UK UK - Corrie McKeague, 23, Bury St Edmunds, 24 September 2016 #9

[DanceCard]

BBM - I think Tony was wrong when he said the police emphatically said that, I really don't think they did and I checked a while back, in their official releases they said that all options were being considered. Now maybe they had other secret meetings with the media where they said something different but why would they do that? Almost in the same breath Tony was talking about a D notice so the police talking to the media wouldn't be likely to happen if that were true.

I understand Tony's frustration but I don't think some of the things he says are his opinions rather than hard facts

JMO

I agree with you. I wasn't trying to 'make a case' to defend either family or police statements in that post.

 

[WhereIsJohnnyGosch]

My 'lingering' post was in response to something said by Nicola this morning.
Nicola herself was the catalyst for my post when she referred to what she was told in the opening days of the investigation, she clearly feels that ' lingering on what was said in the opening days of the investigation' is relevant and important.

Maybe to her it is because she's privy to information that the general public isn't but in my opinion, nothing can be gained from speculating the reasoning behind the differences in statements that were made then and now. Mainly because we don't know why they were made initially and we also don't know what's caused them to change. It could be anything from a simple miscommunication to an important piece of evidence that hasn't been disclosed yet.

Also, it is worth considering that the irregularities could have been intentional to make a potential suspect feel like their time is running out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WhereIsJohnnyGosch]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-38262016

It's interesting that she mentions a 'specific incident' which prompted her criticism of the police


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DanceCard]

in my opinion, nothing can be gained from speculating the reasoning behind the differences in statements that were made then and now.

How the case is being handled is very important IMO, so you and I will just have to agree to disagree on this.

 

[Pinkpuma]

Conspiracy theories eh! Heh... well, we did talk about Honnington and its role as the RAF Police HQ back in thread 2 or 3 and why it has been ultimately silent on the whole thing... still.

Something else to note:

Nicola side of family:
Dislikes police
Dislikes Websleuth's (us)
Dislikes Corrie's father's side of family
Likes Facebook
Likes JustGiving funds (that goal keeps going up without explanation)
Seemingly prefer their own info via uncle tony

Dad side of family:
Dislikes mother's side
Likes police
No comments on Websleuth's
Privately funded reward
Seemingly prefer the police lines of enquiry

My point is the outpouring of support goes to the mother's side but they are clearly the more "difficult"?

EDIT. That said I'm not personally in the know about the source of the 50k reward, if thats the dad's side reward, mothers side, a joint reward or whatnot. Not sure that the justgiving has anything to do with reward money.

I have many teacher friends who say that parents who are also teachers are the worst to deal with. They question everything because they know the ins and outs of what's involved in teaching and often feel like they're being fobbed off when in fact half the time the child is just not as forward as his/her peers. My point being that Tony and Nicola will know 'too much' of what should be going on behind the scenes, something that other families of missing people wouldn't. Therefore, in this case Nicola's side of the family are going to be more 'difficult' by asking questions, raising concerns etc that probably other families wouldn't.

I do agree with some of your points but after seeing the interview with Nicola on Forces TV I would have to say I completely understand where she's coming from and if my son was missing I'd probably be doing the same. I don't think I could sit back and watch nothing happen. She said the 50K reward was from a business couple so that is separate from the JustGiving page that is purely to raise funds for the search, any left over money will be given to charity. That is fair enough. The father's side have put their own reward up, probably because like the rest of the family they are getting desperate for some answers. That was done without Nicola being informed hence the feelings of betrayal. She did state how upset the boys were seeing their Grandparent's distress and she came across as quite genuine whilst saying so. It's a shame there's such an obvious divide in the family as it just complicates things further and at the end of the day they all want the same thing.

 

[suzyjackson]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-38262016

It's interesting that she mentions a 'specific incident' which prompted her criticism of the police


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It would certainly be interesting to know what that incident was.

The final statement is

"We do have the time and the resources to be able to go out and search every single place and we will, because we will not stop until we get Corrie home".

This reminds me so much of an American case some of you may have followed, Christina Morris from Texas who disappeared over 2 year ago, her family and friends have searched for her every week since then and have never found a single trace of her. There are some parallels with final CCTV and phone pings, sadly the truth is that finding a body isn't an easy task.

 

[WhereIsJohnnyGosch]

How the case is being handled is very important IMO, so you and I will just have to agree to disagree on this.

It is important but what do you think of the irregularities in statements in regards to how the case is being handled? To me it bears no relevance as I don't know enough about what was/is going on behind the scenes to pass judgement.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dcflag]

I was chatting to my mum about the police saying they didn't believe third party involvement and the family believing there was. The first thing she said was to her the police believeing no third party involvement (and perhaps a lack of resource) suggests the police believe there maybe evidence to support him going awol.

If he was hitching a lift with the bin lorry driver the driver could have said "I leave for bury around half 3" which would suggest why he went to wait from that sort of time. The bin lorry not stopping means nothing, he could have gotten out at the recycling centre in mildenhall (assuming that's where the lorry went) before entering the actual car park of the facility.

The family has always refuted the awol claims and perhaps that is why they're branching out on their own. It makes a lot of sense to me.

The docu stated Corrie was suffering no mental health issues, which I thought was strange as there really hasn't been much if any emphasis on this anywhere. I'm not sure you can take this as fact. It may also be why the family have been so adamant a third party was involved to keep the momentum of the case going. If it's believed he went awol, had any mental health issues that would have caused him to do that or could have had suicidal thoughts it suddenly becomes much less of a priority than a murderer or a dangerous person out there.

 

[Muriel MayBee]

He arrives in town on his own.
Why didn't he come with his mates ?

I too have pondered this. Maybe he just wasn't as popular as we've been told. Or maybe he didn't feel like joining the crew that night. Certainly odd that an organised group would go ahead into town without one of their own.

He parks in a Disabled Bay.
Is he coming back to his car before the restrictions kick ?

Strikes me that he may have done this so as he had somewhere to kip after his night out and then drive back to base before the restrictions kick in. It looks as though he parked in an empty street in the first bay closest to the road where Flex etc situated. Also shows a total disregard for rules IMO.

He sits and drinks in his car for an hour.
Pre loading ? Depressed ? In no rush to catch his mates ?

I think if you've missed your mates and this is organised then surely you'd be in a hurry to catch them up. Why sit for an hour drinking unless you are a) depressed b) angry in which case, why didn't he turn the car round again and go home? Is that why family were on the phone so much that day?

He is asked to leave Flex early
What was his behaviour and state of mind like in the club ?

IMO bouncers don't throw you out for being drunk otherwise they'd empty the place. Strikes me there was a potential for an altercation. Angry with fellow squaddies when he eventually caught up with them or something else?
My question is a) why did none of them back him up b) no single camp mate leave with him c) the whole group leave???

He stays in Bury for two hours
Is he waiting in Bury for someone ?

Big question and one that makes no sense. Surely you'd take your food back to your car and sleep it off in relative safety and warmth unless as you say he was supposed to be meeting someone somewhere.

He walks into Short Brackland
Is he going for a pee or to meet someone ?

This is where I'm thinking of his slightly furtive stroll across. I think someone who is necking alcohol in a car, parking in a disabled bay, thrown out of the club is a risk taker and if looking to urinate would just do so. Why did he run/jog up to the point where he then strolled across? Why then look up in the direction of the camera? Was he looking at it as the movement or sound startled him? Did he hear or see someone coming along behind him? Did he go there to move out of eyesight of other revellers walking along - didn't wish to be seen? Did he see the bikes in the rack and take one, hence faster journey between BSE and BM? Not car pace and not walking pace but somewhere inbetween? Did he run/jog away from the person or persons he may have had an altercation with in Flex, hence going around a dead end to hide?

OR did he stash a bike and backpack there with change of clothes and make his presence felt by deliberately missing lift with lads, parking illegally where his car would eventually be found, playing games in Mamma Mia and getting thrown out of Flex so that he would be remembered at a later date?!? Is he AWOL? Was his drinking a sign he wasn't coping with military life? Was the dog because he was lonely - cut adrift from family. He's very young and I felt disconsolate at times when I lived away from home comforts.

You see, the police can't just say "clearly this is murder". He could have gone absent without leave. He could have gone somewhere with someone and had an accident trying to get home from there.

There are a thousand an one things to consider, taking everything as equal. The police cannot simply be directed by what the family tell them happened...when in truth, no body knows.

My thoughts above...FWIW

 

[Muriel MayBee]

Sorry I haven't said "hi" or marked my thoughts to separate them from JK's - still learning - apologies

 

[MidsummersDay]

Third party involvement to be fair could mean anything. It's exactly what it says on the tin...'third party involvement'. That could be anything like harbouring a fugitive (if the AWOL was official), accessory to attempted/murder, witness, withholding information a pertaining to an enquiry. This list goes on. :/

Exiting the bin lorry...
Again to be fair he could have got out of the cab anywhere within the BM mast footprint along the A1101. A junction, layby, traffic management system etc.

Family taking over the enquiry...
It would explain why they are frustrated. Embarrassing accusations from the public that could lead to the truth or being discovered that the family would prefer to keep private (gay/bisexual/drugs/gambling etc). Damage limitation of you like.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Muriel MayBee]

I have many teacher friends who say that parents who are also teachers are the worst to deal with. They question everything because they know the ins and outs of what's involved in teaching and often feel like they're being fobbed off when in fact half the time the child is just not as forward as his/her peers. My point being that Tony and Nicola will know 'too much' of what should be going on behind the scenes, something that other families of missing people wouldn't. Therefore, in this case Nicola's side of the family are going to be more 'difficult' by asking questions, raising concerns etc that probably other families wouldn't.

I do agree with some of your points but after seeing the interview with Nicola on Forces TV I would have to say I completely understand where she's coming from and if my son was missing I'd probably be doing the same. I don't think I could sit back and watch nothing happen. She said the 50K reward was from a business couple so that is separate from the JustGiving page that is purely to raise funds for the search, any left over money will be given to charity. That is fair enough. The father's side have put their own reward up, probably because like the rest of the family they are getting desperate for some answers. That was done without Nicola being informed hence the feelings of betrayal. She did state how upset the boys were seeing their Grandparent's distress and she came across as quite genuine whilst saying so. It's a shame there's such an obvious divide in the family as it just complicates things further and at the end of the day they all want the same thing.

I agree, she must be out of her mind with worry and will be so up and down emotionally, angry one minute, defeated the next. I just hope her son is found one way or another.

 

[MidsummersDay]

Whoops, my apologies....I'm supposed to be taking a back seat and lurking with intent


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Liz40]

I don't want to be disrespectful to anyone, but logically that statement just makes no sense to me. Why would you treat it as a homicide if there was zero evidence that it was? surely you could only conclude that it was homicide if you had something that pointed you that way (however tiny that something might be)...in the total absence of any evidence it could be any number of things...and resources not being infinite (as horrible as it is that it comes down to that ) you would want to be sure that you were *barking up the right tree*. I don't know what is being said publicly v's what's being thought privately, but there seems little evidence of anyone other than the family (not the Police, not the RAF) regarding it as being that criminally serious. Which must be awful for the family. I don't know what to think anymore.

I guess the family would be wanting the status to be seen as that so potentially more resources would be available, although that definitely doesn't seemed to have been the case.

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

I'm trying to understand the latest CCTV release. We are shown 12 people minutes to hours before/after Corrie is seen going to the bins and IMO only 3 could possibly be relevant. So what is the thinking behind tracing them? The family have said there are 3 vehicles in/at the horseshoe that have been "identified" but have the Police acknowledged this is correct and if so why no appeal for these after so long?

I mean so far something on the order of 40+ people have have been traced/come forward and presumably had no information or didn't see Corrie so why use apparently limited resources on tracing people in adjacent streets up to 2 hours later?

Maybe there is method in the madness but I still struggle to make sense of it.

 

[Dcflag]

Third party involvement to be fair could mean anything. It's exactly what it says on the tin...'third party involvement'. That could be anything like harbouring a fugitive (if the AWOL was official), accessory to attempted/murder, witness, withholding information a pertaining to an enquiry. This list goes on. :/

Exiting the bin lorry...
Again to be fair he could have got out of the cab anywhere within the BM mast footprint along the A1101. A junction, layby, traffic management system etc.

Family taking over the enquiry...
It would explain why they are frustrated. Embarrassing accusations from the public that could lead to the truth or being discovered that the family would prefer to keep private (gay/bisexual/drugs/gambling etc). Damage limitation of you like.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's true, I took it to mean more along the lines of kidnap or similar.

I just don't think the police this is the case (a malicious third party) I wonder why this is.

 

[Pinkpuma]

I'm trying to understand the latest CCTV release. We are shown 12 people minutes to hours before/after Corrie is seen going to the bins and IMO only 3 could possibly be relevant. So what is the thinking behind tracing them? The family have said there are 3 vehicles in/at the horseshoe that have been "identified" but have the Police acknowledged this is correct and if so why no appeal for these after so long?

I mean so far something on the order of 40+ people have have been traced/come forward and presumably had no information or didn't see Corrie so why use apparently limited resources on tracing people in adjacent streets up to 2 hours later?

Maybe there is method in the madness but I still struggle to make sense of it.

Because all it takes is one of those people to have a much needed vital piece of information and that's probably their best shot as nobody else has seen him. If they didn't bother tracing everyone in the area that night/morning they risk losing a crucial sighting or information. You could bet your bottom dollar the person they didn't bother tracking down would be the one who saw something! No stone left unturned and rightly so, every single person in the area would need speaking to I would think!

 

[MidsummersDay]

Because all it takes is one of those people to have a much needed vital piece of information and that's probably their best shot as nobody else has seen him. If they didn't bother tracing everyone in the area that night/morning they risk losing a crucial sighting or information. You could bet your bottom dollar the person they didn't bother tracking down would be the one who saw something! No stone left unturned and rightly so, every single person in the area would need speaking to I would think!

Yeh I get that, but professionally that just suggests to me that they're at their limits of effective evidence gathering. Can we honestly believe that this is the case? This is such a multi faceted situation it begs belief. A classic case of too many cooks spoiling the broth in my opinion. I genuinely can't see why ALL the intelligence and work efforts could not be channelled through one conduit. Such a waste of effective resources.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[TheTruthWillOut]

Because all it takes is one of those people to have a much needed vital piece of information and that's probably their best shot as nobody else has seen him. If they didn't bother tracing everyone in the area that night/morning they risk losing a crucial sighting or information. You could bet your bottom dollar the person they didn't bother tracking down would be the one who saw something! No stone left unturned and rightly so, every single person in the area would need speaking to I would think!

I would agree with you for 3 of the 12 but for example the first 3 people shown on the Suffolk Police page time stamped at 03:21 are walking toward Looms Lane minutes before Corrie walks to the bins. I guess the Police might want to know if they saw any vehicles in the horseshoe but then why have the family stated they have all been identified?

Until we get a more clear and less contradictory picture we're left with guessing and it is just so frustrating.

 

[Antonia]

Yeh I get that, but professionally that just suggests to me that they're at their limits of effective evidence gathering. Can we honestly believe that this is the case? This is such a multi faceted situation it begs belief. A classic case of too many cooks spoiling the broth in my opinion. I genuinely can't see why ALL the intelligence and work efforts could not be channelled through one conduit. Such a waste of effective resources.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

...or the police want the 'third party' (and Corrie?) to *think* that they are that desperate for info?