CANADA Canada - Ariel Jeffrey Kouakou, 10, Montreal, 12 March 2018

[rosesfromangels]

Agree Otto. That father knows something that isn’t being shared IMHO and speculation, or he has his strong suspicion.

 

[otto]

It looks like he crossed the boardwalk and then went off the trail and walked closer to the waterfront.

This are images posted from the last couple of days:

Special thanks to those who contributed these (except the first).

 

[otto]

Agree Otto. That father knows something that isn’t being shared IMHO and speculation, or he has his strong suspicion.

If he is suspicious about something, he has a responsibility to report it to police. I don't think he has any suspicions of anything. He has said that the police are untrustworthy, the credible witness is not credible, and the CCTV footage of Ariel entering the park is not good enough. That is, he is in denial that Ariel went to the park. That's not helpful. It's interesting that the school board sees this as a good role model at a school.

They want more information, yet they refuse to accept the information they have received.

 

[Hazel]

(part #2 to post #679) regarding the corner of Rue Valmont and Boulevard Gouin

This is the video that shows the Florists' CCTV camera at the 00:51 mark

Link to Video: http://www.journaldemontreal.com/20...-des-recherches-pour-retrouver-le-petit-ariel

Second image is from Google street view (when there was no CCTV installed)
Link to Google street view: https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.5439...4!1sSgJrdJVKK6-_ry0YkNfkBw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

[mojook]

If he is suspicious about something, he has a responsibility to report it to police. I don't think he has any suspicions of anything. He has said that the police are untrustworthy, the credible witness is not credible, and the CCTV footage of Ariel entering the park is not good enough. That is, he is in denial that Ariel went to the park. That's not helpful. It's interesting that the school board sees this as a good role model at a school.

They want more information, yet they refuse to accept the information they have received.

It's not a foregone conclusion that he fell into the water. Yet, you seem to have accepted this as fact and are actively against looking at other options. Why is that?

You have also put a lot of words in his mouth that he didn't say. Context is everything, which you seem to ignore when misquoting him.

If my child was missing, I would absolutely be looking at other options as well. Until a body is found in the water, I will be looking elsewhere. What if he was indeed abducted?

Sent from my SM-N950W using Tapatalk

 

[freudianslip]

It's not a foregone conclusion that he fell into the water. Yet, you seem to have accepted this as fact and are actively against looking at other options. Why is that?

You have also put a lot of words in his mouth that he didn't say. Context is everything, which you seem to ignore when misquoting him.

If my child was missing, I would absolutely be looking at other options as well. Until a body is found in the water, I will be looking elsewhere. What if he was indeed abducted?

Sent from my SM-N950W using Tapatalk

rbbm

Me too.
LE are investigating other options as well, since there is no evidence to confirm either theory.

 

[otto]

It's not a foregone conclusion that he fell into the water. Yet, you seem to have accepted this as fact and are actively against looking at other options. Why is that?

You have also put a lot of words in his mouth that he didn't say. Context is everything, which you seem to ignore when misquoting him.

If my child was missing, I would absolutely be looking at other options as well. Until a body is found in the water, I will be looking elsewhere. What if he was indeed abducted?

Sent from my SM-N950W using Tapatalk

Please let me know if there is additional information that I'm not aware of.

Looking at the facts that I am aware of: there is CCTV footage of Ariel walking to his friend's house, and walking into the park. There is a credible witness who spoke with him at the park and who stated that he was at the "waterfront". Police have stated that there is no footage of Ariel leaving the park, which means they reviewed CCTV footage looking for evidence that he left the park and were unable to find any. This information together means that Ariel was at the park. In fact, it means that he is still at the park with the one exception of: although police review of CCTV footage was successful when looked for him entering the park, their review of footage was faulty when they looked for him leaving the park (that he did leave the park but police failed to see him).

Ariel's father has said that Ariel did not go to the park, that he had never been to the park, and that searches should exclude the park. This inherently means that the witness who spoke to Ariel at the waterfront is, according to the family, not credible. Although the family reviewed the restaurant CCTV footage that includes Ariel entering the park, they have insisted that they have not seen this footage and that footage of Ariel entering the park is not credible.

I am not in any way against exploring other options, however I have read about enough authentic child abductions by strangers to know that they are almost always murdered within two hours of the time of abduction and that they are sexually assaulted. Before going down that road, there should be some clue to indicate that this is what happened. As it is, the last clue places Ariel at the park, next to the waterfront, and there is no evidence he left that location on the pathways.

I'd like to reference the abductions of Lyric Cooke and Elizabeth Collins, pre-teen cousins in Iowa. Their bikes were located next to a lake, they vanished. Searches of the water and pathways as well as door to door inquiries were conducted first. Everything that was done was the same as the police search for Ariel. In Iowa, the lake was drained and the nearby river was scoured. There was no CCTV of their movements. It was ruled-out that they were in the lake or the river. It was then that police knew there was no alternative but an abduction. Their bodies were found many months later 20 miles from their bikes.

If we know that Ariel was at the park and that CCTV footage does not show him leaving the park, why does the family insist that Ariel was not at the park?

 

[dotr]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montr...0-search-resumes-ahuntsic-rdp-river-1.4596499

[h=1]Divers return to icy river to search for missing Montreal boy[/h]

More than two weeks after his disappearance, divers are heading back to Rivière des Prairies this morning as the search for Ariel Jeffrey Kouakou continues.

Divers have searched the frigid waters separating Montreal and Laval several times without success. The nautical unit set out again briefly on Tuesday, but divers were hampered by thick ice.

 

[freudianslip]

There is a credible witness who spoke with him at the park and who stated that he was at the "waterfront".

rsbbm

I missed that. I was under the impression she only stated he was at the Parc des Bateliers. They would have both needed to walk some distance on icy snow to meet at the waterfront IMO
Do you have a link please?
Thanks.

 

[GinaSeikwa]

In the La Presse article the manager of The Bordelais says that she often saw Ariel and his friends playing by the waterfront park

La Presse a frappé à la porte du restaurant. La gérante nous a dit avoir souvent vu le petit Ariel et ses amis jouer dans le stationnement des HLM voisins et près du parc riverain dans le passé. « Je ne le connaissais pas personnellement, mais nous avons beaucoup d'empathie envers sa famille et les proches et nous sommes de tout coeur avec eux. Nous restons à la disposition des autorités et des secouristes », a indiqué Carole Fleury.

 

[rosesfromangels]

I agree that if the child was abducted, the chances of him being alive are not good...at all. However, as long as earthly remains have not been found I am going to continue to hold on to hope, and my prayers continue. Perhaps I am reading too much in to the father's remarks, but he seems vehement that the child was abducted. He must have a reason for believing that...what is it?

 

[ms_x_to_the_m]

I've been ready off and on as my time permits.

Does anyone know if it's possible for the shoes, jacket come off the body, if Ariel is indeed in the water? With the current being so strong, maybe they should search farther away, no?

All moo

Sent from my Life One X2 using Tapatalk

 

[Hazel]

Divers end icy search for missing Montreal boy
Mar 28, 2018

More than two weeks after his disappearance, divers spent several hours in Rivière des Prairies as the search for Ariel Jeffrey Kouakou continues.

The divers ended their daylong operation around 4 p.m. on Wednesday and said the search would resume the next day.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montr...0-search-resumes-ahuntsic-rdp-river-1.4596499

 

[Hazel]

Where are you Ariel?

:candle:

 

[otto]

rsbbm

I missed that. I was under the impression she only stated he was at the Parc des Bateliers. They would have both needed to walk some distance on icy snow to meet at the waterfront IMO
Do you have a link please?
Thanks.

This has been posted a few times already, but here it is again. Unfortunately, as the story is updated, some content is changed so some of the original news articles are difficult to find.

"Police divers spent Monday and Tuesday searching the waters of Riviere des Prairies, with investigators stating they have a credible witness placing Ariel near the waterfront at the time of his disappearance."

https://firenewsfeed.com/news/1322829

 

[otto]

In the La Presse article the manager of The Bordelais says that she often saw Ariel and his friends playing by the waterfront park

La Presse a frappé à la porte du restaurant. La gérante nous a dit avoir souvent vu le petit Ariel et ses amis jouer dans le stationnement des HLM voisins et près du parc riverain dans le passé. « Je ne le connaissais pas personnellement, mais nous avons beaucoup d'empathie envers sa famille et les proches et nous sommes de tout coeur avec eux. Nous restons à la disposition des autorités et des secouristes », a indiqué Carole Fleury.

That is good to hear. I suspect that Ariel's friend could make the same statement to police.

 

[juli99]

Please let me know if there is additional information that I'm not aware of.

Looking at the facts that I am aware of: there is CCTV footage of Ariel walking to his friend's house, and walking into the park. There is a credible witness who spoke with him at the park and who stated that he was at the "waterfront". Police have stated that there is no footage of Ariel leaving the park, which means they reviewed CCTV footage looking for evidence that he left the park and were unable to find any. This information together means that Ariel was at the park. In fact, it means that he is still at the park with the one exception of: although police review of CCTV footage was successful when looked for him entering the park, their review of footage was faulty when they looked for him leaving the park (that he did leave the park but police failed to see him).

Ariel's father has said that Ariel did not go to the park, that he had never been to the park, and that searches should exclude the park. This inherently means that the witness who spoke to Ariel at the waterfront is, according to the family, not credible. Although the family reviewed the restaurant CCTV footage that includes Ariel entering the park, they have insisted that they have not seen this footage and that footage of Ariel entering the park is not credible.

I am not in any way against exploring other options, however I have read about enough authentic child abductions by strangers to know that they are almost always murdered within two hours of the time of abduction and that they are sexually assaulted. Before going down that road, there should be some clue to indicate that this is what happened. As it is, the last clue places Ariel at the park, next to the waterfront, and there is no evidence he left that location on the pathways.

I'd like to reference the abductions of Lyric Cooke and Elizabeth Collins, pre-teen cousins in Iowa. Their bikes were located next to a lake, they vanished. Searches of the water and pathways as well as door to door inquiries were conducted first. Everything that was done was the same as the police search for Ariel. In Iowa, the lake was drained and the nearby river was scoured. There was no CCTV of their movements. It was ruled-out that they were in the lake or the river. It was then that police knew there was no alternative but an abduction. Their bodies were found many months later 20 miles from their bikes.

If we know that Ariel was at the park and that CCTV footage does not show him leaving the park, why does the family insist that Ariel was not at the park?

Because they don't want him to be dead.

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

 

[Hazel]

I hope LE can talk to Ariel's friends and ask if they went together to the park during summer, fall, winter.

I think it is possible that Ariel has more friends around the apartment complex, and maybe when his dad dropped him off at Ismael's to possibly play video games, other friends came knocking and they all as a group went to play outside like boys do. They could have played soccer for a while, then off to the pathways and to the park. Maybe some friends have bicycles.

It seems to me that the father is very convinced that his son would have said "no" when enticed by other friends to go play outdoors, and perhaps that was not the case.
After all, we know that "boys will be boys."

So my point is, it could be possible that Ariel thought he could find his friend at the park, and headed there that Monday morning. He was sad when he found no one there.

All just speculation, but I think a female LE could talk and ask these questions to Ariel's friends, and let them know they will not get in trouble for telling the truth. JMOO

 

[otto]

I've been ready off and on as my time permits.

Does anyone know if it's possible for the shoes, jacket come off the body, if Ariel is indeed in the water? With the current being so strong, maybe they should search farther away, no?

All moo

Sent from my Life One X2 using Tapatalk

Bodies bloat after death, but if the water is cold enough perhaps his body is well preserved. It's hard to say whether his clothes will come of for now, although after enough time they will. His clothing could also snag on underwater debris.

 

[otto]

Because they don't want him to be dead.

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

They want their child to be found, and that should mean providing and accepting facts surrounding his disappearance.