Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Please be extra vigilent around the children's playground in ED Park. Yesterday at around 12.15pm I witnessed a schoolboy masterbating close to the railings that seperates the children's playground from the surrounding bushes/trees. I didn't get too close a look but can give you the following description:


Aged approx 13/14, white, medium height, slim build, very short dark hair, wearing navy blue jumper and trousers, white shirt.


He ran off as soon as I shouted to him to clear off and I think he was on his own. I reported the incident to the community warden who said that this was the second report they'd had.


Please keep your eyes peeled.


thanks

Its a rather different issue but since this incident has been raised I just thought I'd mention that over the summer when out walking in Dulwich Park I had two boys of this age urinate quite openly as I was passing. They were with a football team and supervised by adults. I don't want to seem like a prude but, given their age- they were quite big lads- it didn't feel quite right. They made no attempt to be discreet or to turn away from me. I had a word with the men supervising who shrugged their shoulders.
It's a bit odd really, the disgusting nature of committing the act by a kids playground aside, the time of day means that if this boy was a Charter boy, (and it does sound like Charter uniform) he should definitely have been in school. It was on a Monday, and their lunch time isn't until 13.10pm. The OP should definitely notify the school, as should the park warden. It's always good to give them a heads up, and use some joined up thinking within the community - even it turns out not to be a Charter child at all. If he is - then he's truanting to add to his other misdemeanors.

first mate Wrote:

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

> Its a rather different issue but since this

> incident has been raised I just thought I'd

> mention that over the summer when out walking in

> Dulwich Park I had two boys of this age urinate

> quite openly as I was passing. They were with a

> football team and supervised by adults. I don't

> want to seem like a prude but, given their age-

> they were quite big lads- it didn't feel quite

> right. They made no attempt to be discreet or to

> turn away from me. I had a word with the men

> supervising who shrugged their shoulders.


If you need to go you need to go and there might not have been anywhere else to hand. We all said nothing when Paula Radcliffe gave us a flash of her bits to take a piss in the gutter during the London marathon.

Domitianus Wrote:

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

> first mate Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Its a rather different issue but since this

> > incident has been raised I just thought I'd

> > mention that over the summer when out walking

> in

> > Dulwich Park I had two boys of this age urinate

> > quite openly as I was passing. They were with a

> > football team and supervised by adults. I don't

> > want to seem like a prude but, given their age-

> > they were quite big lads- it didn't feel quite

> > right. They made no attempt to be discreet or

> to

> > turn away from me. I had a word with the men

> > supervising who shrugged their shoulders.

>

> If you need to go you need to go and there might

> not have been anywhere else to hand. We all said

> nothing when Paula Radcliffe gave us a flash of

> her bits to take a piss in the gutter during the

> London marathon.


There are public toilets in the park. There is no excuse for this.

I agree if you need to go and nothing else is available it's sometimes unavoidable. My primary point was that there was absolutely no attempt to be discreet, for instance there were trees they could have gone behind, literally feet away. It was also clear to them that I was approaching, but I was given a full frontal view nonetheless. As I said, I'm no prude, it just seemed a bit odd given the age of the boys concerned.


Anyhow, I don't want to detract from the main point of the thread which is this boy's inappropriate sexual behaviour. I do hope for his sake that he is identified and given help sooner rather than later. His whereabouts at the time of committing the act may be coincidence but extremely worrying if not. At any rate he needs to be counselled that his behaviour could land him in big trouble later as an act of indecent exposure.

Hi


thanks all, I have dropped an email to the head of Charter letting him know what happened and giving a description. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't a Charter boy - at least we know for sure that the head has the information. I did suggest that he pass the email on to other school heads he thought relevant.

I really can't understand the hysteria, and lather, that posters on this forum frequently allow themselves to become involved in. The description of the uniform gives no indication as to which school this miscreant attends, or should have been attending at 12:15pm. Someone could easily have said the description sounds like a Dulwich College student and I'm sure all the usual suspects on this forum would have been enthusiastically leaping on the band wagon, and making all the usual stupid suggestions we've come to expect.

There is no positive identification of the school in the description; there was nothing in the description to say that this miserable urchin can be facially positively identified; there is nothing in the description to suggest that he had an identifiable willy; so what do you expect to achieve by notifying any school? What is being expected of any school that is notified of this incident?

Look, the sensible thing to do, until a more positive identification can be achieved, is to let the wardens get on with their jobs having been notified of the incident. And finally, calm down and ease up on the mass hysteria.

What mass hysteria? It makes sense for relevant organisations and authorities local to the area to be made aware that it is possible a young person in their care is exhibiting unusual and undesirable sexual behaviour- unless you are suggesting that masturbation at the railings of a children's play area is par for the course for many teenage boys?


The sooner he is identified the better for him; letting people know is a great way to achieve that end sooner rather than later.

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

    • I would imagine that the evidence shows that protein powder is not suitable for under 18s whatever the brand.  Staff should’ve known that.
    • I'm not sure it's sensible  to presume any agreement from interlocutors, but if you do, then I do agree that it's the right thing to say so. My own guess -- it's nothing more -- is that the officers were acting just to effect an arrest on arrival, as requested, quite possibly without any knowledge of the content of wretched tweet at all*, and that their being armed was absolutely incidental.  But I don't know any reliable facts. I do think the turning up (5?) en masse to do so was possibly complacent and unthinking, if there was no reason to believe the arrestee was a threat.  If they had  been doing so for good reason, I guess they could have had at least one weapon trained at him, and had  him hands above head or on the ground in no time.  But I know no reliable facts of the incident whatsoever.  Perhaps they were Father Ted fans -- seriously -- and trogged along, on a quiet afternoon, to see the man himself.  Perhaps they and/or their CO will get a severe bollocking from above.  I don't know. * But even that with some reservations.  The last time I looked up cases on wrongful arrest, years ago, I think I remember there being held then to be at least some onus on the acting arresting officer to be satisfied that  the required grounds for a lawful arrest  did exist.  And I don't know any of the facts of the present case. 
    • They carry guns at the airport.  It may not make it ok but that is a fact.  In France and America they all carry guns.
    • TfL and the Met had a small team a few years ago dedicated to addressing bike theft.  https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2011/february/officers-target-bike-thieves-and-successfully-reunite-stolen-bikes-with-their-owners I assume that went with austerity. There is now a Task Force https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/metropolitan-police-service-cycle-taskforce And some advice from the MPS: https://www.met.police.uk/cp/crime-prevention/keeping-vehicles-safe/how-safe-is-your-bike/ The marking service is good and helps.  As a cyclist you do your best to minimise the likelihood and I would never leave a high end bike locked on the street out of sight.  I've had three bikes stolen in London over the last two decades. Gum Tree sadly makes it too easy and for every bike theft there is someone knowingly or unknowingly prepared to buy a bargain that is stolen.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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