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?

All of which rather proves that we are not going to achieve much as we seem unable to communicate effectively. That happens sometimes. You think I am endlessly aiming things at you - the pissing contest comment was about the whole thread and echoed rhubarbs remarks which you didn't query - I am reading your tone as shouty and aggressive which may be wrong but that is how it seems

I thought 'i am sorry for all the ways in which my posts have upset you. None of which were intended to do so' might just cover that. We can bat back and forth about how exactly I found your post upsetting when you meant nothing by it and how you found what I said upsetting although I meant nothing by it but I suspect we would both be left somewhat disatisfied by the process.

And then it would move on to my pissing contest comnents and we would start all over again.

It really isn't going to help. I made a general apology. I am not sure anything else is going to make you any happier.

just read op and some of what followed - tbh yabvu - I've reread your op a few times and am at a complete loss as to what you felt you needed to ring school for.. really don't get it...

Pagwatch, what would make me happier is if people replied to what is written. It doesn't seem to be that kind of thread, though.

I'm not shouting; I'm not aggressive and I've said what I mean. As I said, I don't think you're endlessly aiming things at me apart from that one initial post that was addressed to me. You've already clarified that I'd misinterpreted your "pissing competition" comment; that's fine and what I'd hoped; I was just trying to explain that I wasn't being aggressive.

I neither expect or want an apology, although I appreciate your having made one.
Perhaps if you'd read my posts with a different tone, you'd see what I was trying to say - and I'm really not trying to be aggressive or score points by saying that - but I don't suppose it matters now.

I agree we could go round and round in circles with this so I'll stop there.

I do find it odd how people believe that one can pick up cues regarding abuse, yet not cues regarding the unsavoury of society because then it's all just gut feel guff!

Could this gut feeling actually be a curry that has repeated on you? Its a possibility that digestion can get in the way of "gut feelings".

Nah, it's ring sting I get from curry, not heart burn.

Just a point about 'gut feeling'.

I was walking down the road and a teenager lurched towards me, shouting "Phone! Phone!" I thought he was on drugs because of the way he was walking.

Well, you read so much about street violence these days, I naturally thought he was going to mug me and said I hadn't got one. I then noticed his leg was bleeding. Turned out he'd been clipped by a hit and run driver and wanted me to ring an ambulance.

I thought afterwards how sad it was that teenagers had been demonised due to the drip, drip of negative reporting in the press. But at least I did have some grounds for my first impressions, even if my gut reaction was totally wrong.

Unlike in this case. I think the OP was BVU. And it doesn't mean anything when she was told "It's been referred". That's just protocol. It doesn't mean the school knew him, or that they agreed with her suspicions. Just something they have to do.

It would be interesting to know how many of those "oh my god I'm in trouble" moments end up like this tale, and the other mentioned way up this thread, compared to when one believes they're in trouble and they really are? The reverse would be interesting to know too. How many time has someone believed they were safe when they weren't?

It would be interesting to see a link to reliable evidence to support the claim that people who have been raised by 'peedos' are better at detecting them. A claim which has been stated as fact by two posters.

I'm not holding my breath though....

Tinkerbell, I'm not responding back to you on anything. I feel like I've wrestled with a boa, and frankly I've had enough. I wish you would leave me be too. Thanks.

Well you just have responded back!!

But seriously, as you stated that as fact, it would be useful for many of us to see the evidence base. Somehow I think we'll be waiting a while though .....

Did I state it as fact? My apologies. I should have said, it stands to reason that just as those on the shadier side of society are more street smart than those not, due to learned cues, so too applies to the victim of abuse. We pick of on those learned cues we relied on for fight or flight. I don't car whether you accept that or not, it is how it is. Yes, some may say we see everything distorted, we're over sensitive etc. And I can say, you lot who have never met the beast are a little to lax.

car=care
too lax

Ah right, so it's not a fact, it's your opinion, which is no more , or less, valid than that of anyone else on the thread .

Yours too my love

Gosh, from 'I'm not going to respond to you ' to 'my love'!!
U turn central

god damsel you are embarrassing yourself, you sound hysterical.

I don't really want to join in the whole is he/he's not row but I'd like to just say that at my DDs school we were asked to report suspicious people and cars hanging around. On 2 occasions we have been given discriptions of cars to look out for. And this information was circulated to all schools in the area.

These warnings were deemed necessary for the safety of the children. I don't think for one second they were done lightly. But at some point, somewhere, someone's "gut instinct" was raised enough for them to mention it to the school or police who acted as they saw fit.

Now I know that in one case of the suspicious cars a child came forward after the warnings and admitted to being approached. They provided a better description of the driver which helped the police identity wise.

If the initial people who had felt uncomfortable has not acted upon those feelings then what?

We are actively told to report suspicious people hanging around. I cannot believe that this is the only LA do that?

How does attending a sports day (and the OP never explained what she was doing there as she lives out of the area), waiting for a bus, and being on a train constitute a "suspicious person hanging around"?

I think the problem is, as someone earlier pointed out, that our view of what is suspicious has been skewed by what we read in the press. Once upon a time, our gut feelings would have been acquired through personal experience. Now what we're afraid of is something we've only read about and because we only hear about the bad news we end up with the perception that it's common not exceptional.

We have to recalibrate our 'gut feelings' and test them out rationally in our heads before acting on them. I don't think we can rely on them as people might have done in the past.

I was raised by a monster and I have no sixth sense to be able to 'sniff them out....'

I wasnt talking about a sixth sense. I was talking about picking up on cues.

Emmieging, I'm not hysterical. Do you say that because I responded back to Tinkerbell's challenge to respond back to her only to be taunted by her once again? Or do simply mean to detract?

Lurking, maybe you don't pick up on cues. So does that mean that I don't?

I'm not street smart, doesn't mean street smarts is nothing but guff either.

I don't believe you do. I do believe you may have paranoia issues.

I agree that street smarts are nothing to guff about. They're not taken seriously in our society when the ability to survive is such an amazing thing. :)