UK UK - Corrie McKeague, 23, Bury St Edmunds, 24 September 2016 #7

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Again a quick clarification:
The rehabilitation property is on Lower Baxter Street, not on Short Brackland, it is subject to curfew.

I agree with the suggestion that a small scale drug deal, the sorts of which may be conducted in the relative open, would be unlikely to incur a kidnap attempt if stumbled upon.

The very nature of Bury st Edmunds is such that anything sex trade related is unlikely, especially that close to town.

I don't think Corrie was buying drugs himself because your "dealer" is unlikely to live 2 hours away, especially if you live a fairly closeted lifestyle of Airbase and Bury Town, so why would he wait? And with both a drugs/ paid for sex angle, are we really of the belief that he would rather spend his "taxi" money on such services rather than just go back to his dog etc.

The ever changing terminology and slowing of information leads me to suspect that this is a case of a young man panicking about information pertaining to either or a criminal act committed/ sex life revelation leaking to his family and employer, and as such has done what many of us would do at his age, run away from our troubles, however he didn't bank on the mumsnet brigade creating such noise.
.
Presumably most of us are now basing our thoughts on what we have seen on the released footage and comments by family etc. Has anyone got any factual knowledge of what goes on in that location in the small hours Saturday and Sundays? I also don't think the mumsnet are at fault they are following the family guidance and helping keeping pressure up in the media. Have any miltary gone missing this year apart from corrie?
 
Please bare in mind that you are referencing the Army. The RAF are a completely different animal and the mentality on drugs is far more respectful. The culture within is 'blacksheep and instant dismissal' in my experience. No 24hr postings just straight to jail and don't pass go.

Thanks, it's a good point. I assumed it was more of a rank thing across all the forces, for example the higher up you are the more important your career and the less likely you are to risk a quick dabble at the weekend!
 
Speaking to my "in the know" family member today, updating them on the thoughts here, they repeated to me something that they have repeatedly said all the time we have been discussing this. They say that in their experience many, many men end up going awol, not over some huge, dark issue, but simply because they wake up after a night out next to someone, find that they have slept in, and think..Well that's it, I'm late, I'm in trouble..and they go awol, at which point it turns into a big thing that it shouldn't ever have been. I know that it's slightly different with Corrie in that he couldn't "sleep in" the day he went missing as he wasn't due at work the next day (though he could have been in attendance at an extended party and it happen that way)..but I wondered if we have seriously considered that everything we think we have is really meaningless (ie: not seeing him leaving etc)..and that what has happened is not related to a crime, or a secret, or anything other than some mundane event that has turned into something bigger unintentionally, and now is very difficult to extricate oneself from.
 
Speaking to my "in the know" family member today, updating them on the thoughts here, they repeated to me something that they have repeatedly said all the time we have been discussing this. They say that in their experience many, many men end up going awol, not over some huge, dark issue, but simply because they wake up after a night out next to someone, find that they have slept in, and think..Well that's it, I'm late, I'm in trouble..and they go awol, at which point it turns into a big thing that it shouldn't ever have been. I know that it's slightly different with Corrie in that he couldn't "sleep in" the day he went missing as he wasn't due at work the next day (though he could have been in attendance at an extended party and it happen that way)..but I wondered if we have seriously considered that everything we think we have is really meaningless (ie: not seeing him leaving etc)..and that what has happened is not related to a crime, or a secret, or anything other than some mundane event that has turned into something bigger unintentionally, and now is very difficult to extricate oneself from.

I'm late for duty... so they decide to go AWOL ?????

It doesn't work like that I'm afraid.
Several others on here, cross services and different mobs will confirm that.

The Navy, Army and Airforce like ""specifics".
Being "several hours late" from duty is not AWOL
Stupid, yes. Childish, yes. Pathetic, yes. And there are methods of dealing with said individuals.
AWOL means "Colchester". And a record.
 
I agree with everything you said there ? Apart from the bin ?? I rule that out cos of the Cameras they now have on board to watch as you tipping ??, Also because the rubbish has to be checked ?? and weighed ??
 
JamesKing

Well, with respect, that is the direct experience of someone with 25+ years service who spent many years working with AWOL men directly at different military detention facilities, and they disagree strongly with you. People do silly things, it's the human condition.
 
I honestly don't believe it's drugs related either! I've had this niggling feeling from the beginning that it's someone he knows and that someone he asked to pick him up,
I don't believe he intentionally fell asleep, just nodded off. I think he woke up, realised he couldn't get a lift with the lads. My feeling is he contacted the male from the couple he was originally going to the party with. The party was over and he offered to pick him up and take him back to theirs so he had somewhere to stay for the night.
Your theory could well be on the right track, I think it's one of the most realistic theories I've read so far! My theory was he went back with him and something happened at their house. Maybe he was caught with the female of the couple.
I don't know but the couple has always niggled at me!
I just don't think it was random by a stranger, like others have said before, it's unlikely they would hide the body! Too much of a risk being caught!
I really do hope he has gone awol, if he has it must be for a very good reason and I believe it would have not been a premeditated decision.
 
JamesKing

Well, with respect, that is the direct experience of someone with 25+ years service who spent many years working with AWOL men directly at different military detention facilities, and they disagree strongly with you. People do silly things, it's the human condition.

Hetty, you make a very valid point. Can you ask your friend, though, if tossing your phone away is "normal" behavior for AWOL members? And if there might be any other things that he's found is more common than not in service members who disappear themselves? What I'm thinking is, do they typically go to a bank machine once they've decided to go awol, where do they normally stay, how long do they typically take to return, do they typically have an intermediary contact their family (or do they) after a certain period of time? Just wondering if there's some sort of pattern he's seen that fits most cases that might be able to help here? (Yes, I know every case is different but this is a different perspective and I think it'll be interesting and helpful if your friend would be willing to share). Thanks!
 
Hi all,
Another newbie here! I've been lurking for a while as I have links to the forces (ex-husband served 24 years in the Army) and have also family living in BSE for 40 years... and this has me stumped!
Just wanted to add my bit... drugs are a real 'thing' in the forces. My ex was completely anti-drugs and used to be in charge of the tests (usually done on Monday mornings or after long summer/Christmas leave periods) but when we split up I dated another soldier (different regiment, lower rank) who I caught taking coke, along with all his squadron, every weekend like it was going out of fashion! Call me a goody two shoes but I was AMAZED as I thought it was a dismissable offence, plus you're handling live ammo! Apparently if you were 'in the know' you'd get a tip off when a test was due so you'd know to have a drug free weekend.
Apologies for this not being particularly Corrie related, just wanted to mention it as I wouldn't rule drugs out after having seen it first hand.
thank you for your post an welcome aboard. This could maybe explain the lack of seriousness that initially the police seemed to give the case until the family kicked up and could explain why they did not initially release that final cctv clip. I don't know what to expect now and agree with posters who say we should be getting statements direct from the police. It is council tax payers money paying for the police after all.
 
Hoping my family doesn't search my "history" on this iPad - but I did a search of "Bury St Edmunds Prostitutes" and there seem to be a few active links there. One even has In-calls and Out-calls. I know we had touched on that earlier, briefly, when discussing why "lurker" might be standing in the shadows at 3:40 am. (Forgive me for not posting links - I'll leave that search up to you)
we can vouch for your true reasons for your search history calo if necessary.
 
When they showed the footage in the pod on the Thursday, they explained that it was the original footage and that a number of those shown had already been identified.
So why not show the 4 min lurker?
Because they have identified him/her? Have to wait for that update.
 
So corries family are clased as victims, dose any one know how all this works, victims of what exactly as we have no crime so must be victims of missing family member, not shure, so would his friends and people that new him also be victims, any ideas any one?
 
Because they have identified him/her? Have to wait for that update.

Yet they show others that are also identified? They didn't even blur any of those out? The first CCTV had the Grapes people blurred out....

If they have identified him/her why have they not asked for a chat?
 
Yet they show others that are also identified? They didn't even blur any of those out? The first CCTV had the Grapes people blurred out....

If they have identified him/her why have they not asked for a chat?

I've heard no murmurings of four minute lurker being identified (although running man has so that might be helpful in regards to the lurker) I was also under the impression lurker was pointed out in the pod on the first day but not the second day. Whether they've showed anyone the footage of them leaving the horseshoe I don't know. You'd think they have more than just legs, in fact we know they do.
 
So corries family are clased as victims, dose any one know how all this works, victims of what exactly as we have no crime so must be victims of missing family member, not shure, so would his friends and people that new him also be victims, any ideas any one?

Corries family are classed as the victims family. While perhaps premature in calling them this because we don't know for definate Corrie was a victim of a crime for the purposes on this forum as corries case is discussed he is the victim therefore the family become "the victims family"
 
I've heard no murmurings of four minute lurker being identified (although running man has so that might be helpful in regards to the lurker) I was also under the impression lurker was pointed out in the pod on the first day but not the second day. Whether they've showed anyone the footage of them leaving the horseshoe I don't know. You'd think they have more than just legs, in fact we know they do.

Yeah it is all very odd. There does seem to be something about this person that is making the Police extremely nervous about showing him. At least that is the impression I'm getting rightly or wrongly.
 
Corries family are classed as the victims family. While perhaps premature in calling them this because we don't know for definate Corrie was a victim of a crime for the purposes on this forum as corries case is discussed he is the victim therefore the family become "the victims family"
thanks for that so corrie is a victim until evidence says otherwise,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
138
Guests online
2,633
Total visitors
2,771

Forum statistics

Threads
599,739
Messages
18,098,975
Members
230,918
Latest member
safetycircle
Back
Top