Harringay online

Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!

Murder Investigation Launched after Body Found in Finsbury Park

Following the discovery of a body at the edge of the old cricket pitch in Finsbury Park, the Metropolitan Police have concluded that a person died in suspicious circumstances and have launched a murder inquiry.

The police believe that the young woman who was found died on Christmas Eve. The body was relatively well hidden by the old equipment hut so it remained hidden until today.

While the surrounding 'scene' is  searched for any possible evidence, the whole American Gardens section of the park is closed including the Endymion Road entrance along with the one next to the old cricket pitch on Green Lanes. 

Views: 11797

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Nobody sticks up for geographic features around here and people seem to think it's bizarre when I say "A MAN DID IT!!! NOT THE PARK!!!".

So it might look like I am "peppering" this conversation with "strange comments" to you but you're just doing your usual thing of not thinking very hard.

Most murdered women are killed in their own homes by their partners.

So that just confirms John's point. It's not the homes that are dangerous: it's their partners.

Tris, you're not really playing nicely here. You could have said "from your comments" but you couldn't resist getting in the snarky "from your muddled comments". You're just not someone I can ever see myself chatting to in real life so I don't know why I bother chatting to you here but here goes anyway:

Thank you for agreeing that the park was not the problem but now you've moved on to a building in the park! It's as if men don't exist or that you are presuming we should cater for their violent and sadistic behaviour by giving them fewer opportunities to carry it out. Keep thinking along those lines for a bit.

Tris, if these issues are so complex, why do you have such a simple point of view on them? Your agenda is "the park", I can see that from other postings you have made. I fear you're just using this sad event to further your agenda - in fact this confirms it for me when you say "but your repeated opposition to any discussion around making the park safer needs to be challenged".

You're going to "make the park safer" and we're going to "lose amenity",

I think that’s an important issue that needs addressing urgently.  The problem right now is that being in the park is perceived as unsafe so people stop using it.  As people stop using it it becomes more attractive to those wishing to engage in crime and anti-social behaviour so perceptions of danger increase and even fewer people use it and on and on.  That cycle needs breaking now because places always feel (and probably are) safer when populated.  The idea of the park becoming a no go area fills me with horror.

Actually I think they should remove the fencing and have it open like Clapham Common (I expect there’s some byelaw against this). The park feels quite isolated to me as it’s flanked by very busy roads with few people walking by apart from on green lanes. The hill in the middle also means you can’t see around the park but not much we can do about that. To be honest it’s not a particularly pleasant park and if I have the choice I’d rather stay on the bus for 5 mins and go to Clissold.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, get rid or move the cricket/softball pitch and open a new entrance on the corner diagonally opposite Homebase. Much easier access for Haringey Council residents, less isolated for anti social behaviour and crime.

I agree about the corner entrance. I suggested it on HoL ten years ago and promptly put the nose of the London Mets baseball coach out of joint. Coach Neil has deleted his comments now, but I think he explained that the London Mets lease that part of the park and they weren't willing to open any new entrances.

But we weren't the first calling for this. It was first being demanded by our Edwardian forebears over a hundred years ago.

I did wonder what the original Park covenants have to say about this semi-prvatisation of part of the Park - or perhaps, formally, the cricket ground isn't part of the park as constituted in 1867.

I think this is an interesting question, not just the original park covenants, but the current ones.

Without prejudice to the baseball folks- who I do not know- I am not sure anyone should have de-facto right of veto/control over a public asset such that the park's utilsation to the benefit of the whole community can be nixxed by any one group...

RSS

Advertising

© 2024   Created by Hugh.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service