ianr

> Also just to let you know the police have been and searched gardens i n my street . Lovely police officer > who said they were searching gardens in a 2 mile radius in case he has tried to take shelter in shed etc I'm relieved to hear that, given the possibility of confusion, of whatever degree, being the cause. I gather he didn't have his Freedom Pass with him, but is it known what sort of places he has used it to go to, even maybe just once for something like a country walk, some time ago? He could have got into the train system, maybe even been let on a bus, without it.

And don't even think of letting anyone have access to them. 18/6: edited to remove an example selection of ten icon smileys (five of them animated). Even a few seconds of them can make some feel queasy. :-( The ascii versions, as eg used above and by Sue below, are of course always usable. Ed [22/6]: But now again likely to be translated by the forum software into the graphic ones.

If you believe in education and can deal with their guessing that it was from you, you could leave copies of all or parts of http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200089/street_cleaning/417/litter_and_street_cleaning or http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200178/environmental_crime/773/fixed_penalty_noticesfines under their wipers.

There are several previous threads with similar reports of Lebanese loops eg: http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,697919,697946 I note that the article DF links to suggests calling the police immediately in such cases, presumably on the assumption that there would be someone nearby waiting to retrieve your card. Appearing to give up and leave and then discreetly watching from a distance might be a useful tactic too.

Just checked the live arrivals and departures pages. The system does indeed currently show trains arriving from Sevenoaks and PRye on platform 3, but strangely doesn't seem to know which platform they'll be using for going back there. Incidentally, when I checked earlier this morning, the 02:13 trains from (?)Three Bridges to Bedford were shown using platform 5. Is that Harry Potter territory?

Mr Pat Connelly (photograph from the www.missingpeople.org.uk below)

Stiff (?dopamine deficit)

Actually, this is the index page for BFR, with links to everyfink, including live departure details with platform info. http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/BFR/details.html At this moment all northbound trains seem to be expected to be using platform 2.

> Blackfriars station only has platforms 1 & 2 at the moment, 3 & 4 haven't been unveiled yet So this online map (they're available for all stations; mouse over the large version for photos) might well be up-to-date? http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations/sjp/BFR/stationOverview.xhtml

"The tabby tote is real". (Original model here, for those who haven't already seen it.)

Squirrels is well hard. http://www.maycontainnutz.com/

> I just wondered if anyone else has seen a red squirrel in the local area A queried sighting here (1st May): http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,246908,878911

I'd been wondering when the jubilee weekend was, so thanks for letting me know. I've only just heard, on News Quiz, that Tuesday's going to be a bank holiday as well. I had to check on a government website taht it's true. While I'm here, any news of Mafeking?

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > dunno about the scottish company not being linked The Scottish company called PARADOX PARANORMAL INVESTIGATION LTD was dissolved in July 2011. It has passed over. It is no more. Philip Wray was listed as director. > photos appear to show exact same car and logo paradox-paranormal.co.uk is registered to an unnamed individual who says they are non-trading. The website mentions Philip Wray as one of the team members and doesn't seem to show any updating or activity beyond 2010.

The Animal Welfare Act 2006 applies to protected animals and animals for which a person is responsible (which includes owning or being in charge of). It is an offence to cause unnecessary suffering to any such animal. An animal is protected for the purposes of the Act if and only if: (a) it is of a kind which is commonly domesticated in the British Islands, (b) it is under the control of man whether on a permanent or temporary basis, or © it is not living in a wild state. That would seem to exclude a squirrel. It is an offence under the Act to cause an animal fight to take place, where ?animal fight? means "an occasion on which a protected animal is placed with an animal, or with a human, for the purpose of fighting, wrestling or baiting". I think that would not include a dog's chasing and killing a squirrel. The only reference within the Act to wild mammals (other than those to the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976) is a clause amending the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996. That clause simply defines redefines wild mammals as 'any mammal which is not a ?protected animal? within the meaning of the Animal Welfare Act 2006?'. The Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996, s.1 reads: "If, save as permitted by this Act, any person mutilates, kicks, beats, nails or otherwise impales, stabs, burns, stones, crushes, drowns, drags or asphyxiates any wild mammal with intent to inflict unnecessary suffering he shall be guilty of an offence." So proof of intent to inflict unnecessary suffering to the squirrel would be necessary to obtain any conviction. That would probably require compelling evidence, in examination and cross-examination, from more than one witness, as to the intent of the person in charge of the dog. The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 makes it an offence to be in charge of a dog dangerously out of control in a public place. It has to be proved that a *person* has been injured by it, or put in fear or apprehension that they might be injured by it. That would exclude a dog's chasing and injuring a squirrel. The Dogs Act 1871 provides for the making of a complaint to a magistrate that a dog is dangerous and not under proper control, and empowers the court to order that the dog be destroyed or kept under specified proper control. For the purposes of this Act, "dangerous" can include being a danger to other animals. Any breach of the order can be dealt with under the Dangerous Dogs Act. As has been said here before, it seems that it's only the Dogs Act 1871 that has any possible specific application in cases, like this one, where a dog injures another animal, unless intent to inflict suffering can be proved. http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/dogs-guide-enforcers.pdf (PDF, 160 kilobytes) provides a useful summary.

> I've decided to listen to Freddie King and make pasta instead. For a moment I thought you meant "make pasta".

That reminds me. I use South Bermondsey station very very occasionally, and at least twice I've had headaches from a weekday daytime waste fire burning in the adjoining industrial yard. Is it possible these fires are fairly frequent?

The ED Hospital site has been acquired by a local consortium. It's going to be the home of the largest cup cake manufactory in Europe.

languagelounge> Still don't know who Jeckyl and Hyde are, either. Jekyll and Hyde

Did you get anywhere with this?

You've not told us if any of the advice we offered was of any use, or what the outcome was.

>Dated Rated... Mated... Sated

It seems to be one of their staples. The wikipedia article about them mentions it being around in the late 1990s. The good news is that they're giving some away freely to people who attend their event on 13 May at any local UCKG HelpCentre..

Don't suppose Lely's Nymphs will get a look in? http://www.dulwichpicturegallery.org.uk/collection/search_the_collection/artwork_detail.aspx?cid=516

> These appear to be just the job if you are looking for daily/monthly whatever Just the ticket, thanks. Nicely complements the EA data sets I mentioned.