To email the school re a man at the bus stop???

[JumpingThroughHoops]

Well I have emailed, so no AIBU about it really

Yesterday (Friday) 20 mins after primary school ended I saw a man at the bus stop outside the school. The bus stop usually has a large amount of teenaged girls waiting from the secondary opposite.

He was by himself indicating a bus had just been; there were no other adults or children around.

BUT. Earlier that morning the same man was at the primary sports day. He wasn't with a lady (for that read wife or partner), no reason why he should have been really, he might have been a single dad. BUT. He was chatting with another father, or rather he was listening as the other father waxed lyrical, pointing out his children and all their little friends, getting them to wave over.

Two months previous, I was on a train and he sat opposite me, with a French lady with two small girls (maybe 3 and 5). I assumed they were together, he knew their names. He carried their suitcase. I assumed the stilted conversation was because the lady didn't have English as a first language. I also assumed they were together because he was teasing one of the girls until she screamed in frustration. He was also asking lots of questions, but not in an obvious way, such as "when do you go home?" What are you doing tomorrow?" "is your Dad missing you?" - which of course I was oblivious to on the train because it was general chit chat.

See him at sports day and think it's that annoying wind up merchant again "oh, I didn't know there were little French girls at this school". There aren't any little French girls at the school and they were too young to be in the KS3 sports day anyway.

See him at the bus stop and think "hang on a min" gut instinct kicks in, something just isn't right here.

So I've emailed school with a full description, a set of circumstances and no accusations, because he wasn't actually doing anything suspiciously.

*disclaimer, I don't see a paedophile behind every tree, but I am a believer in gut instinct. I don't know why the red flags shot up when I saw him again. Probably because he was a bit of charmer, again not in an obvious way, he was just very good at ferreting out information from people.

Probably an entirely coincidental set of innocent circumstances and he is a listener rather than a talker.

Would you have emailed the school?

Fantastic post, Pagwatch.

Perfect Pag. I wasn't sexually abused more than once as a child but this is so true.

If others are made aware of abuse we're less likely to be believed because of these exact reasons.

Great post Pag.

I am trying to remember if my step-father ever came to any of my sports days. I can't. However if OP had seen him it would have been there with me, my mum and maybe my sister. My step-father was always surrounded by kids, throwing them in the air and catching them, playing football anything. I doubt her paedo-senses would have tingled then despite the fact that he abused me every way possible for more than half my childhood as all she would have seen was the image of a good 'family man'.

Also I don't see a paedophile behind every tree, but I am a believer in gut instinct completely screams he's a paedo he's a paedo to me or why else would you feel you have to add that?

OMG

What get me is your light hearted tone when you could have potentially made someone's life very difficult.

(that's to the OP btw)

But what does that actually mean we as parents should do then? Be vigilant, don't subscribe only to stereotypes I understand that. But does that not mean that if we get a sense that something is not as it should be - and in the absence of any physical proof (hopefully), do we not then have a responsibility to try and protect our children and act on our suspicions, appreciating that - at this point - they are only suspicions? So in a way that causes minimal harm to any potential innocent parties? Isn't that what the OP was trying to do?

Brilliant and brave post Pagwatch. You hit the nail on the head. We're all too busy looking out for the creepy man lurking in an overcoat that we're blinded to where the abuse is actually happening.

And to all those asking what harm could come of it. Plenty imo. This thread proves we're not all rational. An email is seen by the secretary who casually mentiones to a colleague someone has suspicions about a guy fitting the description of the father of a child in year 3, colleague then goes on to tell a parent and just in those first three steps the details are lost and the Chinese whispers could have kicked in.

If you're still not convinced remember the paediatrician whose flat got petrol bombed, Jo Yeates's landlord, the example I've used upthread of the guy who was set upon by a group of vigilantes in his own estate, without any of the details being known (just 'he's a sex offender, we don't know how or why but he is' fgs).

We're no more civilised or empathetic or rational than during the witch hunts of the 1600s. How bloody depressing.

Foshizzle, why not, yanno, just keep the kids away from someone you think is an oddball rather than email the school about it?

I once had to interview a woman whose new boyfriend had convictions for raping his daughter. She sat there and said to me 'Ah but I am very knowing and I could TELL he was a good man'

Yeah, it was probably that famously reliable 'gut instinct' telling her that.

What a thoroughly depressing thread.
OP - you are so way off the mark I wouldn't know where to begin with trying to respond. It makes me feel truly sorry for men. And for anyone with social interaction issues, who may just find it tricky to deal with everyday social situations. And actually sorry for anyone who happens to be a 'listener' rather than hogging the conversation.

Brilliant post from pagwatch

What we do as parents is teach our children to be confident and self reliant, and remember that "gut instinct" "feelings" "red flags" and all the rest of this sort of stuff is a load of nonsense.

And face up to the fact that the huge majority of child abuse happens within the family. All this talk of sinister strangers in slouch hats and black capes is our way of avoiding the unpleasant reality.

Pagwatch, yours is a brave post full of wisdom.

I've read this entire thread and am as incredulous now as I was when I started. It compels me to ask those who believe in "gut instinct" - do you believe in aromatherapy and ESP too?

Presumably because she wanted to try and make sure nothing happened to any children, not just her own?

I'm not saying you don't have a point Gibbous, but what do you go on in the absence of knowledge of a past conviction or action? What can you do to prevent putting your child at risk from someone in your family or social circle, as has happened to some of the posters here? Serious question, not being sniffy.

I am sure Pag is right, and that the majority of abusers are well trusted people within families.
In my childhood, though, the only men who tried to get me to get into cars, or lead me down alleys (I was unsupervised from a very young age, and these incidents happened quite a few times, sadly) were strangers lurking by pathways etc, so those people do exist too, and are not merely a figment of fevered imaginings.
(Nothing bad happened to me thankfully-I was not a trusting child and always ran fast).

I do actually believe in gut instinct-for some. Some people genuinely do have a kind of sense about people, but I really don't think OP should have written to the school.
Compo is right-this man's life could be ruined over a hunch. Not on at all.

But this man did nothing suspicious!

One thing she could have done at the Sports Day would have been to say to a member of staff- "I don't recognise that man, is it OK that he's here?"
Oh, and she needs to have a word with the school about their security- OFSTED would not be happy with people coming in off the street.

I think that it is a good idea to listen to feelings. I agree totally that you cant use it as a way of determining reliably if someone is a sex offender or not, but if you are in a situation and feel at risk there may be a reason for that, but it might be one that you cannot explain the reasons for.
Ignoring these feelings because they are 'nonsense' is not a good idea. I'm not saying that you should rule your life by instinct and reject logic, but sometimes a situation can cause a feeling of risk before the reasons for that can be consciously explained.

(that was in response to seekers post of Sun 01-Jul-12 11:14:54)

Nowthenwreck 'Compo is right-this man's life could be ruined over a hunch. Not on at all.'

Which man - who is he? How will the school know who he was?

Just drum into our children as early as possible that if somebody touches you in an inapproriate (we explain what that is) way you must tell. No matter who, what, where, when etc.

My DS cannot tell, see etc that scares the absolute fucking shyte out of me as what Pag has stated is so true.

Foshizzle, if I had serious concerns I would keep an eye out for any actual inappropriate behaviour and subtly talk to my child about that person. I wouldn't go firing off dangerous emails without any more than a hunch when that person has not behaved inappropriately at al.

And remember, this was not someone in her circle, not even a neighbour or acquaintance so there is precious little to base that 'gut instinct' on.

Ah gut instinct. It seems to have become a phrase du jour. Don't get me wrong, it has a place, but from what I've seen the significant majority of times people use the term when actually what they mean was actually witnessing someone display certain behaviours. We interviewed someone for a new role at work recently and my colleague kept going on about his gut instinct that one of the candidates was a bit abrupt and unfriendly. No, he WAS actually a bit abrupt and unfriendly.

So yes, so far no real issues with using that phrase for getting an evidence-based impression of someone but because everyone is putting so much importance on it you then get people who use it just because they've seen someone with wispy hair and a long coat twirling a moustache. And insist you can't ignore gut instinct...

Which man - who is he? How will the school know who he was?

As mentioned, someone could have identified him from the description as the dad of x kid in year 3. Yes, that now makes the circumstances of his appearing to the OP not suspicious. But if someone at the school incredulously mentions to a colleague that a parent had suspicions about him, then that colleague incredulously mentions it to another parent, soon the details are lost, along with the incredulity.

Pag's post was good, but it's also not comprehensive. Not ALL paedophiles are family men. Some of them are the strange loner in the neighbourhood, or the lovely bachelor who loves children but doesn't have any of his own. Hell, some love children so much they work "so well with them" that parents a shocked and horrified when they find out that he's not what they thought he was.

He's no just the family man who has plenty opportunity to groom those at home. There are paedophiles out there who predate on children where and as they find the chance.

Ok, to me it says that if someone at the school can identify him that either guarantees that he had good reason to be there, so no concern, or (v unlikely) that they know who he is and that he shouldnt have been there.

But we obviously aren't all seeing this situation the same way.

Pedophiles just do not want to be found out. They'll behave in whichever way it takes to achieve it. Could be anybody.