Two caravans stolen from Lewes camping ground

First published in News
Last updated

Two caravans have been stolen in Seaford after thieves forced their way into a caravan park.

Entry was gained to the Buckle Caravan and Camping Ground sometime between 10.20pm and 10.50pm on Wednesday evening by forcing the gate open.

No vehicles were seen but it is thought the stolen caravans were towed away separately.

Sergeant Stuart Mullins said; "In view of the weather conditions it would have been very unusual to have been moving a caravan and we are appealing for any potential witnesses to try and identify the vehicles used to move them."

One caravan was a white Compasse Rally 635, valued at £6000, and the other one was a white Luna Freelander four-berth valued at £7500.

Police in Seaford are appealing and anyone with information is asked to contact the police on 101 or via email to 101@sussex.pnn.police.uk quoting serial 1496 or 12/2.
 

You can also call the independent charity Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800555111.

Comments (17)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:42pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Indigatio says...

I wonder if they have been moved to Preston Park :-)
I wonder if they have been moved to Preston Park :-) Indigatio
  • Score: 12

2:40pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Bill in Hanover says...

Indigatio wrote:
I wonder if they have been moved to Preston Park :-)
Have you noticed that the Argus blocks any comments from articles about the 'travelling community' either the community is a major advertiser for the newspaper or the Editor is scared witless of any repurcussions to adverse comments.
[quote][p][bold]Indigatio[/bold] wrote: I wonder if they have been moved to Preston Park :-)[/p][/quote]Have you noticed that the Argus blocks any comments from articles about the 'travelling community' either the community is a major advertiser for the newspaper or the Editor is scared witless of any repurcussions to adverse comments. Bill in Hanover
  • Score: 16

2:59pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Serf says...

Bill in Hanover wrote:
Indigatio wrote:
I wonder if they have been moved to Preston Park :-)
Have you noticed that the Argus blocks any comments from articles about the 'travelling community' either the community is a major advertiser for the newspaper or the Editor is scared witless of any repurcussions to adverse comments.
Freedom of speech being denied. Comments regarding travellers should be allowed unless they are offensive.
[quote][p][bold]Bill in Hanover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Indigatio[/bold] wrote: I wonder if they have been moved to Preston Park :-)[/p][/quote]Have you noticed that the Argus blocks any comments from articles about the 'travelling community' either the community is a major advertiser for the newspaper or the Editor is scared witless of any repurcussions to adverse comments.[/p][/quote]Freedom of speech being denied. Comments regarding travellers should be allowed unless they are offensive. Serf
  • Score: 11

3:16pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Indigatio says...

Firstly, mu comment was a light hearted windup to see how long it took before the Argus deletes it.
Secondly I queried this point with the Argus some while ago, they are basically scared of being sued. How they can be sued for other peoples comments I don't know but then I'm not a lawyer.
Freedom of Speech is being denied but it is the Argus's website forum so I suppose they can write the rules. It is also a great shame that there are some out there who cannot have a reasoned argue over this issue without get hateful and spiteful, but then that's life.
Firstly, mu comment was a light hearted windup to see how long it took before the Argus deletes it. Secondly I queried this point with the Argus some while ago, they are basically scared of being sued. How they can be sued for other peoples comments I don't know but then I'm not a lawyer. Freedom of Speech is being denied but it is the Argus's website forum so I suppose they can write the rules. It is also a great shame that there are some out there who cannot have a reasoned argue over this issue without get hateful and spiteful, but then that's life. Indigatio
  • Score: 8

3:29pm Fri 14 Feb 14

earloflucan says...

two new caravans just seen entering preston park
two new caravans just seen entering preston park earloflucan
  • Score: 7

5:19pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Spx says...

Isreal claimed them, they're parked around the back of sodastream!
Isreal claimed them, they're parked around the back of sodastream! Spx
  • Score: -1

7:23pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Vigilia says...

Bill in Hanover wrote:
Indigatio wrote:
I wonder if they have been moved to Preston Park :-)
Have you noticed that the Argus blocks any comments from articles about the 'travelling community' either the community is a major advertiser for the newspaper or the Editor is scared witless of any repurcussions to adverse comments.
An extract from the public minutes of the Traveller Strategy Scrutiny Panel in 2011 explains the political pressure involved in this gagging of comment:
15E Michael Beard, Editor, Brighton & Hove Argus (MB)
15.19 Mr Beard answered panel members’ questions.
15.20 In response to a question asking whether the Argus’s recent extensive
coverage of Traveller issues exacerbated tensions in the city, MB told the
panel that the Argus was reacting to reader interest in Traveller issues which
had grown significantly in recent months. Indeed, the Argus received far more
stories and requests for stories about Travellers than it actually printed –
some of these requests coming from Councillors.
15.21 In answer to a question about the balance of the Argus’s coverage, MB
told members that the Argus strove to give balanced coverage of all issues,
attempting wherever possible to represent the full range of views.
15.22 MB added that he would have been happy to present the city council’s
views on aspects of Traveller issues, but had never been asked to do so by
the council’s leaders. PW interjected, assuring the panel that the council’s
administration had in fact approached the Argus with regard to its negative
coverage of Traveller issues. MB told PW that this was not the case.
15.23 In response to a question as to whether he was worried that the
Argus’s coverage might encourage racism, MB told members that this was a
concern, and that he was minded to bar reader comments on Traveller-related
articles on the Argus website, given the nature of some of the responses.
However, this had to be weighed against the media’s duty to report news.
15.24 Asked about his view of the public’s perception of the council’s stance
on Traveller issues, MB told the panel that after the change of administration
he felt there was a feeling the public did not understand the policy of the new
administration and that the change had led to a feeling is that the city was
more welcoming to Travellers.
15.25 PW made the point that unauthorised encampments were often
described as ‘illegal’ when in fact they were not so. MB agreed to consider the
terminology recommended by the Argus style guide in this respect.
[quote][p][bold]Bill in Hanover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Indigatio[/bold] wrote: I wonder if they have been moved to Preston Park :-)[/p][/quote]Have you noticed that the Argus blocks any comments from articles about the 'travelling community' either the community is a major advertiser for the newspaper or the Editor is scared witless of any repurcussions to adverse comments.[/p][/quote]An extract from the public minutes of the Traveller Strategy Scrutiny Panel in 2011 explains the political pressure involved in this gagging of comment: 15E Michael Beard, Editor, Brighton & Hove Argus (MB) 15.19 Mr Beard answered panel members’ questions. 15.20 In response to a question asking whether the Argus’s recent extensive coverage of Traveller issues exacerbated tensions in the city, MB told the panel that the Argus was reacting to reader interest in Traveller issues which had grown significantly in recent months. Indeed, the Argus received far more stories and requests for stories about Travellers than it actually printed – some of these requests coming from Councillors. 15.21 In answer to a question about the balance of the Argus’s coverage, MB told members that the Argus strove to give balanced coverage of all issues, attempting wherever possible to represent the full range of views. 15.22 MB added that he would have been happy to present the city council’s views on aspects of Traveller issues, but had never been asked to do so by the council’s leaders. PW interjected, assuring the panel that the council’s administration had in fact approached the Argus with regard to its negative coverage of Traveller issues. MB told PW that this was not the case. 15.23 In response to a question as to whether he was worried that the Argus’s coverage might encourage racism, MB told members that this was a concern, and that he was minded to bar reader comments on Traveller-related articles on the Argus website, given the nature of some of the responses. However, this had to be weighed against the media’s duty to report news. 15.24 Asked about his view of the public’s perception of the council’s stance on Traveller issues, MB told the panel that after the change of administration he felt there was a feeling the public did not understand the policy of the new administration and that the change had led to a feeling is that the city was more welcoming to Travellers. 15.25 PW made the point that unauthorised encampments were often described as ‘illegal’ when in fact they were not so. MB agreed to consider the terminology recommended by the Argus style guide in this respect. Vigilia
  • Score: 3

7:59pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Indigatio says...

Viglia, that explains a lot. Looks like the Council have succeeded in gagging the Argus, not good for a free press.
Who is PW.?
Viglia, that explains a lot. Looks like the Council have succeeded in gagging the Argus, not good for a free press. Who is PW.? Indigatio
  • Score: 1

8:29pm Fri 14 Feb 14

JHunty says...

Vigilia wrote:
Bill in Hanover wrote:
Indigatio wrote:
I wonder if they have been moved to Preston Park :-)
Have you noticed that the Argus blocks any comments from articles about the 'travelling community' either the community is a major advertiser for the newspaper or the Editor is scared witless of any repurcussions to adverse comments.
An extract from the public minutes of the Traveller Strategy Scrutiny Panel in 2011 explains the political pressure involved in this gagging of comment:
15E Michael Beard, Editor, Brighton & Hove Argus (MB)
15.19 Mr Beard answered panel members’ questions.
15.20 In response to a question asking whether the Argus’s recent extensive
coverage of Traveller issues exacerbated tensions in the city, MB told the
panel that the Argus was reacting to reader interest in Traveller issues which
had grown significantly in recent months. Indeed, the Argus received far more
stories and requests for stories about Travellers than it actually printed –
some of these requests coming from Councillors.
15.21 In answer to a question about the balance of the Argus’s coverage, MB
told members that the Argus strove to give balanced coverage of all issues,
attempting wherever possible to represent the full range of views.
15.22 MB added that he would have been happy to present the city council’s
views on aspects of Traveller issues, but had never been asked to do so by
the council’s leaders. PW interjected, assuring the panel that the council’s
administration had in fact approached the Argus with regard to its negative
coverage of Traveller issues. MB told PW that this was not the case.
15.23 In response to a question as to whether he was worried that the
Argus’s coverage might encourage racism, MB told members that this was a
concern, and that he was minded to bar reader comments on Traveller-related
articles on the Argus website, given the nature of some of the responses.
However, this had to be weighed against the media’s duty to report news.
15.24 Asked about his view of the public’s perception of the council’s stance
on Traveller issues, MB told the panel that after the change of administration
he felt there was a feeling the public did not understand the policy of the new
administration and that the change had led to a feeling is that the city was
more welcoming to Travellers.
15.25 PW made the point that unauthorised encampments were often
described as ‘illegal’ when in fact they were not so. MB agreed to consider the
terminology recommended by the Argus style guide in this respect.
The fact that there is a travellers strategy scrutiny panel tells you a lot.
The fact they called in an editor of a local newspaper to berate him for simply expressing the views of the public is extremely worrying.
[quote][p][bold]Vigilia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bill in Hanover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Indigatio[/bold] wrote: I wonder if they have been moved to Preston Park :-)[/p][/quote]Have you noticed that the Argus blocks any comments from articles about the 'travelling community' either the community is a major advertiser for the newspaper or the Editor is scared witless of any repurcussions to adverse comments.[/p][/quote]An extract from the public minutes of the Traveller Strategy Scrutiny Panel in 2011 explains the political pressure involved in this gagging of comment: 15E Michael Beard, Editor, Brighton & Hove Argus (MB) 15.19 Mr Beard answered panel members’ questions. 15.20 In response to a question asking whether the Argus’s recent extensive coverage of Traveller issues exacerbated tensions in the city, MB told the panel that the Argus was reacting to reader interest in Traveller issues which had grown significantly in recent months. Indeed, the Argus received far more stories and requests for stories about Travellers than it actually printed – some of these requests coming from Councillors. 15.21 In answer to a question about the balance of the Argus’s coverage, MB told members that the Argus strove to give balanced coverage of all issues, attempting wherever possible to represent the full range of views. 15.22 MB added that he would have been happy to present the city council’s views on aspects of Traveller issues, but had never been asked to do so by the council’s leaders. PW interjected, assuring the panel that the council’s administration had in fact approached the Argus with regard to its negative coverage of Traveller issues. MB told PW that this was not the case. 15.23 In response to a question as to whether he was worried that the Argus’s coverage might encourage racism, MB told members that this was a concern, and that he was minded to bar reader comments on Traveller-related articles on the Argus website, given the nature of some of the responses. However, this had to be weighed against the media’s duty to report news. 15.24 Asked about his view of the public’s perception of the council’s stance on Traveller issues, MB told the panel that after the change of administration he felt there was a feeling the public did not understand the policy of the new administration and that the change had led to a feeling is that the city was more welcoming to Travellers. 15.25 PW made the point that unauthorised encampments were often described as ‘illegal’ when in fact they were not so. MB agreed to consider the terminology recommended by the Argus style guide in this respect.[/p][/quote]The fact that there is a travellers strategy scrutiny panel tells you a lot. The fact they called in an editor of a local newspaper to berate him for simply expressing the views of the public is extremely worrying. JHunty
  • Score: 5

8:31pm Fri 14 Feb 14

JHunty says...

Indigatio wrote:
Viglia, that explains a lot. Looks like the Council have succeeded in gagging the Argus, not good for a free press.
Who is PW.?
Peter west?
[quote][p][bold]Indigatio[/bold] wrote: Viglia, that explains a lot. Looks like the Council have succeeded in gagging the Argus, not good for a free press. Who is PW.?[/p][/quote]Peter west? JHunty
  • Score: 2

8:40pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Roundbill says...

Maybe if, when Argus Bear publishes a story about travellers, everyone could, y'know, resist the urge to post anything blatantly racist for a few minutes, they might let us comment. His boss has told him he'll be in a lot of trouble if they allow anything unlawful: he's a bear of very little brain and can't read very quickly at the best of times, so it takes him a while to read through and check. Give poor Argus Bear a chance!
Maybe if, when Argus Bear publishes a story about travellers, everyone could, y'know, resist the urge to post anything blatantly racist for a few minutes, they might let us comment. His boss has told him he'll be in a lot of trouble if they allow anything unlawful: he's a bear of very little brain and can't read very quickly at the best of times, so it takes him a while to read through and check. Give poor Argus Bear a chance! Roundbill
  • Score: 8

8:42pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Roundbill says...

But yeah, on balance it probably was p!keys who did it.
But yeah, on balance it probably was p!keys who did it. Roundbill
  • Score: 4

8:44pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Roundbill says...

(love you, Argus Bear!)
(love you, Argus Bear!) Roundbill
  • Score: 4

10:19pm Fri 14 Feb 14

Vigilia says...

Indigatio wrote:
Viglia, that explains a lot. Looks like the Council have succeeded in gagging the Argus, not good for a free press.
Who is PW.?
PW is Pete "travellers are the Greens and God's Chosen People" West.

That said, I have to agree that much of what is said in comment on the various articles on traveller matters is intemperate and often verges on racist. If only people would limit themselves to constructive comment on how the BEHAVIOUR of those who trespass on our open recreational land and public parks affects the quality of life of the law-abiding and tax-paying residents of our City we could make our concerns known to those we elect to represent us, the residents.
Currently we are paying over £2,000 a day to sustain the alternative lifestyles of these people. The present travellers transit site costs us £700 a day to maintain because it has lost money hand over fist since the day it opened.
Anybody, and everybody, may adopt whatever alternative lifestyle they choose but only at their own expense. The residents of Brighton and Hove should not be expected to subsidise the lifestyles of gypsies, Irish travellers and the resident squatter colony.
[quote][p][bold]Indigatio[/bold] wrote: Viglia, that explains a lot. Looks like the Council have succeeded in gagging the Argus, not good for a free press. Who is PW.?[/p][/quote]PW is Pete "travellers are the Greens and God's Chosen People" West. That said, I have to agree that much of what is said in comment on the various articles on traveller matters is intemperate and often verges on racist. If only people would limit themselves to constructive comment on how the BEHAVIOUR of those who trespass on our open recreational land and public parks affects the quality of life of the law-abiding and tax-paying residents of our City we could make our concerns known to those we elect to represent us, the residents. Currently we are paying over £2,000 a day to sustain the alternative lifestyles of these people. The present travellers transit site costs us £700 a day to maintain because it has lost money hand over fist since the day it opened. Anybody, and everybody, may adopt whatever alternative lifestyle they choose but only at their own expense. The residents of Brighton and Hove should not be expected to subsidise the lifestyles of gypsies, Irish travellers and the resident squatter colony. Vigilia
  • Score: 5

9:02am Sat 15 Feb 14

Indigatio says...

Well said Vigilia. I agree with you entirely.
Well said Vigilia. I agree with you entirely. Indigatio
  • Score: 2

3:37pm Sat 15 Feb 14

Vigilia says...

Whilst not relevant to this report, the blanket ban on comment on traveller issues makes it impossible to bring this matter to light elsewhere but readers will be interested to know that the planning application for a permanent travellers' site at Horsdean has been "called in" by the Secretary of State.
Details may be found on the SDNPA Planning Application website.
Whilst not relevant to this report, the blanket ban on comment on traveller issues makes it impossible to bring this matter to light elsewhere but readers will be interested to know that the planning application for a permanent travellers' site at Horsdean has been "called in" by the Secretary of State. Details may be found on the SDNPA Planning Application website. Vigilia
  • Score: 3

4:51pm Thu 20 Feb 14

Sahara27 says...

I would look carefully at the site itself before blaming anyone else Dodgy site, dodgy people that seem to live all year round on a non residential site.
I would look carefully at the site itself before blaming anyone else Dodgy site, dodgy people that seem to live all year round on a non residential site. Sahara27
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree