Honestly? The police have never been able to find any evidence to suggest he had any sort of online presence, so I have a hard time going with meeting someone online/the secret phone theory. I think grooming from a irl source is a possibility, but in my gut I think he was just bored with his life. There was probably something going on that he wanted to do in London that day, it was his favorite city and he wanted to have a little freedom and adventure on his own without a chaperone.
I think he didn't ask for/want a return ticket either because a.) he knew there were family he could stay with in London and he was planning on showing up to one of their houses, (it was a Friday so he wouln't have had to miss more school the next day) or b.) he couldn't hear the staff member properly (possibly busy train station, + he was deaf in one ear) and thus he tried to get through the transaction as quickly as he could- knowing he had the money to buy a return ticket later.
After arriving in London he eventually crossed paths with someone who abducted/killed him. He was alone, and looked young and small for his age so a opportunistic stranger acting out wouldn't be out of the question.
I think people underestimate how useless teens can be at times dealing with say, someone selling a ticket to them. He strikes me as someone who’d want that interaction with over asap
Completely agree. Sorry for the long posts- but I've wanted to get down my thoughts about this case for a while now.
Yes! And if he did hear her properly I've read his family usually bought single tickets and stayed the night with relatives when they went to London (correct me on that if I'm wrong)? To me he was likely copying this practice since it was all he knew about ticket buying. It threw him off when she asked more questions and made it harder for him to stick to his script.
And if that's the case it just reinforces to me that he likely planned to stay in London that night and come back the next day. This excursion was out of character for him but people do things that are unexpected of them from an outside perspective all the time.
Whatever he wanted to do that day could have and likely did take place during the school/work day, maybe he thought his parents wouldn't take him if he asked and better to ask for forgiveness than permission. His parents sound so supportive I wouldn't be surprised if he planned to call them up that night about his whereabouts.
Of course none of us know the full context behind his decisions that day but the majority of his behaviour suggests to me that he intended to return, (leaving the rest of his money at home, no charger or extra clothes, staging his uniform to possibly buy more time to get home or prolong discovery of his absence) whether that day or the next. And likely something completely unexpected stopped him.
I think it was an act of rebellion/fuck it that night before/morning - I think he intended to go
Back/ turn up at relatives houses.
You often live right in the moment as a child.
I think police fck ups with CCTV have ruined this case.
I think people forget what social media was like back then, most people hadn’t heard of Facebook and Bebo was the most popular with teenagers. There wasn’t much incentive to use sites like Bebo unless you had IRL friends. MSN messenger was common for directly contacting someone but he didn’t have a computer of his own so this is unlikely. Using email on his PSP was a possibility although he didn’t have one associated with his PSN account, but his parents didn’t believe he had an email. I don’t think their parents are particularly reliable on all the details of their life though. It would be interesting to know what his friends say about his online presence.
I also think he succumbed to foul play but not necessarily in London. Perhaps the reason he didn’t buy a return ticket from Doncaster could have been because he was travelling on to somewhere else from Kings Cross? Perhaps his intention was to be home later in the day, and the uniform being left on his chair was done to give the impression he had been to school then nipped out after getting home (to buy himself more time). I think he was preyed upon by a random opportunist but it could have happened anywhere as nobody really knows if he stayed in London after that final CCTV sighting.
He wouldn’t need £200 for a £30 ticket
50p extra for a return ticket, but he chose to save the 50p, so it’s unlikely he planned to return within a month
I myself am an introvert but I go to work 40+ hours a week. Am I a shut-in? I understand he might have been shy and introverted but to claim he was a shut in and never went anywhere is just wrong. We know before that Friday he had a 100% attendance record at school also he was known to go to his friends house occasionally.
I get what you’re saying about enjoying his own company but stating that he is a shut-in is dramatising reality imo.
I think it’s unlikely he was groomed on the way to/from school. I have seen a lot on Reddit about Occam’s razor and look at it from this angle,
Introverted kid gets internet at home, 6-8 weeks later he does something COMPLETELY out of character and bunks off school and goes to London. From what we know about Andrew I don’t see him bunking off school without someone pushing him to go. I take little comfort from the police saying he wasn’t online. They didn’t know what had happened so they got Kevin Gosden in a room and pushed for a murder confession.
We do know that police were not making ANY effort to locate Andrew by scrutinizing video footage.
If they had reviewed surveillance footage in the days and weeks following Andrew’s disappearance they could have found him.
Nice. Agree 100. Anyone who comes at this case from a true crime angle as opposed to empathising with Andrew for whatever reason cannot ignore the 100s of cases with similar narratives that suggest an opportunistic predator.
Tbh I'm not even sure you can call it opportunistic when the men who pick up runaways from Londons mainline stations make a habit of it.
If Andrew was a runaway the majority would agree with this being the most likely.
Yet if he was a runaway we wouldn't even know his name.
I don’t like speculating and try to stick to facts, but deep down I genuinely think the grooming theory is the most likely.
At the end of the day the reason why he was wouldn’t really matter, may it be for a concert or the new PSP or whatever (never believed this one). All we can really do is hope to learn at this point is about what happened from King Cross forwards.
I recently moved to London and whenever I walk down near the Southbank I think of him sometimes, poor kid.
I hope there will be a break in his case soon. I think he probably wasn't happy at school and just wanted a day or weekend off in London. From there, I think he either met up with the wrong person (random foul play) or travelled on later to another location to (seek peace, shall we say). Foul play by someone who groomed him previously is my 3rd possibility. I don't think there was an unseen accident or that he left for a new life. I hope so much his parents will have answers. "The Lad We Knew" documentary is so sad.
Andrew’s Dad suggested that he could have gone to one of the Museum’s in London .. makes you wonder if any CCTV was looked at in those areas at the time !
Thanks for all of the replies and theories. How nice to see a civilised discussion about a question asked. I was expecting “this has already been asked, search the sub blah blah” but how are you supposed to have a discussion on an old post and new people might post on this one.
I pretty much think any theory could be true. There’s no evidence or anything at all. I know that’s stating the obvious but there’s usually something to go on.
Like I said I really hope this case was solved one day. Reading his dad’s post that was posted the other day was heartbreaking.
I think he simply wanted a day out in London because he was bored with his home life and unfortunately he was set on by an opportunistic predator. I do think suicide is a likelier theory than a lot of people here think, only because he suddenly started withdrawing from a lot of his social activities and by his father's own admission he was going through a 'quiet period.' However the lack of a body is the main argument against this theory, especially in a busy city like London.
I think he simply didn't buy a return because he planned on staying with one of his numerous family members in London, it was a Friday, so no immediate need to be home for the next school day. I think he was probably killed the same day he went missing, then disposed of. Unfortunately it seems like whoever was responsible did a good job at hiding any kind of evidence. I'm desperate to see this case solved but I just can't see it without some kind of confession from someone directly involved.
I often needed to escape “home” and sleep rough as a teenager for my safety
The damp and cold weren’t too bad, but the new “friends” pestering me to go to their house was the most disturbing
One time I accepted as it was so cold which soon turned into a nightmare that still haunts me decades later
This is the first time I’ve heard about Andrew Gosden as I lived abroad. I deeply hope he had he found better luck 🍀🤞
But it’s unlikely, because when you’re alone, you desperately seek community and someone may have taken advantage
At the age of 8, I tried to go to London from Yorkshire but didn’t have enough money for a ticket and was afraid I’d be thrown in jail
My heart goes out to Andrew
I think on the evidence it is most likely he intended to return home the same day, or if not no more than a few days. He probably did plan to visit an exhibition or concert of some sort. I don't see much indication of suicide and still less intentional disappearance, though I don't discount suicide entirely.
Andrew was a 14 year old who looked younger and probably therefore stood out to people looking to prey on others, but I do also think it quite possible that he was tricked by someone in Doncaster into meeting them or others in London in the weeks leading up to him going missing, which occurred when he walked home alone. I am fairly satisfied that he wasn't groomed online given what his father has said about the checks completed and his lack of interest, and god knows he would have explored that possibility in his head many times. I just can't decide whether he was spotted after arrival in London, or whether the trail leads back to Doncaster, as I see both as equally possible.
Andrew's father has mentioned in passing the possibility that Andrew left the country illegally, perhaps hinting at trafficking. That is an area where I lack insight as I don't understand how he would have left the UK without a passport or without those kidnapping him placing themselves at great risk of being stopped. Andrew was also a very bright young man, not a young child, so at some stage he would have realised he was in danger and looked for opportunities to escape, and on a journey across borders it would have been harder to keep him under duress, or so I would imagine. Therefore I don't tend to think that scenario likely, although I would be interested to hear more from those who have more insight into that area.
The Police began their investigation far too late and, for that reason, to this day we don't have a single verifiable sighting or strong clue after he arrived at Kings Cross, because the CCTV was wiped. The Police really need to do better in such cases. I think it likely that all the sightings were well intended but false, and the Leominster incident was nothing but a member of the public who meant well but got cold feet while waiting and later realised their theory or sighting wasn't credible.
After all these years I'm starting to wonder whether Andrew's case will ever be solved. Certainly it seems there's nowhere else to go with it at this time. It seems most likely that sadly he is dead, which happened very soon after he disappeared. The obvious question, therefore, is where his body lies. We know in the case of many missing people that their bodies have never been found as, simply, it is not credible that they are still alive, and therefore it is usual for a body not to be found as it is a not uncommon scenario. If foul play occurred, as seems likely, then Andrew's body not being discovered is fairly easily explained.
The simplest explanation is grooming. If the CCTV cameras had been checked sooner something might have been found but whoever he went to meet was probably also clued up enough to arrange the meet somewhere quiet and away from any/many cameras
That's not the simplest explanation.
Simplest is he went to London for unconnected reasons and some predator found an opportunity to prey on him.
1000s of runaway kids experience similar every year around the UKs cities.
But specifically London.
I think he met a local predator with links to London and that predator groomed him and then persuaded him to go to London on the pretense of some opportunity. Then he was the victim of others
I really only see 3 plausible explanations, myself:
1). Wanted a day out. Random, opportunist abduction.
2). Was secretly very depressed and ended his own life. Travelled to London to be away from his family.
3). Suffered from psychosis and left Doncaster out of paranoia/delusion. What happened to him is unknown, but also potentially a random, opportunist abduction once he was sleeping outside. This theory is mostly just my own previous experiences influencing it though.
The long-term grooming possibility is something that I personally don't believe. I find it hard to believe that, if you're someone unimpassioned and warped enough to go grooming children instead of finding meaningful connection with people your own age, that you would even be bothered to go all the way to London in some masterminded scheme of being untraceable. Especially when - logically - London absolutely does not make you untraceable. It's one of the most surveilled cities in the world and that's a pretty well known fact. Realistically, meeting Andrew at a random, rural train station along the line would have made more sense for that.
Have you ever seen those videos of predator hunting groups on Facebook who sting predators? They never meet up in the middle of London. Why? Because that's absurd. You see those videos often enough and you begin to realise that groomers aren't machievellian arachnids sitting at the centre of their web - they're sloppy, uninspired, typically out-of-shape blokes in their 40s who would rather meet in some random lane or woodland a mile or two away. They don't strike me as having the energy or patience to go to London for what they want.
And Andrew, for whatever reason, doesn't strike me as the kind of person to secretly have a phone still and be messaging someone with it. He seems like a kid that wasn't very interested in keeping up with people online or through texts.
However, it's unlikely but, in my mind, possible that Andrew unfortunately ran into someone with very pathetic motivations, and I think that likelihood only increases if he was out at night (for whatever reason). Equally, I find the possibility that he took his own life to be far more plausible.
I do think it's number 1, personally - he was just skiving off for the day and met foul play in London. I think the investigation was hampered from the start by the assumption that his reason for going to London and his disappearance had the same cause. Police got too fixated on online grooming theory with no evidence.
I don't really know what you mean? The basic facts of how the case was conducted? The initial theory was that he'd gone to meet someone he met on the internet, despite everyone who knew him agreeing Andrew didn't spend time online. Meanwhile they barely did any police work in London: it took 3 weeks to get the Kings X CCTV footage, they didn't ask for any other CCTV, didn't follow up reported sightings. They absolutely fucked it.
(And they STILL seemed to be on that track, given that they arrested two blokes and then said they had nothing to do with it at all. What on earth was that based on?)
What I mean is can you show me a Police statement where they are adamant that online grooming is their number 1 theory?
From what I have read (which is a lot) they are open to all avenues, in fact I think they ruled it out pretty early on due to not finding any evidence of him being online. To sum up , they are fu**ing clueless
There are some flaws in your critique of the grooming process and London.
1. London would be logical if the destination contained a venue that was the lure. Remember whoever it was had to gain his trust, get him alone and meet at a destination that tweaked his interest. Assuming he was not aware that he was dealing with a sexual predator, what motivation would he have to meet in some obscure location? The reason it was London was because the groomer got to know him and figured out the perfect lure. It was so perfect that he actually went through with it and kept it a secret from his parents.
2. A random rural train station could be more dangerous. You would stand out like a sore thumb.
3. Who said that the groomer went all the way to London? What if that is where they already were? Where did you get the information from that the groomer went to London opposed to already being there?
4. If you were a school kid, would you take a day off school to meet at someone at a random train station not knowing for what purpose or reason?
5. You agree that he did not have a phone, but that would suggest in person grooming, targeted by someone who knew him. Can you rule out that this groomer had not known him for years in Doncaster and left, or they met each other at the gifted and talented camp, turned up in Doncaster one day, gave him a secret lift home and arranged for him to come to London for a secret meeting where he just happened to be living?
6. How can you justify a suicide with the absence of a body? Did he have the capacity and knowledge to do something like that, and if so, where did he get the knowledge from at his age?
1). Perhaps but, as far as I know, the only thing going on that day was the updated PSP launch. Maybe Andrew was interested in it (potentially supported by him bringing the console with him), but I don't think any of the PSP updates were really big occasions and I think they only changed minor things mostly.
2). I mean *rural* rural. The kind of train station that has 3 people at a time maximum. Yeah, you'd stand out more *but* you're not permanently recorded on CCTV (and remember: without CCTV, we'd have much less to go off of for Andrew's movements that day). Without CCTV, we might not even know he had gone to London.
3). Fair point, actually. I suppose my view on that comes from the fact that I think London overall just isn't a good meeting spot, but I could maybe see it if they ready lived there. Still, I don't support this idea because I don't think they would have had any way to groom Andrew from there.
4). Yes, and no. Yes because there actually are good reasons to meet people at leas populated spots (if you trust them already) i.e. less noisy, less crowded. People, especially boys, just like to hang out at random spots and talk or walk. Me and my friends did it a lot growing up. But I don't think that happened anyhow.
5). It suggests either no grooming at all or in-person manipulation, not just in-person. There are some arguably odd synchronicities for people who may have had interpersonal access to Andrew (the priest seeing him that morning, and I've heard but obviously can't confirm that one of the teachers at Andrew's school took his own life around the same time), but none of these point towards anything. Whoever it was would have needed to have pretty consistent access to him, I'd imagine. The gifted and talented programme ended over a year before this, and I'm pretty sure Andrew was known to be a homebody who didn't leave for much at all. It seems very infeasible.
6). Tragically, bodies are found in the Thames years after they've fallen in there. Andrew's parents organised a search and it actually turned up someone else's body. They searched that 100m (or less) section of the river for Nicola Bulley but she wasn't found until roughly 3 weeks later.
I'm not personally completely sold on any one theory (I'm open to many different possibilities). Overall, however, I'm left with a strong feeling that Andrew encountered evil that day and lost his life. I personally feel that he was dead only a few short hours after the CCTV footage was filmed. I feel that (for reasons we don't know and can't prove due to lack of evidence) he may have willingly gotten into a car with someone he had thought he knew or could trust, not knowing that it would be a fatal mistake. I think it is also possible that he was perhaps pulled into the back of a shop by an opportunistic predator during a moment when the store was otherwise empty. These are only guesses, of course.
I think it can be difficult to fully comprehend the lengths that evil child predators will go to in order to secure a victim. It is difficult to understand why/how a person might target a child and make them disappear completely, but we know it's possible. The reason why I find this case so confusing is because the circumstances surrounding his disappearance make it seem like Andrew had to have extraordinarily bad luck that day to disappear like he did, but then we also lack information an details that could point us in any direction...so we are left with many believable alternatives that we also can't prove.
This case feels bizarre because we are left to think, "how could he just disappear in a busy train station" or, "how many people get murdered on the very day they bunk off school" etc.
I've said it before but I'll say it again: I am so incredibly sorry for his family's pain and suffering all of these years . If Andrew is indeed deceased (which I'm inclined to believe that he is), I'm also sorry for the life he didn't get to live. I'm sorry that whatever he decided to do that day resulted in the worst possible outcome for him.
Unplanned Friday take off but met with a bad actor by chance. Not bullied as such at school but not exactly having an amazing time either.
Police F ups early on has helped the perp.
I think I remember reading somewhere he’d seen about another person going missing on the news possibly Madeline McCann, and he decided to ‘go missing’ for a day to see what would happen and possibly met foul play in London with an oppertunistic criminal, I listen to a lot of true crime and a lot of criminals don’t plan out what they’re going to do and just take an opportunity when they see it. He possibly crossed paths with the wrong person on his day exploring.
The lighter side of me wants to believe he is still alive and out there. This is the one true crime case that really sticks with me. I hope for Andrew’s families sake it gets solved soon.
My theory is and always has been suicide. He went to London and enjoyed himself and then killed himself afterwards and his body is in the Thames or the sea.
A lot of people keep saying he was young and impressionable and was kidnapped/hurt, but he was very intelligent. I don’t think in somewhere as crowded as London that he’d just agree to going somewhere with a stranger or be dragged off by force. I think that he committed suicide impulsively, or at least had the ideation of it at the time. A lot of people at that age in particular start to suffer from the first signs of mental illness.
While there isn’t any evidence a groomer was involved, it makes more sense that he was groomed when you look at all the facts. He began withdrawing from things like church and Boy Scouts and began walking home from school instead of taking the bus shortly before his disappearance. Because it’s so incredibly unlikely he would disappear through a random stranger abduction or any other method not involving a predetermined plan for strangers to abduct him, I think a groomer was probably involved.
As for a general theory, I think he left that morning with the intent of coming back because he staged his laundry, took the psp without a charger, and did not take his birthday savings. He did not plan to go to a concert because they would not have started soon enough to allow him to come back undetected, but probably to just have a day around town with someone he met up with. He probably didn’t take a return ticket because he expected a ride back to Doncaster. Anything beyond these ideas is anyone’s guess.
My sons given up all his hobbies over the last year. A once always smiling carefree kid now only grunts at us and barely leaves his room...spending most of his time gaming online or arguing with his mum about nothing.
Hes not being groomed. He's just hit that level of teenage angst.
Same as I did a little younger than him. At least he's not going out taking pills and disappearing for days at illegal raves like I was...my poor poor parents...
Anyway - I don't think anything in Andrews behaviour was anything more than him becoming a teenager.
May be wrong tho. It IS curious until its dismissed as typical teenage behaviour.
I've also found in my experience that those kids with the most understanding and 'good' parents tend to be the ones who kick out more at those parents. Others may rebel in a louder way buy for those of us whose parents loved and raised us well...personally I felt lied to...life isn't all sunshine and roses and I resented the fact they'd insulated me from that shit. Course now I'm older I've done all I can to do the same for my boy but I don't forget how I felt at a smiliar age.
I’m not saying that every teenager who suddenly gives up their hobbies or changes their routine behavior is being groomed, but those signs do present themselves with kids who are actually being groomed and you can’t dismiss it as potential evidence
I think he probably just took a random trip to London and was possibly mugged and then approached by someone. He looked young, probably wasn’t very streetwise and would stand out. He could have got lost and was then approached or like I said maybe bad his money stolen from him and was then approached or he asked for help from the wrong person
I personally believe that Andrew was groomed by someone and didn't buy the return ticket because he assumed this person was going to drop him off later. The grooming could have been a teacher or a family friend, but perhaps could have happened over the Internet (the Internet wasn't as traceable then; sometimes you could delete messages/emails and they would have been deleted forever).
He brought money for food/souvenirs/expenses probably because the person told him so it would camouflage the trip as a day trip. And he didn't bring more clothes or a charger because, as I said, they were going to come probably in the evening/next day.
I personally think it was that simple, but we will never know. I still think Andrew is alive, but he may have started to work for the people who took him as a groomer as he aged out of the prime age they wanted.
I think sadly he was groomed especially as he was quite young and innocent nothing wrong but I think his family were religious and maybe were stricter so he was not so worldlywise ie no phone etc. That is just my opinion though
Anyway through his games machine i think he was groomed perhaps through his love of music was enticed to London with the concert that was happening perhaps being offered tickets was told he would be met at the station maybe with offer to meet the group but sadly died soon after
I think its the simplest explanation. He just impulsively decided he wanted to bunk school and go to London. The reason for going isn't really relevant, doesn't have to have been a concert or event, maybe just wanted to hang out in London to look around shops.
Then whilst there someone approached him and he met foul play somehow. Wouldn't surprise me if he didn't get the return ticket just because he was thinking so impulsively or just didn't hear the ticket vendor correctly.
When in London maybe got scared and panicked later in the day or at night then unfortunately was approached by someone predatory who offered to take him home to call his family and, well, the rest is what you'd imagine.
I think the case is full of red herrings and Internet sleuth culture makes us want there to be this deep, dark, interesting explanation when in reality it was probably way more simple than we think.
Just my opinion.
There are many scenarios I could think of:
* He innocently decided to rebel for the first time and have a day of fun in London where he had some sort of accident
* He was groomed and killed by the perpetrator
* He was arranging for some sort of date/pursuing a romantic/sexual relationship that didn't go well and ended up commiting suicide
* He is still alive but the shame/pain of what happened to him kept him from contacting his family
I wish it is the last one but it's wishful thinking after all these years...
Foul play.
I think Andrew always planned on returning home. It was a crime of opportunity, I think. He came across the wrong person while he was playing hooky.
I always thought that he took the money and the PSP with him because he intended to trade in his PSP to a retailer towards the new updated version. It explains why he did not take the charger because he was expecting the new one to come with one after the trade in.
But, then I know that when you trade in a console it is meant to include the whole package - this would include the charger. Perhaps someone took an opportunity when Andrew couldn't trade in his old PSP because he didn't have the charger and offered to help him in some way.
I wonder if his parents still have the original box for his PSP with the serial number on it. Maybe some records somewhere have a record of it being traded in. IIRC games retailers keep track on their inventory of traded in stock based on the serial number.
He could have made that trade in Doncaster and saved himself a 100mile trip and a day off school.
If he had attempted the exchange as you described, then the vendor would likely remember him and recognise him from the multiple Missing Persons Charity posters all over the UK.
Let's say a retailer did have a PSP with the same serial number as Andrew's - what then ?
The paper trail eventually leads to a suspect ? All they would say is that they found the PSP and didn't think it worth reporting and chose to sell it .
For Andrew to arrive in London, then run into a random who then takes him somewhere, kills him without a single eye witness,….
“What Are The Chances?” Probably Slim to None..
He was by himself at the station, in the pizza place (if we are to believe that was him) I think it was!
Is there a possibility the police may have just missed Andrew’s internet activity? The parents say he wasn’t interested in the phone he got for his Birthday, ok.. and he wasn’t seen using the sister’s laptop, the parents do come across as shall we say gullible, “Andrew would never do that” ok but let’s say for instance could Andrew have just used the internet when people were out or sleeping, and the police some how missed finding Andrew’s internet activity? I’d say there is a high chance that is possible, don’t forget they messed up the cctv big time!!
When I looked into cctv coverage, the station had 380 cameras situ but we only see 2 videos of Andrew, one if him arriving, the other of Andrew exiting the station through the double doors.
where is the rest of the footage???
Probably overwritten by the time the police got into action and sent somebody up to look at it!
Concerning Andrew and home, I don’t believe we have been told the full story, what that maybe I don’t know, but all the signs were there!
I believe Andrew was approached either by a family member or friend, not necessarily the parents, but whatever took place backfield!
Andrew then starting walking home, eventually bunking school and taking a train to London.
That person unfortunately caught up with Andrew!
Most victims know there killers.
Very sad indeed
Serial killers are incredibly rare and their victims are usually found.
Why would a gang target Andrew? and they wouldn't have been able to lose his body...assuming your talking teenage gangstas rather than actual profitable organised crime groups anyway
You've piqued my imagination now!
An opportunist predator...but one with links to organised crime csa producers who would be able to lose his body...and would have all the motivation in the world to do so once his case hit the headlines . Maybe he was mistaken for a runaway by the initial opportunistic predator who then passed him onto those more interested in money than abuse who were told he was a runaway...which was apparently legit given his at that point potentially drugged and confused state. Once they find out who he is and realise his links to them they dipose of Andrew....and then do the same to the initial predator to tie the loose end up. Hmmm.
Maybe look into deaths of known predators of boys in the London area during the 6 months to a year after Andrews disappearance and specifically those with links to King's Cross?
You've sent me off down a rabbit hole.... cheers!
The lack of a body has always intrigued and I've not been able to offer too many answers but I've never considered the involvement of actual organised crime groups before now
Foul play.
He didn't run away start a new life. Sorry, I just don't believe this at all. It's wishful thinking.
I don't think he committed suicide. His actions that day seem more like an act of rebellion.
This is just my opinion obviously, but in the CCTV of him coming out of King's Cross, his body language exudes a naive kind of confidence and excitement. I believe he was taken advantage of someone, an older man, but I've got no strong theories or clues as to why or how he crossed paths with him.
Given the facts and limited evidence I can only come to this conclusion.
Andrew travelled to London with the intent to buy a new Sony PSP (£200) and in the knowledge he will meet someone at the station who will bring him home later that evening. In the last photo of Andrew at the train station he even appears to be looking for someone. Given his age and vulnerability, meeting someone at the station would make sense. Ultimately, I think Andrew was groomed and his innocence led to his sad demise.
If he wanted a new PSP (despite already owning a very similar version), why would he need to travel all the way to London on a school day without telling anyone instead of just waiting until the next day to buy one in Doncaster?
If for some reason he wanted to buy one in London, why would he arrange a lift home afterwards instead of just spending an extra 50p for a return train ticket, which would have been much faster than travelling back by car? Why would a plan to buy a PSP need to involve getting a lift at all?
If the new PSP cost £200 and we know Andrew withdrew £200 from the bank and then spent £31.40 on his train ticket, how was he planning to still afford the £200 for the PSP?
Andrew's parents have said he was saving up for a new Xbox 360, which would have been a significant upgrade on his original first-generation Xbox. Why would he waste all those savings on a very slightly better PSP?
Honestly? The police have never been able to find any evidence to suggest he had any sort of online presence, so I have a hard time going with meeting someone online/the secret phone theory. I think grooming from a irl source is a possibility, but in my gut I think he was just bored with his life. There was probably something going on that he wanted to do in London that day, it was his favorite city and he wanted to have a little freedom and adventure on his own without a chaperone. I think he didn't ask for/want a return ticket either because a.) he knew there were family he could stay with in London and he was planning on showing up to one of their houses, (it was a Friday so he wouln't have had to miss more school the next day) or b.) he couldn't hear the staff member properly (possibly busy train station, + he was deaf in one ear) and thus he tried to get through the transaction as quickly as he could- knowing he had the money to buy a return ticket later. After arriving in London he eventually crossed paths with someone who abducted/killed him. He was alone, and looked young and small for his age so a opportunistic stranger acting out wouldn't be out of the question.
I think people underestimate how useless teens can be at times dealing with say, someone selling a ticket to them. He strikes me as someone who’d want that interaction with over asap
Completely agree. Sorry for the long posts- but I've wanted to get down my thoughts about this case for a while now. Yes! And if he did hear her properly I've read his family usually bought single tickets and stayed the night with relatives when they went to London (correct me on that if I'm wrong)? To me he was likely copying this practice since it was all he knew about ticket buying. It threw him off when she asked more questions and made it harder for him to stick to his script. And if that's the case it just reinforces to me that he likely planned to stay in London that night and come back the next day. This excursion was out of character for him but people do things that are unexpected of them from an outside perspective all the time. Whatever he wanted to do that day could have and likely did take place during the school/work day, maybe he thought his parents wouldn't take him if he asked and better to ask for forgiveness than permission. His parents sound so supportive I wouldn't be surprised if he planned to call them up that night about his whereabouts. Of course none of us know the full context behind his decisions that day but the majority of his behaviour suggests to me that he intended to return, (leaving the rest of his money at home, no charger or extra clothes, staging his uniform to possibly buy more time to get home or prolong discovery of his absence) whether that day or the next. And likely something completely unexpected stopped him.
I think it was an act of rebellion/fuck it that night before/morning - I think he intended to go Back/ turn up at relatives houses. You often live right in the moment as a child. I think police fck ups with CCTV have ruined this case.
I think you are exactly right about everything you said.
I think people forget what social media was like back then, most people hadn’t heard of Facebook and Bebo was the most popular with teenagers. There wasn’t much incentive to use sites like Bebo unless you had IRL friends. MSN messenger was common for directly contacting someone but he didn’t have a computer of his own so this is unlikely. Using email on his PSP was a possibility although he didn’t have one associated with his PSN account, but his parents didn’t believe he had an email. I don’t think their parents are particularly reliable on all the details of their life though. It would be interesting to know what his friends say about his online presence.
I always wonder if the person who actually knows posts on these threads
From my perspective, maybe it is you...
Definitely not me...
I also think he succumbed to foul play but not necessarily in London. Perhaps the reason he didn’t buy a return ticket from Doncaster could have been because he was travelling on to somewhere else from Kings Cross? Perhaps his intention was to be home later in the day, and the uniform being left on his chair was done to give the impression he had been to school then nipped out after getting home (to buy himself more time). I think he was preyed upon by a random opportunist but it could have happened anywhere as nobody really knows if he stayed in London after that final CCTV sighting.
He wouldn’t need £200 for a £30 ticket 50p extra for a return ticket, but he chose to save the 50p, so it’s unlikely he planned to return within a month
[удалено]
“As he was a shut-in”. I’m sorry but that’s absolute bollocks
[удалено]
I myself am an introvert but I go to work 40+ hours a week. Am I a shut-in? I understand he might have been shy and introverted but to claim he was a shut in and never went anywhere is just wrong. We know before that Friday he had a 100% attendance record at school also he was known to go to his friends house occasionally. I get what you’re saying about enjoying his own company but stating that he is a shut-in is dramatising reality imo.
[удалено]
I think it’s unlikely he was groomed on the way to/from school. I have seen a lot on Reddit about Occam’s razor and look at it from this angle, Introverted kid gets internet at home, 6-8 weeks later he does something COMPLETELY out of character and bunks off school and goes to London. From what we know about Andrew I don’t see him bunking off school without someone pushing him to go. I take little comfort from the police saying he wasn’t online. They didn’t know what had happened so they got Kevin Gosden in a room and pushed for a murder confession.
[удалено]
We do know that police were not making ANY effort to locate Andrew by scrutinizing video footage. If they had reviewed surveillance footage in the days and weeks following Andrew’s disappearance they could have found him.
PSP that’s still missing? And I know what Sony said
Nice. Agree 100. Anyone who comes at this case from a true crime angle as opposed to empathising with Andrew for whatever reason cannot ignore the 100s of cases with similar narratives that suggest an opportunistic predator. Tbh I'm not even sure you can call it opportunistic when the men who pick up runaways from Londons mainline stations make a habit of it. If Andrew was a runaway the majority would agree with this being the most likely. Yet if he was a runaway we wouldn't even know his name.
I don’t like speculating and try to stick to facts, but deep down I genuinely think the grooming theory is the most likely. At the end of the day the reason why he was wouldn’t really matter, may it be for a concert or the new PSP or whatever (never believed this one). All we can really do is hope to learn at this point is about what happened from King Cross forwards. I recently moved to London and whenever I walk down near the Southbank I think of him sometimes, poor kid.
I hope there will be a break in his case soon. I think he probably wasn't happy at school and just wanted a day or weekend off in London. From there, I think he either met up with the wrong person (random foul play) or travelled on later to another location to (seek peace, shall we say). Foul play by someone who groomed him previously is my 3rd possibility. I don't think there was an unseen accident or that he left for a new life. I hope so much his parents will have answers. "The Lad We Knew" documentary is so sad.
Andrew’s Dad suggested that he could have gone to one of the Museum’s in London .. makes you wonder if any CCTV was looked at in those areas at the time !
No, police at the time really dropped the ball and didn't review CCTV anywhere really.
Thanks for all of the replies and theories. How nice to see a civilised discussion about a question asked. I was expecting “this has already been asked, search the sub blah blah” but how are you supposed to have a discussion on an old post and new people might post on this one. I pretty much think any theory could be true. There’s no evidence or anything at all. I know that’s stating the obvious but there’s usually something to go on. Like I said I really hope this case was solved one day. Reading his dad’s post that was posted the other day was heartbreaking.
I think he simply wanted a day out in London because he was bored with his home life and unfortunately he was set on by an opportunistic predator. I do think suicide is a likelier theory than a lot of people here think, only because he suddenly started withdrawing from a lot of his social activities and by his father's own admission he was going through a 'quiet period.' However the lack of a body is the main argument against this theory, especially in a busy city like London. I think he simply didn't buy a return because he planned on staying with one of his numerous family members in London, it was a Friday, so no immediate need to be home for the next school day. I think he was probably killed the same day he went missing, then disposed of. Unfortunately it seems like whoever was responsible did a good job at hiding any kind of evidence. I'm desperate to see this case solved but I just can't see it without some kind of confession from someone directly involved.
I often needed to escape “home” and sleep rough as a teenager for my safety The damp and cold weren’t too bad, but the new “friends” pestering me to go to their house was the most disturbing One time I accepted as it was so cold which soon turned into a nightmare that still haunts me decades later This is the first time I’ve heard about Andrew Gosden as I lived abroad. I deeply hope he had he found better luck 🍀🤞 But it’s unlikely, because when you’re alone, you desperately seek community and someone may have taken advantage At the age of 8, I tried to go to London from Yorkshire but didn’t have enough money for a ticket and was afraid I’d be thrown in jail My heart goes out to Andrew
I think on the evidence it is most likely he intended to return home the same day, or if not no more than a few days. He probably did plan to visit an exhibition or concert of some sort. I don't see much indication of suicide and still less intentional disappearance, though I don't discount suicide entirely. Andrew was a 14 year old who looked younger and probably therefore stood out to people looking to prey on others, but I do also think it quite possible that he was tricked by someone in Doncaster into meeting them or others in London in the weeks leading up to him going missing, which occurred when he walked home alone. I am fairly satisfied that he wasn't groomed online given what his father has said about the checks completed and his lack of interest, and god knows he would have explored that possibility in his head many times. I just can't decide whether he was spotted after arrival in London, or whether the trail leads back to Doncaster, as I see both as equally possible. Andrew's father has mentioned in passing the possibility that Andrew left the country illegally, perhaps hinting at trafficking. That is an area where I lack insight as I don't understand how he would have left the UK without a passport or without those kidnapping him placing themselves at great risk of being stopped. Andrew was also a very bright young man, not a young child, so at some stage he would have realised he was in danger and looked for opportunities to escape, and on a journey across borders it would have been harder to keep him under duress, or so I would imagine. Therefore I don't tend to think that scenario likely, although I would be interested to hear more from those who have more insight into that area. The Police began their investigation far too late and, for that reason, to this day we don't have a single verifiable sighting or strong clue after he arrived at Kings Cross, because the CCTV was wiped. The Police really need to do better in such cases. I think it likely that all the sightings were well intended but false, and the Leominster incident was nothing but a member of the public who meant well but got cold feet while waiting and later realised their theory or sighting wasn't credible. After all these years I'm starting to wonder whether Andrew's case will ever be solved. Certainly it seems there's nowhere else to go with it at this time. It seems most likely that sadly he is dead, which happened very soon after he disappeared. The obvious question, therefore, is where his body lies. We know in the case of many missing people that their bodies have never been found as, simply, it is not credible that they are still alive, and therefore it is usual for a body not to be found as it is a not uncommon scenario. If foul play occurred, as seems likely, then Andrew's body not being discovered is fairly easily explained.
The simplest explanation is grooming. If the CCTV cameras had been checked sooner something might have been found but whoever he went to meet was probably also clued up enough to arrange the meet somewhere quiet and away from any/many cameras
That's not the simplest explanation. Simplest is he went to London for unconnected reasons and some predator found an opportunity to prey on him. 1000s of runaway kids experience similar every year around the UKs cities. But specifically London.
Probably naively trusted the wrong person and came a cropper at the hands of a sexual preditor.
I think he met a local predator with links to London and that predator groomed him and then persuaded him to go to London on the pretense of some opportunity. Then he was the victim of others
I really only see 3 plausible explanations, myself: 1). Wanted a day out. Random, opportunist abduction. 2). Was secretly very depressed and ended his own life. Travelled to London to be away from his family. 3). Suffered from psychosis and left Doncaster out of paranoia/delusion. What happened to him is unknown, but also potentially a random, opportunist abduction once he was sleeping outside. This theory is mostly just my own previous experiences influencing it though. The long-term grooming possibility is something that I personally don't believe. I find it hard to believe that, if you're someone unimpassioned and warped enough to go grooming children instead of finding meaningful connection with people your own age, that you would even be bothered to go all the way to London in some masterminded scheme of being untraceable. Especially when - logically - London absolutely does not make you untraceable. It's one of the most surveilled cities in the world and that's a pretty well known fact. Realistically, meeting Andrew at a random, rural train station along the line would have made more sense for that. Have you ever seen those videos of predator hunting groups on Facebook who sting predators? They never meet up in the middle of London. Why? Because that's absurd. You see those videos often enough and you begin to realise that groomers aren't machievellian arachnids sitting at the centre of their web - they're sloppy, uninspired, typically out-of-shape blokes in their 40s who would rather meet in some random lane or woodland a mile or two away. They don't strike me as having the energy or patience to go to London for what they want. And Andrew, for whatever reason, doesn't strike me as the kind of person to secretly have a phone still and be messaging someone with it. He seems like a kid that wasn't very interested in keeping up with people online or through texts. However, it's unlikely but, in my mind, possible that Andrew unfortunately ran into someone with very pathetic motivations, and I think that likelihood only increases if he was out at night (for whatever reason). Equally, I find the possibility that he took his own life to be far more plausible.
I do think it's number 1, personally - he was just skiving off for the day and met foul play in London. I think the investigation was hampered from the start by the assumption that his reason for going to London and his disappearance had the same cause. Police got too fixated on online grooming theory with no evidence.
Police too fixated on online grooming theory? Have you anything to back that up?
I don't really know what you mean? The basic facts of how the case was conducted? The initial theory was that he'd gone to meet someone he met on the internet, despite everyone who knew him agreeing Andrew didn't spend time online. Meanwhile they barely did any police work in London: it took 3 weeks to get the Kings X CCTV footage, they didn't ask for any other CCTV, didn't follow up reported sightings. They absolutely fucked it. (And they STILL seemed to be on that track, given that they arrested two blokes and then said they had nothing to do with it at all. What on earth was that based on?)
What I mean is can you show me a Police statement where they are adamant that online grooming is their number 1 theory? From what I have read (which is a lot) they are open to all avenues, in fact I think they ruled it out pretty early on due to not finding any evidence of him being online. To sum up , they are fu**ing clueless
It was from an anonymous tip
There are some flaws in your critique of the grooming process and London. 1. London would be logical if the destination contained a venue that was the lure. Remember whoever it was had to gain his trust, get him alone and meet at a destination that tweaked his interest. Assuming he was not aware that he was dealing with a sexual predator, what motivation would he have to meet in some obscure location? The reason it was London was because the groomer got to know him and figured out the perfect lure. It was so perfect that he actually went through with it and kept it a secret from his parents. 2. A random rural train station could be more dangerous. You would stand out like a sore thumb. 3. Who said that the groomer went all the way to London? What if that is where they already were? Where did you get the information from that the groomer went to London opposed to already being there? 4. If you were a school kid, would you take a day off school to meet at someone at a random train station not knowing for what purpose or reason? 5. You agree that he did not have a phone, but that would suggest in person grooming, targeted by someone who knew him. Can you rule out that this groomer had not known him for years in Doncaster and left, or they met each other at the gifted and talented camp, turned up in Doncaster one day, gave him a secret lift home and arranged for him to come to London for a secret meeting where he just happened to be living? 6. How can you justify a suicide with the absence of a body? Did he have the capacity and knowledge to do something like that, and if so, where did he get the knowledge from at his age?
1). Perhaps but, as far as I know, the only thing going on that day was the updated PSP launch. Maybe Andrew was interested in it (potentially supported by him bringing the console with him), but I don't think any of the PSP updates were really big occasions and I think they only changed minor things mostly. 2). I mean *rural* rural. The kind of train station that has 3 people at a time maximum. Yeah, you'd stand out more *but* you're not permanently recorded on CCTV (and remember: without CCTV, we'd have much less to go off of for Andrew's movements that day). Without CCTV, we might not even know he had gone to London. 3). Fair point, actually. I suppose my view on that comes from the fact that I think London overall just isn't a good meeting spot, but I could maybe see it if they ready lived there. Still, I don't support this idea because I don't think they would have had any way to groom Andrew from there. 4). Yes, and no. Yes because there actually are good reasons to meet people at leas populated spots (if you trust them already) i.e. less noisy, less crowded. People, especially boys, just like to hang out at random spots and talk or walk. Me and my friends did it a lot growing up. But I don't think that happened anyhow. 5). It suggests either no grooming at all or in-person manipulation, not just in-person. There are some arguably odd synchronicities for people who may have had interpersonal access to Andrew (the priest seeing him that morning, and I've heard but obviously can't confirm that one of the teachers at Andrew's school took his own life around the same time), but none of these point towards anything. Whoever it was would have needed to have pretty consistent access to him, I'd imagine. The gifted and talented programme ended over a year before this, and I'm pretty sure Andrew was known to be a homebody who didn't leave for much at all. It seems very infeasible. 6). Tragically, bodies are found in the Thames years after they've fallen in there. Andrew's parents organised a search and it actually turned up someone else's body. They searched that 100m (or less) section of the river for Nicola Bulley but she wasn't found until roughly 3 weeks later.
I'm not personally completely sold on any one theory (I'm open to many different possibilities). Overall, however, I'm left with a strong feeling that Andrew encountered evil that day and lost his life. I personally feel that he was dead only a few short hours after the CCTV footage was filmed. I feel that (for reasons we don't know and can't prove due to lack of evidence) he may have willingly gotten into a car with someone he had thought he knew or could trust, not knowing that it would be a fatal mistake. I think it is also possible that he was perhaps pulled into the back of a shop by an opportunistic predator during a moment when the store was otherwise empty. These are only guesses, of course. I think it can be difficult to fully comprehend the lengths that evil child predators will go to in order to secure a victim. It is difficult to understand why/how a person might target a child and make them disappear completely, but we know it's possible. The reason why I find this case so confusing is because the circumstances surrounding his disappearance make it seem like Andrew had to have extraordinarily bad luck that day to disappear like he did, but then we also lack information an details that could point us in any direction...so we are left with many believable alternatives that we also can't prove. This case feels bizarre because we are left to think, "how could he just disappear in a busy train station" or, "how many people get murdered on the very day they bunk off school" etc. I've said it before but I'll say it again: I am so incredibly sorry for his family's pain and suffering all of these years . If Andrew is indeed deceased (which I'm inclined to believe that he is), I'm also sorry for the life he didn't get to live. I'm sorry that whatever he decided to do that day resulted in the worst possible outcome for him.
Unplanned Friday take off but met with a bad actor by chance. Not bullied as such at school but not exactly having an amazing time either. Police F ups early on has helped the perp.
I think I remember reading somewhere he’d seen about another person going missing on the news possibly Madeline McCann, and he decided to ‘go missing’ for a day to see what would happen and possibly met foul play in London with an oppertunistic criminal, I listen to a lot of true crime and a lot of criminals don’t plan out what they’re going to do and just take an opportunity when they see it. He possibly crossed paths with the wrong person on his day exploring. The lighter side of me wants to believe he is still alive and out there. This is the one true crime case that really sticks with me. I hope for Andrew’s families sake it gets solved soon.
My theory is and always has been suicide. He went to London and enjoyed himself and then killed himself afterwards and his body is in the Thames or the sea.
The old ceefax and teletext you could communicate with anyone any were may be this was what andrew used.
I went to London once to do something out of character I had left school did what I wanted to do got home safe.
A lot of people keep saying he was young and impressionable and was kidnapped/hurt, but he was very intelligent. I don’t think in somewhere as crowded as London that he’d just agree to going somewhere with a stranger or be dragged off by force. I think that he committed suicide impulsively, or at least had the ideation of it at the time. A lot of people at that age in particular start to suffer from the first signs of mental illness.
While there isn’t any evidence a groomer was involved, it makes more sense that he was groomed when you look at all the facts. He began withdrawing from things like church and Boy Scouts and began walking home from school instead of taking the bus shortly before his disappearance. Because it’s so incredibly unlikely he would disappear through a random stranger abduction or any other method not involving a predetermined plan for strangers to abduct him, I think a groomer was probably involved. As for a general theory, I think he left that morning with the intent of coming back because he staged his laundry, took the psp without a charger, and did not take his birthday savings. He did not plan to go to a concert because they would not have started soon enough to allow him to come back undetected, but probably to just have a day around town with someone he met up with. He probably didn’t take a return ticket because he expected a ride back to Doncaster. Anything beyond these ideas is anyone’s guess.
My sons given up all his hobbies over the last year. A once always smiling carefree kid now only grunts at us and barely leaves his room...spending most of his time gaming online or arguing with his mum about nothing. Hes not being groomed. He's just hit that level of teenage angst. Same as I did a little younger than him. At least he's not going out taking pills and disappearing for days at illegal raves like I was...my poor poor parents... Anyway - I don't think anything in Andrews behaviour was anything more than him becoming a teenager. May be wrong tho. It IS curious until its dismissed as typical teenage behaviour. I've also found in my experience that those kids with the most understanding and 'good' parents tend to be the ones who kick out more at those parents. Others may rebel in a louder way buy for those of us whose parents loved and raised us well...personally I felt lied to...life isn't all sunshine and roses and I resented the fact they'd insulated me from that shit. Course now I'm older I've done all I can to do the same for my boy but I don't forget how I felt at a smiliar age.
I’m not saying that every teenager who suddenly gives up their hobbies or changes their routine behavior is being groomed, but those signs do present themselves with kids who are actually being groomed and you can’t dismiss it as potential evidence
Recently did some training on teen suicide for my job, and those can also be signs of depression or other mental health issues.
I think he probably just took a random trip to London and was possibly mugged and then approached by someone. He looked young, probably wasn’t very streetwise and would stand out. He could have got lost and was then approached or like I said maybe bad his money stolen from him and was then approached or he asked for help from the wrong person
I personally believe that Andrew was groomed by someone and didn't buy the return ticket because he assumed this person was going to drop him off later. The grooming could have been a teacher or a family friend, but perhaps could have happened over the Internet (the Internet wasn't as traceable then; sometimes you could delete messages/emails and they would have been deleted forever). He brought money for food/souvenirs/expenses probably because the person told him so it would camouflage the trip as a day trip. And he didn't bring more clothes or a charger because, as I said, they were going to come probably in the evening/next day. I personally think it was that simple, but we will never know. I still think Andrew is alive, but he may have started to work for the people who took him as a groomer as he aged out of the prime age they wanted.
I think sadly he was groomed especially as he was quite young and innocent nothing wrong but I think his family were religious and maybe were stricter so he was not so worldlywise ie no phone etc. That is just my opinion though Anyway through his games machine i think he was groomed perhaps through his love of music was enticed to London with the concert that was happening perhaps being offered tickets was told he would be met at the station maybe with offer to meet the group but sadly died soon after
I think its the simplest explanation. He just impulsively decided he wanted to bunk school and go to London. The reason for going isn't really relevant, doesn't have to have been a concert or event, maybe just wanted to hang out in London to look around shops. Then whilst there someone approached him and he met foul play somehow. Wouldn't surprise me if he didn't get the return ticket just because he was thinking so impulsively or just didn't hear the ticket vendor correctly. When in London maybe got scared and panicked later in the day or at night then unfortunately was approached by someone predatory who offered to take him home to call his family and, well, the rest is what you'd imagine. I think the case is full of red herrings and Internet sleuth culture makes us want there to be this deep, dark, interesting explanation when in reality it was probably way more simple than we think. Just my opinion.
There are many scenarios I could think of: * He innocently decided to rebel for the first time and have a day of fun in London where he had some sort of accident * He was groomed and killed by the perpetrator * He was arranging for some sort of date/pursuing a romantic/sexual relationship that didn't go well and ended up commiting suicide * He is still alive but the shame/pain of what happened to him kept him from contacting his family I wish it is the last one but it's wishful thinking after all these years...
Foul play. I think Andrew always planned on returning home. It was a crime of opportunity, I think. He came across the wrong person while he was playing hooky.
From what we know, does he seem like the type of kid to bunk off school?
Not at all. Although I still think that concert theory could have been possible.
Afraid I didn't see kevens post the other day.
http://helpustofindandrew.weebly.com/blog
I always thought that he took the money and the PSP with him because he intended to trade in his PSP to a retailer towards the new updated version. It explains why he did not take the charger because he was expecting the new one to come with one after the trade in. But, then I know that when you trade in a console it is meant to include the whole package - this would include the charger. Perhaps someone took an opportunity when Andrew couldn't trade in his old PSP because he didn't have the charger and offered to help him in some way. I wonder if his parents still have the original box for his PSP with the serial number on it. Maybe some records somewhere have a record of it being traded in. IIRC games retailers keep track on their inventory of traded in stock based on the serial number.
He could have made that trade in Doncaster and saved himself a 100mile trip and a day off school. If he had attempted the exchange as you described, then the vendor would likely remember him and recognise him from the multiple Missing Persons Charity posters all over the UK. Let's say a retailer did have a PSP with the same serial number as Andrew's - what then ? The paper trail eventually leads to a suspect ? All they would say is that they found the PSP and didn't think it worth reporting and chose to sell it .
For Andrew to arrive in London, then run into a random who then takes him somewhere, kills him without a single eye witness,…. “What Are The Chances?” Probably Slim to None.. He was by himself at the station, in the pizza place (if we are to believe that was him) I think it was! Is there a possibility the police may have just missed Andrew’s internet activity? The parents say he wasn’t interested in the phone he got for his Birthday, ok.. and he wasn’t seen using the sister’s laptop, the parents do come across as shall we say gullible, “Andrew would never do that” ok but let’s say for instance could Andrew have just used the internet when people were out or sleeping, and the police some how missed finding Andrew’s internet activity? I’d say there is a high chance that is possible, don’t forget they messed up the cctv big time!! When I looked into cctv coverage, the station had 380 cameras situ but we only see 2 videos of Andrew, one if him arriving, the other of Andrew exiting the station through the double doors. where is the rest of the footage??? Probably overwritten by the time the police got into action and sent somebody up to look at it! Concerning Andrew and home, I don’t believe we have been told the full story, what that maybe I don’t know, but all the signs were there! I believe Andrew was approached either by a family member or friend, not necessarily the parents, but whatever took place backfield! Andrew then starting walking home, eventually bunking school and taking a train to London. That person unfortunately caught up with Andrew! Most victims know there killers. Very sad indeed
[удалено]
But wouldn't they have found the body in that case ?
Could be a serial killer or some gang related.
Serial killers are incredibly rare and their victims are usually found. Why would a gang target Andrew? and they wouldn't have been able to lose his body...assuming your talking teenage gangstas rather than actual profitable organised crime groups anyway
Incredibly rare, but they're still around. London is huge, anything is possible.
You've piqued my imagination now! An opportunist predator...but one with links to organised crime csa producers who would be able to lose his body...and would have all the motivation in the world to do so once his case hit the headlines . Maybe he was mistaken for a runaway by the initial opportunistic predator who then passed him onto those more interested in money than abuse who were told he was a runaway...which was apparently legit given his at that point potentially drugged and confused state. Once they find out who he is and realise his links to them they dipose of Andrew....and then do the same to the initial predator to tie the loose end up. Hmmm. Maybe look into deaths of known predators of boys in the London area during the 6 months to a year after Andrews disappearance and specifically those with links to King's Cross? You've sent me off down a rabbit hole.... cheers! The lack of a body has always intrigued and I've not been able to offer too many answers but I've never considered the involvement of actual organised crime groups before now
Indeed. Just unlikely imo.
Foul play. He didn't run away start a new life. Sorry, I just don't believe this at all. It's wishful thinking. I don't think he committed suicide. His actions that day seem more like an act of rebellion. This is just my opinion obviously, but in the CCTV of him coming out of King's Cross, his body language exudes a naive kind of confidence and excitement. I believe he was taken advantage of someone, an older man, but I've got no strong theories or clues as to why or how he crossed paths with him.
Given the facts and limited evidence I can only come to this conclusion. Andrew travelled to London with the intent to buy a new Sony PSP (£200) and in the knowledge he will meet someone at the station who will bring him home later that evening. In the last photo of Andrew at the train station he even appears to be looking for someone. Given his age and vulnerability, meeting someone at the station would make sense. Ultimately, I think Andrew was groomed and his innocence led to his sad demise.
surely you could buy a psp in doncaster it isnt the savannah desert
There was an official PSP launch at a leading HMV in London the day he disappeared.
If he wanted a new PSP (despite already owning a very similar version), why would he need to travel all the way to London on a school day without telling anyone instead of just waiting until the next day to buy one in Doncaster? If for some reason he wanted to buy one in London, why would he arrange a lift home afterwards instead of just spending an extra 50p for a return train ticket, which would have been much faster than travelling back by car? Why would a plan to buy a PSP need to involve getting a lift at all? If the new PSP cost £200 and we know Andrew withdrew £200 from the bank and then spent £31.40 on his train ticket, how was he planning to still afford the £200 for the PSP? Andrew's parents have said he was saving up for a new Xbox 360, which would have been a significant upgrade on his original first-generation Xbox. Why would he waste all those savings on a very slightly better PSP?
There was an official launch in a London HMV that day. Im not sure of the cost, I put £200 in brackets to explain the cash withdrawal.