Following on from Part I this article examines both the media myths surrounding Paulsgrove and the potential strategic and operational lessons that can be learned from this ethnographic study. In doing so we continue our account with a critique of Silke's proposition that the most effective operational response to vigilantism is to exploit media reports of vigilantes' personal weaknesses. In doing so we offer our own alternatives of how to relate to community vigilantism. We believe that by addressing the real origin and nature of the dispute, as opposed to the media myths, we provide alternative options for police forces and MAPPAs (Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements) that face the difficult task of managing potentially dangerous offenders in the community against a ***back-drop of high media scrutiny and immense public concern.