake of that poor child who is going to be scared for life - thankfully he may not remember what happened, but will have the scare to prove it!

KentFromKent wrote:
Just read this on another online newspaper site, the story changes hourly, someone must know the truth.


Denny was attacked by a male fox while he was on the sofa in the living room and tried to drag him out of the house by the hand, severing his left ring finger.

‘His mother Hayley heard his screams and then a thud as the fox pulled Denny off the sofa. She said that when she ran towards the fox, it hissed at her through its teeth.
‘If it hadn’t been for her quick actions, who knows what would have happened. We think the fox must have smelled Denny as I don’t think he’d have seen him from the garden.’

reptiles wrote:

KentFromKent wrote:
Just read this on another online newspaper site, the story changes hourly, someone must know the truth.


Denny was attacked by a male fox while he was on the sofa in the living room and tried to drag him out of the house by the hand, severing his left ring finger.

‘His mother Hayley heard his screams and then a thud as the fox pulled Denny off the sofa. She said that when she ran towards the fox, it hissed at her through its teeth.
‘If it hadn’t been for her quick actions, who knows what would have happened. We think the fox must have smelled Denny as I don’t think he’d have seen him from the garden.’

exactly!!! that is totally different to what is in the story above! no mention of sofa or living room according to story above baby was in a cot " His mother Hayley Cawley, of Dagonet Road, said she found the fox with her new-born son's hand in its mouth after she went to investigate a noise coming from the bedroom.

The fox apparently dragged the baby out of his cot, causing him to fall onto the floor, where it continued attacking him.

Denny’s aunt Lorraine Murphy, of nearby Shroffold Road, says the family are devastated by what happened.

She said: “Hayley had just gone upstairs when she heard a bang and came running down and the fox was dragging the baby towards the back door.

“She kicked the fox a few times before it would release him.

“His hand was badly damaged and he had four cuts to his face, one of which had to be stitched


oh and can someone enlighten me HOW the mother knew it was MALE fox? and do foxes "smell" babies

Inspirationalady28 wrote:
#the wall; Nobody told me that at all..I said I'd heard that! It had been mentioned in various national news comments. Just because I quote something that I read/hear doesn't automatically mean I said it or know something!

reptiles wrote:

KentFromKent wrote:
Just read this on another online newspaper site, the story changes hourly, someone must know the truth.


Denny was attacked by a male fox while he was on the sofa in the living room and tried to drag him out of the house by the hand, severing his left ring finger.

‘His mother Hayley heard his screams and then a thud as the fox pulled Denny off the sofa. She said that when she ran towards the fox, it hissed at her through its teeth.
‘If it hadn’t been for her quick actions, who knows what would have happened. We think the fox must have smelled Denny as I don’t think he’d have seen him from the garden.’

exactly!!! that is totally different to what is in the story above! no mention of sofa or living room according to story above baby was in a cot " His mother Hayley Cawley, of Dagonet Road, said she found the fox with her new-born son's hand in its mouth after she went to investigate a noise coming from the bedroom.

The fox apparently dragged the baby out of his cot, causing him to fall onto the floor, where it continued attacking him.

Denny’s aunt Lorraine Murphy, of nearby Shroffold Road, says the family are devastated by what happened.

She said: “Hayley had just gone upstairs when she heard a bang and came running down and the fox was dragging the baby towards the back door.

“She kicked the fox a few times before it would release him.

“His hand was badly damaged and he had four cuts to his face, one of which had to be stitched


oh and can someone enlighten me HOW the mother knew it was MALE fox? and do foxes "smell" babies

annadley wrote:
Much has been made of the broken back door of the property where this 'attack' took place. However, Phoenix Community Housing says this had been repaired on January 24. "We can confirm that repairs were carried out to windows and doors at the property on January 24 2013. We did not receive further reports from the family for repairs works at the home after this date."

It begins to unravel.

reasonable75 wrote:
There is an "exclusive" in the Sun today - and the facts have changed yet again!

Baby was propped up on a sofa downstairs (not in a cot)

Babys head was lodged in the door frame (not being swung around by the fox)

Finger was not bitten off

It was the front door, no mention of a defect "The fox grabbed him after slipping in through the family’s front door. Paul had left earlier to collect older children Ellouise, nine, and five-year-old Lee from school and had slammed the door shut behind him. But Hayley believes the latch did not catch properly and the fox was able to slip into the house"

And the baby was taken to Kings College, not St Thomases

The paper is advertising an exclusive video of an interview from 12.00


(and the paper states Bromley)

reasonable75 wrote:
There is an "exclusive" in the Sun today - and the facts have changed yet again!

Baby was propped up on a sofa downstairs (not in a cot)

Babys head was lodged in the door frame (not being swung around by the fox)

Finger was not bitten off

It was the front door, no mention of a defect "The fox grabbed him after slipping in through the family’s front door. Paul had left earlier to collect older children Ellouise, nine, and five-year-old Lee from school and had slammed the door shut behind him. But Hayley believes the latch did not catch properly and the fox was able to slip into the house"

And the baby was taken to Kings College, not St Thomases

The paper is advertising an exclusive video of an interview from 12.00


(and the paper states Bromley)

Sayso wrote:

reasonable75 wrote:
There is an "exclusive" in the Sun today - and the facts have changed yet again!

Baby was propped up on a sofa downstairs (not in a cot)

Babys head was lodged in the door frame (not being swung around by the fox)

Finger was not bitten off

It was the front door, no mention of a defect "The fox grabbed him after slipping in through the family’s front door. Paul had left earlier to collect older children Ellouise, nine, and five-year-old Lee from school and had slammed the door shut behind him. But Hayley believes the latch did not catch properly and the fox was able to slip into the house"

And the baby was taken to Kings College, not St Thomases

The paper is advertising an exclusive video of an interview from 12.00


(and the paper states Bromley)

Any sympathy I may or may not have had for this family (which wasn't much to begin with as I don't believe this tale at all) has now evaporated after seeing the mum on the front of The Sun looking all glammed up and presumably making a huge sum of money off the back of this 'nightmare'. Shame on her for gaining financially from something like this and trying to become some sort of celebrity figure.

Inspirationalady28 wrote:
This piece really puzzles me... The Mother said that when she was in labour with the baby her sister-in-law came over to her house to help tidy it up. While she was washing the floor she left a door open so that it would dry quicker, she turns around and there's a fox in the living room so she throws the mop at it. Then she has said this today in The Sun.. “But I never thought in a million years a fox would come through the front door to snatch him.” !!!!!


Read more: http://www.thesun.co

.uk/sol/homepage/new

s/4792500/Mum-tells-

of-how-she-ripped-he

r-baby-from-the-jaws

-of-fox.html#ixzz2Km

2JqoeY

Inspirationalady28 wrote:
I do not buy or take pleasure in reading any newspapers, least of all "The Sun"! Neither do I believe everything I hear on the Tv/Radio, but having said that, I'm only interested in this particular story because I happen to live in the Lewisham area and know of people who live close by to where this incident took place!!!

Inspirationalady28 wrote:
I do not buy or take pleasure in reading any newspapers, least of all "The Sun"! Neither do I believe everything I hear on the Tv/Radio, but having said that, I'm only interested in this particular story because I happen to live in the Lewisham area and know of people who live close by to where this incident took place!!!

Oldchap wrote:
He's said he wants to move to a flat "off the ground"

But that's no guarantee of safety

And he's still blaming the council (and as article states Bromley I expect Cllr Smith to be making another comment) because people fly tip.

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

Oldchap wrote:
He's said he wants to move to a flat "off the ground"

But that's no guarantee of safety

And he's still blaming the council (and as article states Bromley I expect Cllr Smith to be making another comment) because people fly tip.

I'm sure we are all aware of by now that the address in question although it has a BR1 postcode, I can assure you that the wheelie bins there have Lewisham on them. According to a report, the Police are satisfied that no criminal offence took place and no further action will be required.. In all of this, we still have not been told by the Authorities if they ran DNA testing to determine if it was that of a fox!

the wall wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

Oldchap wrote:
He's said he wants to move to a flat "off the ground"

But that's no guarantee of safety

And he's still blaming the council (and as article states Bromley I expect Cllr Smith to be making another comment) because people fly tip.

I'm sure we are all aware of by now that the address in question although it has a BR1 postcode, I can assure you that the wheelie bins there have Lewisham on them. According to a report, the Police are satisfied that no criminal offence took place and no further action will be required.. In all of this, we still have not been told by the Authorities if they ran DNA testing to determine if it was that of a fox!

In all of this, we still have not been told by the Authorities if they ran DNA testing to determine if it was that of a fox!”.......

Why do you think the 'authorities' need to tell you ?

What has it got to do with you ?

Why don't you have some bottle and ring the 'authorities' and ask them instead of sniping on here?

Sorry to inform you but in the grand scheme of things you're not that important.
The authorities don't have to tell you anything.

KentFromKent wrote:
(I'll get my popcorn, this could be good)

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

the wall wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

Oldchap wrote:
He's said he wants to move to a flat "off the ground"

But that's no guarantee of safety

And he's still blaming the council (and as article states Bromley I expect Cllr Smith to be making another comment) because people fly tip.

I'm sure we are all aware of by now that the address in question although it has a BR1 postcode, I can assure you that the wheelie bins there have Lewisham on them. According to a report, the Police are satisfied that no criminal offence took place and no further action will be required.. In all of this, we still have not been told by the Authorities if they ran DNA testing to determine if it was that of a fox!

In all of this, we still have not been told by the Authorities if they ran DNA testing to determine if it was that of a fox!”.......

Why do you think the 'authorities' need to tell you ?

What has it got to do with you ?

Why don't you have some bottle and ring the 'authorities' and ask them instead of sniping on here?

Sorry to inform you but in the grand scheme of things you're not that important.
The authorities don't have to tell you anything.

The public have every right to know the outcome. I'm getting fed up with your continuous online bullying towards me and I will be taking some action on this then you'll see how important I really am.. So back off!!!!!

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

KentFromKent wrote:
(I'll get my popcorn, this could be good)

Don't get too comfy because you know what happened to Humpty Dumpty!!? :)

Gypo.Joe wrote:

Inspirationalady28 wrote:

KentFromKent wrote:
(I'll get my popcorn, this could be good)

Don't get too comfy because you know what happened to Humpty Dumpty!!? :)

Steady now Lou. That sounds like a threat to me, are you threatening to push another poster off of a wall ?

'Wall' watch your back please.

the wall wrote:
Having trouble typing someone is sitting on me.


Also waiting for the interweb Police to come and get me.

reasonable75 wrote:
OK, let's go through the reports

Finger was completely bitten off ("torn off") - changed to badly bitten

Fox got in through back door, which was waiting for council to fix - changed to got in through front door that father slammed but it hadn't latched

Baby was upstairs in cot, which fox climbed in & dragged baby out - changed to baby propped up on sofa, fox dragged baby off

Mother was downstairs - changed to mother upstairs (so if she left baby downstairs whilst she went upstairs how come she didnt notice the front door was open?

Baby taken to St Thomases hospital - changed to Kings College


Have I missed anything?

reptiles wrote:

reasonable75 wrote: OK, let's go through the reports Finger was completely bitten off ("torn off") - changed to badly bitten Fox got in through back door, which was waiting for council to fix - changed to got in through front door that father slammed but it hadn't latched Baby was upstairs in cot, which fox climbed in & dragged baby out - changed to baby propped up on sofa, fox dragged baby off Mother was downstairs - changed to mother upstairs (so if she left baby downstairs whilst she went upstairs how come she didnt notice the front door was open? Baby taken to St Thomases hospital - changed to Kings College Have I missed anything?

haha yes think there were a few more changes but lost count! couple of things i remember mother kicked fox to get it to drop baby - changed to mother hit fox with hand. Also babies head was caught in doorway rather than hurt when it was dragged to floor