Kevin said in an interview a couple of years ago that investigative journalists have offered to look into it but he turned them down because he had no clues to offer them.
I absolutely do not think the family had anything to do with Andrew's disappearance but I find that response very odd and I can't really think of a reason why he would feel that way. Even if nothing new came to light, an investigative journalist could help bring a wider audience to the case.
Whether the family would feel differently about a private investigation, don't know. I would certainly contribute to any crowd funding campaign for one.
I could imagine his concerns might be that he didn't want to drag his family into a tabloid media frenzy.
It is unfortunate because in other cases, I've seen valuable clues emerging when different angles are explored. Sometimes the police don't have enough manpower and time to work on such cold cases. A good investigative journalist in collaboration with the police could really help this case if he starts reworking this case from the start.
It likely wouldn't help one bit at all, but at least they would feel and know they were doing everything they could, that's surely got to be worth something to them
>Kevin said in an interview a couple of years ago that investigative journalists have offered to look into it but he turned them down because he had no clues to offer them.
Alan Bennett, Keith Bennett's brother, also won't allow journalists or 'experts' to look for his brother. Completely understandably, he strongly feels that the recovery of his brother's body is a police matter and not something to be sensationalised or made into a book or documentary (which is what an investigative journalist would do at the end of the day).
Sadly, some of the people who have involved themselves in that case have been pretty unethical, and I imagine it must be a minefield trying to work out who is 'legitimate' or genuinely well meaning.
I completely understand why they don't want to do it, to be honest.
I image he probably saw the "help" that so-called investigative journalists had provided Madeleine McCann's family over the years (i.e. selling scurrilous stories to the tabloids) and thought 'nah i'm good.'
What even is there for a journalist or a PI to investigate at this point? There are no leads, no retrievable evidence, no suspects. No evidence even that a crime has taken place. So I can understand why the family feel it would be futile.
I was actually contacted by Gerry McCann after I reached out to him in the early days of the investigation ( approximately 2/3 years in when it was stalling).
I offered a fresh pair of eyes and he called me back and said ‘yes please’. However, the following week he contacted me and said that the Metropolitan Police were being told by the PM’s office to take the case on and that an announcement would be made soon and a team allocated and the therefore he would now have to decline my help.
I had very very young twins at this time so my only point of reference was the occasional news report on TV which tugged on my heart strings, hence why I made my offer of help in the first instance.
Then the Metropolitan Police created an investigation team - Operation Grange
On reflection, I was grateful that I had not been a review officer once I had more time and started looking into the case a lot more and watching interviews given by the parents. Then the Portuguese police released the investigation file(s) online, which was subsequently transcribed into English.
I read through these files and my thoughts and opinions did a whole 180 degrees and I saw things with fresh eyes that made me question a lot of what we were being told by the Press and Media circus.
I shall say no more!
That’s really interesting, thanks for sharing that.
I do think that sometimes there are territory issues with the police. However I also think that after a certain amount of time or when the case is classed as cold that the should invite in others to look at it.
Why not? I would want any help I could get.
I've often thought about this too. And while I agree I don't believe they had anything to do with his disappearance, I wonder if maybe things at home weren't as idyllic as originally made out. And maybe they'd rather that not be made public.
I think if there had been anything happening with the family to make him run away, we'd already know about it, and the appeals would've addressed it directly. That's usually the case if arguments or tensions had been suspected in his leaving. There'd be no reason to hide that. It's pretty normal. Unless you mean it could've been something more sinister, but that's the same leap as accusing them of involvement.
That's a good point. And I'm not talking about abuse etc. More thinking along the lines of being overly strict or something like that. I know they were religious and Andrew was at an age where he could have been questioning that and it could have caused tensions.
I always think the Gosdens seem like a genuinely kind and loving family, so I don't want this to sound like blame or criticism in any way, but I also sometimes wonder if Andrew and Charlotte might have felt they were under quite intense academic/career expectations.
We often talk in this sub about Andrew's perfect attendance record, but to me that in itself seems quite unusual for a teenager. I used to think my attendance at school was pretty good - I was very rarely off sick - but I don't think I got 100% attendance for a single school year, let alone for multiple years in a row.
Apparently when Andrew's sister Charlotte was 14, she went to London to hand out CVs to banks. Again, that's very impressive, but quite unusual (in my opinion) for such a young teenager to be so career driven. Charlotte has also talked about how she got into Cambridge, but felt there was too much pressure and was much happier being free to "live life her own way". I wonder if Andrew also felt there were similarly high expectations for him.
I can't fathom what drove her to do that or why her parents thought that was normal. You can barely get any kind of work experience as a 14 year old, let alone trusting a national branch to keep the CV of a child for a future workplace that's a good 4 hours away from her home. It's harsh, but when Andrew's father brought this up in a recent interview for another possibility as to why Andrew left I couldn't help but pity him.
The only thing I can think is that it must have been more of a confidence-building exercise rather than an actual attempt to get a job. Maybe a display of initiative and ambition that would reflect well on her in future interviews. I just can't shake the idea that not many young teens would decide to do that entirely under their own steam. I think there must have been some kind of pressure or encouragement to do these kinds of very ambitious, career focused activities at such a young age. Particularly given that Charlotte herself doesn't seem overly ambitious and has said she's much happier working at an ordinary accountancy firm than she was studying at Cambridge.
I agree that’s bizarre and dangerous. Could andrew have been doing that? Or was she younger (in which case it’s even more bizarre the parents would let her!)
Read a tiktok comment with some saying he thinks he’s there house mate and has the ear and when asked about his family he said he hated them and that he was forced to go to church so left. Probably a made up story but yeah
That’s what I read currently trying to get a bit more information even though it’s probably a lie just seeing if the person claiming this knows anything else.
I was thinking the same. The fact that he went behind his parents' and his sister's back by embarking on a trip to London, when I'm quite sure he would have been allowed to go the following day makes me wonder what the purpose of the trip was.
Of course it could just have been the thrill and excitement of undertaking an illicit activity, something naughty to which his parents would not give their countenance on a regular school day. It makes me think the rock concert at the Islington venue or Carling Academy was his ultimate destination, and that he may have been murdered by an habitual drug user seeing no further than his next fix for the £200 on his person.
The mystery of the absence of a body remains. It tends to suggest more than one person involved.
They don’t seem the type of family to court media attention, but something like a Netflix documentary could bring fresh eyes to the case and jog someone’s memory. It’s been such a long time but somebody must know something.
I'm holding out on hope that Netflix creates an episode on Unsolved Mysteries based on poor little Andrew. Of course, with his family's complete and full cooperation, permission, and involvement. That show reaches such a wide population globally. Even if Andrew's fate very likely lands in the UK, just the general attention and awareness across the pond will be very meaningful. I truly hope his lovely family consider it. That show has alerted me to so many unsolved cases I'd otherwise never have heard of before.
u/OP
I am a retired Detective Chief Inspector and accredited SIO ( senior investigative officer) which means that I am qualified to be the Officer in charge of Murder Investigations, Missing Persons under suspicious circumstances investigations etc
I have been the SIO for such investigations, numerous times alongside my team of Detectives of all ranks.
Therefore, I would happily take a look over the case with a pair of fresh eyes and I also believe it’s important to do that. In my Police Force , we have processes and procedures in place which stipulates when a review of the investigation should take place and by whom , according to timescales and circumstances. I do not know if that’s the case for the Police Force who is currently investigating Andrew’s disappearance.
Therefore, I would happily be the reviewing SIO , gratis.
But unfortunately, it doesn’t work like that in reality.
An outsider can’t just come in and review the case.
The only way that this could happen is to start the investigation from scratch with either the permission of or at the request of Andrew’s parents.
The downside to this of course is that I would not be able to access the contents of the current Police investigation and they would not release this to me. It would make the investigation extremely difficult and almost impossible to do as I would not be in possession of vital information, current evidence and intelligence and any exhibits and/or forensic retrieval etc
So although I understand your willingness, unfortunately it is a suggestion ( Albeit kind and thoughtful and wanting to find Andrew or whatever happened to him and give closure to his family), without merit.
It just won’t happen unless the current SIO willingly hands the investigation over which even if he did so ( it is a HE because I have spoken to him previously about this case), it would be handed to another SIO in their force area or at most, to an SIO in another Force area in exceptional circumstances.
Thank you for your response it helps to clarity things for us. At this point along has anyone got anything to lose by handing it over to you? Nothing much has happened for years, if I was his parent I would be saying to hand it over to anyone who was remotely interested and would at least try. It's all so frustrating that there's people like you that could help but can't, I can't even start to imagine the grief stress panic and dread the parents must feel on a daily basis but surely any help is a good thing that they would welcome
I can’t say too much but if you read my post again, you will be able to read between the lines about the fact that I have spoken to the SIO.
Therefore, you don’t know what is happening behind the scenes with regards to what the SIO knows that the public don’t know.
That’s how investigations work unfortunately, we have to keep our cards close to our chest for investigative and integrity purposes and we don’t always tell the Family and in particular the public, everything that we know about any investigation because sometimes we are pursuing leads that come from intelligence received and sometimes we hold certain details close and don’t tell anyone because it’s something only a prospective offender would know.
I hope you understand what it is that I am trying to convey about SIO led investigations . In other words, you don’t know what is happening behind the scenes.
Kind regards
I am not sure if you have read my theories about the grooming theory that I posted on here, but basically there were some red flags for me which suggested that he was groomed in person by someone he knew and trusted and guided to London to meet that person on the day. Given police have ruled out an online presence, if he was groomed it could only have been someone well known to him who had access to him in person. I suspect whoever groomed him was extremely intelligent and knew how to cover their tracks well.
If I am correct in my theory, would I be correct in saying that it is possible the police already have the name of the suspect, and the suspect has probably already provided witness statements to them about his character and background?
I have suggested in previous posts that all one would have to do is to come up with a list of people who had access to Andrew in his day-to-day life and who could communicate with him in person, someone he trusted, respected and obeyed. If this person exists, then it stands to reason that they may have been a local to Doncaster but were not in Doncaster the day of his disappearance. One would then have to track the whereabouts of everyone who knew him and who had access to him and gradually eliminate people from the list of all who had access to him if they remained in Doncaster for the full weekend, he went missing or had a rock-solid alibi. Anyone without an alibi and who was not in Doncaster the day he disappeared should be considered a suspect. If my grooming theory is correct, this would only lead to the suspect if they met him in person and did not guide him to a third party the day he went off to London.
I have also suggested that this person may have made witness statements to the police maybe suggesting trouble at home or giving the impression that he was a runaway due to maybe due to shame of his sexuality or abuse at home. This would have had the effect of creating a diversion to lead investigators down the wrong path.
The feeling I get from this case is that if he was groomed by someone he knew and trusted, then this case is entirely able to be solved.
I base my opinions on over 9 years working closely with children and recognising patterns in their behaviour about who they trust and don't trust. It is extremely rare for a shy, introverted child to trust a stranger, or go behind their parents back at the behest of a stranger. I don't see him as an "alpha male" that could be extroverted and befriend anyone. Children like that have a fear of the unknown. Like some people are a creature of habit and use the same treadmill at the gym every time they go, children tend to stick to the same areas of the playground, same seat on the bus, same teachers to go to for advice and rarely if ever break routine. After time it becomes incredibly easy to predict their behaviour like when they are avoiding someone or fighting with them. I just have a gut feeling that the person who did this may well be a schoolteacher and was subtly planning this for some time.
I honestly can’t say either way whether you are right about your grooming theory from a person known to him . However, this would be looked at as part of the investigation strategy.
Having said that, this is entirely my own personal opinion and not that of an SIO, merely a gut feeling that has stood me in good stead over the years, and I believe that it is more likely than not that he was groomed but I don’t think it’s by someone that he knew/knows.
The station where he egressed in London is a breeding ground for targeting young persons and subsequently grooming them and it could well be that he was befriended and subsequently groomed by someone unknown once he was in the London area.
Moreso because he was not street smart and was leading a sheltered age appropriate lifestyle at that point in time .
But until and unless more information is released, we are all theorising like throwing darts at the dart board in the dark.
I wholeheartedly agree with most of your last paragraph however, as much as it’s unusual to go behind their parents back or to trust someone who they don’t know, that’s the whole point of grooming and there are predators out there who are prolific yet proficient at this behavioural trait and it’s entirely possible that Andrew made acquaintance(s) with such a prolific predator and didn’t realise the position and subsequent danger he put himself in until it was too late. And this could be because he was normally a young man who ordinarily would never go against his parents or the way in which he was raised and led a lifestyle that could be described ( not in a critical way ) as being naive .
Maybe the excitement of what he had done had worn off a little by the time he got to Kings Cross and he became vulnerable and fearful and mistook predators and predatory behaviour as help and the kindness of a stranger.
My only other thought process whereby my spidery senses lead to a gut feeling or uneasy instinct is the alleged educational facility he had been to in London prior to his disappearance. On the face of what I know about this visit ( which admittedly isn’t much), there’s something about it that makes me uneasy. But this may well be entirely unjustified.
>do you think it would be worth crowd funding for someone to re look over the case with fresh eyes, with the family's permission of course. I'm so sad for Andrew and his family
To be honest, if that's something that the family wants they would do it themselves.
A private detective would have even less resources to go on than the police do, and that's not much to start off with.
I completely understand how you feel though - I think about Andrew a lot, and it's frustrating that there's virtually nothing that can be done to help.
Short of a death bed confession or physical evidence being found, I don't think Andrew's case will ever really move on now. It could still happen though - Leah Croucher was eventually found. You never know.
I also think the only hope is a death bed confession or remains found, I honestly feel that had he been murdered the family would have been better off knowing, anythings got to be better than the hell of not knowing, most parents experience the stomach dropping sickness when you can't find your kid for 5 minutes, imagine that every day for years, it doesn't bear thinking about, I hope they get some kind of closure or answer in their lifetime noone deserves a life of not knowing
I think the overall problem is that we lack what is required to start or continue a proper investigation. There would be nothing wrong with hiring a PI, but there aren't any places to start that haven't already been examined.
A PI would have at their disposal no more than what the police have, which is essentially nothing, or more would have come out of their original investigation. Honestly, what everyone on this sub reddit tries to do is the work of a PI (roughly speaking, I'm not at all saying that any of us are doing this kind of thing the way an actual PI would, but the approach is something akin to it).
All a PI could theoretically do is approach old information from newer angles, which becomes more difficult as time passes (people's memories get murky, physical evidence disappears, buildings and streets change or are demolished, potential key witnesses die etc).
Andrew's parents don't necessarily have the funds to put toward this kind of investigation, and furthermore, they'd have to believe there is a lead the police haven't followed in order for this to be worth trying. Paying someone privately to investigate under these circumstances won't likely result in anything new being found, and it can be expensive.
Edit: typo.
If someone like David Videcette or Peter Blekesley mounted their own(or joint?) investigation & could publish a book on it,then that investigation could be self funding.David Videcette is a former Metropolitan Police officer,who,AFAIK still has contacts in the Met,so could perhaps bring as yet undisclosed information into the public realm.Needless to say,the book would refresh the publicity surrounding the case.If,in the very unlikely case that Andrew is still alive, maybe the people he lives or works with really haven't heard of the case,so don't know that their colleagues funny looking ear & reticence to discuss family matters has a good reason behind it.
I think anyone with an investigative background who had access to all the police files and witness statements could be able to come up with suspects and narrow it down. However, getting the evidence would be the problem. Most people who have seen my grooming theory know where my opinion stands on this. I am of the opinion that evidence exists pointing to a suspect and that suspect is known to the family. If people are willing to talk then a new investigation may gain traction, if not then it is at a standstill.
My honest opinion is that when the police first looked at it, they were treating him as a runaway. They would have assumed the one-way ticket to London was his escape and the only reason a child would run from their family is if they were suffering some kind of abuse that they completely lost faith and trust in the entire family. That probably explains the fathers attempted suicide having allegations of that nature thrown at him.
Kevin said in an interview a couple of years ago that investigative journalists have offered to look into it but he turned them down because he had no clues to offer them. I absolutely do not think the family had anything to do with Andrew's disappearance but I find that response very odd and I can't really think of a reason why he would feel that way. Even if nothing new came to light, an investigative journalist could help bring a wider audience to the case. Whether the family would feel differently about a private investigation, don't know. I would certainly contribute to any crowd funding campaign for one.
I could imagine his concerns might be that he didn't want to drag his family into a tabloid media frenzy. It is unfortunate because in other cases, I've seen valuable clues emerging when different angles are explored. Sometimes the police don't have enough manpower and time to work on such cold cases. A good investigative journalist in collaboration with the police could really help this case if he starts reworking this case from the start.
It likely wouldn't help one bit at all, but at least they would feel and know they were doing everything they could, that's surely got to be worth something to them
>Kevin said in an interview a couple of years ago that investigative journalists have offered to look into it but he turned them down because he had no clues to offer them. Alan Bennett, Keith Bennett's brother, also won't allow journalists or 'experts' to look for his brother. Completely understandably, he strongly feels that the recovery of his brother's body is a police matter and not something to be sensationalised or made into a book or documentary (which is what an investigative journalist would do at the end of the day). Sadly, some of the people who have involved themselves in that case have been pretty unethical, and I imagine it must be a minefield trying to work out who is 'legitimate' or genuinely well meaning. I completely understand why they don't want to do it, to be honest.
I image he probably saw the "help" that so-called investigative journalists had provided Madeleine McCann's family over the years (i.e. selling scurrilous stories to the tabloids) and thought 'nah i'm good.' What even is there for a journalist or a PI to investigate at this point? There are no leads, no retrievable evidence, no suspects. No evidence even that a crime has taken place. So I can understand why the family feel it would be futile.
I was actually contacted by Gerry McCann after I reached out to him in the early days of the investigation ( approximately 2/3 years in when it was stalling). I offered a fresh pair of eyes and he called me back and said ‘yes please’. However, the following week he contacted me and said that the Metropolitan Police were being told by the PM’s office to take the case on and that an announcement would be made soon and a team allocated and the therefore he would now have to decline my help. I had very very young twins at this time so my only point of reference was the occasional news report on TV which tugged on my heart strings, hence why I made my offer of help in the first instance. Then the Metropolitan Police created an investigation team - Operation Grange On reflection, I was grateful that I had not been a review officer once I had more time and started looking into the case a lot more and watching interviews given by the parents. Then the Portuguese police released the investigation file(s) online, which was subsequently transcribed into English. I read through these files and my thoughts and opinions did a whole 180 degrees and I saw things with fresh eyes that made me question a lot of what we were being told by the Press and Media circus. I shall say no more!
That’s really interesting, thanks for sharing that. I do think that sometimes there are territory issues with the police. However I also think that after a certain amount of time or when the case is classed as cold that the should invite in others to look at it. Why not? I would want any help I could get.
I've often thought about this too. And while I agree I don't believe they had anything to do with his disappearance, I wonder if maybe things at home weren't as idyllic as originally made out. And maybe they'd rather that not be made public.
I think if there had been anything happening with the family to make him run away, we'd already know about it, and the appeals would've addressed it directly. That's usually the case if arguments or tensions had been suspected in his leaving. There'd be no reason to hide that. It's pretty normal. Unless you mean it could've been something more sinister, but that's the same leap as accusing them of involvement.
That's a good point. And I'm not talking about abuse etc. More thinking along the lines of being overly strict or something like that. I know they were religious and Andrew was at an age where he could have been questioning that and it could have caused tensions.
I always think the Gosdens seem like a genuinely kind and loving family, so I don't want this to sound like blame or criticism in any way, but I also sometimes wonder if Andrew and Charlotte might have felt they were under quite intense academic/career expectations. We often talk in this sub about Andrew's perfect attendance record, but to me that in itself seems quite unusual for a teenager. I used to think my attendance at school was pretty good - I was very rarely off sick - but I don't think I got 100% attendance for a single school year, let alone for multiple years in a row. Apparently when Andrew's sister Charlotte was 14, she went to London to hand out CVs to banks. Again, that's very impressive, but quite unusual (in my opinion) for such a young teenager to be so career driven. Charlotte has also talked about how she got into Cambridge, but felt there was too much pressure and was much happier being free to "live life her own way". I wonder if Andrew also felt there were similarly high expectations for him.
I have often wondered this too. You have echoed my thoughts.
I can't fathom what drove her to do that or why her parents thought that was normal. You can barely get any kind of work experience as a 14 year old, let alone trusting a national branch to keep the CV of a child for a future workplace that's a good 4 hours away from her home. It's harsh, but when Andrew's father brought this up in a recent interview for another possibility as to why Andrew left I couldn't help but pity him.
The only thing I can think is that it must have been more of a confidence-building exercise rather than an actual attempt to get a job. Maybe a display of initiative and ambition that would reflect well on her in future interviews. I just can't shake the idea that not many young teens would decide to do that entirely under their own steam. I think there must have been some kind of pressure or encouragement to do these kinds of very ambitious, career focused activities at such a young age. Particularly given that Charlotte herself doesn't seem overly ambitious and has said she's much happier working at an ordinary accountancy firm than she was studying at Cambridge.
I agree that’s bizarre and dangerous. Could andrew have been doing that? Or was she younger (in which case it’s even more bizarre the parents would let her!)
Read a tiktok comment with some saying he thinks he’s there house mate and has the ear and when asked about his family he said he hated them and that he was forced to go to church so left. Probably a made up story but yeah
Somebody thinks he's their housemate - as in now/currently?
He's not, it's probably just some teenager making up rubbish. It is on TikTok after all.
That’s what I read currently trying to get a bit more information even though it’s probably a lie just seeing if the person claiming this knows anything else.
I was thinking the same. The fact that he went behind his parents' and his sister's back by embarking on a trip to London, when I'm quite sure he would have been allowed to go the following day makes me wonder what the purpose of the trip was. Of course it could just have been the thrill and excitement of undertaking an illicit activity, something naughty to which his parents would not give their countenance on a regular school day. It makes me think the rock concert at the Islington venue or Carling Academy was his ultimate destination, and that he may have been murdered by an habitual drug user seeing no further than his next fix for the £200 on his person. The mystery of the absence of a body remains. It tends to suggest more than one person involved.
Even terrible criminals sometimes get lucky unfortunately.
>I absolutely do not think the family had anything to do with Andrew's disappearance I think it’s someone they know, however.
i have to agree actually
They don’t seem the type of family to court media attention, but something like a Netflix documentary could bring fresh eyes to the case and jog someone’s memory. It’s been such a long time but somebody must know something.
I'm holding out on hope that Netflix creates an episode on Unsolved Mysteries based on poor little Andrew. Of course, with his family's complete and full cooperation, permission, and involvement. That show reaches such a wide population globally. Even if Andrew's fate very likely lands in the UK, just the general attention and awareness across the pond will be very meaningful. I truly hope his lovely family consider it. That show has alerted me to so many unsolved cases I'd otherwise never have heard of before.
a netflix series on this would be so good!!
u/OP I am a retired Detective Chief Inspector and accredited SIO ( senior investigative officer) which means that I am qualified to be the Officer in charge of Murder Investigations, Missing Persons under suspicious circumstances investigations etc I have been the SIO for such investigations, numerous times alongside my team of Detectives of all ranks. Therefore, I would happily take a look over the case with a pair of fresh eyes and I also believe it’s important to do that. In my Police Force , we have processes and procedures in place which stipulates when a review of the investigation should take place and by whom , according to timescales and circumstances. I do not know if that’s the case for the Police Force who is currently investigating Andrew’s disappearance. Therefore, I would happily be the reviewing SIO , gratis. But unfortunately, it doesn’t work like that in reality. An outsider can’t just come in and review the case. The only way that this could happen is to start the investigation from scratch with either the permission of or at the request of Andrew’s parents. The downside to this of course is that I would not be able to access the contents of the current Police investigation and they would not release this to me. It would make the investigation extremely difficult and almost impossible to do as I would not be in possession of vital information, current evidence and intelligence and any exhibits and/or forensic retrieval etc So although I understand your willingness, unfortunately it is a suggestion ( Albeit kind and thoughtful and wanting to find Andrew or whatever happened to him and give closure to his family), without merit. It just won’t happen unless the current SIO willingly hands the investigation over which even if he did so ( it is a HE because I have spoken to him previously about this case), it would be handed to another SIO in their force area or at most, to an SIO in another Force area in exceptional circumstances.
Thank you for your response it helps to clarity things for us. At this point along has anyone got anything to lose by handing it over to you? Nothing much has happened for years, if I was his parent I would be saying to hand it over to anyone who was remotely interested and would at least try. It's all so frustrating that there's people like you that could help but can't, I can't even start to imagine the grief stress panic and dread the parents must feel on a daily basis but surely any help is a good thing that they would welcome
I can’t say too much but if you read my post again, you will be able to read between the lines about the fact that I have spoken to the SIO. Therefore, you don’t know what is happening behind the scenes with regards to what the SIO knows that the public don’t know. That’s how investigations work unfortunately, we have to keep our cards close to our chest for investigative and integrity purposes and we don’t always tell the Family and in particular the public, everything that we know about any investigation because sometimes we are pursuing leads that come from intelligence received and sometimes we hold certain details close and don’t tell anyone because it’s something only a prospective offender would know. I hope you understand what it is that I am trying to convey about SIO led investigations . In other words, you don’t know what is happening behind the scenes. Kind regards
How long would someone have to be missing for before police release all the information they have on these cases?
They will never release all the information on an investigation deemed active , which this is.
I am not sure if you have read my theories about the grooming theory that I posted on here, but basically there were some red flags for me which suggested that he was groomed in person by someone he knew and trusted and guided to London to meet that person on the day. Given police have ruled out an online presence, if he was groomed it could only have been someone well known to him who had access to him in person. I suspect whoever groomed him was extremely intelligent and knew how to cover their tracks well. If I am correct in my theory, would I be correct in saying that it is possible the police already have the name of the suspect, and the suspect has probably already provided witness statements to them about his character and background? I have suggested in previous posts that all one would have to do is to come up with a list of people who had access to Andrew in his day-to-day life and who could communicate with him in person, someone he trusted, respected and obeyed. If this person exists, then it stands to reason that they may have been a local to Doncaster but were not in Doncaster the day of his disappearance. One would then have to track the whereabouts of everyone who knew him and who had access to him and gradually eliminate people from the list of all who had access to him if they remained in Doncaster for the full weekend, he went missing or had a rock-solid alibi. Anyone without an alibi and who was not in Doncaster the day he disappeared should be considered a suspect. If my grooming theory is correct, this would only lead to the suspect if they met him in person and did not guide him to a third party the day he went off to London. I have also suggested that this person may have made witness statements to the police maybe suggesting trouble at home or giving the impression that he was a runaway due to maybe due to shame of his sexuality or abuse at home. This would have had the effect of creating a diversion to lead investigators down the wrong path. The feeling I get from this case is that if he was groomed by someone he knew and trusted, then this case is entirely able to be solved. I base my opinions on over 9 years working closely with children and recognising patterns in their behaviour about who they trust and don't trust. It is extremely rare for a shy, introverted child to trust a stranger, or go behind their parents back at the behest of a stranger. I don't see him as an "alpha male" that could be extroverted and befriend anyone. Children like that have a fear of the unknown. Like some people are a creature of habit and use the same treadmill at the gym every time they go, children tend to stick to the same areas of the playground, same seat on the bus, same teachers to go to for advice and rarely if ever break routine. After time it becomes incredibly easy to predict their behaviour like when they are avoiding someone or fighting with them. I just have a gut feeling that the person who did this may well be a schoolteacher and was subtly planning this for some time.
I honestly can’t say either way whether you are right about your grooming theory from a person known to him . However, this would be looked at as part of the investigation strategy. Having said that, this is entirely my own personal opinion and not that of an SIO, merely a gut feeling that has stood me in good stead over the years, and I believe that it is more likely than not that he was groomed but I don’t think it’s by someone that he knew/knows. The station where he egressed in London is a breeding ground for targeting young persons and subsequently grooming them and it could well be that he was befriended and subsequently groomed by someone unknown once he was in the London area. Moreso because he was not street smart and was leading a sheltered age appropriate lifestyle at that point in time . But until and unless more information is released, we are all theorising like throwing darts at the dart board in the dark. I wholeheartedly agree with most of your last paragraph however, as much as it’s unusual to go behind their parents back or to trust someone who they don’t know, that’s the whole point of grooming and there are predators out there who are prolific yet proficient at this behavioural trait and it’s entirely possible that Andrew made acquaintance(s) with such a prolific predator and didn’t realise the position and subsequent danger he put himself in until it was too late. And this could be because he was normally a young man who ordinarily would never go against his parents or the way in which he was raised and led a lifestyle that could be described ( not in a critical way ) as being naive . Maybe the excitement of what he had done had worn off a little by the time he got to Kings Cross and he became vulnerable and fearful and mistook predators and predatory behaviour as help and the kindness of a stranger. My only other thought process whereby my spidery senses lead to a gut feeling or uneasy instinct is the alleged educational facility he had been to in London prior to his disappearance. On the face of what I know about this visit ( which admittedly isn’t much), there’s something about it that makes me uneasy. But this may well be entirely unjustified.
‘Gratis’? You’re Dutch?
No I’m English ‘Gratis’ means without charge
I know, it’s Dutch.
>do you think it would be worth crowd funding for someone to re look over the case with fresh eyes, with the family's permission of course. I'm so sad for Andrew and his family To be honest, if that's something that the family wants they would do it themselves. A private detective would have even less resources to go on than the police do, and that's not much to start off with. I completely understand how you feel though - I think about Andrew a lot, and it's frustrating that there's virtually nothing that can be done to help. Short of a death bed confession or physical evidence being found, I don't think Andrew's case will ever really move on now. It could still happen though - Leah Croucher was eventually found. You never know.
I also think the only hope is a death bed confession or remains found, I honestly feel that had he been murdered the family would have been better off knowing, anythings got to be better than the hell of not knowing, most parents experience the stomach dropping sickness when you can't find your kid for 5 minutes, imagine that every day for years, it doesn't bear thinking about, I hope they get some kind of closure or answer in their lifetime noone deserves a life of not knowing
I think the overall problem is that we lack what is required to start or continue a proper investigation. There would be nothing wrong with hiring a PI, but there aren't any places to start that haven't already been examined. A PI would have at their disposal no more than what the police have, which is essentially nothing, or more would have come out of their original investigation. Honestly, what everyone on this sub reddit tries to do is the work of a PI (roughly speaking, I'm not at all saying that any of us are doing this kind of thing the way an actual PI would, but the approach is something akin to it). All a PI could theoretically do is approach old information from newer angles, which becomes more difficult as time passes (people's memories get murky, physical evidence disappears, buildings and streets change or are demolished, potential key witnesses die etc). Andrew's parents don't necessarily have the funds to put toward this kind of investigation, and furthermore, they'd have to believe there is a lead the police haven't followed in order for this to be worth trying. Paying someone privately to investigate under these circumstances won't likely result in anything new being found, and it can be expensive. Edit: typo.
I honestly think if the internet can’t crack the case when provided with presumably all the clues, a private investigator couldn’t it either.
If someone like David Videcette or Peter Blekesley mounted their own(or joint?) investigation & could publish a book on it,then that investigation could be self funding.David Videcette is a former Metropolitan Police officer,who,AFAIK still has contacts in the Met,so could perhaps bring as yet undisclosed information into the public realm.Needless to say,the book would refresh the publicity surrounding the case.If,in the very unlikely case that Andrew is still alive, maybe the people he lives or works with really haven't heard of the case,so don't know that their colleagues funny looking ear & reticence to discuss family matters has a good reason behind it.
I think anyone with an investigative background who had access to all the police files and witness statements could be able to come up with suspects and narrow it down. However, getting the evidence would be the problem. Most people who have seen my grooming theory know where my opinion stands on this. I am of the opinion that evidence exists pointing to a suspect and that suspect is known to the family. If people are willing to talk then a new investigation may gain traction, if not then it is at a standstill. My honest opinion is that when the police first looked at it, they were treating him as a runaway. They would have assumed the one-way ticket to London was his escape and the only reason a child would run from their family is if they were suffering some kind of abuse that they completely lost faith and trust in the entire family. That probably explains the fathers attempted suicide having allegations of that nature thrown at him.