Got it!
Someone on Facebook said the photo of a baby is a child with a cat scratch.
If you google “cat scratch baby,” you’ll find the photo at the link below in an article about a cat attack on a baby:
That baby was in the UK, and the photo was taken 3 years ago.
That must be why the photo has been removed from some of the websites that first posted it along with this case.
When you think about it, it makes no sense that this would be the photo: The child victim in the attack is 3 years old, not a baby. Also, the victim’s family has not gone public, so the media shouldn’t have a photo of the child.
And Drudge posted a link today which termed the injuries to the victims as "minor". I think a white victim of black violence has to at least be still alive to have injuries qualify as "minor." :)
I googled images for, cat scratch baby
and I got these.. I feel so disappointed. Sigh.
No way that baby was attacked by a cat. Just one claw? Been around cats all my life they get you with all four. Plus if that was a cat scratch that was one big cat like a Puma or Bob Cat that did that scratch. No house cat did that. Even then where are the other claw marks? One thing I know about cats and their aim with claws they are dead on when they strike.