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?

Surely if they school can identify the man as a someone working there or a parent or family member of a DC they can just dismiss the op e-mail as green ink over vigilance.

She hasn't accused the man of anything so can't see there would be any come back to him professionally. Though I could image him being uncomfortable if he found out someone viewed him as suspicious.

Probably better than OP e-mails school than going round playground suggesting possible problems to other parents and starting panic and rumors.

Yes we do Damsel, she posted it earlier in the thread.

yanbu, it all looks VERY dodge, i would have done same

can you tell me on what page, or quote it here?

It's on page 3

YAB(a little) U - and if you are worried you would have been better reporting it to the police...I don't think the school can do much...
We have a convicted paedophile living on our (small - 20 houses) estate. And we live in a semi rural 'nice' 'safe' area.
He is 70+ years old and was convicted (a couple of years ago) of touching his wife's two nieces over a number of years - whilst children were between age 8 -12 ish - was found guilty but put on some rehabilitation scheme -so not jailed. His wife is still with him and claims he is innocent...
When it first came out we were horrified...talk of petitions etc - then found out (from people who know) that he is a relatively 'safe' type of paedophile and we know who he is and where he lives - we can warn our children etc..it is the ones we don't know (and there could be more - even in our village of less than 700 houses) we need to worry about....
Having said that for legal reasons the primary school could not warn parents about his presence. He is less than 5 mins walk from the primary school ...
He parks his car in a carpark from which he can clearly see the children playing in the school field and had been seen hanging around there...
Apparently now he is not allowed to go near the school, to hang around the car park or use the bus shelter (next to the car park). BUT the only reason I know that is because he lives next door to the granny of a 5 yr old my daughter plays with...
When her mother saw him hanging around the car park again (quite recently) she reported it to the school and the police ... but again the school aren't allowed to warn parents...
You are much better making your children aware of 'stranger danger' and coming up with a plan...
I lost DD1 at 3 yo for 30+ mins in a large hotel (turned my back for a second and she had gone) - whole hotel staff were looking for her and I was told to stay in reception area - one of things that scared me the most was when she was found (in a play area) one of the hotel workers went up to her and said 'are you XXXX? ' come on and I'll take you back to your mummy' ..she'd been in the creche and had her name badge on - it could have been anyone who had noticed she was an unaccompanied child....

Now for her (and DD2) we have a code word - a secret word- and I have drilled it into them that if anyone (unless the school or police) says I have sent them for them - to ask for the code word ...and if I have sent them they will know what it is...

No accusations are being made. She is questioning and alerting the school of her concerns, which are, he doesn't seem to have any children at the event he attended.

Dear Mrs Office Lady

I might be putting two and two together and coming up with five, but this didn't sit well with me.

At 3.40 on Friday evening, I saw a gentleman at the bus stop by the roundabout on XXXXX Road. There was no one else, so a bus had obviously just been as there were no XXXXXX girls waiting as they usually would be.

That in it's self isn't strange BUT he was at sports day, talking to a (male) parent. The conversation was very one way with the parent pointing out his child and the conversation wasn't going to and forth; it was the parent doing all the talking (I can go with parental pride and wanting to talk to a willing audience) and the gentleman listening and asking further questions about other children in the vicinity.

Again that isn't a set of strange circumstances except I saw the same man again on a train a few weeks back. He was with a French woman with two young girls (maybe 3 and 5). At the time I put the conversation they were having down to English not being the ladys first language. Retrospectively, I think maybe he had just met her, he was asking lots of questions and teasing the girls to the point he made one cry. He was asking where they were going tomorrow, what time, when they were going back to France, was Daddy missing them etc. They got off at different stops (she at XXXX) and he made comment about having to get a bus to XXXXX, so they weren't acting as a couple.

I really wouldn't have paid any attention and assumed he was another parent/uncle etc on sports day if he hadn't been at the bus stop, by himself. As I say, a bus had clearly been and gone, there were no other pedestrians.

I just find it very odd that you have the same man outside a school, where he has just attended sports day, unaccompanied by children or another friend/relative with children.

I would point out I'm not the sort to see a paedophile behind every tree, but my alarm bells just started ringing. I really cannot rationalise it either.

I suppose a description would be helpful!

description follows<

Probably totally innocent and he wasn't actually doing anything suspicious. However I thought I should mention it in case there have been other reports in the area.

Wow, for some reason I had missed that letter the first time it was posted.

I don't think that the OP was being unreasonable in raising a concern, but I don't think that was an appropriate way of doing it.

The trouble with starting a witch-hunt is ...it tends to start a witch-hunt. What do you expect the school to do? Can't YOU talk to him? Better he's p*ed off with you than at the school.

I don't think anything says, "I've made unfounded and irrational assumptions about someone's motives" quite so eloquently as the ridiculous phrase, "...alarm bells just started ringing".

So I suppose the school will at least be able to gauge their response accordingly.

54,000 is a lot imo registered. They are going to be 10's of 1000's more out there unregistered.

And you offer that figure based on what? Nothing,absolutely nothing. Apart from your own opinion.

And that's the problem. It's such a serious issue that it pisses me right off that some undermine it with supposition, hearsay and general vagueness. If you're going to argue do it based on evidence and fact.

[Pagwatch's] post came shortly after mine and I would just like to the opportunity to answer the charge of being 'dimwitted' because I suggested talking to the man at the bus stop. Firstly, I am desperately sorry, Pagwatch, to hear of your experience of abuse. The reason I was not online this morning to reply earlier was because I was doing a regular shift at Childline, where I talk to children who have been sexually abused. I really did not mean to suggest that by talking to the man she would know if he was an abuser or not. It was simply to get a sense of who he was and why he was at sports day, to, possibly put her mind at rest that he had a valid reason to be there.

Something I feel really really strongly about is that our culture of suspicion against men around children has made life far worse for the majority of children. That was the point I was trying to make and I don't mind being called dimwitted for not expressing myself properly

So the email to the school claims to be non-accusatory and simply reporting a possibly unusual set of circumstances... Yet the op though fit to mention paedophiles in it....

No way is that simply reporting a genuine concern. That's gossip mongering and malicious. Why would she even use the word 'paedophile' unless she's making a damning judgement about this man?

thread gone sour. Shocker.

53,000/54,000 sex offenders means that out of every 1,000 people you know one will be a sex offender

Absolute nonsense Gibbous . And I think you know that.

I do not know if your initial statement is true or not (you have not cited a source). However your conclusion is completely unfounded. You are making the assumption that every person you know is equally likely to be sex offender, common sense (or gut instinct) will tell you that is not true.

To make my point, maybe 5% of the population speak with a London accent, does that mean that 1 in 20 people you know will have a London accent?

None of us has any idea whether the man in question was in fact in any way sinisiter. If we had acted in the same way as OP it could go several ways. Imagine if the police did locate the man and question him. That would be deeply upsetting if he is in fact an innocent person who had good reason to be at the sport's day. If they find that he is in fact a sex offender that has previous convictions then it will be a good thing that OP reported what she saw. Maybe other people's suspicions were aroused and she was not the only one. Maybe his description might match that of someone who had offended or approached a child in the area at some other time, maybe it wont.

I completely agree that chances are he is an innocent man but we don't know that. I would feel horrible to report someone who turned out to be innocent but I would feel even worse to hear that he then went onto assault someone and I had NOT voiced my concerns.

Ell, as none of his behaviour was even remotely suspicious, I would put money on him being innocent.

But "a mother's gut feeling" obviously trumps everything.....

But any of us could have 'concerns' or 'gut feelings ' about anyone. Doesn't make it acceptable to start spouting off about those concerns to the police!

Sorry tinker ell- I forgot to put at the end!

Actually Complex if you read the thread you'll see I was citing stats given by a poster who thought the OP was being reasonable.

And you would have known I was citing the same figures which that poster used to argue that paedophiles were common to demonstrate, statistically speaking, that no, in fact, they aren't.

some of those 53,000 will be underage teenagers engaged in consensual sex - yes wrong but not something that should affect the rest of their lives

And you would have known I was citing the same figures which that poster used to argue that paedophiles were common to demonstrate, statistically speaking, that no, in fact, they aren't.

Some how I got the wrong end of your argument. It seems we were, possibly saying the same thing'

Sorry Gibbous

No probs Complex! I thought we probably were on the same page :)

Brokendown, yes, if the figures are correct they are for sex offences, so therefore only a proportion would be child sex offences (not that I am trivialising other sex offences).

Astounded that you felt the need to post this actually. You weren't asking for advice. Do you want a pat on the head and a good citizen medal? Never mind AIBU, try AIBP. (am I being pointless)
Do you not have a very exciting life? that you have to poke your nose into others personal space, on the train, on the sports field , hang on the every word of others conversations then analyse everything you have heard, and then get hysterical, emailing the local school?
My gran had a word for people like you- busybody.
I have a few words for you - mad as a box of frogs.

More astounding is the number of posters validating the OP's behaviour.