I can’t get my head round this scheme being run by the local Neighbourhood Watch. Are they going to round up all the troublemakers (‘Hey kids, come to our new youth hub’) and then just lock them in the crate so they can go home and watch Emmerdale in peace, without having their houses egged and their wing mirrors ripped off?
Depher /CPH CIC #4 Burnley Council have an approved list and Depher is not on it
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Depher Threads
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I’m completely confused as I didn’t think this was in the remit of neighbourhood watch at all? I’ve tried looking at the national website and can’t find anything to say it is. It’s all about reporting issues.
Have I missed something? Has anyone contacted Neighbourhood watch to find out?
And again, why not use the Railway club?
Have I missed something? Has anyone contacted Neighbourhood watch to find out?
And again, why not use the Railway club?
They're literally operating under the outdated and simplistic belief that antisocial behaviour is because "there's nothing for the kids to do!" And that by providing a shipping container presumably full of activities, everything will be all good.
Is it wrong to hope the kiddies tear the wing mirrors off the container
James is sadfishing this morning lol womp womp
Attachments
Those boomer memes are always shared by the biggest thundercunts
There’s that too. It’s far more complex than that. I’m not sure that there’s any research to support putting a shipping container on a carpark next to a bar will help youth/ solve ASB.
Let the kids have a little shandy that’ll sort em out
Only thing she’s smoking is 40 a day 
Attachments
Using donations for absolutely anything except plumbing still then.
No doubt he’ll pop up to say the tin box was built with the profits from paid work again although he’s already spent that money 100 times over
No doubt he’ll pop up to say the tin box was built with the profits from paid work again although he’s already spent that money 100 times over
On the subject of photos James needs to be very careful. I run a charity and we ask up front if photos can be shared in our groups and on the website.
Recently a national bank who had put some funding in for us asked if they could share a photo from our website to show what they do for communities. We had to ask the family involved all over again because clearly their agreement was with us and not the bank.
Family were fine with it but we would never have agreed it without asking first - the family have now signed an agreement with the bank involved and are happy. The bank agreement included where the photo would be shown (locally) and how long for plus their procedures for deleting images once the short campaign finishes.
So no James - just because families have agreed with one charity doesn't mean you have a free for all.
Recently a national bank who had put some funding in for us asked if they could share a photo from our website to show what they do for communities. We had to ask the family involved all over again because clearly their agreement was with us and not the bank.
Family were fine with it but we would never have agreed it without asking first - the family have now signed an agreement with the bank involved and are happy. The bank agreement included where the photo would be shown (locally) and how long for plus their procedures for deleting images once the short campaign finishes.
So no James - just because families have agreed with one charity doesn't mean you have a free for all.
Do you take pho
Especially as it will have anti-vandal stickers all over it. Too tempting.
It can't just be me that sees a 'wet paint' sign and has to check?
ETA: no idea why I didn't finish or send the top bit
Last edited:
Theres such a weird narc-y belligerence to the withholding deleting the photos of CHILDREN that gives me the heeby-jeebies. If I was in that situation and there was even the slightest whiff of there not being full consent for a photo being shared it would be straight off, because if it turned out it was OK you can just repost it?
He's up on his Facebook giving a non-apology video where he confesses absolutely nothing then manipulatively asks his audience if they want DEPHER to continue because he's "saved lives"
Uploaded there. YouTube normally provides a transcript when it's done processing and you should be able to watch x2 speed to minimise exposure to the mouth smacking noises.
Uploaded there. YouTube normally provides a transcript when it's done processing and you should be able to watch x2 speed to minimise exposure to the mouth smacking noises.
This this this 100%. It's allll ego with this guy.
He’ll be right back to the suicide baiting whenever this BBC thing airs guaranteed
Wow. So whatever this upcoming BBC thing is, it must be big if Jimmy is flapping his gums ahead of time? Good.
He’s spending ever such a lot of time apologising considering he never thinks he’s done anything wrong. Like the other day and the hour (and a few minutes) between ‘we’ve made safeguarding mistakes *sad face*’ and ‘I won’t take down the pictures of the child because I don’t recall being asked to *pokey tongue face, stamps foot*’
He did jump on tiktok a week or so back to do the same and then subsequently deleted it which is why I screenrecorded and uploaded this one.
He actually suggests in the video he chose video because it's harder to twist his words. I think he's banking on it being "harder" to archive and the be confronted with when the truth comes out.
He actually suggests in the video he chose video because it's harder to twist his words. I think he's banking on it being "harder" to archive and the be confronted with when the truth comes out.
I still have those TT ones but can’t for the life of me compress them or upload them anywhere, but they basically say the same.
- Status