This happened yesterday at Longley school in Sheffield.
The man drove a silver car and no other details are available to me.
Can anyone extend on this.

how do you know about it?

ANGRY MOB MULLS OPTIONS

:heyhey:

[mbatey]

Because I have been told by my wife who in turn was told by another mum picking up her child.

Why do you need to know how I know.

My first response would be "Why did you not ask the man what he was doing?"

But as it seems to be one of these third-hand bits of ???? why bother?

I have just been Pm,d by someone who works at the school and he only found out about it this morning.
It seems the incident happened in the infants yard and " the man was thought to be taking pictures ".

It may be third hand on my part but it proves this incident happened and its better to have it third hand than not at all just incase someone else knows anything about it which in this case they do.

Thanks for the Pm.

its pretty typical for the school however - no mention of it today in the letters out to parents from the new headteacher.

Lets hope it's nothing sinister.From the information given, it could have a perfectly innocent explaination, such as someone photographing their old school whilst passing through the area.

Originally posted by Internetowl
its pretty typical for the school however - no mention of it today in the letters out to parents from the new headteacher.

But it only happened yesterday and the school only found out today.
I dare say they'll be keeping watch and will announce something once they know more

but explains what the police were doing there today, parked up besides the school - rapid reaction force ;)

Originally posted by peakma
Lets hope it's nothing sinister.From the information given, it could have a perfectly innocent explaination, such as someone photographing their old school whilst passing through the area. That is the problem these days that you take photos of an old haunt or in this case a school and you actually feel like a pervert.
You dare not talk to kids these days because you will be accused as being a P***ophile another word I can never spell.

with freaks like Michael Crosby - City Road being allowed out and about, schools have every right to be suspicious of people taking an interest in their pupils.

<Rummages around in attic for base ball bat>:suspect:

This happen a lot when my daughter was in shirecliffe school. If this has happend again the police will be out to walk around the school befor and at home time looking for anything funny.
The police use to do this at shirecliffe school when this sort of thing happend as it happend on more then time and it was always a bloke that use two differnt cars one being a silver ford seria.

I think if this thread is truly serious some people on here really haven't got anything better to do.

What does it matter if the kids were fully clothed and the photographer wasn't foaming at the mouth.

IF it was so important why didn't you take his car number plate and report it to the police. Seems like he was probaly the school photographer or someone quouting the school for new railings or some other work or something.

Next thing, people will be banned from taking photos at national sporting events if any of the competitors are less than 21 years.

most people know nowadays that it is not the thing to photograph other proples children. i would be suspicious of any one defending any one doing so. grow up baseball bat man, report such a incident to the police. dont interfere and cause a diversion which often ruins evidence

Originally posted by muddycoffee

What does it matter if the kids were fully clothed and the photographer wasn't foaming at the mouth.

IF it was so important why didn't you take his car number plate and report it to the police. Seems like he was probaly the school photographer or someone quouting the school for new railings or some other work or something.



There are loads of regulations around child protection about why there are serious issues with taking unauthorised images of children - he's hardly going to be the school photographer is he if the school didn't know anything about it till today?

Originally posted by muddycoffee I think if this thread is truly serious some people on here really haven't got anything better to do

You are jokeing.You sound like you aprove of this kind of goin on.Kids have been snatch befor for this kind of thing.If he was a paedophile and it has been proven the kids do not have to be naked for them to get there sexual kicks.

Originally posted by muddycoffee What does it matter if the kids were fully clothed and the photographer wasn't foaming at the mouth.

So if the kids was naked it would not be ok and will be a serious matter then.I belive it is not aloud to take photos of any person with out permisson.

Originally posted by muddycoffee IF it was so important why didn't you take his car number plate and report it to the police. Seems like he was probaly the school photographer or someone quouting the school for new railings or some other work or something.

If he was the school photographer .one he needs permisson from all parents to take a picture.Two if the school knows i think the person who work at the school would have told the orignal poster that it was nothing serious and also all parents would have been told in the first place.

Originally posted by muddycoffee Next thing, people will be banned from taking photos at national sporting events if any of the competitors are less than 21 years.

Well people have been banned from kids sports days and also school plays too unless the parents do not have a problem with it.so i think that also proves this kind of thing is taken serious.

You cant use a camcorder at a school nativity play without prior permission from the school and the consent from every parent.

You cant even use a camera phone in a school or swimming baths leisure centre

It is illegal to take photographs of children with out parental permission.

Doesnt sound like he had permission to me

And if he wanted a pic of the school why do it when there are kids about ?

All schools should have CCTV filming the surrounding areas to catch B@@?ard Paedos

And there's sometimes a very good reason. I know a chap who managed to get photographs of his daughter being bullied by two other girls who had been making her life a misery. The head teacher had been 'unable to take action without evidence' for several weeks, but he finally nailed the culprits.

your mate was lucky not to get arrested then - had either of the suspected bullies informed their parents that he'd been taking pics of them it would have been a different matter.

Originally posted by Cycleracer
I have just been Pm,d by someone who works at the school and he only found out about it this morning.
It seems the incident happened in the infants yard and " the man was thought to be taking pictures ".

It may be third hand on my part but it proves this incident happened and its better to have it third hand than not at all just incase someone else knows anything about it which in this case they do.

Thanks for the Pm.

It was me who PM'd Cycleracer.

I shouldn't really be discussing this on a public forum because I should be leaving it to the school to sort out. I will possibly get it in the neck for doing this anyway, but as it has been brought up and there are several forummers who have kids at the school, I wish to allay their fears.........so here goes.

I only found out about it this morning because I wasn't directly involved in that part of the school so staff were informed on a 'need to know' basis at that time (yesterday).

The info I have now is that a child in the infants reported that they THOUGHT (note the word 'thought') they had seen a man in a silver car taking photos. As far as I know, no adult saw this, but acting on the child's report the school phoned the police who attended immediately.

As far as I know, today's visit from the police was unrelated and involved them being called because a suspicious man was seen in a car parked up outside the school. The school phoned them. They traced the driver to an address and it turned out that he had been innocently waiting to pick up his child.

So, in the first instance - yesterday - would there have been any point in sending 400+ letters home, and what would the letters have said? "A child THINKS they saw someone in a silver car taking photos, so keep your eyes open for it....and panic"?

In the second instance (today), the school was so switched on that even a parent isn't safe from their suspicions........ as some poor bloke found out today. We did apologise by the way!

As I have said, at this juncture we can only say 'a child thinks they saw.........' I hope this has gone some way towards settling the minds of you parents out there, and I have told you all I know at this time.

I have probably over-stepped the mark as well!!!! Anybody know of any job vacancies !!!!!

:(

I'm glad it sounds like something of nothing.In this day and age we do all have to be switched on and aware to the dangers of perverts and paedophiles, but we do have to be careful not to get to paranoid,which can result in un nerving our children( which is in a way a victory to the baddies,and unfair to put on children).
At the same time ,I'm glad they took notice of the child, as all to often children are ignored or dismissed,and who knows maybe he did see smeone with alterior motives,and him raising the adults attention topwards this could have prevented anything else to happen. Who knows, but the unfortunate reality is you can't be too careful when it comes to protecting children from some of the evils in the world.

Originally posted by peakma
I'm glad it sounds like something of nothing.In this day and age we do all have to be switched on and aware to the dangers of perverts and paedophiles, but we do have to be careful not to get to paranoid,which can result in un nerving our children( which is in a way a victory to the baddies,and unfair to put on children).
At the same time ,I'm glad they took notice of the child, as all to often children are ignored or dismissed,and who knows maybe he did see smeone with alterior motives,and him raising the adults attention topwards this could have prevented anything else to happen. Who knows, but the unfortunate reality is you can't be too careful when it comes to protecting children from some of the evils in the world.

yes, because this day and age is so much worse than any time in the past.

Can anyone provide a link to something on the statute book that says it's illegal to take photographs of children? And can anyone explain why it should be so?
If (extremely unlikely as it is) a paedophile wished to get pictures of children in school uniform, they could just pick up a mail order catalogue.
Maybe I'll have to go and apologise to everyone on the PC thread, it seems that the world has actually gone mad.

Has no one been listening to the latest news?
Its lucky any one without business near a school is not thrown in gaol

I cant believe people on here actually think this is sinister. There are so many explanations that are not sinister. It might be he was up to no good but I just cant see it myself

Having read through the posts on this thread, I have come to the conclusion that schools are now in a 'no-win' situation with this photography issue.

a) There are those who would demand police involvement and a letter home informing them of a 'suspected paedophile' acting suspicious around the school and that anyone being there without good cause be hassled by the police.

and

b) Those who accept that the photographer (if indeed there was one) may be just taking nostalgic shots or even just wanting a shot of 'children at play' for his next serious 'arty' exhibition.

The school, however, has to make a choice. 'a' or 'b'?

They err on the side of caution and choose to please the folks in catagory 'a' - but without the letter home so as not to overreact -, thus becoming the target of ridicule from the folks in catagory 'b'.

So, everyone, if YOU were the person at the school who had to make the decision.........would YOU phone the police on a suspicious whim, or would you just think 'no harm done!'?

Saxon51 - in reply to your question - I'd plump for the police option everytime then again I'm biased. Its not like its the first time this sort of thing has happened though is it? Better to side with due caution I'm sure you'll agree and which the school did today, at the end of the day I'm sure the innocent person wasn't too upset about it on reflection - I'm sure he'd have wanted similar action if his child had been at risk. And from the police's point of view (is the forum police man on tonight) I'm sure they'd rather be called out for a false alarm than not and have to investigate something more sinister as a result.

>The only way is up....unless you've just climbed Everest of course.

Which is apt looking at Y6's subject matter this term :)

Saxon 51 if someone is taking photos at a school play or in the playground with the teachers permission then OK.
Do you seriously think that any one going around taking pictures of kids without them knowing is doing for artistic reasons.
Please tell us you are not so naive

Originally posted by artisan

Do you seriously think that any one going around taking pictures of kids without them knowing is doing for artistic reasons.
Please tell us you are not so naive
Is saxon naive or are you overly paranoid? there r ametuer photographers who enjoy taking candid shots of ppl, try to catch genuine expressions etc rather than forced that u would get if ppl know their pic is being taken.
I dont do this sort of photography for 2 reasons...not interested but also worry about being confronted/assulted by paranoid types.

Originally posted by miffed24_7
You cant use a camcorder at a school nativity play without prior permission from the school and the consent from every parent.

It is illegal to take photographs of children with out parental permission.

Not necessarily true. Each school has their own non-legally binding 'code of conduct'.

If the photographer wasn't on school grounds he wouldn't have been breaking the law. He could have even been a Star photographer just getting some stock material.

It's amazing how quickly people jump to conclusions and how things get out of hand on this forum without knowing the full facts.

Originally posted by muddycoffee


Next thing, people will be banned from taking photos at national sporting events if any of the competitors are less than 21 years.

In this day and age, you can't take photographic equipment seem to be forbidden everywhere - the police'd love my HDD and DVD collection - children [relatives & myself as young 'uns] - thank ourselves lucky when we were - if we were all young now, there'd not be half as many photos/video footage out and about!

:)

Originally posted by artisan
Saxon 51 if someone is taking photos at a school play or in the playground with the teachers permission then OK.
Do you seriously think that any one going around taking pictures of kids without them knowing is doing for artistic reasons.
Please tell us you are not so naive
Yes of course they can be. They can also be doing it for professional reasons.

I've done it myself.

So should I have to worry about being put in a Police car or maybe beaten up by a load of stupid parent vigilantes, just because I'm working?

OK but how do you differentiate between a deviant and a goodo bloke. Some terriblecrimes have happened just a lakley and you blokes could be putting yourselves in the frame!
Do you not see this
My kids are grown up but now I have my Grandchildren to worry about, if any thing happened to them how would you forgive yourself for thinking 'Oh he's just some gezzer watching thr kids play'

I know it's not the answer that a lot of people like to hear, but the real truth is that the risk from pedophiles on the street is to all intents and purposes, zero.

Of course it is emotive, but because it is emotive people appear to refuse to see the reality or the facts.

People should be more concerned about their child dying in a car crash.

It's far more likely, but it doesn't stop people from driving kids to school every day to avoid non existent pedophiles.

Originally posted by artisan
Saxon 51 if someone is taking photos at a school play or in the playground with the teachers permission then OK.
Do you seriously think that any one going around taking pictures of kids without them knowing is doing for artistic reasons.
Please tell us you are not so naive

In photography circles taking pictures of people in real life situations without there knowledge is called "Candid" and has been around as long as photography. In the early days photographers even had to set up scenes to look like candids (Frank Meadow Sutcliffe's famous Whitby scenes spring to mind)
It has become very difficult for photographers to pursue their hobby in these circumstances without attracting unwanted and largely unwarranted attention from (understandable in today's climate) worried parents and even the police.
It doesn't seem that long ago that no slide show at the local camera club would be complete without the "kids playing in the park" type of candid shots which were taken, shown and admired on there photographic merits alone.
As a parent I can understand why people are so concerned but there really isn't a paedophile behind every hedge and there are lots of reasons why people are in places and doing things that don't at first seem to make sense but are actually quite innocent.

Originally posted by Internetowl
Saxon51 - in reply to your question - I'd plump for the police option everytime then again I'm biased. Its not like its the first time this sort of thing has happened though is it? Better to side with due caution I'm sure you'll agree and which the school did today, at the end of the day I'm sure the innocent person wasn't too upset about it on reflection - I'm sure he'd have wanted similar action if his child had been at risk. And from the police's point of view (is the forum police man on tonight) I'm sure they'd rather be called out for a false alarm than not and have to investigate something more sinister as a result.

>The only way is up....unless you've just climbed Everest of course.

Which is apt looking at Y6's subject matter this term :)

The first time what sort of thing has happened, a few photos were taken, it's probably not the first time that photos have been taken, you're right.
I don't agree with the schools actions, they sound like paranoid panic causers.

Originally posted by Cyclone
I don't agree with the schools actions, they sound like paranoid panic causers.

Not just the school, but also the OP who is an 'old timer' of the forum whom I generally respect.

Many years ago when life was less complicated I used to go for my holiday to Barry Island in South Wales where they held photographic courses in a local college during the summer recess. If you went for four years you could get a teaching qualification. As part of the course work we took candid photographs. They may only have been people on the beach, donkey rides, street entertainers, a local flower show, or dog show, a tramp directing traffic, a child with a candyfloss almost as big as themselves, a porter pushing luggage in the local railway station, and store-holders in the local markets selling their wares and so on.

Our only motivation was to enjoy our hobby and to take interesting and perhaps humorous photographs. No one ever bothered then and I think it is such a shame that I would be scared to do it now for fear of what might happen?

Originally posted by alchresearch

It's amazing how quickly people jump to conclusions and how things get out of hand on this forum without knowing the full facts.

It's even more amazing that after using the forum for almost three years, you still find it amazing :confused: ;)

Originally posted by alchresearch
Not just the school, but also the OP who is an 'old timer' of the forum whom I generally respect.
Ok, thanks for your views, but let me make a few points a little more clearer.
alchresearch, the thread simply says a man was seen taking photos outside a school and drove a silver car.
It then goes on to say can anyone extend on this.

No way does my thread suggest a peadophile, pervert or any other weirdo was involved.
All I know is third hand and I have asked for anyone who may know of the facts.
Thanks to Saxon51 we now know the facts.
No way am I scare mongering on this issue, but knowing the history of Longley school this is not an isolated case, there has been attemp abductions at this school in the past.

People have simply come forward with there points of view and I agree with most repliers who are against taking photos near of a school without permission.
It is illegal to take photos of a government building due to the terrorism laws so why should people take photos of a school while kids are in the play ground.

This thread started with some very brief details saying someone was taking photos of the school, and this has proved to be correct.
Now can forumers who know what happened be allowed to put in the correct details without being accused of being parroniod.

Originally posted by artisan
Saxon 51 if someone is taking photos at a school play or in the playground with the teachers permission then OK.
Do you seriously think that any one going around taking pictures of kids without them knowing is doing for artistic reasons.
Please tell us you are not so naive

Er...excuse me?

I posted on this thread to answer the OP's concerns, and to impart what little I know of the incident so as to clarify things for those parents who may have kids at the school.

I haven't even expressed MY feelings on this subject. All I have done is explain what HAPPENED, and the school's actions in response to what HAPPENED. I was refering to the school's choices, not MINE. I asked what YOU lot would do if you were in the same situation as the school. How the hell you can come to the opinion that I am naive from what I have posted on here, I don't know.

None of my post are about what I think should have, or ought to have, happened.

Originally posted by Cyclone
The first time what sort of thing has happened, a few photos were taken, it's probably not the first time that photos have been taken, you're right.
I don't agree with the schools actions, they sound like paranoid panic causers.

The school surely can't be accused of being 'paranoid panic causers' if all they did was act on a child's report on the off chance that what the child 'thought' they saw was real can they. All they did was inform the police in line with how they would suspect the parents would want them to act.

The school didn't make it public knowledge, did they? They just took a 'better safe than sorry' stance.

Originally posted by Cycleracer
It is illegal to take photos of a government building due to the terrorism laws
Is it? :confused: Which bit of legislation is that? That's going to upset the tourists.

Originally posted by Cycleracer
This thread started with some very brief details saying someone was taking photos of the school, and this has proved to be correct.
What they actually said was...

Originally posted by saxon51

The info I have now is that a child in the infants reported that they THOUGHT (note the word 'thought') they had seen a man in a silver car taking photos. As far as I know, no adult saw this, but acting on the child's report the school phoned the police who attended immediately.
It could as easily have been somebody making a mobile phone call, or a child having a wind up, or , or, or, or ... or maybe not have even happened at all!

Saxon51 reiterates 3/4 times that people should exercise caution when interpreting what a youngster SAID they THOUGHT they saw.

It has NOT
Originally posted by Cycleracer
proved to be correct.

Originally posted by saxon51
The school surely can't be accused of being 'paranoid panic causers' if all they did was act on a child's report on the off chance that what the child 'thought' they saw was real can they. All they did was inform the police in line with how they would suspect the parents would want them to act.

The school didn't make it public knowledge, did they? They just took a 'better safe than sorry' stance.

quite frankly I think the school should have said to the child "so what?" Taking photos isn't a crime, isn't suspicous and doesn't need reporting to the police or to parents, nor does the rumour need spreading as it obvioulsy was, or would wouldn't be talking about it.

Personally I wouldn’t worry about it. The chances are that if someone was doing something wrong, then more than likely they would be doing it surreptitiously and you wouldn’t even have known about it?

The fact he was doing it openly suggests to me that it was innocent?

Tony

Nor did I say a peadophile was taking pictures either.

This was not made public until I did so and will do so anytime there is an incident where children are involved or a risk even if it proves to be incidental.

I don't care about what he was photographing or even if he was using his phone inocently, if the alarm bells ring however mineute then caution should take place and parents should be vigil.

I'd be more worried about the forthcoming SF Child Friendly Meet. How many paedophiles will be attending?

It's very well meaning of people to 'alert' other parents about something, but it is basically scare mongering about something that parents can contribute absolutely nothing towards resolving... especially is it (likely) untrue!

The spiral of pointless fear descends ever downward, and the fearful are the only sufferers.

Originally posted by Tony
I'd be more worried about the forthcoming SF Child Friendly Meet. How many paedophiles will be attending?

It's very well meaning of people to 'alert' other parents about something, but it is basically scare mongering about something that parents can contribute absolutely nothing towards resolving... especially is it (likely) untrue!

The spiral of pointless fear descends ever downward, and the fearful are the only sufferers. The trouble is you will never know.
I could be a paedophile so could any man on this forum.
Its unlikely but out of all the male members on this forum do you think that a small percentage may be sex offenders.

You just never know.:suspect:

Originally posted by Tony

The spiral of pointless fear descends ever downward, and the fearful are the only sufferers.

Except of course for the paediatricians attacked by the mob for being paedophiles. the hysteria spreads in ever widening circles and affects everybody to some degree.

I was on Loxley Common taking pictures there because of my interest in Robin Hood and this young boy on a mountain bike came up to me and asked me if I was a paedeophile. I ask you!

Sometimes I wonder if we put these ideas into our children’s heads? Perhaps we imagine the worst when we shouldn't?

There you go then Cycleracer mate.

Because you asked a simple question as to whether anyone had heard what went off at school the other day - as we do on local public forums, - you are now a 'paranoid, scaremongerer'........... and because I replied telling you what I know about it and pointing out the school's two possible courses of action in this case, I am now also 'paranoid' for mentioning option 'a' ....... and 'naive' for for mentioning option 'b'.

Wonder what option 'c' could be! Oh, I know, don't bother asking for info/don't bother replying with info.:thumbsup:

Whilst i would agree to people being alert to this kind of thing.
I think sometimes it gets blown out of all proportion.

Last summer i wanted to film and take pics of my sons sportsday and after mixed advice on here eg asking parents etc

I went along with my mini cam and also ordinary camera and asked a couple of parents if theyd mind me taking pictures
They looked at me rather blank and said of course not.
I took pictures and movies with all the kids on and parents and teachers alike and no none battered an eye lid.

My point being no one was bothered i think its just a certain few
who are really paranoid about this.
Its not illegal otherwise i would have been carted off to the nearest police station.
I took loads of the kids in all events.

And as another poster wrote, people would be more worried if someone tried to do it sneakily and not out in the open.

Also remember, never assume.
It makes an ASS of U and ME.

Originally posted by Cycleracer
Because I have been told by my wife who in turn was told by another mum picking up her child.

Why do you need to know how I know.

A case of chinese whispers (hear-say) perhaps? (trying to be pc here!)

Bring 2'/6" we're going to a dance.

Originally posted by Cyclone
quite frankly I think the school should have said to the child "so what?"

Right, so had it been a more serious matter, would the school have been slated for that attitude in the aftermath?

Perhaps the thread title should be amended to include the word 'ALLEGEDLY' ?

After all, the Meadowhall bomb threads soon get modified with the word HOAX.

Originally posted by Cycleracer
This happened yesterday at Longley school in Sheffield.
The man drove a silver car and no other details are available to me.
Can anyone extend on this.

It was the School Photographer checking light levels :P

That or just plain old British Paranoia :loopy:

Someone with a camera .... nobody was naked I assume! what's the problem ... apart from in your mind?


I know a woman who claims she sees pedos checking out her 9 yo daughter most days on the way to/from school ... I think she's a lunatic and needs help ... she thinks every man walking unsupervised past a school is up to no good

it could be something as innocent as someone taking photos of the school and the surrounding area as i myself take pics in and around sheffield.....But then again it could be someone sick twisted and evil as the 'man' featured in the star the other night....until someone knows the facts for sure you've got to keep an opened mind

if you ask some forummers they'd probably say he was innocent too.

Originally posted by alchresearch
Perhaps the thread title should be amended to include the word 'ALLEGEDLY' ?

After all, the Meadowhall bomb threads soon get modified with the word HOAX.

I cant read your comments now without hearing Moes voice:hihi:

Originally posted by Internetowl
Right, so had it been a more serious matter, would the school have been slated for that attitude in the aftermath?

It couldn't be more or less serious than it was. Assuming it was even true, the whole story is that someone was taking some photographs. So What? Why did the school need to do anything, what was the worst possible outcome of photographs being taken?

Originally posted by stateside200
A case of chinese whispers (hear-say) perhaps? (trying to be pc here!) Have you read the opening thread, more importantly did you read Saxon51s reply.....Chinese whispers, I think not.....Go back and start again.:suspect:

Originally posted by Cycleracer
The trouble is you will never know.
I could be a paedophile so could any man on this forum.
Its unlikely but out of all the male members on this forum do you think that a small percentage may be sex offenders.

You just never know.:suspect:

Surely you mean't anyONE on this forum. And yes it could be anyone but the chances are so vanishingly small that the negative effects of worrying about it (instilling paranoia, increasing anxiety levels in both parents and children, innocent paediatricians being forced out of their homes etc.) aren't even remotely ballanced by the positive effects (the vanishingly small chances that you will actually stop/catch a paedophile).

and if one of us is capable of doing something like that. It's our direct relatives that are most at risk. So that makes those of us who are grandparents, uncles, mothers and fathers the most likely to be that one...

Originally posted by miffed24_7
You cant use a camcorder at a school nativity play without prior permission from the school and the consent from every parent.

You cant even use a camera phone in a school or swimming baths leisure centre

It is illegal to take photographs of children with out parental permission.

Doesnt sound like he had permission to me

And if he wanted a pic of the school why do it when there are kids about ?

All schools should have CCTV filming the surrounding areas to catch B@@?ard Paedos

I don't doubt any of the above - it just saddens me to think of what an ugly world we've created for ourselves!

Can't take pictures of our kids at nativity plays??....just think about it.....how ridiculous is that?

I don't need any lectures btw on 'issues'....trust me, I've seen enough to last me a lifetime....

Just happen to think it's sad, that's all.

it's very sad, and sensible people everywhere should make a point of complaining about stupid rules. I think the camcorder thing was just one school though, I've no idea if it's widespread.

My childrens safety would certainly come before some photographer who wants the right to photograph someone elses children . any partent would feel the same i am sure. of course if i was a peadophile i wouldnt care what any one else thought.

Originally posted by Cyclone
it's very sad, and sensible people everywhere should make a point of complaining about stupid rules. I think the camcorder thing was just one school though, I've no idea if it's widespread.

It's at all school, its to do with the child protection thing.
Wanted to use the camcorder at my daughters school as she had a part in the christmas pamtomime, but wasn't allowed.

Can somebody tell me exactly what is being protected by denying parents the use of cameras?

He was filming in the dressing room!!:o :rolleyes:

That has to be wrong.

Originally posted by windows
My childrens safety would certainly come before some photographer who wants the right to photograph someone elses children . any partent would feel the same i am sure. of course if i was a peadophile i wouldnt care what any one else thought.

I'm glad you made your point so clear. As I understand it taking a photograph may actually steal the soul (or is it sole) of a child. Is that right? If not, then how does your childs safety come into it?

Originally posted by candystick
It's at all school, its to do with the child protection thing.
Wanted to use the camcorder at my daughters school as she had a part in the christmas pamtomime, but wasn't allowed.

glad to see it's unequivocal, it happened to you too, so it must be nationwide. Tonight a pint cost me £1.60, so we can rejoice that everywhere they are that price.

My wife works at a ballet school and for the annuall concert this year all the people involved in it regarding doing the hair, sorting the sets etc. have had to send in forms to the local (calderdale) council and be checked out.
This shows how far these perverts are corrupting our societyand taking away the innocence of uor young ones.

I work in a school (dinner lady) and at our school every corridor and possible entrance and exit of the school is filmed at all times on CCTV, fed back to a sinister man with a bank of tellys in a dark office.

Great shots are recorded of the dinner hall and outside the girls toilets. It was even considered of having cameras inside the toilets to catch smokers and vandals! All of course for security.

Makes the guy in the car outside the school seem a bit pathetic.

And if he was a perv couldn't he just buy any childrens magazine and have instant access to pictures of other peoples' kids. :suspect:

Originally posted by artisan
My wife works at a ballet school and for the annuall concert this year all the people involved in it regarding doing the hair, sorting the sets etc. have had to send in forms to the local (calderdale) council and be checked out.
This shows how far these perverts are corrupting our societyand taking away the innocence of uor young ones.

Errrrr no - it shows how paranoid people can become about the very unlikely. If anyone is "taking away the innocence of our young ones" it is the people demanding measures like this and trying to convince you that every other person on the street is planning to rape / murder / abduct / mug / blow you up. Society needs some serious CBT.

Well this report (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1681914,00.html) in the Observer today just adds to the confusion.

The polce say the guy's a risk, Ruth Kelly decides he isn't. As the report names the school in question I confidently expect TV pictures of a baying mob outside the school next week.

Cyclone, Past experience. I would not want ANY child to be "picked out"

Originally posted by Greybeard
Well this report (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1681914,00.html) in the Observer today just adds to the confusion.

The polce say the guy's a risk, Ruth Kelly decides he isn't. As the report names the school in question I confidently expect TV pictures of a baying mob outside the school next week.

That is just completely wrong, but nobody has any respect for Ruth Kelly and her competence anyway.

When I had a police check before I started working in my school in 2003, my whole job was in limbo because I had an assault charge (ABH) from 1990 which the council wanted to investigate thoroughly.

Originally posted by windows
Cyclone, Past experience. I would not want ANY child to be "picked out"

you'll have to explain.

It is the future of our children we have to protect. Please read between the lines. Some things are hard to bear.

Mod note:

As this thread seems to have run its course and is in danger of getting personal I'm closing it down.

Thanks for all the contributions.