Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hello John k

The above letter we all received through our parent mail from the safer school police . I agree that they've put road instead of avenue but as for the authenticity of the above letter it has come directly from school as a warning .

To me dulwich village is close enough to east dulwich to warrant mine and many other parents to be extra aware of someone who is possiably a danger .

From the Southward News post above:

A Met Police spokesperson told the News: ?Police are looking into an incident where a man approached a four-year-old boy in East Dulwich on November 7 at around 3.30pm.

?The boy was with an adult and officers are making further enquiries.?

Anyone with information that could help the police should call 101



The spokesperson only goes as far as to say "approached". Not sure what that proves, if anything. Probably that without sufficient evidence or other witnesses, Police do not want to categorise this as a crime, prematurely.


There would appear to be a potential disparity between the OP's account/classification of the incident and what the police are willing to say at the moment, for whatever reason.

edhistory Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There is no Calton Road

>

> The term "IC4" is not helpful for parents.

>

> Turney Road is not in SE22.

>

> Is this really a police notice?

>

> John K


That sounds as if it's from a notepad


Southwark News also say "attackers"

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Something happened that has raised serious

> concerns


Well - We have now reached the stage of the thread where the initial OP headline has long ago made its initial impact and warned parents and carers of the serious concern issue.


However, now the dust has settled, there is room for another discussion - and it's important to take on board that what the Met Police have said makes no reference to abduction or attempted abduction. I find that interesting.

Mick Mac Wrote:


>

> However, now the dust has settled, there is room

> for another discussion - and it's important to

> take on board that what the Met Police have said

> makes no reference to abduction or attempted

> abduction. I find that interesting.


Do you mean as opposed to a 'potential' abduction or have I not read something? If you do, it sounds like police speak for not really knowing what the motive was.

  • 3 years later...

What I find weird is that he was described as ? Asian?.

There have been a few other instances across the country when

toddlers have been led away or grabbed one in Sutton and one up north and all were

described as ? Asian? - something needs to be examined there.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Every year they ask for more and every year it is an exhausting process pushing back on that for local residents and councillors. What annoys me is that at the post event consultation/ feedback this year, I specifically asked them if the rumours around applying for two weekends next year were true. They told me no. So that was a lie. Anyway, we go again. 
    • Double In New or great condition  Or super comfortable air bed Any1 pls
    • Rant ahead: You're not one of them but unfortunately, there's a substrate of posters here that do very little except moan and come up with weird conspiracy theories. They're immediately highly critical of just about any change, and their initial assumption is that everyone else is a total fucking contemptible idiot. For example: don't you think that the people who run the libraries will have considered the impact of timing of reconstruction on library users? (In fact, we know they have - because they've made arrangements at other libraries to attempt to mitigate the disruption). After all, these are the people that spend their whole working week thinking about libraries and dealing with library users (and the kids especially). You don't go into the library game for the chicks and fame - so it's fair to assume that librarians are committed to public service and public access to libraries, including by kids. Likewise the built environment people (engineers, architects, construction managers, project managers, construction contractors, subcontractors or whoever is on this job) are told to minimise disruption on every job they do. The thing that occurs to us as amateurs within 30 seconds of us seeing something is probably not something a full time professional hasn't thought about! Southwark Council, the NHS, TfL, Dulwich Estate, Thames Water, Openreach - they're not SPECTRE factories filled with malevolent chaosmongers trying to persecute anyone. They're mostly filled with people who understand their job and try to do their best with what they've been given - just like all of us. Nobody is perfect or immune from challenge, and that's fair enough, but why not at least start from the assumption that there's a good reason why things have been done the way they have? Any normal person would be pleased that their busy, pretty, lively local library is getting refurbished, and will have more space and facilities for kids and teens, and will be more efficient to run and warmer in winter. But no, EDT_Forumite_752 had kids who did an exam 20 years ago, and this makes them an expert on library refurbishment who can see it's all just stuff and nonsense for the green agenda and why can't it all be put off... 😡😡😡
    • I completely misread the previous post, sorry. For some reason I thought the mini cooper was also a police vehicle, DUH.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...