UK UK - Andrew Gosden, 14, Doncaster, South Yorks, 14 Sep 2007 #2

[JG123]

I've found something interesting about the "National Association for Gifted and Talented Youth" course that Andrew attended at summer school in 2006 (confirmed as 2006 by Kevin's dad).

The Tavistock Institute wrote a report titled "Impact Assessment of ICT-based Initiatives". In this report they state the following:

Schome Park was an educational experiment set up in 2006 by the National Association for Gifted and Talented Youth and the Open University to explore the potential of virtual worlds to engage young people in new ways of learning.

The "virtual worlds" they're talking about is the Second Life game. It then goes on to explain the types of ICT that were used during the experiment:

Use of virtual worlds to explore educational potential and use of several Web 2.0 technologies to support the learning programme. Additional Web 2.0 tools included the Schome Park wiki; the Schome Park blog; SLogs (effectively a blog which allows users to send messages and photographs to a web page from inside Schome Park so the students could blog as their avatar); blikis (collaborative blogs which are not necessarily chronological); some students set up a radio station which streamed music into the island and played over the internet. Students also created a series of Machinima film projects, which they shared on YouTube and Blip.tv. Additionally, some students uploaded Second Life snapshots of their experiences of Schome Park to the projectwiki, as well as to their own photostreams or Flickr.

However, it then states that this specific experiment was aimed at underachievers or minorities, neither of which Andrew fits into:

The team actively recruited students from the National Association for Gifted and Talent Youth (NAGTY) who are underachieving in school. Of these students, 23% were from ‘socially disadvantaged or ethnic minority backgrounds who are currently underrepresented in higher education.

Therefore, it's unlikely he would have been part of this specific experiment, however, it does raise the consideration that he may have used IT when he was at this summer school.

 

[SJ16321]

My school didn't even have that firewall. I recall boys accessing pornographic and gory websites during classes, and online chatrooms/forums were definitely accessible too. It's why I have a hard time believing they'd be able to pinpoint exactly what websites Andrew himself would have been visiting. I can only imagine that being the case if every student had their own user login (like with most colleges and universities) and all your activity is associated with your specific account. Plus like already mentioned he may have visited any of the local libraries to use their computers which leaves the same problem - how do you know which sites Andrew was using? And that's presuming the internet history was even still saved by the time they checked it. (I'm no tech expert, maybe there's a way around accessing deleted history but somehow I don't think the police would have dug that deep all things considered...)

I also have difficulty believing Andrew wasn't using the internet at all. Lack of a phone is more understandable (although why not have one just for emergencies?) but someone at that age - especially one who was quiet and introverted - would be drawn to the internet and socialising online, surely? I know I was!

I went to a school in Doncaster at a similar time period to Andrew and you could basically access anything you wanted, the filters were laughably poor back then. I've mentioned before in previous posts that people in my class would access an empty chat room and speak to each other via that in the lesson, the teachers were none the wiser. Some lads even managed to set another lads background as gay *advertiser censored* when he'd left his PC for a bit, that's how easily they could be bypassed.

It's very likely there were no individual log ins for students in 2007 and everyone was logged into a PC as a generic user. Back then it was just considered easier, rather than trying to get a usually not very tech savvy teacher to help 30 kids log on with separate ID's at the start of the lesson. I went back to a school as an IT tech a few years ago and now everything is electronic from the doors to the registers to paying for your lunch and every student has their own individual identifier. It's amazing really how much it's changed in just over a decade. It's also worth nothing that the public library at that time had no individual log ins either, you just asked for access and the librarian would log you in and say you've got 60/120 mins.

Even if the police located a website where Andrew could have been chatting it would still be nigh on impossible to find anything. People easily forget what it was like back then but social media was in its infancy with only Myspace having any real popularity and even then it was mainly alternative kids who had it, not like Facebook today where even your nan has it. FaceParty had been big for a time in the UK but had basically died by 2007.

Chat rooms and messengers like AIM and MSN Messenger were very popular. You also had popular sites such as NeoPets, Habbo Hotel and loads of others I've forgotten which had chat functions. The real issue for police would have been chat rooms. There was thousands upon thousands of them and many you didn't need to register for, you just typed in your username and it joined you to the chat as that username. When you set it out like that, the police could have done full forensic IT searches for years and still come up blank, the online chatting options are endless.

I strongly believe now the internet theory is likely. Roughly 2005-2007 was the height of the whole "chav" thing in the UK and because of this it was a really tough time to be an alternative kid into rock music etc as you were enemy number 1 to the chavs. It's not hard to see how someone like Andrew could become isolated and possibly take solace in a new online relationship.

 

[catchingdelivery]

I went to a school in Doncaster at a similar time period to Andrew and you could basically access anything you wanted, the filters were laughably poor back then. I've mentioned before in previous posts that people in my class would access an empty chat room and speak to each other via that in the lesson, the teachers were none the wiser. Some lads even managed to set another lads background as gay *advertiser censored* when he'd left his PC for a bit, that's how easily they could be bypassed.

It's very likely there were no individual log ins for students in 2007 and everyone was logged into a PC as a generic user. Back then it was just considered easier, rather than trying to get a usually not very tech savvy teacher to help 30 kids log on with separate ID's at the start of the lesson. I went back to a school as an IT tech a few years ago and now everything is electronic from the doors to the registers to paying for your lunch and every student has their own individual identifier. It's amazing really how much it's changed in just over a decade. It's also worth nothing that the public library at that time had no individual log ins either, you just asked for access and the librarian would log you in and say you've got 60/120 mins.

Even if the police located a website where Andrew could have been chatting it would still be nigh on impossible to find anything. People easily forget what it was like back then but social media was in its infancy with only Myspace having any real popularity and even then it was mainly alternative kids who had it, not like Facebook today where even your nan has it. FaceParty had been big for a time in the UK but had basically died by 2007.

Chat rooms and messengers like AIM and MSN Messenger were very popular. You also had popular sites such as NeoPets, Habbo Hotel and loads of others I've forgotten which had chat functions. The real issue for police would have been chat rooms. There was thousands upon thousands of them and many you didn't need to register for, you just typed in your username and it joined you to the chat as that username. When you set it out like that, the police could have done full forensic IT searches for years and still come up blank, the online chatting options are endless.

I strongly believe now the internet theory is likely. Roughly 2005-2007 was the height of the whole "chav" thing in the UK and because of this it was a really tough time to be an alternative kid into rock music etc as you were enemy number 1 to the chavs. It's not hard to see how someone like Andrew could become isolated and possibly take solace in a new online relationship.

I just got so much nostalgia from your post! Brought back a lot of memories and feelings. The internet back then felt completely open and unrestricted, like we (teenagers at the time) were the ones who knew what we were doing on it, it was an even playing field and most parents and teachers were clueless with it. It felt like it was 'ours'. I'm not sure if I'm explaining myself very well but looking back we were mostly innocent and incredibly naive.

 

[catchingdelivery]

I've found something interesting about the "National Association for Gifted and Talented Youth" course that Andrew attended at summer school in 2006 (confirmed as 2006 by Kevin's dad).

The Tavistock Institute wrote a report titled "Impact Assessment of ICT-based Initiatives". In this report they state the following:



The "virtual worlds" they're talking about is the Second Life game. It then goes on to explain the types of ICT that were used during the experiment:



However, it then states that this specific experiment was aimed at underachievers or minorities, neither of which Andrew fits into:



Therefore, it's unlikely he would have been part of this specific experiment, however, it does raise the consideration that he may have used IT when he was at this summer school.

They may have considered Doncaster a deprived area?

 

[SJ16321]

I just got so much nostalgia from your post! Brought back a lot of memories and feelings. The internet back then felt completely open and unrestricted, like we (teenagers at the time) were the ones who knew what we were doing on it, it was an even playing field and most parents and teachers were clueless with it. It felt like it was 'ours'. I'm not sure if I'm explaining myself very well but looking back we were mostly innocent and incredibly naive.

I know what you mean, it was a completely different world online. Social media killed off so many different things like instant messengers, a lot of forums, chat rooms etc. Bands would always have their own website, now many don't bother and just use social media.

When I was a teenager I twice met up with girls I'd met on music forums. Thankfully for us we were all who we said we were, looking back now I can see how naive and incredibly dangerous it was!

They may have considered Doncaster a deprived area?

It's very possible, it's not the nicest place in the UK. For deprivation it comes in the top 30-40 usually. It's probably worth mentioning that Andrew went to one of the best rated schools in the town, the kids there are either catholic or their parents are affluent and were able to put enough money into the church to basically buy their kid a place.

 

[BethAnn777]

If mom, dad or sister had cell phones, hopefully they checked the internet usage and text messaging on all three of their phones. When my kids were around that age, before they had phones of their own, they used my phone to text and access the internet. They easily could have erased text messages and cleared my internet history without me noticing.

I’ve never heard mention of texts being checked in this case. Could Andrew simply have been texting from someone else’s phone and then erasing the messages?

At first glance it would seem unlikely because Andrew had two phones in the past and lost them. If he wanted to text someone why not get another phone which his parents offered. Perhaps the relationship/texting all happened quickly and plans were made for Andrew to go to London quickly. No time for him to get another phone if his own? Just use his mom, dad or sister’s when needed and then erase? Or could he have had a secret burner phone?

 

[Kitkat28]

It's very possible, it's not the nicest place in the UK. For deprivation it comes in the top 30-40 usually. It's probably worth mentioning that Andrew went to one of the best rated schools in the town, the kids there are either catholic or their parents are affluent and were able to put enough money into the church to basically buy their kid a place.

Some faith schools also had to accept a certain number of non-practicing pupils in order to receive government funding, so there’s always that possibility too.

One thing that’s never struck me before - maybe he had more than one charger for his PSP. It seems so obvious I don’t know why I hadn’t thought of it. I mean in the great scheme of things it’s not that relevant, but my son was always losing chargers and replacing them and then finding the original one.

 

[JG123]

One thing that’s never struck me before - maybe he had more than one charger for his PSP. It seems so obvious I don’t know why I hadn’t thought of it. I mean in the great scheme of things it’s not that relevant, but my son was always losing chargers and replacing them and then finding the original one.

I've never understood the relevance of the charger. I assume people think about it in regards to him potentially planning an extended stay? If we view it in regards to the theory I posted above, where he goes to London to meet someone then comes home soon after, it makes complete sense why he wouldn't take the charger.

- The original PSP had between 3-6 hours of gameplay time (probably on the higher end as he would have had the original PSP with a larger battery). The journey to London was a couple of hours, so he could have potentially played it all the way there and all the way back.
- If he then met someone and went off to do something, he wouldn't be playing his PSP.
- And lastly, even if we assume that he would have wanted to charge his PSP, where would he actually be able to charge it? I found an article from 2015 with a train company talking about being able to charge your phone as something novel, and people saying they'd go to a coffee shop to charge their phone, so I don't think charging your devices on the train existed in 2007 (admittedly, I never travelled by train back then and with the way phone batteries were they lasted so long there was no need to charge them).

 

[ChatteringBirds]

Presumably if his original plan was to try to start a new life for awhile, he would have brought a larger backpack with some clothes, the PSP charger, etc. That he didn't bring much is just a hint that maybe he planned to come back home within a relatively short time.

It really breaks my heart to think about a person innocently going to meet who they think is a new friend from the Internet and instead meeting a bad person. I really hope that didn't happen
but now can't say it's very unlikely.

I wonder if he and his school buddies ever hung out in a computer lab together, ever - even once - surfed forums or used a chatroom. I assume it never came out that anyone ever saw him do that, though, only because his parents seem to discount the idea.
And I think they really just want to know the truth now, any truth. But teens also hide a lot... All JMO.

 

[Kitkat28]

I've never understood the relevance of the charger. I assume people think about it in regards to him potentially planning an extended stay? If we view it in regards to the theory I posted above, where he goes to London to meet someone then comes home soon after, it makes complete sense why he wouldn't take the charger.

- The original PSP had between 3-6 hours of gameplay time (probably on the higher end as he would have had the original PSP with a larger battery). The journey to London was a couple of hours, so he could have potentially played it all the way there and all the way back.
- If he then met someone and went off to do something, he wouldn't be playing his PSP.
- And lastly, even if we assume that he would have wanted to charge his PSP, where would he actually be able to charge it? I found an article from 2015 with a train company talking about being able to charge your phone as something novel, and people saying they'd go to a coffee shop to charge their phone, so I don't think charging your devices on the train existed in 2007 (admittedly, I never travelled by train back then and with the way phone batteries were they lasted so long there was no need to charge them).

I think it only mattered because it was fixated upon as a ‘sign’ of his intentions. If you were going out for the day you wouldn’t take a charger, if you were planning to stay away longer you would.

I still think (and I’ve thought all along) that Andrew was planning to meet someone, and then he was going to go to his grandparents or other relatives and ask if they could call his parents and hoped that way he wouldn’t be in so much trouble. To an adult that seems a bit convoluted, but it’s the sort of thing I could see a young teenager doing.

 

[JG123]

Presumably if his original plan was to try to start a new life for awhile, he would have brought a larger backpack with some clothes, the PSP charger, etc. That he didn't bring much is just a hint that maybe he planned to come back home within a relatively short time.

That's how I see it too.

I wonder if he and his school buddies ever hung out in a computer lab together, ever - even once - surfed forums or used a chatroom. I assume it never came out that anyone ever saw him do that, though, only because his parents seem to discount the idea.
And I think they really just want to know the truth now, any truth. But teens also hide a lot... All JMO.

I'd be very interested if they ever asked his friends about this too. I think his parents entirely discounting the idea is a large part of why this theory doesn't seem to be pursued. Whenever it's brought up they always just say the police checked the computers and he didn't have one at home, and it's quickly brushed over. If they interviewed his friends would they have even brought anything like that up? His friends may not have thought it was relevant in any way, so it's not like they could have been hiding information, it could have simply been a case of they were never asked and so they never thought it was important in any way.

I still think (and I’ve thought all along) that Andrew was planning to meet someone, and then he was going to go to his grandparents or other relatives and ask if they could call his parents and hoped that way he wouldn’t be in so much trouble. To an adult that seems a bit convoluted, but it’s the sort of thing I could see a young teenager doing.

I think this is a good possibility. His Dad essentially says the same thing in the Thin Air podcast: "All of us, our gut reaction was, he's gone to do something or see something that we wouldn't give permission for because it involves a school day, and he just figured it's ok, I'll end up at my Uncle's, or my Grandparents, or any number of people, and then I'll face the music later." This also explains the lack of a return ticket. He wouldn't have wanted a return ticket, even though it was only 75p more or whatever it was, because he wouldn't have used it.

This would invalidate my third point about where he would charge it, but again, I think we're looking at a short term situation where he didn't envision playing his PSP long enough to need to charge it.

 

[ChatteringBirds]

If he was tricked into going to London, it is a little interesting to me that London is one of the 2 cities his family originally guessed he would have gone to.

Then again, it's also a place where a person could pretend to be visiting for business or get to easily by transport, etc.

Someone pretending to be a teen could have said, Let's ditch school and meetup for the day in London, since we can both get there by train...

 

[catchingdelivery]

Snipped by me;

It really breaks my heart to think about a person innocently going to meet who they think is a new friend from the Internet and instead meeting a bad person. I really hope that didn't happen
……………
I think they really just want to know the truth now, any truth.

I feel the same and I really worry that if this is the case, what if the person or people who know what happened to Andrew are dead? The truth would be lost forever. I hate thinking that and I don't really want to post it either, though I'm sure his poor family have considered it. I wish they had answers

 

[Oakie]

I strongly believe now the internet theory is likely. Roughly 2005-2007 was the height of the whole "chav" thing in the UK and because of this it was a really tough time to be an alternative kid into rock music etc as you were enemy number 1 to the chavs. It's not hard to see how someone like Andrew could become isolated and possibly take solace in a new online relationship.

What is a "chav"?

 

[chanchandlerbing3]

UK equivalent to the term "white trash" - CHAV stands for "Council House and Violent"

 

[HCcoffee]

- And lastly, even if we assume that he would have wanted to charge his PSP, where would he actually be able to charge it? I found an article from 2015 with a train company talking about being able to charge your phone as something novel, and people saying they'd go to a coffee shop to charge their phone, so I don't think charging your devices on the train existed in 2007 (admittedly, I never travelled by train back then and with the way phone batteries were they lasted so long there was no need to charge them).

I was travelling around London a lot during that time and did see plug sockets on trains that some people were using to charge their phones or laptops. I'm fairly sure they had notices above them stating to not use them for that purpose but obviously this was ignored. I imagine Andrew would have fully charged his PSP the night before and probably didn't feel the need to charge it again during the train journey (which took just under 2 hours I believe?). I still think not taking the charger is just a red herring; likely something he forgot to take or didn't feel the need to bring along. Also...

One thing that’s never struck me before - maybe he had more than one charger for his PSP. It seems so obvious I don’t know why I hadn’t thought of it. I mean in the great scheme of things it’s not that relevant, but my son was always losing chargers and replacing them and then finding the original one.

Kitkat28 raises a good point, he may have owned more than one and his parents were simply not aware of this.

I think his parents entirely discounting the idea is a large part of why this theory doesn't seem to be pursued. Whenever it's brought up they always just say the police checked the computers and he didn't have one at home, and it's quickly brushed over.

Yeah I agree. I don't know how people can completely dismiss the idea he was using the internet just because he didn't have a computer at home. Maybe he intentionally didn't want to own one because his parents would likely monitor his internet activity and potentially find out who he was talking to and not approve. Teenagers are secretive and if he didn't want them knowing, I could see him pretending to have no interest in using the internet so they'd be none the wiser.

 

[Kitkat28]

UK equivalent to the term "white trash" - CHAV stands for "Council House and Violent"

It doesn’t. That’s been retro-fitted to make an acronym. The word has been around for a long time and probably has its roots in the Romany language.

 

[HCcoffee]

If he was tricked into going to London, it is a little interesting to me that London is one of the 2 cities his family originally guessed he would have gone to.

Then again, it's also a place where a person could pretend to be visiting for business or get to easily by transport, etc.

Someone pretending to be a teen could have said, Let's ditch school and meetup for the day in London, since we can both get there by train...

That's a good point. The thing with King's Cross station is if you're coming in from anywhere north of London (i.e. the Midlands, northern England, Scotland, etc) then almost always you'll be coming into King's Cross (another station like this would be London Euston, which happens to be very close by). I'm probably looking too much into this now but it has me wondering if perhaps this person didn't actually live in London but rather just outside of it or at least in fairly close proximity, and that they specifically chose London because it's a very busy city where Andrew (and possibly them if they were picking him up) wouldn't really be noticed amongst the crowds.

It's such a shame the police didn't pull CCTV sooner. We could've seen roughly what direction he went in after leaving the station; did he get into a car? What was the make, model, colour or even license plate of this car? Was he seen with anyone and if so what did they look like? Did he catch a bus; what bus number/route? Where did he depart? Did he catch another train; where was it headed and, again, where did he depart? So many questions could've been answered if they had just asked for all this footage sooner. Even if this was a grooming situation and his life ended shortly after, his family would have answers and not be stuck in this limbo of not knowing anything. I get questioning the family but how hard would it have been to pull the footage then question them? Or do both simultaneously? I can't even begin to imagine how frustrating that was and continues to be, just awful.

 

[Dan Cooper]

 

[JG123]

Good video. He basically comes to the same conclusion that we've been talking about over the past couple of pages, though without explicitly stating he thinks it's online:

"I think Andrew was motivated by an external influence, probably another person."

He also thinks suicide and starting a new life are very unlikely theories.

From searching for something he mentioned, I also found the below website, which has posted a lot of articles from not long after Andrew went missing:

Gosden, Andrew Sept 14 2007

There's some things that I wasn't aware of, or things that have been clarified better than I knew previously, such as:

"The night before had been a standard evening at home. The family ate together and Andrew played a jigsaw game with his father on their computer"

"It took only three days to establish that Andrew had arrived in London at 11.20am on the Friday. It would take another 24 days before the CCTV footage of him leaving King’s Cross was discovered."

"Martin Taylor, one of his teachers, said that Andrew would comfortably achieve a first-class honours degree in the subject at Oxford or Cambridge. “He’'s quite a shy lad, but he has a fantastic smile and I’'ve never seen him down or sullen,” Mr Taylor said. “Andrew is deep and mature beyond his years. He’s quite self-contained and happy in his own company, but he’s not a loner. He always had a little posse of friends with him.”"

"Andrew seemed unusually content to stay at home in the evenings. He never went to a friend’s house or had anyone round, still less hung around on street corners."

"Mr and Mrs Gosden had suggested that Andrew travel alone to London during the summer holidays to stay with his grandmother. He did not want to go."

"By 6pm we realised he wasn't home."

"That evening, everyone assumed Andrew was already home and up in his bedroom. "When I had made the meal I asked Charlotte to call Andrew down," says Glenys, "and that's when we realised he was missing.""

"He can be quite insular, doesn't socialise with pals away from school and is thoughtful and mature, despite appearing young."

"Calls to friends and his school revealed that Andrew hadn't been there that day."

"We know now that many children go missing because of bullying, or issues with their sexual identity. We've asked his friends and his school if that could have been the case and drawn blanks."