Sorry chaps... I forgot that it's necessary to make sure i clarify every potential sticking point or area of confusion of a post so that things are not taken the wrong way. Of course what happened to the child is horrible
The point was, if you read the article, that it says the law only covers dog attacks in public places. All i was suggesting was that, if parents win the case and successfully get compensation... as they probably should... it could mark another change in the law in addition to the extra powers the RSPCA were recently granted.
i.e... some curtain twitching nause over