UK UK - Corrie McKeague, 23, Bury St Edmunds, 24 September 2016 #4

[rogerthelodger]

Oh and "remember" this is (and it is in the update) NOT a "Homicide Without A Body" investigation, but a "Missing Persons" enquiry.

Under "PACE" you are restricted to what you can an cannot search. You have to "jump" certain hurdles before you can go "bashing down doors".

Am I right in thinking accessing those isn't a simple process?

 

[hazel324]

JK you make my brain hurt!

I just reckon that instead of highlighting sentences from the update and dropping cryptic clues etc...could you not just say you read update to say...

Following update, imo, Corrie left via one of the 4 vehicles seen on camera, we've identified said vehicles but won't confirm how he came to be in the vehicle, or what occurred thereafter. OWTTE

 

[JamesKing]

Am I right in thinking accessing those isn't a simple process?

Two totally different "concepts" in English Law (and in PACE)

 

[JamesKing]

JK you make my brain hurt!

I just reckon that instead of highlighting sentences from the update and dropping cryptic clues etc...could you not just say you read update to say...

Following update, imo, Corrie left via one of the 4 vehicles seen on camera, we've identified said vehicles but won't confirm how he came to be in the vehicle, or what occurred thereafter. OWTTE

I don't know the answer.... I'm just saying other posters make me think.

4 vehicle (inc bin lorry)
No times mentioned
0325 to 0800

So that's 3 vehicles ?
And no time mentioned.

We are looking for "one" (Corrie can't go in two).

Question is "the phone".
Was it in
1. the bin lorry or
2. one of the three other vehicles

 

[MidsummersDay]

The way it stands is actually the reverse...!

Standard (and proven) is
Means. What ability have they, What surprise is there.
Motive. Do they have a reason.
Opportunity. Where will they be. Can I surprise them

I'd go for "he's banging a married woman" on that basis.

Did I not suggest this awhile ago? Lol
EVERYTHING that's being formulated at the moment I put in the speculative events post.
@James, now think a long the line of MT.

 

[rogerthelodger]

Two totally different "concepts" in English Law (and in PACE)

Two different sets of rules?

 

[hazel324]

I don't know the answer.... I'm just saying other posters make me think.

4 vehicle (inc bin lorry)
No times mentioned
0325 to 0800

So that's 3 vehicles ?
And no time mentioned.

We are looking for "one" (Corrie can't go in two).

Question is "the phone".
Was it in
1. the bin lorry or
2. one of the three other vehicles

No-one in this discussion knows the answer (assuming perp + LE are not here)

...and i'm not being funny, but... (you can only use this expression in UK it's not understood to mean "I'm just saying" o/s)

IMO you have firm ideas that you think has occurred, but (there's that 'but' again) instead of coming right out and saying it straight away, you allude to what update statements could mean, throw in a bunch of bold text and quotes, adding a wee cryptic remark for good measure... then when others work out what you're actually meaning and say yeah they see it now... you agree with THEM :gaah:

...you coulda just come out and said it in the first place! lol Not having a go....just a bit o' banter since this has been a rather frustrating topic

oh and phone....separated & went with bin lorry ?

 

[JamesKing]

Two different sets of rules?

Rules...policy....yeah.

Remember here, there hasn't been any "defined" criminal activity.
People DO go missing.
And did he go to Barton with his phone and then turn it off ?
Missing people "could do that".

It could be very well argued "how did he get to Barton". But that doesn't answer "acts of criminality".

Essentially (and legally) he still is a "Missing Persons".

Don't forget however, that "legality" has been exploited over the years. Many murdered people have been reported "Missing Persons". It's the "until suspected otherwise" that it changes. And it changes "only" on evidence.

 

[Dcflag]

No-one in this discussion knows the answer (assuming perp + LE are not here)

...and i'm not being funny, but... (you can only use this expression in UK it's not understood to mean "I'm just saying" o/s)

IMO you have firm ideas that you think has occurred, but (there's that 'but' again) instead of coming right out and saying it straight away, you allude to what update statements could mean, throw in a bunch of bold text and quotes, adding a wee cryptic remark for good measure... then when others work out what you're actually meaning and say yeah they see it now... you agree with THEM :gaah:

...you coulda just come out and said it in the first place! lol Not having a go....just a bit o' banter since this has been a rather frustrating topic

oh and phone....separated & went with bin lorry ?

I find the nature of the posts helpful, it challenges the normal way of thinking and makes you ask the relevant questions instead of the obvious ones. But maybe that's just me. By challenging your thought processes in this way you're opening up to lots of different angles and working out what the really relevant information is.

As for James' opinion on what happened, I've summarised a few posts back the general discussing over the last day to help break it down, the summary is based on information from the most recent update. I do like to summarise a great deal as otherwise my head spins.

 

[Dcflag]

Regards to the phone/bin lorry question, I've seen Nicola comment that she suspects it was separated from Corrie but cannot confirm it. I'm guessing you won't ever be able to probe definitively it went in the bin because if it did you'll never find it.

If you're working towards a scenario where he was taken unwillingly I think it's a logical assumption it was binned (albeit just an assumption and nothing more)

 

[MidsummersDay]

I don't know....
I am merely saying "is the time relevant" ?

Drugs ? Isn't it late for a user.
Prostitute ? They work all night...and day
Gay sex ? It would have to a lover. Just review previous weeks

Which ever way you want to find the "truth", you have to consider this night one in isolation (and so you can rule thru things).

Key is...
Run thru "was he waiting" or "was he not waiting".
Then run thru possibilities.

I'd say definitely NOT drugs. With random drugs tesets that could potentially wreck your career immediately it's a very, very probable no. Besides, the RAF doesn't have an acceptance of a drug culture. Bodies are temples and all that (no jokes please ).

Very,very doubtful there's prostitution involved. Why would there be when there a pick of 'free' women around?

As much as I hate to suggest it I think it's doubtful but possible. Some sort of 'hook up' seems to fit this case.

Is he waiting? I reckon he was....from 0308 to 0330. Thereafter, he entered the shadows to pee and was driven out from the shadows by a waiting vehicle (probably a car).

 

[Dcflag]

So, who knew he would be there? and why would he be there? What reasons are there for targeting him?

 

[hazel324]

I find the nature of the posts helpful, it challenges the normal way of thinking and makes you ask the relevant questions instead of the obvious ones. But maybe that's just me. By challenging your thought processes in this way you're opening up to lots of different angles and working out what the really relevant information is.

As for James' opinion on what happened, I've summarised a few posts back the general discussing over the last day to help break it down, the summary is based on information from the most recent update. I do like to summarise a great deal as otherwise my head spins.

Of course, crikey....I realise it suits others here, was just giving own opinion as I'm generally direct (NZ's polite way of referring to me as blunt) and I really like to know everyone's take on what happened in a direct manner.

 

[Dcflag]

Of course, crikey....I realise it suits others here, was just giving own opinion as I'm generally direct (NZ's polite way of referring to me as blunt) and I really like to know everyone's take on what happened in a direct manner.

No worries at all, I try to respond to as many comments as I can so people don't fall by the way side. It can be a bit of a head scratcher in here at times!

 

[Bedouin]

Can anyone remember, or were we ever told how many cars went into town at the start of the night each thinking the other had Corrie?

 

[Dcflag]

Can anyone remember, or were we ever told how many cars went into town at the start of the night each thinking the other had Corrie?

There were two

 

[hazel324]

you know....i realise that as military guys they'd (likely) not be able to comment but... I would've thought there would be comments somewhere from friends or colleagues incognito.

if not on FB (to be respectful to family) WS might be a place to fill in some gaps...

 

[rogerthelodger]

Did I read on here or elsewhere his phone was able to have the sim card swopped for a different one?
I think the term used was a dual sim, does that mean it can take two completely different sim cards ie. take a sim card out and use a different one in the same handset.
Sorry I have no idea about phones, I last had one about 10 years ago :/

 

[hazel324]

dual sim means 2 slots for 2 sims....I have seen this mentioned previously but do not know if his particular Nokia did have this feature

 

[Amonet]

I know this quote is from ten pages back in the thread, and I haven't read through the rest of the thread yet, but I wanted to reply to this one.

Scotland Yard seemed to be mentioned in connection to the CCTV footage, and it again made me think of Milly Dowler and how they knew she was walking down a particular road, then she just 'disappeared' and none of the cameras could see her, yet she must have been on that road somewhere. I think the Yard will have the ability to do what was done in the Milly Dowler case for CCTV and look for ways Corrie could have got out of the horseshoe, either on foot or in a vehicle. From the documentary I saw on Milly Dowler it was very technical expertise that had to be used to find her on that CCTV, not exactly by seeing her per se, but by understanding how she was being obscured, which could help them pin down her actual position without physical views of her.

I'm sure the Yard has other expertise they can bring to the case, but that's one example that my intuition tells me will be part of what they can bring to the investigation.

Outside of additional manpower, is there any significance in getting Scotland Yard involved? Do they have any authority or equipment to aid in the case that the local police don't have available? (Specifically, ability to pull records of all cell phones leaving BSE at that time of the morning or anything along those lines?). Is this normal for Scotland Yard to be called in on high profile cases, and for the locals, does this add a level of confidence to the investigation? I'm just not sure of police protocols in the UK and am hoping it's a good thing, like they're bringing in the "big guns" now....