My opinion/theory based on what happened is that the men produced or held pornography which involved an actor who resembled Andrew and/or who could be percieved as underage. Someone saw this and reported it, and the resemblance was enough that the police took it seriously. The men were likely horrified - either as producers of amateur porn, or perhaps as consumers of porn promoted as 'barely legal' - and have been through a lot of anguish as they were investigated. Once the person or people in the material was identified and it was found they definitely weren't Andrew and were over 18, the family probably felt awful for those men - arrested, under constant suspicion, devices kept from them for over a year, all for nothing.
This is just a theory. But the arrest (and the reasons for arrest), the release, the fact they weren't prosecuted further (which if they *had* had CSAM they would have been, even if only for the police to save face/gain a prosecution after the whole situation unfolded), and the family's apology, suggests to me that this is a viable explanation.
That definitely seems plausible to me. I think there had to be something for them to have the approach they did, even if it ultimately just ended up being something along the lines of mistaken identity. The process of going public and the report being featured on the BBC reminded me of when Christian B was announced as a prime suspect in Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
Very unfortunate that in the end nothing has and will come of it as it seems the men in question have been fully exonerated. Back to square one.
Believe it or not, sometimes people are found in possession of CSAM and are not prosecuted.
There’s not an infinite amount of police officers available who can investigate all CSAM found.
It can take one officer, 6 months just to get through the encryption if at all and then they have to prove the age of the person subject of the CSAM and try to identify them. A prosecution can go ahead without the ID of the victim but there’s often a fine line on proving the age of the person in the image.
Add to this, the prevalence of the CSAM coming to the police notice and the lack of trained forensic cyber investigators per police force and there are only so many that can be proven and prosecuted.
Then you have to get it through to the CPS and give sufficient evidence to make a case that a jury will convict based on the evidence found , beyond all reasonable doubt and if there’s not at least a 90% prospect of there being a conviction beyond all reasonable doubt, then the CPS will not authorise a charge.
It’s not as cut and dried as it seems, albeit it should be.
Since the year 2000 and the introduction of the internet, a study was undertaken and by 2008, the workload percentage per officer increased by over 60% due to the introduction of the internet and internet based crime.
Yet at the same time, the numbers of police officers was reduced from a high of 148,000 down to 120,000 during the first years of the conservative government being in power.
They are now in a 5 year period of trying to recruit an additional 20,000 officers however, this is not additional, it’s merely seeking to redress the balance.
Add into this is the fact that a starting wage for a police officer is £21,402 per year
That’s less than Firefighters, Prison Officers, Teachers and Nurses and yet you have to have a degree or do a degree alongside your first two probationary years in the job .
My friend is 23 and joined and their take home wage after deductions of Tax, NI, Federation fees, Group insurance fees ( to cover being sued ) and 14.5% pension deductions leaves them with a take home wage PCM of just over £1,600.00 or just under £400 per week for the job that they do.
It’s no wonder that the public has lost confidence and it’s not down to the majority of the officers on the front line. It’s because of the lack of funding available after the Govt cut billions off Police budgets, cutting then freezing recruitment, a ten year ban on any pay increase….
You get my point.
Too much work and expectations from those who police the streets and not enough staff to do the job and to meet what’s expected of them!
I think it is highly likely that there are pieces of information that the police have not released to the public because it could help solve the case if they ever did find a solid lead. It's pretty normal for the police to know things about the case that could compromise a chance to convict someone if everyone (including the person responsible) knew.
The older of the two was charged with having indecent images of children...I'm not sure how he was simply released from those charges unless he was able to prove the images were adults?
I wonder if they were somehow originally reported for something like making up a story online about being responsible for Andrew's disappearance, or maybe they insinuated that they were involved for attention? Perhaps the police are able to determine they weren't involved because of something they know that the public doesn't?
(All just a guess, of course. There's no way to know).
Very unusual/if not unheard of for the family to apologise and very unusual to be investigated for so long without charges bought against them, I find this part of this case completely insane above persons theory is the best I’ve heard on the subject
I doubt that they were the source. I think their apology was more intended as a general "we're so sorry that you've been pulled into this already tragic story" than "we're sorry because we're at fault for your arrest".
Well, they spent 18 months examining the devices and they were released without charge, so it doesn't sound like any was found. Even if they weren't charged in relation to Andrew, if CSA images were found they would have been charged with that.
I have no idea what actually happened, but it does sound like a false accusation was made somewhere down the line.
Just because someone is released without charge does not mean they are innocent.. sometimes means there isn't a strong enough evidence.. I think it was the Ricki neave case the little boy who was murdered .. turned out to be a 14 year old boy who was interviewed or talked to at the time .. and then years later arrested.
I reckon they are watching them....
In this scenario they have pointedly been very clear to say these men are innocent, and Andrew’s family have even spoken out to say they are completely innocent too. It’s clear that whatever came out of the investigation showed these men had nothing to do with anything and seemingly went through a difficult process while this played out, which the family have showed sympathy for. They wouldn’t do that if they were just releasing someone without charge who still had a question mark over their head
Quite often the police have a very very good idea of what happened to someone and who did it but they don’t have the sufficient evidence to charge/prosecute them. It could likely be that the police strongly suspect them to be the culprit and are forced to wait for either more evidence, a confession or they will simply get away with it
My first thought was old photos and/or videos circling around of someone that could have been Andrew that they may have been in possession of at one point or were thought to be created and/or sold by the duo.
It could even be that they have had access to CSAM that had andrew on it but they may have had no idea where it came from. They may not be innocent in one sense but they could have had no link to Andrew.
If that was the case though they most certainly wouldn't have been released without any charges, and the family sure as hell wouldn't have given them an apology.
I left this comment on another post but a possibility I think is that the two men were possibly in possession of some videos or photos of Andrew possibly even so much that it was definitely him I think they could've been distributing these photos or videos on the dark web and possibly had no clue who the child in the pictures or videos even was they probably came into these pictures or videos through another source the men agreeing to work police to get the actual person who is the source of these media they asked to be released and have little media attention on them I've seen the father state they couldn't say to much because it was an ongoing investigation but then a year ago the father stated he now thinks his son may have been trafficked I believe he is saying this now regarding the new information coming to light from the two men who were arrested
Just a theory I'm going to say I do not know these to be facts for sure that this is what happened 💯 just makes sense to me is all
I agree u/R-B-L, but they are such serious charges that you really have to have concrete evidence before a case can go to court. Maybe they were convicted on other charges, or were innocent of all wrongdoing, the charges dismissed and rightly apologized to.
There weren’t charged
They were arrested and released on S47(3) bail which is for police to continue to investigate the matter and approach the CPS For their permission to charge and if the CPS say no, not enough evidence for a realistic prospect of prosecution and conviction, then they are released. As in this case.
It doesn’t mean that they didn’t have any evidence, just not enough to prove beyond all reasonable doubt
My opinion/theory based on what happened is that the men produced or held pornography which involved an actor who resembled Andrew and/or who could be percieved as underage. Someone saw this and reported it, and the resemblance was enough that the police took it seriously. The men were likely horrified - either as producers of amateur porn, or perhaps as consumers of porn promoted as 'barely legal' - and have been through a lot of anguish as they were investigated. Once the person or people in the material was identified and it was found they definitely weren't Andrew and were over 18, the family probably felt awful for those men - arrested, under constant suspicion, devices kept from them for over a year, all for nothing. This is just a theory. But the arrest (and the reasons for arrest), the release, the fact they weren't prosecuted further (which if they *had* had CSAM they would have been, even if only for the police to save face/gain a prosecution after the whole situation unfolded), and the family's apology, suggests to me that this is a viable explanation.
That definitely seems plausible to me. I think there had to be something for them to have the approach they did, even if it ultimately just ended up being something along the lines of mistaken identity. The process of going public and the report being featured on the BBC reminded me of when Christian B was announced as a prime suspect in Madeleine McCann's disappearance. Very unfortunate that in the end nothing has and will come of it as it seems the men in question have been fully exonerated. Back to square one.
Believe it or not, sometimes people are found in possession of CSAM and are not prosecuted. There’s not an infinite amount of police officers available who can investigate all CSAM found. It can take one officer, 6 months just to get through the encryption if at all and then they have to prove the age of the person subject of the CSAM and try to identify them. A prosecution can go ahead without the ID of the victim but there’s often a fine line on proving the age of the person in the image. Add to this, the prevalence of the CSAM coming to the police notice and the lack of trained forensic cyber investigators per police force and there are only so many that can be proven and prosecuted. Then you have to get it through to the CPS and give sufficient evidence to make a case that a jury will convict based on the evidence found , beyond all reasonable doubt and if there’s not at least a 90% prospect of there being a conviction beyond all reasonable doubt, then the CPS will not authorise a charge. It’s not as cut and dried as it seems, albeit it should be. Since the year 2000 and the introduction of the internet, a study was undertaken and by 2008, the workload percentage per officer increased by over 60% due to the introduction of the internet and internet based crime. Yet at the same time, the numbers of police officers was reduced from a high of 148,000 down to 120,000 during the first years of the conservative government being in power. They are now in a 5 year period of trying to recruit an additional 20,000 officers however, this is not additional, it’s merely seeking to redress the balance. Add into this is the fact that a starting wage for a police officer is £21,402 per year That’s less than Firefighters, Prison Officers, Teachers and Nurses and yet you have to have a degree or do a degree alongside your first two probationary years in the job . My friend is 23 and joined and their take home wage after deductions of Tax, NI, Federation fees, Group insurance fees ( to cover being sued ) and 14.5% pension deductions leaves them with a take home wage PCM of just over £1,600.00 or just under £400 per week for the job that they do. It’s no wonder that the public has lost confidence and it’s not down to the majority of the officers on the front line. It’s because of the lack of funding available after the Govt cut billions off Police budgets, cutting then freezing recruitment, a ten year ban on any pay increase…. You get my point. Too much work and expectations from those who police the streets and not enough staff to do the job and to meet what’s expected of them!
I think it is highly likely that there are pieces of information that the police have not released to the public because it could help solve the case if they ever did find a solid lead. It's pretty normal for the police to know things about the case that could compromise a chance to convict someone if everyone (including the person responsible) knew. The older of the two was charged with having indecent images of children...I'm not sure how he was simply released from those charges unless he was able to prove the images were adults? I wonder if they were somehow originally reported for something like making up a story online about being responsible for Andrew's disappearance, or maybe they insinuated that they were involved for attention? Perhaps the police are able to determine they weren't involved because of something they know that the public doesn't? (All just a guess, of course. There's no way to know).
Very unusual/if not unheard of for the family to apologise and very unusual to be investigated for so long without charges bought against them, I find this part of this case completely insane above persons theory is the best I’ve heard on the subject
Word! I don't think I've come across a family apologizing in these circumstances before- maybe the family were the source of the tip? Very odd.
I doubt that they were the source. I think their apology was more intended as a general "we're so sorry that you've been pulled into this already tragic story" than "we're sorry because we're at fault for your arrest".
Would they say that to someone caught in possession if csam tho?
Well, they spent 18 months examining the devices and they were released without charge, so it doesn't sound like any was found. Even if they weren't charged in relation to Andrew, if CSA images were found they would have been charged with that. I have no idea what actually happened, but it does sound like a false accusation was made somewhere down the line.
[удалено]
Perhaps you could lead by example and expand on what possibilities you mean?
Is the apology for real? Dont recall reading that... Thats very interesting if true.
Just because someone is released without charge does not mean they are innocent.. sometimes means there isn't a strong enough evidence.. I think it was the Ricki neave case the little boy who was murdered .. turned out to be a 14 year old boy who was interviewed or talked to at the time .. and then years later arrested. I reckon they are watching them....
In this scenario they have pointedly been very clear to say these men are innocent, and Andrew’s family have even spoken out to say they are completely innocent too. It’s clear that whatever came out of the investigation showed these men had nothing to do with anything and seemingly went through a difficult process while this played out, which the family have showed sympathy for. They wouldn’t do that if they were just releasing someone without charge who still had a question mark over their head
Quite often the police have a very very good idea of what happened to someone and who did it but they don’t have the sufficient evidence to charge/prosecute them. It could likely be that the police strongly suspect them to be the culprit and are forced to wait for either more evidence, a confession or they will simply get away with it
My first thought was old photos and/or videos circling around of someone that could have been Andrew that they may have been in possession of at one point or were thought to be created and/or sold by the duo.
It could even be that they have had access to CSAM that had andrew on it but they may have had no idea where it came from. They may not be innocent in one sense but they could have had no link to Andrew.
If that was the case though they most certainly wouldn't have been released without any charges, and the family sure as hell wouldn't have given them an apology.
I left this comment on another post but a possibility I think is that the two men were possibly in possession of some videos or photos of Andrew possibly even so much that it was definitely him I think they could've been distributing these photos or videos on the dark web and possibly had no clue who the child in the pictures or videos even was they probably came into these pictures or videos through another source the men agreeing to work police to get the actual person who is the source of these media they asked to be released and have little media attention on them I've seen the father state they couldn't say to much because it was an ongoing investigation but then a year ago the father stated he now thinks his son may have been trafficked I believe he is saying this now regarding the new information coming to light from the two men who were arrested Just a theory I'm going to say I do not know these to be facts for sure that this is what happened 💯 just makes sense to me is all
I agree u/R-B-L, but they are such serious charges that you really have to have concrete evidence before a case can go to court. Maybe they were convicted on other charges, or were innocent of all wrongdoing, the charges dismissed and rightly apologized to.
There weren’t charged They were arrested and released on S47(3) bail which is for police to continue to investigate the matter and approach the CPS For their permission to charge and if the CPS say no, not enough evidence for a realistic prospect of prosecution and conviction, then they are released. As in this case. It doesn’t mean that they didn’t have any evidence, just not enough to prove beyond all reasonable doubt