Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Friday 13 August at 10pm. My son was mugged by a man with a knife, on Piermont Green (opposite Peckham Rye Park). He was unhurt, but his phone was stolen. I have reported this information to the police. Description of person involved ? Wearing: Hoodie and tracksuit trousers. Age: Around 20. Build: 5ft 9ins tall. Ethnicity: Black. Sex: Male. Other details: Wearing a face covering.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/291586-armed-mugging/
Share on other sites

Thank you. Is there a more detailed description of the mugger please?


J27 Wrote:

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

> My son was mugged by a man with a knife, on Friday

> (13 August), at around 10pm. He was on Piermont

> Green, next to Forest Hill Road - opposite the

> park.

> His phone and keys were stolen, but he was

> unharmed. The mugger then went towards the Herne

> Tavern.

> The police came round quickly, and took details.

>

> This is just to alert people, and also to ask if

> anyone saw anything suspicious near Piermont Green

> or the Herne Tavern, at that time.

> Thanks! J

I would like to add that if anyone else has a similar experience there or feels threatened at any time please go into the Herne (when open) where the staff can keep you safe and contact who you need to.

Edited to say pretty sure this applies to any local businesses- I remember Emily?s fish bar helped in a similar situation.

obviously anyone who saw the crime or who has access to cctv would be in contact with the police.


Anyone not on this forum or unaware of the crime would have any idea (necessarily) that people passing their CCTV camera were in any way suspicious. So would have no reason at all to contact the police. And I'm afraid that people who actually see crime committed my not report it - some at least will be afraid of any consequences when the little scrotes, if even arrested, are let off with a caution.

Alice - I amdire your confidence in people. Not everyone is as public-spirited as you think, and soem may not understand the importance of what they saw or heard and choose to not make a fuss and bother the police. What is wrong with putting a description up? Sure, some people will use it to confirm biases, but is avoiding that more important than warning others and preventing them, perhaps, from becoming another victim, or from helping an individual make more solid a suspicion they had which could then help the police?

I fear your good intentions, alice, are more to do with how you would like to be perceived (even on an anonymous forum) than anything to do with the victim and others who may fall foul of the attacker.


If you could point to a peer-reviewed research paper that confirms your assertion, please post it here and I will stand corrected (though how someone or a group of someones can be criminalised when they are not actually deemed to be criminals because they haven't been found guilty in court or even questioned is uncertain to me).

To back up my CCTV point - it seems the victim knew which direction the attacker went in i.e. towards herne tavern.


Obviously we know approximately what time (around 10pm).


There is probably some CCTV around the shops/traffic lights in that area (don't know for sure, but there are in most places now).


If the victim can remember much about what the attacker looked like (obviously it was dark so this may be difficult), looking at CCTV at around that time frame may show the attacker walking/running off. A clear picture could help the police identify him.


Edit: From my experience with such things, you need to really push (and I mean really push) the police in this sort of thing.


Even take the initiative yourself and find out if there is CCTV from any of those businesses and then explicitly tell the police. Don't passively assume the police will undertake this themselves.

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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