Violent sexual assault on Crossfields linked to Peckham attacks ?

Update 13 Feb : £10,000 Reward offered

On New Year's Day, Crossfields residents were greeted with the shocking news that a 'violent assault' had taken place on the estate the night before, when police conducted a door-to-door enquiry asking for witnesses. Information was vague: was it a young woman or teenager? Between 3am to 6am or was it nearer 5am? Was it a rape? Where exactly? Was it a resident? (Apparently not)...

The grassy area behind Wilshaw was taped off by police, a small tent was erected and a patrol car sat nearby on Creekside for three or more days. No further information was forthcoming, although a small number of Wilshaw House residents received an incident notice through their doors the following week. No one else did, so if you were out on New Year's Day (or tucked up in bed with a hangover and didn't answer the door), you'd be none the wiser.

Several young (and not so young) women artists frequent APT and Arthub Studios right next to the crime scene but neither of these premises were informed. Creative types work odd hours and holidays, so likewise, Cockpit Arts further along the street. On New Year's Eve, the Birds Nest pub was open all night. Did one of their punters get followed home from the pub? This blogger was walking home carefree from the night bus in New Cross at 4 in the morning but not via Creekside. Crosswhatfields resorted to Twitter to find out more, but Lewisham MPS (@MPSLewisham) knew nothing.

On 2nd January, the Metropolitan Police (@metpoliceuk) launched an appeal on Twitter, which the Deptford Dame retweeted (otherwise we would not have seen it):  

"Detectives are appealing for information and witnesses after a woman was seriously assaulted in Deptford in the early hours of New Year's Day. Police were called to a south London hospital at 06.20hrs on Friday 1 January, after a woman had been brought to the hospital by family members. The victim, aged in her late teens, remains in a stable condition. Enquiries continue to establish if there was any sexual motive for the attack. As such, the investigation is being led by detectives from the Sexual Offences, Exploitation and Child Abuse Command. At this stage, officers must retain an open mind as to any motive. Police enquiries are ongoing to establish the circumstances. Officers are appealing for anyone who saw anything suspicious in the area of Creekside and Deptford Church Street between 03:00hrs and 06:00hrs on Friday 1 January to contact the incident room on 020 8721 4617. To remain anonymous, call Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111."  

This was retweeted by 125 of its 380,000 followers (0.03%). @MPSLewisham tweeted the appeal on Jan 3rd and got 5 retweets from its 23,000 followers (0.02%).

On Sunday 3rd, a resident found a pair of nearly new women's boots in one of the rubbish bins not that far from the incident site – which seemed to indicate that not much of a search of the surrounding area had taken place. She handed these to the waiting patrol car but, having been disturbed from their mobile phone games, its occupants were more concerned that she'd crossed through the police tape and "contaminated" the incident site. The following week, a police van unloaded a team to 'search' the grassy area but did not search the rest of the estate; one rookie was overheard saying "What on earth are we expected to find if they've already looked here?".

To date, Crossfields residents have been given no further information. There have been no incident notices pinned up or delivered. Female residents might assume the assailant had been found and that it's safe to leave their homes – or alternatively, they may still be extremely worried, or they may not be aware there was any danger at all. We now see that two further appeals were tweeted by the Met on 11th Jan, but were not necessarily seen or retweeted by local tweeters. This time the Met was releasing a CCTV image of a man they wanted to speak to. 4 seconds of CCTV video was available to view, although no information was given as to where it was filmed. The image was retweeted 55 times, the appeal 70 times. This was quite a development in the case, but Lewisham MPS did not tweet or retweet it at all.

Click to enlarge

This time the Met's appeal read: "Detectives are appealing for help to identify and trace a man seen on CCTV. They are also appealing for anyone who was in the area at the time of the offence to contact them with what they saw or heard. In particular they would like to speak to two potential witnesses who would have been in the immediate vicinity of Creekside, at the junction with Deptford Church Street, between 04:50hrs and 04:55hrs...Did you see anyone acting suspiciously or running in the street? Do you know the man in these images? If you are this man we would like to speak with you..."

Three weeks after the attack, the tape and tent had been removed. Rather oddly, residents as far away as St Johns got a leaflet through their doors about the assault – with SERIOUS RAPE typed in big black letters on it but not much more info than that – yet already more info than we were getting in Creekside!

Earlier this week, the incident site was visited by people in suits (rather than uniforms), which seems to have heralded more news...Today, the News Shopper reported: Women urged to keep safe after violent Deptford assault linked to others in south London, as police suggest sexual motive. 

The story also appeared in the Evening Standard. From this report, we now know that the Deptford victim was 18 years old, was attacked from behind before being physically assaulted, suffered injuries to her head and face, and no property was stolen. Two incidents in Peckham earlier in December are being linked because the assaults were similar, though the victims are much older. Police have suggested there was sexual motive even though none of the attacks were actually sexual. According to the Met's latest appeal (also today, co-inciding with their press release), 'intelligence work' led to the link, and "while currently there is no forensic evidence linking them as sexual attacks, all three are now being investigated by the Sexual Offences, Exploitation and Child Abuse Command's Serious and Complex Case Team".

This news has been tweeted by Lewisham MPS today and has so far been retweeted 10 times. They also retweeted the Met's tweet. The CCTV photo isn't any clearer but can now be recognised as Deptford Church Street near the Broadway, so the suspect (or not) is heading south from the Birds Nest roundabout...

Click to enlarge

Not everyone reads the News Shopper or other local papers (especially when they're not delivered free like they are elsewhere in the borough), and certainly not everyone is on Twitter. And even if they were, not everyone's following the police, and apart from that, it's easy to miss one single tweet. The Met tweet about crime all over London and much of it is irrelevant to locals, who might like to know what dangers lurk locally. You'd expect local crime news to come from local police. But the point (if you haven't guessed) is that this dependence on Twitter (to which you cannot report crime and which is not staffed 24 hours) takes precedence over more conventional methods: there are no incident notices pinned up anywhere in the area whatsoever – nothing in shop windows or bars, for instance, where people might actually see the appeal and respond if they can.

In this assault case, it appears the (centralised) investigating team are not making the most of local police resources to gather evidence by way of witness appeals via conventional methods, and the local police are the last to know what the (centralised) investigating team are up to regarding a crime on their own patch.* Why are we only hearing about it tonight on BBC London News – or reading about it in The Standard – ONE ENTIRE MONTH AFTER the same image of a possible suspect had already been presented on Twitter (when it concerned only one woman in Deptford)?

Why are these crimes are being investigated by the 'Sexual Offences, Exploitation and Child Abuse Command's Serious and Complex Case Team' ? Who are those guys? Isn't their remit rather too broad to be effective (it includes sex trafficking and peodophilia)? The link with the Peckham attacks is most strange considering how many assaults go on all the time, and we wonder if police resourcing is so deranged (by Tory cuts?) that they've had to create or hype up the links and suspicion of sexual motive to gain access to funds for publicity otherwise not available. After all, men DO assault women without thoughts of raping them, but perhaps the press don't pick up on a story unless it is sexually related? Or can't the Met understand that some men just like hitting women?

And why were constables assigned to sit in a patrol car for days on end guarding the taped off site and playing mobile phone games when they could have been doing more door-to-door? And more importantly, why wasn't the advice below – that appeared in the News Shopper and Evening Standard today – circulated to all local women back in early January?

•    Prepare and consider your travel arrangements carefully and ensure someone knows where you are going, who you are with and when you might be home.

•    Look as assertive as you can, walk with confidence and be aware of your surroundings and who is around you.

•    Avoid short cuts and dark isolated areas, vary your routine and be discreet handling cash, phones and wearing jewellery in a public place.

•    Never take your safety for granted and look after your friends so that they don’t become vulnerable. Remember your personal safety is more important than your phone or other valuables.

•    Keep your bags close to you and secured with zips closed. Check your belongings and your pockets regularly.

•    Wearing headphones and talking on the phone can make you unaware of your immediate surroundings - this makes you appear vulnerable and gives an advantage to a criminal.

•    If you feel uneasy about an individual or situation, trust your instincts and leave the area and head towards a public place such as a shop.

BE SAFE.

(Edited and update 12 Feb 2016)


***

*Related comment
This very same LACK OF INFORMATION from local police led to a spate of burglaries (at least 9 in 8 weeks) on Crossfields last year while scaffolding was up. Because very few people knew they were happening and didn't take extra precautions, the opportunistic thieves just kept coming back. While it was not newsworthy enough for Twitter, no one even knew which local SNT team were dealing with the crimes – it should have been New Cross SNT, but Evelyn SNT often responded (thanks to misinformation from Lewisham Homes). Neither team knew what crimes the other team was investigating. Evelyn SNT's monthly online crime map did not cover Crossfields, and New Cross SNT's map did not report those dealt with by Evelyn. The full extent of the robberies cannot be viewed (and the crime maps are in any case collated a month behind rather than in real time). Lewisham Homes did very little to let anyone know how vulnerable we were, and refused to accept the burglaries were happening as a result of the dark cover provided by the scaffolding they'd put up and were responsible for (and which, when the scaffold was also used for access to back windows, was not alarmed). And, of course, no one knows if anyone was caught...

***

Live webchat with Lewisham's Borough Commander

The Press Release reads:

Lewisham Borough Commander Chief Superintendent Russell Nyman will host his first live Borough webchat on Thursday 18th October between 6:45pm-7:45pm.

The web chat, called Ask Lewisham, is a unique opportunity for members of the public to ask questions about policing issues in their local neighbourhood.

The session will provide a unique opportunity for members of the public to put questions to their Borough Commander directly and to ask him about any concerns or queries they have about their local neighbourhood.

The webchats are all part of the Commissioner's commitment to hear directly from the public to find out their views on how the MPS can be the best police service.

Lewisham Borough Commander, Chief Supt Russell Nyman "This is a great opportunity to directly engage with the residents of Lewisham and find out about their concerns. I want to hear what they think about policing in Lewisham, what we are doing well at and what we need to do better at."

Members of the public can join the webchat between 6:45pm and 7:45pm at www.met.police.uk/askyourlocalpolice/ 

People can pre-submit questions on Twitter using #AskLewisham.

There is also a live webchat with the Met's Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe on Friday 19 October between 10.30 and 11.30am. You can join the discussion and pre-submit a question on Twitter using #AskMetBoss. Apparently, "More than 1,400 people have joined the Commissioner during his webchats, questioning him on a variety of topics including racism, drugs, uniform and terrorism. During the last webchat we received over one hundred questions during the hour long session hosted on the MPS website, and nearly four hundred people took part."

A peek at Twitter at the time of writing reveals hardly anyone except Cllr Duwayne Brooks (LibDem, Downham) is pre-submmitting questions of Lewisham Met's new Borough Commander at #Ask Lewisham, whilst Lee Jasper is asking all the questions at #AskMetBoss.

Update:

You can see/read the replay of the Lewisham webchat at the Met website.

Update on cold callers + bogus official warning

We posted in April about the EON rep who was using rather unconventional methods to sign up new customers. Jim in Farrer House wrote to Lewisham Trading Standards about it. When he didn't get an acknowledgement of his email, he contacted Crossfields' Estate's new Tenancy Officer, Kerrie Taylor*, who got in touch with Trading Standards on Jim's behalf. This prompted a reply on 1st May from the Senior Trading Standards Enforcement Officer, Duncan Brand.

Mr Brand apologised for his tardy response and said he would be contacting EON. He requested that if Jim knew anyone who has signed up to EON as a result of this salesman's tactics then they should "contact the Citizens Advice Consumer Advice Service on 08454 040506 for advice about their rights. If there is a breach of the legislation we enforce they will pass the details to us. Finally, if you would like a No Cold Calling sticker to display on your property then let me know." Jim was tempted to tell Mr Brand where to stick his sticker.

Bogus official operating

Soon after, Crosswhatfields received an alert from the Met Police on 4th May (our apologies for this late posting). The police warning is seemingly unconnected to the EON story, but the advice line number given at the bottom (Consumer Direct) is the same as the one given above.

Lewisham Police and Lewisham Council are again urging residents especially the vulnerable to be on their guard following three burglaries today (04.04.12) where the suspects have  professed to be working on behalf of the council.

Residents are reminded that anyone from Lewisham Council, Lewisham Homes or the Police will always have official documentation or ID to prove who they are.

Bogus callers succeed because they sound believable, so don't be fooled. Make sure in your own mind that they are whom they claim to be by following these simple steps:

• Think before you open the door – use your chain and spy hole or look out of the window to see if you recognise them.

• Ask callers for proof of identity. Genuine tradesmen should carry an identification card with their photograph on. Check this carefully. If you are unsure, telephone the company the caller claims to represent. 

• The Utilities now offer a password identification system. Any caller from one of these companies should be able to give a pre-arranged password as additional proof of identity. 

• Beware of callers who attempt to distract you by claiming that they have seen something untoward in your rear garden or somewhere which may encourage you to leave your house – they may have an accomplice awaiting this distraction. 

• If you are not convinced of the identity of the caller, don't let them in. Ask the caller to come back later and arrange for a friend, relative or neighbour to be present on their return or ask the caller to contact this person. 

• All police officers carry a warrant card with their name, rank & photograph. To confirm an officer’s identity the public are encouraged to dial Lewisham Police on 101 or contact your local Safer Neighbourhoods Team

For more information about what to do about cold callers or to report a persistent cold caller, contact Consumer Direct on 08454 040506.

Residents wishing to find out more information about cold calling zones can contact Lewisham Council Trading Standards on 020 8314 7759. 

Neighbourhood Community Safety Team

Safer Neighbourhoods Team

* Contact Kerrie Taylor (Lewisham Homes Tenancy Plus Officer):
020 863 4802 / 07710 387942  Email kerrie.taylor@lewishamhomes.org.uk

Zero tolerance on the high street

Although the high street was as lively as ever in the Spring sunshine yesterday, certain usually more rowdy areas were eerily quiet. Can you guess what is missing in these pictures?

The street drinkers who gather outside the betting shops and on the anchor have been "moved along". These spots are now being policed by the Safer Neighbourhood Team (or whatever they're called now). The officers first took up their posts on Wednesday and it's thought they might be around for a couple of weeks. We are unable to confirm how long this will last at time of posting, and also didn't have time to find out where the drinkers have "moved along" to.

Mostly everyone seems to welcome the arrival at last of the police presence – or rather, the absence of the street drinking crowd. Signs stating the high street is a zero tolerance zone have been up for a long time, so congratulations must go to whoever has finally decided to actually put it into practice.

UPDATE 30/03/12: 4pm

Officers were called off early for the day, as the regulars began to gather outside Ladbrokes in anticipation of their leaving. The two-week initiative is drawing on officers from all surrounding wards and several 'dispersal notices' have been issued since it started. Well-known character Errol was fined £50 for 'getting a bit too feisty', but was back in his usual spot next to Paddy Power today.

UPDATE 13/04/12

This initiative didn't seem to last for more than a week. The Deptford Dame posted on 7 April about the antisocial behaviour being tolerated by local residents, one of whom has started a petition (click to sign) and has also received a response from Mayor Steve Bullock regarding the problem.

It appears the temporary police presence was the result of the Safer Lewisham Partnership's Designated Public Place Order (DPPO) being applied. "The DPPO can now be used in tandem with Police Dispersal powers that allow Police Officers to disperse individuals causing alcohol related disorder from a particular area for up to 48 hours. If the individual returns to the area within this time they will be arrested. The enforcement of these dispersal orders will begin shortly and it’s hoped this will have a significant impact on the drinking habits of the problematic drinkers in the High Street area." Read the Mayor's letter in full on the Deptford Dame's post.

Deptford Update

Please note that the Thames Tunnel meeting this evening is cancelled.

3.30pm: Meanwhile, rumours that the rioters were coming back to the high street today at 1pm led to the police asking shopkeepers who had bothered to open today to pull down their shutters. Two or three pairs of PCs patrolled the street whilst a police van drove slowly up and down. The rumour was the rioters were coming down from Bermondsey. People were hanging about waiting, and a couple of shops continued to trade (obviously prepared to defend their property). A couple of kids on bikes lazily entered the street at around 2pm. Nothing happened. Later on the street was quiet and the police had left.

However, that rumour about Wavelengths that was doing the rounds yesterday had meanwhile turned to reality. We have been told that around 2pm whilst the high street waited for the next onslaught, a bunch of kids swarmed into Wavelengths and proceeded to piss in the pool.

Transpontine has written up his stroll round the neighbourhood today and ends with a story from The Times in 1886 about some rumoured Deptford riots.

Meanwhile, amidst the lockdown, we hear that around 40 people joined this evening in the high street at around 8.30pm for an informal "We Love Deptford High Street" gathering (organised by those folk from Socialcentre Plus)...

Tenants have no water for 3 days while London burns

Tenants in Wilshaw House have been without water since Friday. No water to flush the loo. No water in the bathroom.

The problem was reported on Friday. Today someone came and parked their Lewisham Homes van outside 41-60 Wilshaw House, leaving the engine running for half an hour (are they pretending they're stuck in traffic somewhere?) whilst they sat inside the van chatting on the phone. Result? Still no water.

Meanwhile, London's Burning. But not, as yet, in Deptford. A Greggs in Peckham was set on fire which Channel 4 claimed was in Deptford High Street. There's not a lot of any value to loot in Deptford, but an hour or so after the misreporting by Channel 4 (and the resulting hyperbole on Twitter), the windows of the HSBC were smashed and a bin was turned over. Oh, and Tescos.

Shutters were down on almost all shops by about 6pm, and at around 8.45pm when this blogger went to take a look, there were just a few rubberneckers, some with quite flashy cameras, hanging around outside the HSBC, some walking freely up and down the high street. A group of kids seemed to be waiting for some action, and a couple of boys on bikes were hanging about in the road at the Ladbrokes end. Someone said they'd seen a Twitter post about a proposed attack on Wavelengths, but this was part of the same hype about the fire at Greggs (what are they going to do at Wavelengths, go for a swim?).

We dearly hope the high street is not subjected to arson later on, but we are quite happy to see all the bookies looted.

Brockley Central has been doing a fine job of keeping local people updated. It appears there has been some looting in New Cross but Twitter hype about the Venue being alight are (unfortunately) false. Some comments are a bit Daily Mail, but some are very funny, even though this isn't really a laughing matter.

10.30pm: a friend who lives on the high street reports small gangs of black youth have been gathering. No police up till now. It's all going on up at the HSBC and about to kick off with one lone police wagon.

Whilst slightly fearing for our friend's life should a fire break out, we agree that there are three major and obvious things about all this:
1. There's a Tory government
2. It's the SCHOOL HOLIDAYS.
3. Torys cut Youth Projects and Youth Clubs and Youth Provision.

11.00pm: Kicked off in Woolwich. Had to leave the house.



2pm: Back after a recce...Sick of television coverage, we had gone to join the onlookers at the high street. A car was on fire in Douglas Square. It appeared to have been er..taken away from the Chinese takeaway nearby, since a calm but obviously disturbed Chinese lady seemed to be the owner. Police stood in a group outside the HSBC with a van further down outside Barclays. The burning car was still on fire but smouldering like a neglected and dying bonfire.

We found that considerably more damage had taken place than we'd previously seen earlier on. The tally at this point was: HSBC, Barclays, Greggs, Samuel jewellers next to Corals, HandT Pawnbrokers, Fish Brothers Pawnbrokers, Ladbrokes, and Tescos. It seems the attacks had been sporadic (but well aimed for political statement, financial advantage and sugar rush) – Greggs had been raided at around 8pm but we'd not noticed when we saw the windows at the HSBC earlier.

We met a Deptfordian who works in Peckham who told us it was completely nuts in Peckham – anybody and everybody were just walking out of shops with anything they liked. He was drinking from a can he'd found on the pavement in Rye Lane. He'd been chatting to a Jamaican shopkeeper there who had suggested some Asian shopkeepers might be 'taking advantage of the situation'. That is something that'll never be televised. Unlike the old lady telling them all off in Hackney:



We debated the question of bored youth (he is a youth worker) but he said it was everyone, not just the youth, who were looting in Peckham. But he agreed the loss of the EMA didn't help.

We walked down the street. The police, who initially had been on guard, were more relaxed and not bothering to stop anyone taking photographs, or stop anyone passing. They were guarding the banks, Greggs and HandT pawnbrokers. It turned out that some places had been robbed but owners had managed to pull down broken shutters after the event. We were pleased to see that no one was guarding William Hills further down, the door front opened out with a sheet of broken glass.

Tescos had broken windows but appeared to be secured, with first floor windows boarded up. Which begs the question, why were the police still having to guard the other places at taxpayers' cost?

We chatted with a couple of shopkeepers who were standing outside their own premises. Having survived the looting, one had sent his family to stay somewhere else and faced a sleepless night fearing an arson attack, whilst the other had called in a van load of family and friends to stand guard. You really wouldn't want to mess with those guys.

We got chatting opposite Tescos to a couple of white guys who were on their way home from town, and were joined by a young mixed raced couple on bikes. The first two were asking the question Why? What's going on? It's not just black kids surely? We put it to the young couple who were obviously local. They said it's cos everyone's bored, and because the kids have lost their EMA.

But how come the kids know which places to attack, we asked – not just the obvious looting targets like Currys etc but impossible places like banks and food places like Tescos? They said they'd got a message on BB last weekend about where to meet and what to do, like everyone knew where to go and when, and this wasn't the end of it.

We mentioned Birmingham and Croydon. Birmingham, the girl said, was mad, they were very bad in Birmingham, they'd attacked a children's hospital, that was really bad. (?) It would be Bromley tomorrow and she reeled off a list, and it could go on all summer. They had an invincible air about them. Maybe there's some new drugs we don't know about. It surely couldn't be politics giving these young people that whizzy self confidence.

As we walked away, we wondered how kids who couldn't survive without the £35 a week EMA could afford Blackberrys. If BBs were that cheap, maybe we should get one? But, it seemed perhaps you only need one person with one among many to spread the word....We speculated on the nature of viral messages: that it must be pot luck whether your BB owner and message recipient was a leader of people (possibly even a designated and recognised lieutenant of a potential army, or a gang leader) or just a loudmouth showoff...or maybe just someone charismatic and influential....or a copper....

We walked back up the street and bumped into some neighbours and went to their flat for a beer. In true Deptford style, the appropriate music went on to accompany the rolling news (though unfortunately these neighbours were far too sophisticated to put on The Clash or else they had already played them earlier). By then trouble had started in Liverpool. We didn't fancy the police's chances there. A shopping list had probably been scrawled on Friday night. It was cheering to see Camden was finally in the mix. Media panic and Notting Hill coming up, oooh scary.

We debated who were behind the Blackberry messages...We looked on Facebook, someone said "Gangsters at the top, gangstas at the bottom". Hmm. And,  "Cameron's coming home to his Big Society...The Big Rioty Society"...plus there were the usual japes from the Daily Mash: "With the economy plunging once more into the abyss, middle income professionals keen to maintain their standard of living are now learning how to smash a really big window, grab a Dualit toaster and run like fuck."

Another post caught our eye: "Money-Free Shopping: At last the working class have re-entered the arena. BIG TIME. THE REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH IN TORY BRITAIN HAS BEGUN! LOOT NOW WHILE SHOPS LAST! The SHOPPING WITHOUT MONEY craze swept across London overnight – and likely to spread to the rest of FIRESALE UK over the next few days. While the Tory toffs holiday in Tuscany effective wealth redistribution is taking place...''

Whilst we warmed to the sentiment, we wondered if the whole thing might be a covert operation to rehearse the police for 2012 and security measures beyond (had the police really failed or are they just underfunded?), or a clever terrorist attack (no message other than anti-capitalism that has harnessed and exposed the true nature of street capitalism). Either way, it wouldn't be long before tear gas or the army had to be brought in. The agonising analysis that the media and the chattering classes will now indulge in must surely be a cue for a holiday.

Back at home, the pictures on the Beeb of the activity in Woolwich are horrific, mainly frightening because of the armoured police vehicles employed. Thank God Deptford has not had to go through that (crossing fingers and touching wood). They tried to make me go to Woolwich but I said No, No, No. 853 Blog has some footage. Here's one of the shocking videos he's posted:



It reminds us that some people have been missing a football season all summer. It's just about to start again, is it not?


Here is a map of London Burning.

Doilum has some pix of Deptford – he got there a bit earlier than us. Here are ours...

Starting at around 8.45pm, HSBC has a brick positioned to show you the best way to keep your money safe...

 

Burning car in Douglas Square

 Police guard HSBC and Barclays

 Empty jewellery boxes from H Samuel's

 Greggs plundered for doughnuts and crisps

 H and T Pawnbrokers

 Doughnut tray, crisp packets and jewellery boxes

 Just one small flame now in the headlight

Move along there - Police notebook - Betfred update

This week, Crosswhatfields was contacted by a Reuter's UK Equities editor for our view on the betting shop situation. This suggests there may be concern among the many investors in the area about the direction our high street is taking with the advent of yet another betting shop.

Whilst some may scorn the arrival of the developers, perhaps they may prove influential in halting the decline. And pigs may fly.

New people are moving into Greenwich SE8 (ha, ha) and finding not much to do locally without fear of being mugged and the value of their property plummeting. Although Lewisham planners are going large on regenerating the business heart of Lewisham town centre with their massive development on Lewisham Vale, it has always seemed that in Deptford they were merely building a dormitory from which city workers would be able escape on the DLR every day and not come home till they were ready for bed.

Meanwhile, look away now if you are of a nervous disposition or are about to renew your insurance premiums. We've been on the police.uk website looking at the Deptford crime map...It's December 2010 and it's not looking good for Creekside or the High Street.

On the No To Betfred campaign trail, we tried to get in touch with our local neighbourhood police, since one of the grounds for objecting to a Betting Licence application is to link gambling with crime and disorder.

Surely they would be able to confirm that the high street was getting a bit messy with an increase in begging, petty theft, street drinking, drug dealing and antisocial behaviour mainly outside betting shops, and this was increasing their workload unnecessarily? I mean, we don't want to exaggerate the crime in the area because it makes residents fearful and businesses suffer, but honestly, it is getting worse, isn't it, and don't you feel frustrated that the law in its present form that allows betting shops to open up whereever whenever makes it harder for you to do your job?

Oh, and by the way, how is it you were up on Ha'Penny Hatch three days running but not when someone got mugged (but that's another story)....

Notice in the following maps, if you dare, that there's a lot of stuff going on in side streets, ie just off the high street, in the dark, round the corner from a bookies.

14th January:

Three weeks ago, we emailed the New Cross Safer Neighbourhood Team (SNT) to ask if they could provide us with any statistics of incidents that related directly or indirectly to betting shops, since shopkeepers, traders and the local community were witnessing an increase in crime that they perceive is related to betting shops.

We asked that they treat our enquiry with some urgency since we hoped to include any information they could provide in an objection to the latest Betting Licence application by Betfred that had to be in by January 19th.

We also noted that many petty thefts were not reported by local shopkeepers because of the disruption in business that was caused. For instance staff in Greggs the bakers had been told by head office not to confront the daily shoplifting by junkies barging through the lunchtime queue (full of local schoolkids) to the cold cabinet to steal sandwiches. Other shops sometimes catch a thief red-handed only to end up in a totally embarrassing scene fighting outside their premises with their thief. Many shopkeepers quietly watch a shoplifter take a small item and go straight to the bookies opposite.

The shopkeeper inevitably finds another way to compensate for the loss, and suddenly something that was £1.99 is £2.10. Of course in the present climate, no one is surprised to see the 99p shop selling items at £1.20. In the present climate, the dry cleaner is paying 4 times as much for his dry cleaning fluid as he did last year, but cannot increase his prices without losing customers. He's never had a competitor because up till now Deptford folk can't afford to dry clean that often. God forbid there might be people who want it all the time, because if word gets out and with Lewisham Planning in (read: out of) control, before long there could be wall-to-wall dry cleaners. Or not. That's his fear and his fantasy and his dread. His offering of sewing and mending could keep him unique, but...

Meanwhile, amidst the downturn, a high street selling it cheap might do better where bargains are to be had. That has always been Deptford's secret. But new shoppers and visitors are unlikely to return and loyal shoppers unlikely to report to the police the number of times they have been asked for money by numerous beggars, and how they found it unpleasant. The more well travelled the resident or visitor, perhaps the more compartmentalised they may treat their visit to the high street, they'll be used to the begging in third world countries, but they may find it rather shocking that it is a young Chinese or Vietnamese boy poking them and then pointing to his mouth to be fed. They may even think it funny to be offered a stolen jar of coffee by a white geezer who looks like something out of Fools & Horses.

For the local community it is an enormous source of shame and it makes everyone who works there feel dirty. It's completely unsuitable for children.

But perhaps the Wire-style drug dealing outside betting shops (complete with overgrown boys on tiny bikes) hasn't quite got to the trendy levels it needs to get to achieve Brixton-like status yet...perhaps we need even more open drug dealing to make newcomers feel like they've found a funky new groove... 

Ten days later: 24th January:

We received a response from the "Business Support Unit". "Apologies for the late response...due to you sending this direct to the SNT mailbox".  (Er...that's the email address you give out on the Lewisham Met website). It then twittered: "Unfortunately we are unable to issue the information you requested."

We asked why this information wasn't available. The Haiku/Twitter answer: "Because you do not hold an Information Sharing Protocol with us."

We asked if it would be available to a Councillor, or a member of the Community Police Consultative Group? Could they point us in the right direction? No answer.

25th January:

We got a surprise email from the office of Freedom of Information Quality, Assurance and Compliance Team | Security Standards and Architecture | Directorate of Information | Public Access Office | Metropolitan Police Service (based in SW6).

It was a seemingly helpful email which said we'd been given the wrong information by the 'Business Support Unit' and that the Freedom of Information Act allows a right to request the information we had asked for, and if the question was framed in a different way, it may or may not be answered within 20 days. We were advised how to ask our question and to provide a list of the betting shops in question. We were also pointed to the Met Crime map (http://maps.met.police.uk/) which we already knew about, the London pre-trial to this week's new police.uk.

We followed his advice and got an acknowledgement the next day which confirmed we might not get the info we wanted, nor in 20 days.

It was already too late anyway. If someone had replied when our first email went to New Cross SNT, we might have had an answer in time for the hearing on 9th Feb, but we were already in the middle of a Kafkaesque nightmare just by choosing to object. Nothing was made easy by any authority we had to deal with including Lewisham Licensing, Lewisham councillors, Lewisham Council, let alone the police. Faced with such fuckwittery it could only get better.

The only good news was finding out what other boroughs in north London are doing to combat the problem, more in another post. Locally it got worse. It was possibly the worst week to try and get information out of the police when they were too busy giving information out.

26th January:

We had also been advised by the FOI chap that we might contact our local SNTs via Lewisham Police station and were given a special email address, which we duly followed up. The Information & IT Support Manager at Lewisham Police Station replied: "The contact for the local SNT Teams can be found on the Lewisham page of the MPS website." (Yes, we tried that 2 weeks ago, we've been in a complete circle, mate)..."I have copied your emails to the two police sergeants for New Cross and Evelyn Wards."
(Ta ra-a-a!)

27th January:

The sergeant at Evelyn SNT replied that he'd be happy to meet or talk over the phone. We arranged to meet at his convenience on 31st January at the Evelyn SNT office. Nothing from New Cross SNT.

31st January:

The sergeant was friendly but more than a little distracted by the ongoing walkie-talkie conversations of his PCSOs who had just gone out on a recce. He was rather noncommittal about crime on the high street and how it related to betting shops on his beat, which are the north of the high street and in the Evelyn triangle plus one nearer Surrey Quays (6 in all but spread out). We pointed out that with reference to the Met's crime map, crime had risen in the north of the high street in December. He said that it was a 'spike' and that when they got the perpetrators who were usually the same well known faces and put them away, crime went down. Then when these people got out of jail after a short sentence, crime would spike again. He would say nothing about the south of the high street (even though we have seen him patrol it).

"What group do you represent?" asked the sergeant. Er, the high street and everyone who uses it? The PC with us during the conversation gave us a fridge magnet with their phone number on it. The number is 020 7161 9390.

Funnily enough it is the same number as the Lewisham Met website gives out for New Cross SNT. We called it later. It rang for a long time and no one answered. The same website gives a mobile number to ring (07843 065920). A ringing tone ended in disconnection.

1st February:

We rang the New Cross SNT number again (which is also the number given to us by Evelyn SNT). Finally came the answer, "Hello, Casualty Bureau, Hendon".

Sorry, wrong number, dial again. The same cheerful Geordie we now know as Dexie at Hendon Met Casualty said he'd been having a lot of misdirected calls.

Since the new Crime Mapping site had just gone online and crashed, it didn't seem surprising that other Met communications were fucking up.

Back to the Lewisham Met website page. According to the website, the New Cross team would be having a "Drop in Surgery" at DAGE in Deptford High Street between 10 and 11am the next day. We couldn't make that so we thought we'd go to their next surgery at Sainsbury's in New Cross 1-2pm the same day.

We emailed the New Cross team copying in the sergeant at Evelyn, saying we'd try and catch the New Cross sergeant at Sainsbury's the next day at their "drop in surgery" and if the New Cross sergeant wasn't going to be there could he please email back.

2nd February:

Nothing from the New Cross sergeant. We went down at 1.30pm to Sainsbury's. No one there. Sainsbury's Customer Services had FUCK ALL in their diary to do with the Safer Neighbourhood Team, they knew nothing about it. The car park was devoid of any signs or police officers.

Luckily it was not a wasted journey since before venturing out we had thought to empty the 2 year piggy bank savings of 1p and 2p pieces and deposit them in the coin exchange machine onsite. It was eerily similar to the sound of a gambling slot machine as the coins clattered in and began registering not just the estimated £5, but maybe £7, and then we passed £10 to get to the grand total of £14.98.

The machine takes 9p in every £1, so it's probably not the best way of saving, but you don't have to bag it up like you'd have to at your bank. Despite the shocking rate of interest it was a bonus, and there was enormously enjoyable irony in this particular exchange: we came to find coppers and found none, but we brought some with us and turned them into fifteen quid.

Back in Deptford we had to go and put a petition in The Albany. A week before, the marketing officer there had refused to have it. "If we take your petition, we'll have to take everyone's" was the line at the time. Now their position had changed, thanks to the intervention of someone more senior.

On the way, in the Douglas Way market, we spotted a couple of bobbies. Sorry, I mean New Cross SNT PCs. We pounced. "We've just been up at Sainsbury's looking for you and you weren't there!". Yes we were, they said. No you weren't, we said, we've just been there. "We were there from midday till 1pm". Er, that's not what it says on the Lewisham SNT website, we pointed out, but no matter, we have you now! "What did you want to see us about?" asked the PC who is like Dixon of Dock Green to Deptford High Street, everyone knows him.

We wanted to ask your sergeant to make a statement about how all the stuff that's going on now in the high street is linked to the betting shops. "Oh yes," both PCs nodded, "it's a problem, but why did you want a statement?"....because we've put in an objection to the new Betfred and we need back up from you guys..."Oh yes," they nodded, "we don't want that, last year we all of us made statements against the betting shop at the Deptford Arms, each one of us"...

WHAT??!!! Oh, so d'you think if we ring your sergeant he'll be able to have you do the same thing again? "Well you can try, give him a ring on...020 7161 9390"

No man, that number's fucked. "No, it's the right number, really, here's a card"...and he gives me a postcard with the number clearly printed on it.

OK, now we've been getting Hendon Casualty all week on that number, we're practically going out with Dexie now, we've had more conversations than most people have on any online dating service before they get married. Not that we don't want to talk to Dexie, but maybe the Met has sorted the exchange problems and we can talk to the sergeant at New Cross SNT now?

During and after another meeting (a living must be earned), we ring 020 7161 9390. No answer. And then Hello, Casualty Hendon. Dexie again. We promise not to ring him again, nothing personal.

He gives us another number. He's reported the problem and he's been given the number of Brockley SNT. We ring the number 020 8649 3599. It goes dead. 

Later on we try to find out how much the council gets paid from Betting Licences, based on a casual comment from Evelyn Ward SNT. We make online contact with Cllr Bell, hoping for a sane voice. We end up gravely insulting Cllr Bell over a completely unrelated but equally blood boiling matter.

3rd February:

Fuck'em all. Who's in charge? A load of fuckwits. Spend the day with people who agree with this general theme.

4th February:

We look at Lewisham Met website again. See a general number 0300 123 1212 that you must call if you don't want to call 999. Trust the connection will be to a central London Met exchange, so must be good enough even if we get sent round the houses.

Whoah! 0300 123 1212 gets straight through to New Cross SNT, how can I help you? though it's more like "Yeah, what do you want? You're getting in my face."


Well actually, can you ask Sergeant Mark Alger to answer his email, it's now become quite urgent. The situation was explained to the PCSO. He'll call you back, he'll answer his email when he's not busy, she said.

He didn't. Bad timing yet again. A big fire at Marine Tower, two dead, as we later found out.


Later. Looked at the spanking all new police.uk and see that the 0300 123 1212 number is quoted as the number to ring for New Cross SNT. All the numbers we've been given all week by team members are completely redundant. They don't even know themselves about this number. It's not on any fridge magnet.

Heard the sirens and saw ambulances earlier when trying to cross Deptford Church Street on way to Creek Road. Now Lewisham Homes will be in trauma as well as the Met, since it could've been a gas explosion?

Apologised for being rude to local councillor who has found out for us that Lewisham presently charge £2400 per application and a measly £480 annual fee.

Received details and papers from the Hearing Officer re Hearing for Betfred on Wednesday 9th Feb.
Includes Betfred's response to seven people's objections. Betfred have countered every objection rather predictably on the grounds that if there is antisocial behaviour, crime or whatever on the street related to other betting shops it's because the other firms aren't running a clean shop.

They on the other hand are going to run the cleanest shop ever. Nothing is going to go wrong INSIDE their shop. Anything that goes on outside is not their problem.

They fail to acknowledge who their potential customers are. And that is surely going to be a share of the clientele already using the other betting shops who supposedly manage things so badly.

Hanging out on the street annoying other people is what their potential customers do now. Why would they change their behaviour when they go into a Betfred?

Betfred can certainly blame other bookies for the present sorry state of affairs, however. When Paddy Power took over the Deptford Arms there ceased to be a place on the high street for Betfred's potential punters to go and spend time in a 'supervised and appropriate' environment. The only pubs left are now on the main road away from the more mainstream life of the high street that allowed more integration for a wider range of folk from all walks of life which to a certain extent curbed excesses. And those main road pubs are even further from the centre of the high street, so it can be assumed that with no pubs in sight that street drinking will prevail even more so around Betfred. And what can we expect at night? A return to mugging alley that the corner of HSBC used to be?

The agenda for the Licensing Committee on Wednesday 9th to also include putting up the Licensing Fee to maximum allowed by law to £3000 application and £600 annual fee. It's all chicken feed to the betting companies. We note that Lewisham think it worth noting that increasing the fee brings in extra £14000. Pathetic. That's half a holiday for Barry Quirk. But maybe enough to fight the next betting shop in court.

In desperation at not hearing from the New Cross SNT, we rang the New Cross Ward councillors, Padmore, Maslin and Long. All absent and useless as usual, except Padmore who was quick to recommend the others.

Noted that Betfred says in its application that out of all the bodies initially informed of their request for a licence (not the public) ABSOLUTELY NO ONE OBJECTED INCLUDING METROPOLITAN LICENSING.
Helpful Cllr Bell, despite not being at all well, suggested calling Lewisham Met Licensing to find out why they didn't object to the application. He's been told SNTs can only be 'consulted' but Met Licensing can 'object'. We conclude phone call at 4.45pm. Called Met Licensing but got ansaphone cos their office closed at 4pm.

Noted that only other case to be heard at same hearing on Wednesday 9th Feb is Sydenham supermarket trying to get 24hr booze licence and that only objection is from Safer Neighbourhood Team with 10-page report on crime and antisocial behaviour stats for the area.
Cllr Bell said liquor licence is different. Police are allowed more powers to intervene. The Gambling Law has to change.

Question: Who are the magistrates that preside over appeals?
Question: Why are there so many players (including some friends and politicians who refuse to sign petition) in this ridiculous charade?
Question: Why is this Human Rights clause included in the "Mandatory conditions forming part of the licence" when it is surely meaningless:

4. Legal and Human Rights implications

4.1 Licensing Authorities as defined by the Gambling Act 2005 section 1
(a) are public authorities for the purposes of the Human Rights Act
1998. Accordingly, they are under a duty to act compatibly with
convention rights in the exercise of their functions.

4.2 Article 6(1) of the Convention provides that everyone is entitled to a fair
and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and
impartial hearing established by law.

4.3 The right to apply for a licence falls within the scope of civil rights and
obligations in Article 6 (1) because it relates to the applicants’ right to
make a living and pursue commercial activity. Therefore, an applicant
for such a licence has the right to have the application determined fairly
in accordance with the guarantees contained within Article 6(1). Thus a
licence is considered to be a possession for the purposes of the
Human Rights Act 1998.

4.4 However, the right to hold a such licence is not absolute. It is a
“qualified right”. So, where the grant of a licence may affect the
interests of local residents or others, in a significant way, then article 6
(1) will be engaged. The right to hold a licence may be lawfully
interfered with where, for instance, it is in the interests of wider society
to do so.

4.5 Objectors’ rights under article 6(1) will not automatically be triggered
merely because they wish to object. The question of whether they have
a sufficient interest to engage is ultimately a question of fact.

4.6 The grant or refusal of a licence may also raise issues under article 8,
right to private and family life, article 10, freedom of expression, or
article 1 of Protocol 1 , right to peaceful enjoyment of possession. The
rights guaranteed by articles 8-11 of the Convention, are not absolute
rights. In the same way as the right to a licence is a qualified right, so
are these other rights referred to above.

4.7 Qualified rights may therefore be interfered with, provided the
interference is justified according to the conditions set out within each
article. So such interference must be legal, necessary in a democratic
society and there must be a reasonable relationship of “proportionality
between the means employed and the aim pursued”. The principle of
proportionality involves the striking of a fair balance between the
demands of the general interest of the community and the
requirements of the protection of the individual’s fundamental rights.

Move along, please, nothing to see here....

I thought I'd give the new police.uk local crime map a look.  My post code doesn't appear to be on it, though.  Has anybody had any more luck?

 

Hello Marmoset, Sue here, sorry to barge in on your post...

I thought you only had to put your postcode, Marmoset! But anyway, it crashed when I tried it, and I had lots of trouble with other websites afterwards, probably because of the general surge in traffic (Radio 4 said it was similar to the problems incurred during the swine flue epidemic, and when Take That tickets went on sale etc!)...ie, millions of hits per minute.

Meanwhile, I've been looking at crime in our area here: maps.met.police.uk/, ever since the Deptford Dame posted about it last May (deptforddame.blogspot.com/2009/05/crime-mapping.html). *

The Met are also reorganising the Safer Neighbourhood Teams, although not in our area. But the Met's phone exchange has also gone haywire – when I tried to call New Cross SNT today I got through to Casualty at Hendon Met, and the team's mobile phone number was dead...

Also new (to me, at least) is that the SN Teams are having 'surgeries' and 'drop-ins' in local places if you want to talk to your local team...see the Lewisham Met page www.met.police.uk/teams/lewisham/newcross/index.php (details at the bottom).

*This site is also having problems. But here's what I got a moment ago (6.30pm) looking at Personal Robbery for December 2010.

There's also a category called "Robbery - Other (not Residential)" and that has Crossfields in the "high" area...not sure how this is different to personal robbery...