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

[rendelharris]

Well done, virtue well and truly signalled.

ETA and smallminded Poirot I may be (though I'd prefer to be a smallminded Sherlock Holmes), you really don't see anything odd in a nanny, a childcare professional, seeing an attempted abduction of one of her charges and not only not informing the police but not informing her employers for several hours? Well I do.

[Otta]

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

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

> Can we avoid forming an angry internet mob on

> absolutely sod all information?

The irony.

Well yes, that's basically what we are saying. We don't know what this man was really about, neither do you. The police are aware (too late, but there you go), and parents are being told to be vigilant.

But the fact remains that you have "absolutely sod all" proof that this was an attempted abduction.

[LondonMix]

Isn't a nanny an adult? Surely you mean before contacting the child's parents or the police. Your word choice is very demeaning to nannies and really, why is it necessary to criticize the nanny in an incident in which she prevented a potential crime. You don't know all the circumstances around her communication or lack there of with the parents so your comment seems particularly unnecessary and mean spirited.

I agree with Otta it might be a misunderstanding but nevertheless, I'm glad I've been made aware and that's really enough said about it.

alice Wrote:

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

> If I'm reading this right that nanny had poor

> knowledge of child safety if she waited several

> hours before telling an adult.

[Jeremy]

Yeah, I think some of the comments regarding the nanny are a bit unnecessary and might be upsetting if she were to read them. I imagine at the time her immediate instinct was probably to protect and comfort the children.

[rendelharris]

OK, I realise I'm on a sticky wicket here and actually I should not have used the phrase "crying wolf" in my previous, that was ill-judged, inappropriate and I apologise. However, I stand by saying I think that it's extraordinary that this was not reported to police for hours. Let's assume there was no misunderstanding, this was a genuine attempt at child abduction. Had it been reported at once the police would definitely have sent cars to investigate and either caught the bugger or at least scared him away. What if he'd made a successful attempt on another child half an hour later because nobody knew he was in the area? If I, or anyone else, came on here and said "I saw an attempted child abduction this afternoon but as it was foiled I didn't report it" I would be quite rightly severely castigated, it seems incredible that someone whose job it is to care for children didn't see it the same way. If that's harsh then I'm harsh, so be it.

[alice]

Of course a nanny is an adult, she had the opp to tell the school, another parent as well as the police and parents. If she feels bad maybe that's good - that's how we learn - from errors.

[Jeremy]

Rendel, Alice, I do understand your point. And I'm sure the nanny realises the severity of her mistake with hindsight.

[QueenMab]

There were police all over the place this morning, including at the school gates. Which would suggest this is being taken seriously by them, as such police presence is not usual.

[Angelina]

in positions of such importance, should we really make such big mistakes in order to learn basic lessons?

I think some positions should be trained and as such be aware of what to do in such a situation. Something this serious should have been reported immediately. Perhaps it was - or was not - an attempted abduction, but there was a potential very serious risk identified and ignored.

I'm sorry to sooth it over, but I think it's a shocking lack of responsibility on nanny's part.

[missse22]

Bessemer grange sent warning texts out , also there is an article in the Southwark news about it too .

[pablo12]

POLICE PATROL DULWICH SCHOOLS AFTER FOUR-YEAR-OLD BOY NEARLY KIDNAPPED

OWEN SHEPPARD (09 December, 2016) CRIME

Attacker was described as a man in his thirties and of Asian complexion, in a green car

9811

Calton Avenue

Police were stationed at schools in Dulwich after the attempted kidnap of a four-year-old boy on Wednesday near Dulwich Village Church of England Infants? School.

It was reported that a man tried to grab the four-year-old from a car, as the child was cycling several paces ahead of his nanny, at about 3.27pm.

A statement from the child?s parents has been published on the East Dulwich Forum, saying a man ?in his thirties? and of ?Indian or Asian origin? attempted to pull the child into a green car, believed to either be a Vauxhall or Volkswagen.

The child and their nanny were walking in Calton Avenue at the corner Gilkes Crescent when the unknown man attempted to snatch the boy.

The attackers drove away without the child after the nanny shouted at him. The police were then contacted by the child?s parents later that day.

The News contacted Dulwich Village Infants? School, but the school did not wish to comment.

Letters have been published to parents by the head teacher of Dulwich Prep School and Herne Hill Primary School, to warn them of the attack.

The headteacher of Dulwich Prep School, Rhona Muir, yesterday sent a letter to parents saying local police had informed her of the incident on Wednesday.

Ms Muir?s letter said: ?Please remind the boys about staying close to their carers at all times, we will do the same at school. The police have any such incidents are reported immediately, as there was a delay in reporting this one.?

Police have confirmed that ?assurance? patrols have been increased in the Dulwich Park area, and around local schools.

A Met Police spokesperson told the News: ?Police are looking into an incident where a man approached a four-year-old boy in East Dulwich on November 7 at around 3.30pm.

?The boy was with an adult and officers are making further enquiries.?

Anyone with information that could help the police should call 101.

[Alan Medic]

What a crap article that is, if that's what it's supposed to be.

[QueenMab]

Yes let's all focus on what the nanny did "wrong", rather than the nutcase who tried to drag a child into a car.

I'm amazed at some of the responses on here

[Lowlander]

QueenMab Wrote:

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

> Yes let's all focus on what the nanny did "wrong",

> rather than the nutcase who tried to drag a child

> into a car.

>

> I'm amazed at some of the responses on here

Because her delay in reporting the incident means that the police did not attend ASAP and start searching for the alleged culprit, or interview potential witnesses (e.g. passers-by, builders, delivery drivers).

Personally I find it incomprehensible that she didn't report it ASAP, and just hope that her mistake becomes well-known enough for anyone else to not hesitate should such an incident repeat itself (God forbid that it does not).

[Penguin68]

We know nothing about this 'nanny' - but it is quite possible that she is rather more an au pair than a nanny - in which case it is also likely that (a) English is not her first language and that (b) she is not au fait with the methods of reporting activities to the police - indeed she may have had a concern that doing so without discussing this with her employers might have led to trouble for her - other country's attitude to the involvement of police, particularly where these are of a state or militarised nature are very different from ours. She may also come from a country where child abduction (or the fears surrounding this) is/ are less common.

Indeed I would argue that it is quite unlikely that a trained (i.e. NNEB or similar) nanny would have acted in this way.

[Zebedee Tring]

Typical EDF thread. Where the wrong person is attacked (i.e. the nanny) rather than (in common parlance) the perp. Why does this happen so often?

[Penguin68]

NB Zebedee - I was not 'attacking' the nanny - but trying to explain why her actions might have a perfectly reasonable basis, given speculation about her possible background.

[intexasatthe moment]

Penguin I've been thinking that . Poor nanny/au pair hope she's not reading all this .After all she did thwart the alleged "perp" .

[uncleglen]

Since the boy is 4 he could probably give some evidence- what the man said etc...and yes the nanny was wrong in not reporting it sooner- the perp may have tried it on somewhere else.

This happened a couple of years ago...http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/news/11488408.Woman__attempted_to_snatch__young_girl_at_Bluewater_shopping_centre/?ref=mr

The only legitimate reason I can think of that the nanny did not call the police is that she is not bona fide

[Otta]

FFS, no one has "attacked" anyone.

[Zebedee Tring]

FFS, when I used the word "attacked", I meant it in the metaphorical sense of "criticised". That should have been obvious from the context - but clearly this was too difficult for at least one contributor to this thread to understand.

[edcam]

Yes, the nanny is clearly an idiot but it's not her fault this man tried to do this.

[Medusa]

I can't believe what I'm reading.The nanny is 'an idiot'? Possibly 'not bona fide'?

The original post says only that the parents of the child informed the police when they got home. So in fact the nanny told them what had happened when they got in. The incident happened at school pick-up time and for all we know, the parents could have been home within a couple of hours. In fact for all we know, the nanny may have rung the parents to tell them what had happened and they may have left work, come straight back and called the police. Half of the comments about how much time was wasted due to her irresponsible behaviour are based on assumptions, not established facts. So the nanny told the parents rather than ringing the police...yes, not the best course of action but really, deserving of all the criticism? Nothing in the OP even tells us *for certain* that the nanny didn't report it to the parents immediately, to be told that they would deal with it as soon as they got home. Anything beyond the basic facts is nothing more than supposition and some of that is really quite unpleasant in its inferences.

[Otta]

Zebedee Tring Wrote:

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

> FFS, when I used the word "attacked", I meant it

> in the metaphorical sense of "criticised". That

> should have been obvious from the context

It was obvious.

I disagree that she's been criticised to a level that could be described as an attack. People have questioned aspects of the story. If you're going to stick something like this on a public forum and get everyone scared, people are naturally going to question elements of the story.

In my opinion this whole thread should never have been started, and it should have been left for police and local schools to decide how much to advertise things. But it was started, so people have a right to comment / question as they see fit.

[Alan Medic]

Agree with Otta's point. The fact is no one who has posted knows the facts.