UK UK - Corrie McKeague, 23, Bury St Edmunds, 24 September 2016 #17

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
penguinface said:
Agreed that I think it's better planned than a simple "impulsive" mugging, though by my own personal headcount, I think it's maybe ten or twelve people who know what has happened. JMO and it sounds both unlikely and very disturbing that a ring of silence can encompass that many. But if they know that the people at the top of the chain can "make someone disappear", it may help explain the reticence to come forward with information.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you suspect a criminal conspiracy to murder. Is that what you mean? Or an accident covered up?
 
So what are the chances that he walked out of the HS without being seen? Less than zero?

What vehicles left the HS before 8am the following morning?

Possible that someone he met online doesn't want to come forward because they are married?
 
Shiressleuth said:
Sounds like you suspect a criminal conspiracy to murder. Is that what you mean? Or an accident covered up?
Click to expand...

would people cove up a simple accident if that was what it was, IMO only intent to kill would dispose of a body,
 
Shiressleuth said:
Sounds like you suspect a criminal conspiracy to murder. Is that what you mean? Or an accident covered up?
Click to expand...

Well, if planning is enough for it to be "pissed someone off earlier in the night, they want their hard mates to rough him up, teach him a lesson" then that maybe rules out manslaughter. However, I don't think death was intended, more that the beating went too far, so I guess I'm somewhere between your two options.

It's odd though... in a funny way, if the situation as I see it did happen (and I know it's not a theory to which you personally ascribe!) the people who wanted the beating to take place would possibly be culpable of murder whereas those who carried out their bidding are probably closer to manslaughter. Not sure how that situation works as a point of law, will give it some research as it's interesting, whether or not it has any bearing here!

If the situation I believe happened did happen, then I think the cover-up afterwards is far better planned, and involves more people, than the botched "before" that lead to a death, and blood, on their hands but both are two sides of a coin when it comes to a whole crime, I guess.

JMO though, as ever!
 
penguinface said:
Well, if planning is enough for it to be "pissed someone off earlier in the night, they want their hard mates to rough him up, teach him a lesson" then that rules out manslaughter. However, I don't think death was intended, more that the beating went too far, so I guess I'm somewhere between your two options.

It's odd though... in a funny way, if the situation as I see it did happen (and I know it's not a theory to which you personaaly ascribe!) the people who wanted the beating to take place would possibly be culpable of murder whereas those who carried out their bidding are probably closer to manslaughter. Not sure how that situation works as a point of law, will give it some research as it's interesting, whether or not it has any bearing here!

If the situation I believe hapoened, then I think the cover-up afterwards is far better planned than the botched "before" that lead to a death, and blood, on their hands but both are two sides of a coin when it comes to a whole crime, I guess.

JMO though, as ever!
Click to expand...

Can I ask how you came to the conclusion that it was a possible beating that went too far?
 
Updated poster

c9f89b2cde3f6f9e1c9c4626bce7ee34.jpg

http://www.findcorrie.co.uk


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
maximcarter said:
I've read most of the threads about Corrie after the story brought me here. I remembered hearing about it near to the time it happened and never heard the outcome. Reading it all left me feeling mixed emotions. I am his age and that really bothered me.
Hoping for a positive outcome, it happens. An outcome of any sort would at least give him the justice or peace he deserves.

Watching the CCTV footage especially the second one I could easily imagine myself in any number of situations that would play out like that on camera, some good some bad. The first time I watched the second footage though my first and foremost thought was that when he sort of turns direction that he is meeting someone and he sees them and then walks/fast walks towards them with his hands in his pockets as I could picture myself doing if perhaps I was meeting someone I liked. I just think it's off how he has his hands in his pockets and sort of speeds up/jogs a bit to go into such an area if there isn't somebody there who he sees when he gets to where he turns. I would feel quite vulnerable with my hands in my pockets going into such an area is all I mean.
Just a perspective from someone his age.
Click to expand...

I like this post because the poster saw something I did whilst watching the videos and articulated far better than I could. I saw it on the vidieo but just couldn't articulate it Thank you for your post.

KR
R
 
So Corrie was put into a bin after being hit unconscious. <modsnip> The phone was put into a different bin.
But who did it and why :thinking:
 
FlashyHydra said:
So Corrie was put into a bin after being hit unconscious. <modsnip> The phone was put into a different bin.
But who did it and why :thinking:
Click to expand...

He could just have easily tossed the phone away himself and decided to disappear.
 
FlashyHydra said:
Like said, he was already drinking in his car that night, so he wasn't afraid of that....but perhaps he was afraid of something else. It might be something to do with that running I suppose.
Click to expand...

As I have already pointed out, drinking in his car would NOT have been illegal, and drinking even large quantities of alcohol does not immediately make one over the drink drive limit. He was definitely obviously over the limit later in the night (unless he was suffering from one of the several conditions that makes one appear drunk).
 
FlashyHydra said:
Of course that is one possibility. Tell us, why would he do such a thing?
Click to expand...

Who knows what was going through his mind. Its unlikely but its a possibility.

Any more details on the three men acting suspiciously 20 miles away and attempting to burn a suspicious car?
 
Tucker said:
As I have already pointed out, drinking in his car would NOT have been illegal, and drinking even large quantities of alcohol does not immediately make one over the drink drive limit. He was definitely obviously over the limit later in the night (unless he was suffering from one of the several conditions that makes one appear drunk).
Click to expand...

He was still parked illegally and I doubt the RAF would be too pleased about him drinking in his car. Anyway, it's by the by, I'm not sure what it has to do with his disappearance?
 
For all the people convinced he didn't go and sleep in his car as he was just abiding by the law- then you have to also accept he wouldn't wee on the street and therefore he wasn't going to the HS to urinate.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Just come across this video on Youtube.
The guy presenting this video claims that N said that C was not supposed to have a dog.

Is this common knowledge on Websleuths? I know the issue of his dog has been brought up on here.

.[video=youtube;T8IqNvl-GTA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8IqNvl-GTA[/video]
 
TerryB said:
Just come across this video on Youtube.
The guy presenting this video claims that N said that C was not supposed to have a dog.

Is this common knowledge on Websleuths? I know the issue of his dog has been brought up on here.
Click to expand...

Yes, Nicola acknowledged that he was not supposed to have a dog on base during a Q&A in December. Someone asked if the dog had been barking at the weekend:

"He was not supposed to have his puppy there so as a result he was trained to be very quiet. He very rarely barks at all. He had food and water and his toys to play with. He was probably getting distressed and board but he is okay ".
 
CoverMeCagney said:
Yes, Nicola acknowledged that he was not supposed to have a dog on base during a Q&A in December. Someone asked if the dog had been barking at the weekend:

"He was not supposed to have his puppy there so as a result he was trained to be very quiet. He very rarely barks at all. He had food and water and his toys to play with. He was probably getting distressed and board but he is okay ".
Click to expand...
She's right, they are not supposed to have pets there, but my dad had a kitten when he was in the RAF and smuggled it in and out in his work bag.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 187 more.
Total: 2,173 (members: 188, guests: 1,985)

Online statistics

Members online
188
Guests online
1,985
Total visitors
2,173
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,334
Messages
18,094,654
Members
230,851
Latest member
kendybee
Back
Top