UK UK - Corrie McKeague, 23, Bury St Edmunds, 24 September 2016 #6

[calo44]

Delivery from where?

No specific delivery, just that the photo of the man appeared as though he had one glove on and was in the process of putting on the other as he passed the camera. When asked why he would be wearing gloves - it was mentioned that moped drivers typically wear gloves and perhaps this person was walking back to his moped after a night at work or could have been delivering something as a lot of delivery people in the area drive mopeds. Nothing more.

 

[markymint]

Some good points to read over the last few pages! But meh.. Can't leave the area without being seen on CCTV is still a hard pill to (personally) swallow. It keeps getting repeated, but only in the most vaguest of forms. It really doesn't take much nor violate any rules to just be clear and informative about WHICH cameras are involved in this "theory" (that you can't leave undetected).

I can accept the concept of this but the hard evidence hasn't been presented by anyone yet. Cornhill rear CCTV camera is currently the BIG missing link. But firstly the "can't leave" theory with relation to other cameras:

The running man LEAVES the area, is it possible to see him beyond the alley? Sure, he heads out to Butter Market where he should be seen face forward by a known camera (Butter Market Starbucks), so why haven't (and quite simply too) they matched the timecode of running man CCTV to the camera in Buttermarket. Instead they want us to identify the back of someone's head?

The police AND the military have seriously tested this theory? Then why hasn't either said a word, only for us to get a vague reminder from the family a couple of times? As I mentioned before there is a very strange element of "protecting" the CCTV system in this town. No-one on the family, bury, police etc side is willing to discuss the CCTV in any real detail. They are surely viewing it and asking exactly the same questions as we are. In fact beyond the acronym CCTV they don't actually give any personal opinion or detail.

What they should understand is that, despite them saying repeatedly it's not possible to leave on foot without being seen by CCTV, that until they say which cameras make this possible, none of us are able to believe that vague statement. I'm certainly not. It reminds me of the TV show Mayday, in one episode he says the "pilot always needs to be ahead of the plane". And how that really does not apply to any of us with eager eyes on this case. There is no way we can be ahead in our understanding of this, because limited information is reaching us.

I'm at a bit of a loss with their or others choice to be so vague. Does not seem like they want the public to help too much, so when the public do try to over-ride that and help, they put out a very vague response that doesn't answer anything in any detail, just enough to stop the public asking. I do understand there's a difference between ground zero, and people like me sitting on a forum doing some armchair investigation. But if you're going to utilize and work with the internet on your missing son's appeal, then WORK WITH IT. Not against it. The protection of all the digital information from phone, to internet accounts, thru to CCTV systems is just... Well a bit like everything else so far, somewhat abnormal.

Ok, so someone also mentioned the Short Brackland cornhill rear car park CCTV. Has this angle actually been seen or used? If so, what does that angle look like? It's also pretty clear from the google street view image that of all the cameras in that area, that one is probably the easiest to block, let alone the tree likely blocking some of the view. The public has not seen this angle. We do not know if it's pointing with the ability to see the entirety of the width of Short Brackland's road. Sure, it probably shows the barrier and the car park, but it's really not designed to be looking at short brackland STREET, is it?

So we've seen a bunch of images from the FRONT of Cornhill. They clearly have the REAR footage, and is likely the camera they're using for number plate checks on the cars that come and go. But let's be honest, you've seen the quality of the FRONT camera in Cornhill, how good do you think it'll be at showing anything in any detail... ?? (granted, it's perhaps a more rugged outdoor model that can take proper video!).

The funny thing is, if people abided by the law (using a car) they would drive up Short Brackland, therefore CCTV from running man angle may only ever see the side of a car (no plate). The driver would have to take the illegal shortcut past the Cornhill entrance to get their plate on running man angle CCTV. The next fallback is this camera in Cornhill rear car park, which is a rear car park camera, not a road monitor. And if the interior footage is anything to go by when it comes to CCTV on the Cornhill property, this rear one isn't going to be much use...

Well, I'm not trying to bash them. I just wish they'd get round to the specifics about the cameras and how the conclusion "you can't be missed leaving the area" is reached, with some kind of detail beyond "because I said so".

PS and thanks for the comment about Corrie's friends, goape I think. I was not trying to insinuate that they don't care, more that I thought it was normal for friends to make their own pleas about getting their friends back, yet I haven't seen or read anything outside of his family. No colleague pleas, no friend pleas, not even pleas from Corrie's wider family. And that smells a bit of purposeful "co-ordination". By which I mean, purposefully silenced or warned, not to disrespect or discredit X authority, or Corrie himself. Cos you'd think there might be some character clues in there, someone who might understand what they're seeing on CCTV better than any of us can. We know afterall, the Honnington colleagues have not been allowed to say anything publically. Without any official statement from them we can only assume and define that as "being silenced", no?

PS. Moderator note about respecting the family are the victims also noted and sorry I know that was me to some extent and that I've questioned them hard again just now. I do feel though, this is a bit of a special case, as all the family members work for the authorities also involved in this case, which could mean a strong potential bias and an adherence to code that could actually prevent him from being found effectively and quickly. So it's a moral toss up for me. I didn't realize we don't have full impartiality here. But sure, I will try not to break that rule, sorry - I want a positive outcome for him and his family! My investigative mind however, does not want to be partial to anyone involved until a conclusion is met. I also want to be praising the RAF and the Police for their efforts, but there is a substantial data gap & manner of interaction with us online folks that does not allow "the pilot to be ahead of the plane at all times". Not that I demand they interact fully with the public. I guess I'm just surprised how "contained" it all gets. Well, apologies again, back to moaning about CCTV...

 

[markymint]

fell asleep for around two hours in a doorway of Hughes Electrical

Someone mentioned high risk situations. Is there such a thing as ultra-high risk? If he slept in Hughes Doorway, the amount of people walking around and past between the hours of 1-3am makes it seem like something happening to him was inevitable. Eats kebab. Goes to sleep out in the public literally on a path for 2 hours, wakes up and disappears. For whom is this normal behavior to fall asleep in a perfectly muggable public area for other than homeless people?

Doing that would surely be an unsafe option for pretty much anyone, what made him so confident that night that sleeping in a doorway would be safe and wouldn't attract unwanted attention? It's matter of fact that drinking makes you more vulnerable, especially in these kind of situations. You'd need a pretty big ego for that level of confidence IMO, and that kind of matches up peoples theories about him being a bit of a loner. I'm just trying to think of someone I know who's ever slept in a doorway, and I can't, no matter how inebriated, you do not simply lie down in a public doorway without some kind of over-brimming confidence. Confuzzling!

 

[Mr applebee]

Someone mentioned high risk situations. Is there such a thing as ultra-high risk? If he slept in Hughes Doorway, the amount of people walking around and past between the hours of 1-3am makes it seem like something happening to him was inevitable. Eats kebab. Goes to sleep out in the public literally on a path for 2 hours, wakes up and disappears. For whom is this normal behavior to fall asleep in a perfectly muggable public area for other than homeless people?

Doing that would surely be an unsafe option for pretty much anyone, what made him so confident that night that sleeping in a doorway would be safe and wouldn't attract unwanted attention? It's matter of fact that drinking makes you more vulnerable, especially in these kind of situations. You'd need a pretty big ego for that level of confidence IMO, and that kind of matches up peoples theories about him being a bit of a loner. I'm just trying to think of someone I know who's ever slept in a doorway, and I can't, no matter how inebriated, you do not simply lie down in a public doorway without some kind of over-brimming confidence. Confuzzling!

When I was working on the rigs when I was in my early twenties, we used to go out on the lash when we got home and get ridiculaously hammered. My local haunts were Warrington and Liverpool and I (am ashamed to admit) have fallen asleep in doorways and on benches many a time. Especially if I'd ran out of money and was hanging on to jump a train in the morning. Me and mates would always end up separated and each of us would have a crazy story to tell the next day.

Basically what I am saying is that Corries behaviour isn't as weird and crazy as some people are saying on here. Not the norm by any means but he's an outgoing free spirited young man and to me he's quite typical of the early twenty year olds that I grew up with/around, myself included.

 

[bbyblueeyez]

I also read about this party saying that was why the other lads left without Corrie as he made different plans and was going to the married couples party this however was not confirmed by any of the family and turned into a farce with people commenting swinging this led to the thread being deleted. You seem to have all been working really hard and looks like its being narrowed down to Corrie leaving area by Car ..... I agree with the most about the witnesses looking for them could lead to them positively confirming that Corrie did infact leave by car and if he left without a row of any kind. I don't think anyone in here is purposely trying to bash the family I just feel it is a very tough case and very frustrating we all want that lad back safe with his family we shouldn't turn against one another its just peoples opinions and different perspective on things.

 

[Amonet]

If they're low on resources why do the hub? Why not release the facial stills of the people they seem most important? Are we assuming they've had each vehicle forensically searched and discounted? I mean, out of the vehicles they must have spoken to owners to clarify why they were there etc surely they don't all have watertight alibis and if one isn't registered/fake plates/stolen etc then it makes it all the more likely to be the one involved.

The timeline itself really has to be 3.25-4am this can't leave them with too many options here. What about the neighbours of the car owners? Suspicious behaviours and anything unusual happening. If resource is really low why are the vehicles not the priority over some rather grainy footage?

I've said it before, I fail to see the huge mystery. Yes he could have arranged to disappear, arranged a lift or been taken unwillingly but if it comes down to four vehicles then what's the next feasible steps?

This post sums up my thoughts. Tony has said the cars/vehicles have been identified and no need to speculate.

I would think the police would visit the owners of those cars and ask them if they, or another driver, were in that area at that time. Each has said they were in the area but didn't see Corrie.

In a missing persons inquiry, I don't see that as being enough to get a warrant to go any further, which leaves the police a bit stuck, not knowing exactly which vehicle Corrie could have left in, and not even knowing if Corrie could have stayed in the horseshoe area (one of the buildings) until past 8am, which would be something that a judge would want to know before signing off on a warrant.

So the police wouldn't need to do an appeal for these vehicles if they know who they belong to, it would be more a case of dotting the i's and crossing the t's to put Corrie in one of those cars if one of the 23 had seen anything that night.

 

[kernow]

This is where the confusion is made, and I think I know why.
The update of the 20th has been altered.

In the first part "ALL have now been identified". has been added later

Whereas the last part "Investigations into the other 3 vehicles from the ‘Horseshoe’ continue" remained the same.

It's just "4 vehicles" in total (one being the bin lorry).

I think it's just a complex way of saying - we have identified (confirmed quantity only) there were 4 vehicles in the horseshoe area in the timeframe.

 

[goape]

Tony has posted this (I'm copying the family posts when I see them comment as they often clarify items but are easily missed and often misquoted):

"A couple of things to help:

- if you've just joined the group, firstly welcome! Thank you for getting involved. It would be a real help (to you and us) if you were to please read the pinned post and check the website (URL given above) before posting questions. Thanks

- to clarify about the cctv; all of the footage shown in the pod is from AFTER Corrie went into the Horseshoe.

It is not ALL of the cctv footage available, but highlighted edits - the Investigation team have not shared the better quality, colour images, presumably because they have positively identified everyone captured on those images... presumably.

This is why none of the vehicles appear.

- we have received a number of posts asking about retaining the services of a Private investigator, please don't feel the need to keep making this suggestion. There are also no fund raising efforts supported by the family in this regard."

 

[Shiressleuth]

New mini update from uncle t under comments in nicola's latest post. Sorry not tech savvy enough to copy and paste. Could someone do that?
Edit - thnks we are all wide awake this a.m. aren't we?

 

[Shiressleuth]

So how many of us think the authorities have a pretty good idea what happened and are now trawling for the evidence or just looking to find the actual crime itself? If this is drugs/awol should we all just have another poll?

 

[Dcflag]

So how many of us think the authorities have a pretty good idea what happened and are now trawling for the evidence or just looking to find the actual crime itself? If this is drugs/awol should we all just have another poll?

I do, going back to the vehicles it can't be hard to corroborate the drivers alibis with cctv evidence to determine whether they drove to their destination and home again or whether bm was a possibilty.

I think it's just time needed.

 

[Dcflag]

You know, by releasing cctv I've not heard hardly any comments on the vehicles despite the fact that Corrie had to leave by vehicle no matter how suspicious four minute man or running man or lurking man is.

Clever really that everyone is so into this rubbish quality footage memory of the fact there were also four vehicles has escaped their minds.

 

[Tillymint]

I do find it odd that the information about the vehicles is being held back, especially since it's clear that the family believe Corrie must have left in a vehicle.
There is obviously something suspicious about some of the characters loitering around the general horseshoe area but that may or may not be related to the disappearance of Corrie. I do wonder if the skulking figure under the lamp is in fact a prostitute. In some of the stills, it does look like a woman. If people are involved in nefarious activities anyway, they may not come forward simply because they don't want to get in trouble for whatever they WERE up to.

I have to hope that more is known behind the scenes than we know. It's the most convoluted case I've ever come across.

 

[Shiressleuth]

You know, by releasing cctv I've not heard hardly any comments on the vehicles despite the fact that Corrie had to leave by vehicle no matter how suspicious four minute man or running man or lurking man is.

Clever really that everyone is so into this rubbish quality footage memory of the fact there were also four vehicles has escaped their minds.

We were asked not to speculate on the vehicles so that's really why we haven't but perhaps we should now, or could this harm the case? I don't know what to say.

 

[MelmothTheLost]

Edinlass, I agree with you on the silver car. For whatever reason, they don't want us talking about it - but there's no mention of it having been investigated and cleared (like the lorry).

It does make one wonder.

Was it genuinely just a car parked by an ordinary member of the public and has been investigated and cleared, even if it they haven't said so explicitly, or was it a covert surveillance vehicle with hidden cameras watching something or someone that they don't want to draw attention to?

 

[mrazda71]

Someone mentioned high risk situations. Is there such a thing as ultra-high risk? If he slept in Hughes Doorway, the amount of people walking around and past between the hours of 1-3am makes it seem like something happening to him was inevitable. Eats kebab. Goes to sleep out in the public literally on a path for 2 hours, wakes up and disappears. For whom is this normal behavior to fall asleep in a perfectly muggable public area for other than homeless people?

Doing that would surely be an unsafe option for pretty much anyone, what made him so confident that night that sleeping in a doorway would be safe and wouldn't attract unwanted attention? It's matter of fact that drinking makes you more vulnerable, especially in these kind of situations. You'd need a pretty big ego for that level of confidence IMO, and that kind of matches up peoples theories about him being a bit of a loner. I'm just trying to think of someone I know who's ever slept in a doorway, and I can't, no matter how inebriated, you do not simply lie down in a public doorway without some kind of over-brimming confidence. Confuzzling!

My group of going out friends in my 30's (so not even young and stupid) included a friend who was 4 foot 11 inches and she weighed 7 stone at most. She would ALWAYS be tipsy by the time she left home and had a head start on the rest of us! By the time we'd get to a club after a couple of bars, she'd be done for. I think because she was a petite blonde and not a strapping big bloke, the security staff didn't ever feel the need to kick her out though we would have bouncers come and find one of us and say "Maria's asleep again" and we'd find her on the loo, on the sofas, one night even being propped up over a balcony by some random bloke - dead to the world! She's slept head down on many kebab/pizza shop tables, in taxis ... and yes.I even in doorways while we've waited for lifts/taxi.

My ex brother in law also used to sleep everywhere after just a few pints which we later found out was due to a thyroid problem.

As for risky behaviours? It's been stated by family AND I myself don't believe he WENT to sleep, he sat to eat food and dozed off - less risky than purposefully thinking 'I'll have a kip here for 2 hours'.

I'd like to remind everyone that it's very easy for all of us to sit here, desperately trying to make something fit, to try and read the clues, read between the lines and the longer this goes on the more we go round in circles and the theories get more wild but, at the heart of this is a Nicolas Son, her back, her pain in the bum, larger than life middle child (I have one too) and some of you can not probably understand her behaviour but that's because you're not living her nightmare. This is an open forum for all to read (including victims family and friends) and we MUST be respectful to the victim and family because that's how it should be, that's how YOU would want it if it were your loved one missing.

If anyone here is new, welcome and please read the Adrian Lynch forum. He went missing from a small island and wasn't found for 8 long months.

 

[Dcflag]

It does make one wonder.

Was it genuinely just a car parked by an ordinary member of the public and has been investigated and cleared, even if it they haven't said so explicitly, or was it a covert surveillance vehicle with hidden cameras watching something or someone that they don't want to draw attention to?

I guess if they haven't released anything they don't necessarily need any help or speculation. I guess you have to trust they know what they're doing. After all it is a live investigation and we are just public people.

 

[trickydicky]

Having read through a few more posts, - couple of questions spring to mind.

Firstly, there is now talk of someone being seen on CCTV apparently putting gloves on; this comment rightly suggests that perhaps whomever is doing so may be doing so because they ride a moped. We have been continually told about the four 'vehicles' so perhaps this is one of the methods of transport which could have been used to take Corrie away from the area. This would explain how they could definitively say that he 'didn't leave on foot'.

Secondly, if a moped was involved; is it conceivable that if Corrie was ridding pillion it would have been easy for his phone to have fallen out of his pocket? Perhaps when he was getting on the bike? We already know from the CCTV that he was wearing jeans with bulging pockets.

Lastly, once again if a moped were involved; am I right in thinking that mopeds aren't legally bound to have registration plates on the front, only the back? Perhaps this would explain how this 'vehicle' took a while to identify, particularly if all CCTV didn't catch the plate on the front.

Maybe I'm grasping at straws; but perhaps this would explain why the vehicle drove up Short Brackland the wrong way (it's a narrow street), and also why the Police are still looking for witnesses? A moped with rider and passenger at 4am would be an awful lot more surprising or memorable than simply a car.

 

[Dcflag]

Having read through a few more posts, - couple of questions spring to mind.

Firstly, there is now talk of someone being seen on CCTV apparently putting gloves on; this comment rightly suggests that perhaps whomever is doing so may be doing so because they ride a moped. We have been continually told about the four 'vehicles' so perhaps this is one of the methods of transport which could have been used to take Corrie away from the area. This would explain how they could definitively say that he 'didn't leave on foot'.

Secondly, if a moped was involved; is it conceivable that if Corrie was ridding pillion it would have been easy for his phone to have fallen out of his pocket? Perhaps when he was getting on the bike? We already know from the CCTV that he was wearing jeans with bulging pockets.

Lastly, once again if a moped were involved; am I right in thinking that mopeds aren't legally bound to have registration plates on the front, only the back? Perhaps this would explain how this 'vehicle' took a while to identify, particularly if all CCTV didn't catch the plate on the front.

Maybe I'm grasping at straws; but perhaps this would explain why the vehicle drove up Short Brackland the wrong way (it's a narrow street), and also why the Police are still looking for witnesses? A moped with rider and passenger at 4am would be an awful lot more surprising or memorable than simply a car.

All very valid points. But surely cctv would identify his clothing so they'd know pretty early on he left on a moped?

 

[MelmothTheLost]

I guess if they haven't released anything they don't necessarily need any help or speculation. I guess you have to trust they know what they're doing. After all it is a live investigation and we are just public people.

Yes, we are, but I was wondering whether there was some sort of other investigation going on in that area, eg a Customs & Excise or Immigration thing, which Corrie blundered into and which his disappearance and the resulting investigation focused on that area has compromised. It might explain why they are so damned cagey about what they've got.