Jump to content

Recommended Posts

scareyt Wrote:



>As it stands, it just sounds like a simple part of the description given following a suspicious encounter with a strange man in case anyone else had the same thing happen to them.


Yeah, but the stranger in question was already off on their way by the time the OP got to the door. No one's managed to go in to any real detail about what exactly is suspicious about having your door knocked on. Where's the threat in someone cycling away for your house and saying "wrong door"?


>You develop a fine-tuned instinct for behaviour that isn't right and could turn into a threat, and that's what the OP sounds like to me.


I've developed a "fine tuned instinct" for certain types of behaviour, too. Please don't imply that your experiences and knowledge are some how more valid than my own. I'd be on the same page as you in there had been some sort of confrontation or act of violence, but I know first hand that black skin causes people to see threatening or suspicious behaviour where there is none.

scareyt Wrote:

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


>

> It sounds like you have equated this thread with

> the front gardens one, and decided that somehow

> the OP was objecting to the presence of a black

> man on her doorstep in the same way that other

> people were objecting to rubbish and weeds in

> other people's front gardens, as some kind of

> undesirable rubbish spoiling their view. If this

> is genuinely what you believe then I feel great

> compassion towards you.


Cheers for the "great compassion" but nah, that isn't what happened. Believe it or not, I've got the cognitive faculties to separate two completely unrelated threads about to different topics. Read that back and ask yourself how patronising you sound.

I agree. What is inherently dodgy about someone knocking on a door and riding away before you answer the door, then explaining that it was the wrong house?


If that's not an inherently dodgy scenario, which I think is the case, what made the OP think it was?


It was night? Ok maybe, but most burglaries happen during the day and night time ones are more likely to be creepers where they don't wake the occupiers, so unlikely to knock first.


He was young? He was black? No?


What else was there?

charlesfare Wrote:

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

Read

> that back and ask yourself how patronising you

> sound.


Fair enough. I've now deleted most of that post. What I was trying to say is that yes it's crap that a young black man can't knock on the wrong door by mistake without being suspected of being a criminal. And it's crap that a woman can't open a door to any strange man late at night without feeling scared. Both of those things are crap.

LadyDeliah Wrote:

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

> What is inherently dodgy about someone

> knocking on a door and riding away before you

> answer the door, then explaining that it was the

> wrong house?


It's unusual. I've lived in South London for a while now, not once have I had a stranger knocking on the door in the night. Then realising it's the wrong house before anyone even answered (and the 'right' house is far enough away for him to get back on his bike)... pretty strange. Of course it could all be perfectly innocent (and probably is), but I'd at least think "what the hell was all that about?"


Just because you personally wouldn't find the situation suspicious, it's unfair to declare that it's categorically not dodgy.


From the way some people are carrying on, you'd think that the OP has already made up his mind that the kid was guilty of something. But I don't think that's the case.

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

    • 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?
    • Very sorry to hear this, but surely the landlord is responsible for fixing the electrics?  Surely they must be insured for things like this? I hope you get it all sorted out quickly.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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