UK UK - Corrie McKeague, 23, Bury St Edmunds, 24 September 2016 #20

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why do you say that? Nothing about his earlier behaviour suggests planning.
If the opportunity had presented itself, he might well have accepted a lift, whether back to his base or to some entertainment elsewhere.
I do not believe it was planned. A contributor said that there may have been no planning but he just happened to evade CCTV/people by leaving in a vehicle...but surely if he left in a vehicle it suggests a) there was foul play or b) there was a lot of planning.
 
I do not believe it was planned. A contributor said that there may have been no planning but he just happened to evade CCTV/people by leaving in a vehicle...but surely if he left in a vehicle it suggests a) there was foul play or b) there was a lot of planning.

I think you may be overestimating the amount of planning required. If he decided to leave that night when he was out why would it not be possible? All you need is a friend to come and pick you up and take you somewhere. I could do it with a £20 payphone and the clothes I am standing up in.
 
I do not believe it was planned. A contributor said that there may have been no planning but he just happened to evade CCTV/people by leaving in a vehicle...but surely if he left in a vehicle it suggests a) there was foul play or b) there was a lot of planning.

I didn't suggest that it was planned either. I said he might have accepted a lift. That seems perfectly plausible as a spontaneous event, so I don't know why you would discount it.

What happened after that is a matter for further speculation. He may have come to harm in some way, but that too may have been something spontaneous, rather than a planned act.
 
N professional instinct said where SP are now searching, under the circumstances N made the call, based perhaps on numerous refusals of SP to do things on her own professional instinct. It's not N fault both investigation parties were sub par that led to where they now are searching so late in the game with both one way or another claiming the credit for it, when N asked for it to be done at the start of the investigation, frankly MIS or SP claiming credit is just salt on a wound for N no doubt.


I don't think anyone in N position who felt things with any police force where not up to par and had the cash to outsource some kind of effort would not do the same, none of us would just stand aside in the same position with professional experience, being ignored by a police force on that would not pay any amount to get information on our child. We all would. No one can fault a parent, esp a woman who carried that child for that. And the crux, where are both parties claiming C now is ? Salt in the wounds.

If N was so convinced C was in the landfill, why did she put so many resources into private searches? An area of Barton Mills was checked on the basis that C could have got a lift there and been hit by a car trying to walk back to Honington.
 
If N was so convinced C was in the landfill, why did she put so many resources into private searches? An area of Barton Mills was checked on the basis that C could have got a lift there and been hit by a car trying to walk back to Honington.

IMO she has only become convinced about the LF since the error in the bin weight came to light and possibily more info from the police about other work they've done


afaik there haven't been any searches since then


JMO
 
I do not believe it was planned. A contributor said that there may have been no planning but he just happened to evade CCTV/people by leaving in a vehicle...but surely if he left in a vehicle it suggests a) there was foul play or b) there was a lot of planning.

All the vehicles are accounted for?
 
All the vehicles are accounted for?

It depends on what you mean by accounted for, I believe the police have identified all the vehicles and spoken to the drivers

N has said that one of the vehicles did not have a valid reason to be there (see the Q & A threads)

JMO
 
It depends on what you mean by accounted for, I believe the police have identified all the vehicles and spoken to the drivers

N has said that one of the vehicles did not have a valid reason to be there (see the Q & A threads)

JMO

Cool thanks, yeah was wondering if they had all been questioned and cars searched?

No valid reason, meaning when questioned they couldn't explain why they were there at 3am?
 
Cool thanks, yeah was wondering if they had all been questioned and cars searched?

No valid reason, meaning when questioned they couldn't explain why they were there at 3am?

Questioned I think yes but all searched I don't think we can say yes to that.

The valid reason quote puzzled me at the time as it suggests that the driver refused to say why he was there (which is suspicious in itself) or maybe gave some explanation that was obviously made up.

afaik nothing much has been made of this vehicle, I don't think the police have said anything publically about it

JMO
 
I didn't suggest that it was planned either. I said he might have accepted a lift. That seems perfectly plausible as a spontaneous event, so I don't know why you would discount it.

What happened after that is a matter for further speculation. He may have come to harm in some way, but that too may have been something spontaneous, rather than a planned act.
Well in that case we are in agreement! I always thought he left in a vehicle until the landfill search started due to the weight of the bin. With info changing all of the time, the weight of that bin could yet change again but I would think they must have strong evidence to suddenly put so much time/resources into the landfill search.
 
If N was so convinced C was in the landfill, why did she put so many resources into private searches? An area of Barton Mills was checked on the basis that C could have got a lift there and been hit by a car trying to walk back to Honington.
SP did not secure the site for themselves, MIS or Royal Air Force Police or further MOD, not even when any possible MOD connection leads may have concluded. Of course you follow the leads you can. I cant help but think the differences of professional opinion were very early on. It certainly points to that.
 
I believe the last info on vehicles was 2 stiil under investigation. Presumablu bin lorry and one other.

Other vehicles between 0500-1600 investigation continues. ( see www.findcorrie.co.uk 30 Jan is most recent vehicle update )

No news on digger afaik.
 
SP did not secure the site for themselves, MIS or Royal Air Force Police or further MOD, not even when any possible MOD connection leads may have concluded. Of course you follow the leads you can. I cant help but think the differences of professional opinion were very early on. It certainly points to that.
Your first sentence is wrong. Unless you have a link for it?
 
SP did not secure the site for themselves, MIS or Royal Air Force Police or further MOD, not even when any possible MOD connection leads may have concluded. Of course you follow the leads you can. I cant help but think the differences of professional opinion were very early on. It certainly points to that.

Your first sentence is wrong. Unless you have a link for it?

I think Aye is correct

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2014341/corrie-mckeague-missing-raf-airman-arrest-landfill-parents/

"Nicola said: “It was not by design that no more waste was piled on top. It is just luck. I think that the area may have already been full, but I was not told why.”

JMO
 
I prefer LE link that says they secured the site early on in the investigation. Two facts but I choose to believe SP. Whether it was secured because of rotation is not luck but planning IMO. Also, N admits she 'thinks' it was full but doesn't know why.
 
I prefer LE link that says they secured the site early on in the investigation. Two facts but I choose to believe SP. Whether it was secured because of rotation is not luck but planning IMO. Also, N admits she 'thinks' it was full but doesn't know why.

It's unfortunate that we aren't allowed to link to multiple family posts that don't support the fact that the police asked the operators of the LF site not to dump any more waste in that specific area.

When N says she's not sure I think she means she not sure why no more waste was dumped not that she's not sure that it wasn't iyswim

What would clear it up is a link to an SP statement that they instructed that no more waste be dumped

JMO
 
Welcome Laws. We will need links (LE or MSM or family website) for these facts. Its not enough to say "N says" unless it is linkable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
196
Guests online
1,631
Total visitors
1,827

Forum statistics

Threads
606,608
Messages
18,207,115
Members
233,908
Latest member
Kat kruck
Back
Top