Jump to content

Recommended Posts

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

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

> I was surprised at that as earlier in this thread

> quids said it was me!


But Sean, ???? doesn't know anything about this so if he said it was you, that is clearly a joke. If the OP says that the 'Lothario' is posting on this thread and then suggests he is ????, I can understand that he should take offence. She has now made it clear that she was joking, but the whole thing continues to be very baffling to me.


If the OP has now collected all the 'evidence' she needs from PMs and so on I suggest that this thread be locked and that those people who know what's going on continue a private conversation. To suggest that 'a shopkeeper of Lordship Lane' is a wrong'un casts doubt on all the shopkeepers of LL, and that makes me uncomfortable.

Hve PM'd you


moving2dulwich Wrote:

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

> I'm glad women are being warned about this man. He

> comes over as nice but he is disgusting. He

> believes all British women are whores and is very

> forceful.

Life threatening STD.... HIV?

or one of the curable STD's?


If this is to do with someone who is HIV positive then we are talking about a very serious matter, even a criminal offence, though not sure here but seem to remember that has been a court case (or maybe there have been a few) where a man who was HIV positive (who had intentional withheld the information from a sexual partner) who had in turn infected the woman... pretty certain he got a prison sentence.

LegalEagle-ish Wrote:

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

> I disagree - why should the thread be locked?

>

> I think the subject should be changed to 'Evidence

> needed to prosecute possible sex offender in ED'

> though.


LE, if there's a sex offender in ED, someone needs to go to the police with evidence. If people are in danger, then they need to be warned - and not just with mysterious dark hints that cast doubts on lots of innocent people - including all the men who have posted on this thread, and all the male shopkeepers of LL!


Let's assume for an instant that this is all true. The people who know what's going on are not saying anything useful to the people who don't know. They are PMing, because they are concerned not to provide details. The people who don't know are just speculating. So what's the value of a public discussion when nothing real is being said?

PM'd you


charliecharlie Wrote:

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

> Life threatening STD.... HIV?

> or one of the curable STD's?

>

> If this is to do with someone who is HIV positive

> then we are talking about a very serious matter,

> even a criminal offence, though not sure here but

> seem to remember that has been a court case (or

> maybe there have been a few) where a man who was

> HIV positive (who had intentional withheld the

> information from a sexual partner) who had in turn

> infected the woman... pretty certain he got a

> prison sentence.

The majority of the business owners in Dulwich are lovely, I have known most of them since childhood and they make my whole shopping experience lovely. You only need to worry if you PERSONALLY are being hassled.

I am sure Felicity has managed to get all the info she needs and thus the thread has been useful and helped her to collect her evidences.

Charlie - yes I can't remember the case but it was assault after a guy knowingly infected his gf with HIV.


And Moos - it's important in anything like this to have as much evidence as possible before ging to the police - so if that is Felicity's motive then it seems justifable to me,

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> Sorry Heidi and Chav - I can only tell certain

> people.

>

> I'm sure you understand.



No worries, it is like my childhood days, I always got left out!:(

Chav? I didn't know Chav posted on this thread.

FelicityNormal Wrote:

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

> The thing that is shocking me is that so far there

> are five or more different shops all with male

> staff women on here say have behaved

> inappropriately towards them


What exactly do you mean "inappropriately" - are we talking the same level as the STD/Aggressive Lothario? When you discount Estate Agents / Restaurants / Pubs as not being Shops - plus it's ALL male staff, it sort of does point the finger!?!

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...