AWOL Theory
It seems far fetched given that he didn't have any of his belongings with him so if anyone was to search for him he would have had the same clothes on that he was last seen in. Throwing away your phone is overkill, the Armed Forces don't take absconders that seriously that they bring CSI in. It doesn't seem right that you'd plan to go AWOL on a whim after a night out and then not come back when you've sobered up even if it was to get your stuff and plan it properly. You'd still need to use your bank account or have some form of currency. You could still speak to your family, probably even stay at a mates across the road from your mums house and not be found by the MP. Someone would have spotted him now he's gone national.
Accident Theory
It is plausible he has left the area and fallen victim to some kind of accident whether on his own or at someone else's hands (hiding a body takes it beyond being an accident to becoming manslaughter at least). However, where could he have gotten to so remote that no one would have found him injured or dead in the last 10 weeks? In this day and age with local news spreading so fast even the slightest sighting of something untoward would most probably make someone connect the dots (you'd think).
Abduction Theory
Again, it seems plausible that he could have been abducted for purposes unknown. If there was a terrorist connection then surely there would have been contact by now by someone trying to claim the crime for the notoriety and praise it would generate from sympathisers. If an abduction was carried out by someone without terrorist links then it would presumably need at least minimal planning, I can't see why Bury town centre would be considered a reasonable abduction point amongst weekend police presence and CCTV everywhere. Even with knowing where the CCTV cameras were it would still be incredibly risky and arguably unnecessary. If you are going to abduct someone it's not likely you'd just pick anyone, you'd be incredibly lucky if a person that matches your criteria just stumbles upon you in the dark. That being said, it's possible he could have been abducted by someone he knew. If the abduction didn't end with a murder then where is he being held, surely there can't be that many discreet places to keep a man where you aren't going to be rumbled in 10 weeks.
Murder Theory
One that is entirely possible but a lot of the same questions arise as the accident theory. Where is the body, even if it had been hidden/buried surely someone would have noticed something by now. Particularly as it's not easy to dispose of a body without attracting attention to yourself. Again, why pick Bury town centre to snatch someone or commit the act, if you don't know the victim surely as with the abduction theory you would be lucky to have someone that matches your criteria land in your lap, if you do know the victim surely there's easier places to pick them up without being seen. How common is it for someone to just randomly pick someone and kill them? (Genuine question - I always thought there was some kind of type the killer has i.e. Women/Prostitutes/Gay men)
Tinder/Grindr Theory
This is the one that best fits what we already know, or more specifically what we don't. The fact that no one has come forward to say they saw him that night after he was last seen on CCTV actually fits with this theory in that if he was meeting a random for some no strings attached frolics then that person is highly unlikely to come forward if they are embarrassed about it, particularly if that person is a closet homosexual. It's my personal opinion that in the last episode of CCTV footage he looked like he spotted someone behind that wall, someone he was sheepish in meeting. Perhaps they had a car there or close by were they then drove in the direction of Barton Mills either to were they lived or just somewhere out of the way so they could have some uninterrupted fun. Now up until this point the lack of information fits theory pretty well. Here is where the twist comes, it could be that either that person was a murderer and killed poor Corrie, it could be that they had a disagreement and in a heated exchange Corrie was killed or it could be that in a heated exchange Corrie killed someone else. Feeling that he can't come forward because a) he would need to explain why he was in a car with a strange man at that time of night and b) scared of going to prison and branded a murderer he decides to hide the evidence and disappear until everything dies down. This would explain the phone being discarded and the police not disclosing whether or not they can gain access to the information on dating apps. It also fits Corries mum saying she felt betrayed and the sudden reward being offered, perhaps the police mentioned the possibility of Corrie being gay and his mum was so offended by the suggestion (not in a homophobic way, just in a 'I think I'd know if my son was gay' way) that they told her they wouldn't pursue it any more, they have and in disclosing the information and subsequently the reason why they believe no one has come forward, the dads side of the family have decided to offer the reward in the hope the cash overrides someone's need for anonymity.
Looking at the options it's hard to discount there not being some kind of rendezvous with someone male or female that doesn't have some kind of vested interest in not becoming known to be the last person to see him or be with him. Sorry for the long post, I just keep going through all the possible scenarios and the CCTV video takes me back to the Tinder/Grindr theory each time.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(personal overload) Anyway I didn't think much of the interview / documentary I am thinking much on the lines of others he has walked out the area and public searches will find him cant say much more got to me a bit