Teenagers Chucking Stuff

Dransfield said:

so I pretended my phone had a camera and 'took his
picture' and said "You'll be hearing from your headmaster" (they were all in
school uniform). As I walked away there was some lip, but turning round and
taking another picture put paid to any more of that and they all scuttled
off while I stood still.

Camera as weapon. I like it.

BugBear

Dransfield said:

Yesterday I was cycling to my local stationat 12:20, doing about 20mph in
the rain with lorries thundering past, when a couple of school kids of a
gang of about 10 threw either mud or stones at me, one hitting me on the
chest.

Commiserations.

I was driving in Brum some years ago along a section of road where the
pavement was sunk down about three or four foot, with an iron railing to
protect someone from someone else. I was vaguely aware of some kids
down in the sunken bit. As I approached, a couple of big sticks sailed
up over the railing and splattered into my bonnet/windscreen. I pulled
in at the next left turn and came storming back, bloody furious. I
found their mother with them, and she turned round to me and said,
"They're only kids playing." Gobsmacked.

R.

Dransfield said:

I pretended my phone had a camera and 'took his picture' and said
"You'll be hearing from your headmaster"

You're bloody lucky the kids didn't notice it didn't have a lens -- you'd
have been the laughing stock!

bugbear said:

Dransfield said:

so I pretended my phone had a camera and 'took his
picture' and said "You'll be hearing from your headmaster" (they
were all in school uniform). As I walked away there was some lip,
but turning round and taking another picture put paid to any more
of that and they all scuttled off while I stood still.

Camera as weapon. I like it.

I'm getting more and more attracted by the idea of a helmet cam.

--
Dave...

Dransfield wrote:

<snip attack by louts)

Quoted message said:

I also rang the school and spoke to the deputy head who said that if they
were out of school at lunchtime then they were out of bounds, therefore
truant, and the parents' responsibility not his!

I'd certainly push this with teh school and its governors as they were
in school uniform and thus advertising the school and its behaviour.

Funny how schools insist on things like wearing helmets if cycling, but
deny all responsibility when it comes to things like behaviour.

Quoted message said:

I asked the police what I should have done, and they said call 999, don't
approach the kids (for own personal safety apparently), and follow at a safe
distance until the police arrive. But what they'd actually do I don't know.

Probably nab you for stalking :-(

Quoted message said:

I might go up there in the car this lunchtime with a working camera.

That will definitely have you labelled at a pervert :-(

Quoted message said:

Sorry had to get that off my chest.

John B

"Dransfield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I might go up there in the car this lunchtime with a working camera.

If you did have a picture it isn't going to prove a thing - only that they
were at a certain location at some point in time. Whether it was them who
throw the stone is your word against theres. The school's attitude seems to
be that it isn't their responsibility (despite the fact that it drags down
the reputation of the school) and even if they could ID them from the photo
they are not going to (one would hope they would not anyway) give you any
personal details to enable you to talk to their parents - if they would do
anything anyway.

Annoying behaviour and dangerous as well, police attitude isn't great but
with limited resources they have to priorities.

In short, I think getting it off your chest is perhaps the most you are
going to achieve now, so don't waste any more of your time on the little
buggers. It is a shame these people cannot think about the consequences of
their actions as it seems a reoccuring theme that people on bikes are
verbally or physically assualted. On a local time trial a person was hit on
the back of the head by someone hanging out the window of a car as it passed
him - can these idiots not think of anything better to do!

JohnB said:

I'd certainly push this with teh school and its governors as they

were

Quoted message said:

in school uniform and thus advertising the school and its behaviour.

I believe the term is "ambassadors for the school"

<url:http://www.playgroundlaw.com/cgi-bin/browse.pl?sid=3275>

d.

Dransfield said:

I also rang the school and spoke to the deputy head who said that if
they were out of school at lunchtime then they were out of bounds,
therefore truant, and the parents' responsibility not his!

write to the chair of governors and ask him her if they support this policy.
Write to the local paper quoting the head.

I complained by phone to the school office of the local comp when kids threw
stuff into gardens on this street.

with 10 minutes one of the assistant heads was on the phone inviting me in
to view the school mug shot album to identify the culprit as public image
was important. I simply described the culprit, the asst head recognised the
distinctive hair and body shape and took it from there.

pk

dkahn400 said:

I'm getting more and more attracted by the idea of a helmet cam.

There's websites for people like you.

Now. Where's my coat?

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:41:57 GMT someone who may be "Dransfield"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

I rang the police, who after 10 mins on hold said there was not much they
could do, but I bet it would have been a different matter if they'd been
throwing stones at cars

If they had thrown a snowball at a police car then it would have
been very different. http://www.newstatesman.com/Ideas/200504250026

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

In message <[email hidden]>, Dransfield
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I also rang the school and spoke to the deputy head who said that if they
were out of school at lunchtime then they were out of bounds, therefore
truant, and the parents' responsibility not his!

While I guess technically true, lots of times schools pulls up kids over
their behaviour outside of school.

I'd write letter of complaint to the headteacher.
--
Chris French, Leeds

Simonb said:

dkahn400 said:

I'm getting more and more attracted by the idea of a helmet cam.

There's websites for people like you.

Fnarr, fnarr. :-)

--
Dave...

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 12:14:34 +0100,

erics said:

"Dransfield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I might go up there in the car this lunchtime with a working camera.

If you did have a picture it isn't going to prove a thing - only that they
were at a certain location at some point in time. Whether it was them who
throw the stone is your word against theres. The school's attitude seems to
be that it isn't their responsibility (despite the fact that it drags down
the reputation of the school) and even if they could ID them from the photo
they are not going to (one would hope they would not anyway) give you any
personal details to enable you to talk to their parents - if they would do
anything anyway.

No but when I was a lad those boys would have had a detention for bringing
the school into disrepute. The boy who threw something would also have got
a letter to take home to his parents (with a reply expected). An
appropriate assembly would probably also follow. It was made very clear
when we started that as long as we were in uniform, even before or after
school, the school would punish you for misbehaviour.

--
Andy Leighton => [email hidden]
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_

erics said:

"Dransfield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I might go up there in the car this lunchtime with a working camera.

If you did have a picture it isn't going to prove a thing - only that they
were at a certain location at some point in time.

It doesn't prove the crime, but it's very helpful
in identification; I can show a plod a photograph,
and he has a MUCH better idea of who to go after
than if I say "I'd know him if I saw him"

Or:

"He was young and was weaaring a blazer"

BugBear

On 26 Apr 2005 12:21:46 GMT someone who may be Andy Leighton
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

[when I was a lad]
It was made very clear
when we started that as long as we were in uniform, even before or after
school, the school would punish you for misbehaviour.

How very Victorian:-) Even to suggest such a thing for these young
gentlemen would mark you out as a danger to their development. The
idea of punishing children, how terrible:-)

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 11:55:40 GMT someone who may be chris French
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I also rang the school and spoke to the deputy head who said that if they
were out of school at lunchtime then they were out of bounds, therefore
truant, and the parents' responsibility not his!

While I guess technically true, lots of times schools pulls up kids over
their behaviour outside of school.

I suspect this tells us a lot about the attitude of the school to
people who are "only cyclists".

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

"bugbear" <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

erics said:

"Dransfield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I might go up there in the car this lunchtime with a working camera.

If you did have a picture it isn't going to prove a thing - only that
they were at a certain location at some point in time.

It doesn't prove the crime, but it's very helpful
in identification; I can show a plod a photograph,
and he has a MUCH better idea of who to go after
than if I say "I'd know him if I saw him"

Or:

"He was young and was weaaring a blazer"

I could go and take a picture of a group of people standing at a bus stop.
Take the picture to the police and say "That person there was throwing
stones at me as I cycled past" - I expect the PC would say, "but can you
prove it was them throwing stones" before going after them. May be I am
alone in thinking that a photo without any other form of evidence is not
going to be taken that seriously for a single incident, I guess it could be
different if it was a reoccuring thing and his photo was appearing time and
time again.

"Andy Leighton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 12:14:34 +0100,

erics said:

"Dransfield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I might go up there in the car this lunchtime with a working camera.

If you did have a picture it isn't going to prove a thing - only that
they
were at a certain location at some point in time. Whether it was them who
throw the stone is your word against theres. The school's attitude seems
to
be that it isn't their responsibility (despite the fact that it drags
down
the reputation of the school) and even if they could ID them from the
photo
they are not going to (one would hope they would not anyway) give you any
personal details to enable you to talk to their parents - if they would
do
anything anyway.

No but when I was a lad those boys would have had a detention for bringing
the school into disrepute. The boy who threw something would also have
got
a letter to take home to his parents (with a reply expected). An
appropriate assembly would probably also follow. It was made very clear
when we started that as long as we were in uniform, even before or after
school, the school would punish you for misbehaviour.

So having a picture of them standing around in a group makes them guility?
The photo does not prove they have done anything wrong - it would be your
word against theirs, and it doesn't sound like they are the sort of people
that are going to admit to it.

In my day the PE teacher would hit you with the sole of your trainer, the
headmaster would give you the cane, the whole class would get detention if
no one admitted to something that had been done wrong. Still didn't stop
people so inclined from repeat-offending.

erics said:

I could go and take a picture of a group of people standing at a bus stop.
Take the picture to the police and say "That person there was throwing
stones at me as I cycled past" - I expect the PC would say, "but can you
prove it was them throwing stones" before going after them. May be I am
alone in thinking that a photo without any other form of evidence is not
going to be taken that seriously for a single incident, I guess it could be
different if it was a reoccuring thing and his photo was appearing time and
time again.

I'm only suggesting a photograph is helpful in identification; the claim
of stone throwing, and (indeed) the claim that the photograph
corresponds to the perpetrator are down to you as a witness,
which well may not be enough for a conviction, as you point out.

BugBear