attempted child abduction - Calton Avenue, Wed 8th Dec 2016

[northdulmum]

Dear Parents/carers,

One of our parents has just informed me of an incident that occurred on Woodwarde road yesterday afternoon that I feel is important to make you aware of. Her nanny was walking to pick up at DVIS with the baby in a buggy and 3 year old on a bike. The 3 year old cycled a bit ahead, a man in a green vauxhall got out and tried to grab the child. The nanny shouted him off and he took off in the car. The police were informed by the parents when they returned home, they have stressed that they should have been informed immediately to get cars out in the area. Please do make your carers aware of this too. We will be reading age appropriate 'stranger danger' books to the children as well.

[Lowlander]

Not good news. Thanks for making us aware.

(What is DVIS?)

[northdulmum]

Dulwich Village Infants School

[northdulmum]

Hello all

The family involved have sent the following update that they are comfortable with me sharing...

The incident occurred on Calton Avenue on the corner of Gilkes crescent, not far from Woodwarde Road. The car was possibly a Volkswagon, it was definitely green. The man was in his 30s of Indian/Asian origin. I wasn?t a witness but I have spoken with our Nanny a few times about the incident. The police will be talking to her on Monday. The incident happened at 3:27. There were surprisingly no witnesses.

[JMK]

Thanks

It would be helpful if the Police spoke to to the Nanny as a matter of urgency while the details are still fresh. 5 day later may result in the loss of valuable information

Secondly for them to co-ordinate a rapid response to all parents and the wider community via the schools and other avenues to ensure consistency of information, secure the support and help of the community in apprehending the individual and minimising future risks of such an event

I'm sure that all would welcome them prioritising such a serious incident as a #1 priority

[Sue]

Is the child OK? It must have been quite frightening.

[alice]

If I'm reading this right that nanny had poor knowledge of child safety if she waited several hours before telling an adult.

[worldwiser]

His/her primary responsibility was to ensure the safety of her charge. A task at which s/he succeeded admirably would you say?

[Monkey]

worldwiser Wrote:

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

> His/her primary responsibility was to ensure the

> safety of her charge. A task at which s/he

> succeeded admirably would you say?

Protecting the child in this situation included calling the police immediately.

[prit]

I'd be interested to hear how many schools have told their parents. I have kids at two schools and heard this from one school but concerned that the other school have said nothing. Surely all schools nearby would've been told?

[Monkey]

Maybe the schools are waiting for police advice and the interview won't take place until Monday... It's all not very good really.

[nina_maniana]

Maybe the police know something we don't which is why they are not prioritising it. Seems to me if they believe there was genuinely a kidnapper roaming south east London looking for kids to steal this would be the Met Police's number one priority, national news type stuff. Which indicates to me maybe there is more to this story.

[Otta]

It is right that people should be vigilant, but there should definitely be a "SUSPECTED" at the start of this thread title.

It is entirely possible that this man thought the child was unsupervised and got out of his car to ask him/her where their parent was.

I am not being naive, I read the OP and thought how the hell was this 3 year old so far ahead of the nanny that a would be kidnapper felt he had the time to get out of his car, approach the child, put them in his car, get back in himself, and make his escape?

This MIGHT have been an attempted abduction, but there is AT LEAST as much 1chance that it was a misguided attempt to help an apparently unsupervised child.

And as for "why would he run then?", well see this thread.

[Jeremy]

Our nursery mailed the parents about this.

Ironically(?) they warned us all "to be vigilante at all times"

[Ruskin]

There was an incident several years ago in Herne Hill and the police response was to place plainclothes officers in the area and the male was caught and sentenced.

If they think this was a real attempt to kidnap, they will take this very seriously.

[Pugwash]

Worrying news.

As a grandparent I am surprised at the number of adults with young children who let them walk/run/scoot in front or behind them especially on main roads. I watched a man pushing his buggy and a child around 3 dawdling behind picking up things from the pavement - child being some 12 feet away. This was on the bend of Barry Road opposite Etherow Street - if the child ran out in the road, or was picked up by a stranger, or even just had a fall the Dad (assumed) would have no idea as too far in front.

I am probably being over cautious or even old fashioned, but my 2.5 yr old grandchild is asked to hold onto her baby brother's buggy when out in the street so that I or her parents can be at her side. The use of reins appears to be out of fashion (they are now incorporated into a rucksack which is a good idea of Mothercare's)

If the man in question was genuine he would have stayed on the pavement until the nanny reached him.

[Otta]

Pugwash Wrote:

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

> If the man in question was genuine he would have stayed on the pavement until the nanny reached him.

You absolutely can not know that. The OP says he "tried to grab the child". Well how the hell did he fail then? We're talking about a grown man and a 3 year old here.

The whole thing just doesn't sound right.

But as Rusking says, if the police think it's genuine, they'll be on the look out.

[rendelharris]

Otta Wrote:

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

> The whole thing just doesn't sound right.

I was hesitant to say this but (cravenly, now you've broached the subject) I agree - the nanny "shouted him off"? The fact that three days later this doesn't appear to have surfaced in any local or national press and the police haven't issued any warnings would seem to indicate they don't take it as a serious threat.

Parents and carers need to remain vigilant at all times, of course, but this seems likely either to have been a case of misapprehension (as Otta said above, perhaps, ironically, the driver thought the child was in danger) or crying wolf for some other reason - it seems very odd that a nanny would witness the attempted abduction of one her charges and not call the police or even tell the parents until they got home from work.

[TheCat]

Perhaps it was the scooter, rather than the child, that was the target? Xmas is around the corner and times are tough I suppose.

In anycase, im reticent to further trivialize or speculate about what is potentially a scary and serious incident. I hope the kid is okay, most importantly.

[Jeremy]

While I agree that there are other plausible explanations, to suggest that the nanny's story is either inaccurate or untrue is, IMO, a bit out of order...

[rendelharris]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> While I agree that there are other plausible

> explanations, to suggest that the nanny's story is

> either inaccurate or untrue is, IMO, a bit out of

> order...

Well, apologies if so. But why haven't the police or local press issued any warnings then?

[Jeremy]

I imagine because it's unproven, and could be, as you/Otta say, all a mistake. But that doesn't mean it probably is a mistake...

[Otta]

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> While I agree that there are other plausible

> explanations, to suggest that the nanny's story is

> either inaccurate or untrue is, IMO, a bit out of

> order...

Just to be very clear, I was not intending to cast doubt on what anyone has said, which is why I purposely avoided the phrase "doesn't ring TRUE". I am sure it has been reported as the nanny saw it. All I am saying is that she may have got the wrong idea. And the law of averages suggests that the guy was more likely to be innocent than a kidnapper.

[Jules-and-Boo]

we had undercover police parked outside our primary in Herne Hill before - when a similar incident occured. they were being vigilant and watching what was going on.....

My friend spotted them and the image of my loud Jamaican friend challenging them for parking near a school and them trying to not give their game away was absolutely hilarious. She gave them a proper telling off for scaring all the kids (who had been told to look out for strangers in cars)

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

The fact that three days later

> this doesn't appear to have surfaced in any local

> or national press and the police haven't issued

> any warnings would seem to indicate they don't

> take it as a serious threat...this seems likely either to

> have been a case of misapprehension...or crying wolf for some other

> reason - it seems very odd that a nanny would

> witness the attempted abduction of one her charges

> and not call the police or even tell the parents

> until they got home from work.

This really takes the biscuit for speculation by small minded internet Poirots. You're assuming that you know what the real rate of child abduction is; how police and press respond to them; and that everyone else relates to police in the same way you do.

There are about 2 non-parent abduction attempts every day in the U.K.; about 1% of kids will be the subject of an abuduction attempt; very few of them are reported in media. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37504781

Can we avoid forming an angry internet mob on absolutely sod all information? Chucking around allegations of "crying wolf" in this context is pretty unsavoury.