You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
UK UK - Corrie McKeague, 23, Bury St Edmunds, 24 September 2016 #3
- Thread starter Greater Than
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Yeah but the family are now saying he didn't walk out of that loading bay and he had to leave in a vehicle.
Are they though? They're saying he didn't leave bury on foot. Not that he didn't walk out of that bay.
My responses in bold (where I got the bb code right).
I can't get your whole post thru on this post, so people should refer back one page and see it.
But, yes, I agree with your comments.
And this
" And he knew at least 8 people out that night, but they were going back in 2 almost full cars. He's also not a stranger to pubbing/clubbing in BSE and probably acquainted with far more people than just the USAF guy in the pizza shop, so we can't rule out that it might have been someone he knew"
I agree with totally.
Simple answer is, I haven't a clue.
But IF he was meeting someone....it has to be someone that "couldn't leave until 3.30am".
Are they though? They're saying he didn't leave bury on foot. Not that he didn't walk out of that bay.
Yeah I'm. Sure I read on the fb page that the uncle said that if he had left on foot from.the bay cctv would have picked him.up. maybe wrong
Yeah but the family are now saying he didn't walk out of that loading bay and he had to leave in a vehicle.
That statement means the family knows more than they are releasing ?
Or... they don't know at all and they are just a guessing ?
The basic thing is, it is likely he departed in a car.
But it is also likely that this car was not seen (at the time leaving).
That could be the Silver Car
Or another car in the loading bay (that Corrie must have seen)
OR.... he didn't leave the loading bay area until much later on (assuming he was attacked in the loading bay, put in a car, his phone went in the nearest bin, the car left some time Saturday).
Yeah I'm. Sure I read on the fb page that the uncle said that if he had left on foot from.the bay cctv would have picked him.up. maybe wrong
Have a read back. It's entirely possible he left the bay without being seen on cctv, he couldn't have gotten much further mind.
If it was genuinely the case that he didn't leave on foot and he's not still there then there's no mystery is there, cctv would show him leaving in a vehicle already parked there or a vehicle picking him up front there (so entering and exiting)
It's either one option or the other, he either walked out unseen and got into a vehicle before hitting cctv or they have the vehicle brazenly driving in to collect him.
MidsummersDay
New Member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2016
- Messages
- 1,194
- Reaction score
- 1
No... it could just be "I'll meet you xxxxxx street at 3.30".
That's just Corrie and the driver.
James, think about my comment earlier about 'alternative transport'. MilSec.
never thought of that before but you could be onto something there. Only thing is why was the assailant not seen leaving the bay?That statement means the family knows more than they are releasing ?
Or... they don't know at all and they are just a guessing ?
The basic thing is, it is likely he departed in a car.
But it is also likely that this car was not seen (at the time leaving).
That could be the Silver Car
Or another car in the loading bay (that Corrie must have seen)
OR.... he didn't leave the loading bay area until much later on (assuming he was attacked in the loading bay, put in a car, his phone went in the nearest bin, the car left some time Saturday).
That statement means the family knows more than they are releasing ?
Or... they don't know at all and they are just a guessing ?
The basic thing is, it is likely he departed in a car.
But it is also likely that this car was not seen (at the time leaving).
That could be the Silver Car
Or another car in the loading bay (that Corrie must have seen)
OR.... he didn't leave the loading bay area until much later on (assuming he was attacked in the loading bay, put in a car, his phone went in the nearest bin, the car left some time Saturday).
He would have to be attacked without leaving DNA if that were the case. I still have my doubts about a vehicles ability to be completely unseen, but I accept you know far more than I do about the cctv in the area!
James, think about my comment earlier about 'alternative transport'. MilSec.
What alternative transport?
never thought of that before but you could be onto something there. Only thing is why was the assailant not seen leaving the bay?
But a hooded man was seen leaving the bay? not that I think it's connected in anyway but you can't assume no one else was seen leaving the bay after Corrie went in. Just because it's not confirmed currently doesn't mean it didn't happen.
never thought of that before but you could be onto something there. Only thing is why was the assailant not seen leaving the bay?
That's the thing. Was that missed on CCTV ?
I mean it's "way out there" but possible (ish)
But think about this.... if someone "left the loading bay area in a car" then it follows "someone arrived in the loading bay in a car" ?
Now was that missed ?
James, think about my comment earlier about 'alternative transport'. MilSec.
You see.... I want to say "no way" to this BUT there is a thing that niggles me.
One "technique" I am aware of is the "Muddle Up". No one ever Covers Up things, they muddle them up. How it works is this....
You get two (or more) platforms (or sources) and you release conflicting evidence/facts....
....and then you swap them round again and release them again !
I'm kind of getting that feeling here.
The BBC, the police, the family.
He walks home normally. He's never walked home.
He was about to walk home. We're searching the AXX.
He couldn't walk out without being seen. We need to ID a car parked 60 foot away. All cars have been ID'd but one car in Cannon Street.
He sleeps in doorways. He was drunk and it wasn't normal. He wasn't that drunk.
And it goes on.
Is this "the Muddle Up" in play ?
Is THIS covering "a beasting" that went a bit wrong ?
So they're essentially covering what they do know while also able to appeal and track witnesses without looking strange?
I don't know what they are doing (or why).
But I do know the technique.
I sincerely hope it's not covering a beasting gone wrong.
But the family would not go along with this surely?
I sincerely hope it's not covering a beasting gone wrong.
Me to.
I once "disturbed" one guy once....and got a "welcome home" I wasn't expecting.
But the family would not go along with this surely?
I'm not saying "that happened", I'm saying "anything is possible".
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
DNASolves
Online statistics
- Members online
- 169
- Guests online
- 1,792
- Total visitors
- 1,961
Totals may include hidden visitors.