Bromley girl 'lucky to be alive' after dog attack (From News Shopper)

The dog should be put down, not muzzled. Have you noticed that the amount of dogs roaming around recreation grounds has increased dramatically in recent years. They are a real hazard for adults with small children. All dogs should be kept on leads where the general public walk, cycle and play - end of!

Lovely photo of little girl. Such a relief she has not been scarred for life. x

so who exactly pays this mans fines?

"Matvejev, who is unemployed and on benefits, was ordered to pay a £150 fine and £200 compensation to Chloe as well as other costs totalling £185"

"Be cause this is the dog' first attack". I beg your pardon. Does a fog have to kill before action is taken. It has the taste for human blood now.

The law and our judges are so inconsistent and out of touch it’s unbelievable.

A badly trained or mistreated dog can be a lethal weapon.

If you own a dog and I mean ANY dog, you should be entirely responsible for it and its actions.

If it bites someone in a public place then the dog should be destroyed and the owner should face a criminal charge at least equivalent to GBH.

I hope that this little girl grows out of her fear of dogs. A well trained and loved dog can bring an unquantifiable explosion of love and fun into a person’s home and life. Dogs can truly be man’s very best friend.

Dejavu with other articles.
And my comment to this is:

Bring back dog licenses!

joertmclark wrote:
Dejavu with other articles. And my comment to this is: Bring back dog licenses!

And how would that stop it. The type of people that have badly trained dogs are the type that wouldn't bother with a licence.

Dog licensing was abolished in 1987. Prior to this dog licences were mandatory, but the requirement was widely ignored, with only about half of owners having one.

Vladimir Matvejev sounds a bit like a German Irish name to me.

There is no way i'd let my child anywhere near a dog like this. Her mother, or the 'responsible adult' she was with at the time should have warned her away. These dogs are v powerful and a child of 4 should be kept well clear - is that not common sense.

So how is a non-english speaking Russian living here on benefits. This country really is going to the dogs.

The 49-year-old, whose testimony was translated through a Russian interpreter,

Matvejev, who is unemployed and on benefits

bothered44 wrote:
There is no way i'd let my child anywhere near a dog like this. Her mother, or the 'responsible adult' she was with at the time should have warned her away. These dogs are v powerful and a child of 4 should be kept well clear - is that not common sense.

I totally agree, people need educating as well.


Nothing common about sense.

A waste of time prosecution.

If the parents had been caring and monitoring the child she would not have been bitten.

piglet2011 wrote:
A waste of time prosecution.

If the parents had been caring and monitoring the child she would not have been bitten.

she wasn't bitten!!!!

I find most of you discusting you do not know the person or the animal i do not personally know the man but i have seen him with not only this dog but his previous dog for over the last 10 years they have been the most obedient dogs i have seen in my life i have seen them with many children cuddling them and other dogs and they were completely timid and placid i agree with another writer saying they are powerfull dogs and no child should ever be aloud to play around with a dog they do not know i have two dogs and do not leave any children unattended with them the mother should have taken responsibility for her daughter and not let her around the dog NOT ALL DOGS SHOULD BE TARRED WITH THE SAME BRUSH ........

Hang on a minute - a parent may not know the danger of a dog ( crazy I know ) but a dog owner must be more responsible surely. And no we don't all tar dogs with the same brush but all dog owners have a responsibility to the general public as a whole - KEEP ALL DOGS ON A LEAD IN PUBLIC AREAS

If a parent doesnt know the dog then they shouldnt let there child around them and i agree 100% with you that all dogs should be kept on a lead at all times but this particular dog could pass for a guide dog it does not leave the mans side and thats what im trying to get across to people they are so quick to say put the dog down when they dont even know it and if a dog of that size bit her it would of taken her face off istead she had a scratch and i have seen this man with his dogs hes had over the last ten years and not once have i seen him be irresponsible and i see so many people walking there dogs about without leads or a care in the world what there dogs actually doing and as a responsible dog owner myself i know the difference and he is not one of them

vincemadden wrote:
If a parent doesnt know the dog then they shouldnt let there child around them and i agree 100% with you that all dogs should be kept on a lead at all times but this particular dog could pass for a guide dog it does not leave the mans side and thats what im trying to get across to people they are so quick to say put the dog down when they dont even know it and if a dog of that size bit her it would of taken her face off istead she had a scratch and i have seen this man with his dogs hes had over the last ten years and not once have i seen him be irresponsible and i see so many people walking there dogs about without leads or a care in the world what there dogs actually doing and as a responsible dog owner myself i know the difference and he is not one of them

Oh you have seen him in 10 yrs with dogs, so if he has been over here for at least 10 yrs, why can't he speak English. And such a large dog, he leaves it outside the swing area y he is inside with his son.

the wall wrote:

bothered44 wrote:
There is no way i'd let my child anywhere near a dog like this. Her mother, or the 'responsible adult' she was with at the time should have warned her away. These dogs are v powerful and a child of 4 should be kept well clear - is that not common sense.

I totally agree, people need educating as well.


Nothing common about sense.

The owner of the dog was inside the swing area with his son, with the dog outside. Chloe was playing with some friends she was the one who picked up their ball

bothered44 wrote:
There is no way i'd let my child anywhere near a dog like this. Her mother, or the 'responsible adult' she was with at the time should have warned her away. These dogs are v powerful and a child of 4 should be kept well clear - is that not common sense.

The dog is so powerful, children r playing in the park on the grass where the dog was and the owner was inside the swing area so he had no control, as their is gates seperating them, Chloe just happened to be the one to collect their ball.

starryblueeyes wrote:

piglet2011 wrote:
A waste of time prosecution.

If the parents had been caring and monitoring the child she would not have been bitten.

she wasn't bitten!!!!

Stop being so bitter, it was Not a scratch, it was a puncture was you at the court hearing what the hospital statement was..

vincemadden wrote:
If a parent doesnt know the dog then they shouldnt let there child around them and i agree 100% with you that all dogs should be kept on a lead at all times but this particular dog could pass for a guide dog it does not leave the mans side and thats what im trying to get across to people they are so quick to say put the dog down when they dont even know it and if a dog of that size bit her it would of taken her face off istead she had a scratch and i have seen this man with his dogs hes had over the last ten years and not once have i seen him be irresponsible and i see so many people walking there dogs about without leads or a care in the world what there dogs actually doing and as a responsible dog owner myself i know the difference and he is not one of them

That sentance is longer than the one that should have been handed out.

Invicta58 wrote:

vincemadden wrote:
If a parent doesnt know the dog then they shouldnt let there child around them and i agree 100% with you that all dogs should be kept on a lead at all times but this particular dog could pass for a guide dog it does not leave the mans side and thats what im trying to get across to people they are so quick to say put the dog down when they dont even know it and if a dog of that size bit her it would of taken her face off istead she had a scratch and i have seen this man with his dogs hes had over the last ten years and not once have i seen him be irresponsible and i see so many people walking there dogs about without leads or a care in the world what there dogs actually doing and as a responsible dog owner myself i know the difference and he is not one of them

That sentance is longer than the one that should have been handed out.

Once again, the man was inside the swing area while the dog was on the other side of the fence, Chloe was playing with friends and she was the one to pick up their ball, she had a puncher on her face and managed to move her face in
time, was you at he court hearing. And if his been there over 10 years, why can't he speak English.

this article and these comments anger me. For starters, do any of you actually know the dog or her family of owners? oh? that's a no? Well luckily i do know the family, and I've known the dog all of her life. (BTW her name is Lacey not Lesse, so if this article cant get a name right then who knows what else its saying isn't right) I've known this dog for 6-7 years and she has always been completely well behaved. she always listens to any commands her owners give her. she has never once bitten, scratched or done anything of the sort the numerous times that I've been round the house. So any comment that says shes badly trained or misbehaved is wrong. Secondly theres 4 kids that live in the house! age range from 4-17 and nothings ever happened to any of them because they know who to treat and interact with a animal! the youngest child in the house is the same age as the Chloe, but nothing has ever happened to him. Probably because he knows not to poke, prod or pull a dogs ear. I mean, come on, what do you expect? Anything, being human or animal, would be annoyed if someone was poking and prodding them! oh yeah, and where were the child's parents? too busy to watch the child while in a park where there are potentially more dangers than a well behaved dog who was poked and prodded? Theres both sides to one story. Fair enough she wasn't on a lead but the dogs been going to that park without a lead for years and nothing has ever happened like this. Parents should watch their child and if they see a dog come over to the child, then they can take action quickly to anything. Oh and the slurs about not learning English properly yet? I like to see any of you go to Russia and try to raise a family of 4 while learning the language.

laura69 wrote:
this article and these comments anger me. For starters, do any of you actually know the dog or her family of owners? oh? that's a no? Well luckily i do know the family, and I've known the dog all of her life. (BTW her name is Lacey not Lesse, so if this article cant get a name right then who knows what else its saying isn't right) I've known this dog for 6-7 years and she has always been completely well behaved. she always listens to any commands her owners give her. she has never once bitten, scratched or done anything of the sort the numerous times that I've been round the house. So any comment that says shes badly trained or misbehaved is wrong. Secondly theres 4 kids that live in the house! age range from 4-17 and nothings ever happened to any of them because they know who to treat and interact with a animal! the youngest child in the house is the same age as the Chloe, but nothing has ever happened to him. Probably because he knows not to poke, prod or pull a dogs ear. I mean, come on, what do you expect? Anything, being human or animal, would be annoyed if someone was poking and prodding them! oh yeah, and where were the child's parents? too busy to watch the child while in a park where there are potentially more dangers than a well behaved dog who was poked and prodded? Theres both sides to one story. Fair enough she wasn't on a lead but the dogs been going to that park without a lead for years and nothing has ever happened like this. Parents should watch their child and if they see a dog come over to the child, then they can take action quickly to anything. Oh and the slurs about not learning English properly yet? I like to see any of you go to Russia and try to raise a family of 4 while learning the language.

too right! you should always know both sides before you judge!

laura69 wrote:
this article and these comments anger me. For starters, do any of you actually know the dog or her family of owners? oh? that's a no? Well luckily i do know the family, and I've known the dog all of her life. (BTW her name is Lacey not Lesse, so if this article cant get a name right then who knows what else its saying isn't right) I've known this dog for 6-7 years and she has always been completely well behaved. she always listens to any commands her owners give her. she has never once bitten, scratched or done anything of the sort the numerous times that I've been round the house. So any comment that says shes badly trained or misbehaved is wrong. Secondly theres 4 kids that live in the house! age range from 4-17 and nothings ever happened to any of them because they know who to treat and interact with a animal! the youngest child in the house is the same age as the Chloe, but nothing has ever happened to him. Probably because he knows not to poke, prod or pull a dogs ear. I mean, come on, what do you expect? Anything, being human or animal, would be annoyed if someone was poking and prodding them! oh yeah, and where were the child's parents? too busy to watch the child while in a park where there are potentially more dangers than a well behaved dog who was poked and prodded? Theres both sides to one story. Fair enough she wasn't on a lead but the dogs been going to that park without a lead for years and nothing has ever happened like this. Parents should watch their child and if they see a dog come over to the child, then they can take action quickly to anything. Oh and the slurs about not learning English properly yet? I like to see any of you go to Russia and try to raise a family of 4 while learning the language.

No, most of us on here don't know the man or his dog. Quite frankly I couldn't care less that you know him, because that has nothing to do with it. We're all still entitled to our opinions based on the facts of the story. The simple fact is that children should be able to run around and play in a public area without the risk of being attacked. Dogs should be on leads and muzzled when in public places. To try to blame the parents is disguting.

Oh and here's a question - Why has he got a dog when he's unemployed and living on my taxes? Why should the British tax payer pay for an unemployed person's pet? The benefit system should be there as a safety net to make sure that people have the basics, not to fund their pets!

PaulErith wrote:

laura69 wrote: this article and these comments anger me. For starters, do any of you actually know the dog or her family of owners? oh? that's a no? Well luckily i do know the family, and I've known the dog all of her life. (BTW her name is Lacey not Lesse, so if this article cant get a name right then who knows what else its saying isn't right) I've known this dog for 6-7 years and she has always been completely well behaved. she always listens to any commands her owners give her. she has never once bitten, scratched or done anything of the sort the numerous times that I've been round the house. So any comment that says shes badly trained or misbehaved is wrong. Secondly theres 4 kids that live in the house! age range from 4-17 and nothings ever happened to any of them because they know who to treat and interact with a animal! the youngest child in the house is the same age as the Chloe, but nothing has ever happened to him. Probably because he knows not to poke, prod or pull a dogs ear. I mean, come on, what do you expect? Anything, being human or animal, would be annoyed if someone was poking and prodding them! oh yeah, and where were the child's parents? too busy to watch the child while in a park where there are potentially more dangers than a well behaved dog who was poked and prodded? Theres both sides to one story. Fair enough she wasn't on a lead but the dogs been going to that park without a lead for years and nothing has ever happened like this. Parents should watch their child and if they see a dog come over to the child, then they can take action quickly to anything. Oh and the slurs about not learning English properly yet? I like to see any of you go to Russia and try to raise a family of 4 while learning the language.

No, most of us on here don't know the man or his dog. Quite frankly I couldn't care less that you know him, because that has nothing to do with it. We're all still entitled to our opinions based on the facts of the story. The simple fact is that children should be able to run around and play in a public area without the risk of being attacked. Dogs should be on leads and muzzled when in public places. To try to blame the parents is disguting. Oh and here's a question - Why has he got a dog when he's unemployed and living on my taxes? Why should the British tax payer pay for an unemployed person's pet? The benefit system should be there as a safety net to make sure that people have the basics, not to fund their pets!

Maybe he had the dog before be made unemployed. Did you think of that?
I'm sure that the dog isn't claiming as well, so if the man wants to spend his dole money on dog food then so be it.

Could it be that some people don't know how to behave around animals?

Paula we all know you're anti-dog.

the wall wrote:

PaulErith wrote:

laura69 wrote: this article and these comments anger me. For starters, do any of you actually know the dog or her family of owners? oh? that's a no? Well luckily i do know the family, and I've known the dog all of her life. (BTW her name is Lacey not Lesse, so if this article cant get a name right then who knows what else its saying isn't right) I've known this dog for 6-7 years and she has always been completely well behaved. she always listens to any commands her owners give her. she has never once bitten, scratched or done anything of the sort the numerous times that I've been round the house. So any comment that says shes badly trained or misbehaved is wrong. Secondly theres 4 kids that live in the house! age range from 4-17 and nothings ever happened to any of them because they know who to treat and interact with a animal! the youngest child in the house is the same age as the Chloe, but nothing has ever happened to him. Probably because he knows not to poke, prod or pull a dogs ear. I mean, come on, what do you expect? Anything, being human or animal, would be annoyed if someone was poking and prodding them! oh yeah, and where were the child's parents? too busy to watch the child while in a park where there are potentially more dangers than a well behaved dog who was poked and prodded? Theres both sides to one story. Fair enough she wasn't on a lead but the dogs been going to that park without a lead for years and nothing has ever happened like this. Parents should watch their child and if they see a dog come over to the child, then they can take action quickly to anything. Oh and the slurs about not learning English properly yet? I like to see any of you go to Russia and try to raise a family of 4 while learning the language.

No, most of us on here don't know the man or his dog. Quite frankly I couldn't care less that you know him, because that has nothing to do with it. We're all still entitled to our opinions based on the facts of the story. The simple fact is that children should be able to run around and play in a public area without the risk of being attacked. Dogs should be on leads and muzzled when in public places. To try to blame the parents is disguting. Oh and here's a question - Why has he got a dog when he's unemployed and living on my taxes? Why should the British tax payer pay for an unemployed person's pet? The benefit system should be there as a safety net to make sure that people have the basics, not to fund their pets!

Maybe he had the dog before be made unemployed. Did you think of that? I'm sure that the dog isn't claiming as well, so if the man wants to spend his dole money on dog food then so be it. Could it be that some people don't know how to behave around animals? Paula we all know you're anti-dog.

"Could it be that some people don't know how to behave around animals?" - We're talking about a 4 year old girl here! Maybe she doesn't know how to behave around dogs, but then she is only 4 so that's to be expected. It's the dog owner's responsibility to keep it under control.

Yes, I realise that he may have had the dog before. I was talking more generically. I know of lots of people who are on benefits that then get a pet (note that in my earlier comment and this one, I refer to pets, and not dogs specifically). It's not on. If someone on benefits can afford to get a pet, then their benefit payments are clearly too high.

PaulErith wrote:

the wall wrote:

PaulErith wrote:

laura69 wrote: this article and these comments anger me. For starters, do any of you actually know the dog or her family of owners? oh? that's a no? Well luckily i do know the family, and I've known the dog all of her life. (BTW her name is Lacey not Lesse, so if this article cant get a name right then who knows what else its saying isn't right) I've known this dog for 6-7 years and she has always been completely well behaved. she always listens to any commands her owners give her. she has never once bitten, scratched or done anything of the sort the numerous times that I've been round the house. So any comment that says shes badly trained or misbehaved is wrong. Secondly theres 4 kids that live in the house! age range from 4-17 and nothings ever happened to any of them because they know who to treat and interact with a animal! the youngest child in the house is the same age as the Chloe, but nothing has ever happened to him. Probably because he knows not to poke, prod or pull a dogs ear. I mean, come on, what do you expect? Anything, being human or animal, would be annoyed if someone was poking and prodding them! oh yeah, and where were the child's parents? too busy to watch the child while in a park where there are potentially more dangers than a well behaved dog who was poked and prodded? Theres both sides to one story. Fair enough she wasn't on a lead but the dogs been going to that park without a lead for years and nothing has ever happened like this. Parents should watch their child and if they see a dog come over to the child, then they can take action quickly to anything. Oh and the slurs about not learning English properly yet? I like to see any of you go to Russia and try to raise a family of 4 while learning the language.

No, most of us on here don't know the man or his dog. Quite frankly I couldn't care less that you know him, because that has nothing to do with it. We're all still entitled to our opinions based on the facts of the story. The simple fact is that children should be able to run around and play in a public area without the risk of being attacked. Dogs should be on leads and muzzled when in public places. To try to blame the parents is disguting. Oh and here's a question - Why has he got a dog when he's unemployed and living on my taxes? Why should the British tax payer pay for an unemployed person's pet? The benefit system should be there as a safety net to make sure that people have the basics, not to fund their pets!

Maybe he had the dog before be made unemployed. Did you think of that? I'm sure that the dog isn't claiming as well, so if the man wants to spend his dole money on dog food then so be it. Could it be that some people don't know how to behave around animals? Paula we all know you're anti-dog.

"Could it be that some people don't know how to behave around animals?" - We're talking about a 4 year old girl here! Maybe she doesn't know how to behave around dogs, but then she is only 4 so that's to be expected. It's the dog owner's responsibility to keep it under control. Yes, I realise that he may have had the dog before. I was talking more generically. I know of lots of people who are on benefits that then get a pet (note that in my earlier comment and this one, I refer to pets, and not dogs specifically). It's not on. If someone on benefits can afford to get a pet, then their benefit payments are clearly too high.

At four years old I knew how to behave around all types of animals.

It's the child owner's responsibility to keep it under control. Works both ways. Just because you have a child doesn't mean the whole world revolves around you and that child.


You know of lots of people who are on benefits - Well that's CAFC for you.

However do you know if they have used their savings ? Are you their bank manager?

Don't disagree that a child also needs to be kept control. However, this child was playing in a park. It's a sad day if you can't let your children run around in the park for fear of killer dogs.

Yes, I do know lots of people on benefits or more to the point, in most cases, I know of them rather than being friends. This is mainly from my local pub. I can guarantee that they don't have savings without needing to be their bank manager!

Not sure what CAFC has to do with it especially as my local is a big Millwall pub.

So every dog is a killer dog is it?

Where have people walked dogs for many many years ? A park, it is a shared space, if you can't get along with people at the park then maybe you are not grown up enough to there by yourself.

I have kept dogs for over 30 years and none have attacked a child in the park. I've had to tell some kids to stop teasing before. So that comes back to parental control.

Please stop confusing your opinion with fact.