UK UK - Andrew Gosden, 14, Doncaster, South Yorks, 14 Sep 2007 #2

[TheRockingRev]

Do you have the address so I can see it on Maps?

The original in Soho was 97-99 Wardour Street. The later incarnation was on St. Giles High Street, but the building has long gone and the area has been entirely redeveloped.

 

[Inspector Evans]

The original in Soho was 97-99 Wardour Street. The later incarnation was on St. Giles High Street, but the building has long gone and the area has been entirely redeveloped.

Know that area of Soho well, right by Carnaby street which is a tourist favourite.

Also about half an hour walk from XC if you go at a leisurely pace so fits the timeline if Andrew stopped off at the British Library and then was spotted having a pizza from 1pm onwards.

 

[Rey_nolds.]

In 2007, I was in Year 6 of primary school, while Andrew was in Year 7, having just started secondary school.
We lived quite close to each other—around 6 or 7 miles apart in Doncaster—so his disappearance felt very personal to me.

I vividly remember how much emphasis there was in school on internet safety and not talking to strangers online. That really sticks with me, especially considering the police looked into the possibility that Andrew might have been groomed or influenced through the internet.

It makes me wonder if this was the leading theory for South Yorkshire Police at the time.

 

[Rey_nolds.]

On the day Andrew went missing, would schools in London have been out? I’m sure it was looked into at the time, but if there was no school that would make me think he went to meet someone around his age who was out of school for the day.

Andrew went missing on Friday, 14th September 2007. By that point in the year, schools in London would definitely have been open — the autumn term starts in early September after the summer holidays end in late August. While individual schools might have had occasional INSET (training) days, there’s no evidence or indication that 14th September was a widespread day off in London.

So statistically speaking, most young people in London would have been in school at the time Andrew arrived at King’s Cross. That said, it’s still possible he arranged to meet someone who was skipping school or perhaps someone older who wasn’t in education.

 

[Rey_nolds.]

In 2007, I was in Year 6 of primary school, while Andrew was in Year 7, having just started secondary school.
We lived quite close to each other—around 6 or 7 miles apart in Doncaster—so his disappearance felt very personal to me.

I vividly remember how much emphasis there was in school on internet safety and not talking to strangers online. That really sticks with me, especially considering the police looked into the possibility that Andrew might have been groomed or influenced through the internet.

It makes me wonder if this was the leading theory for South Yorkshire Police at the time.

I’ve been thinking about the police investigation into Andrew Gosden’s digital trail — especially the fact that they reportedly checked the school and library computers and found no trace of his activity.

From my own experience growing up in Doncaster at the time, school PCs back then didn’t have individual logins. They were often shared, unlocked, and you could just sit down and use them. There was little to no tracking, and no personalised profiles like you’d expect today.

That makes me wonder: even if Andrew did use a school computer to message someone or access a forum, would there have been any way to definitively trace that back to him? If there were no user logins and no monitoring software installed, then even a police check might have come up empty — especially if he was careful or deleted history.

So I’m curious: is there any significance to the fact that South Yorkshire Police found “no trace” on the school PCs? Could it simply mean that they couldn’t trace anything, not that he didn’t use them?

Would be interested to hear others’ thoughts — especially from people who were in school around that time or who understand digital forensics.

 

[maamager]

Would be interested to hear others’ thoughts — especially from people who were in school around that time or who understand digital forensics.

snipped by me.

i’m a year (and some change) younger than AG but essentially the same age, and i remember thinking way back in 2007 how sophisticated the PSP web browser was compared to the browser on my Nokia phone. you could watch flash videos, youtube, and chat on FB + other chat rooms (albeit slowly, you had to refresh the page iirc). i wonder if comms were through his PSP that hasn’t been recovered.

 

[KathPlumber]

snipped by me.

i’m a year (and some change) younger than AG but essentially the same age, and i remember thinking way back in 2007 how sophisticated the PSP web browser was compared to the browser on my Nokia phone. you could watch flash videos, youtube, and chat on FB + other chat rooms (albeit slowly, you had to refresh the page iirc). i wonder if comms were through his PSP that hasn’t been recovered.

yep, ever since it was pointed out that a PSP browser could be used this way, by getting on Wifi (not by connecting to the PSP store or partaking in networked gaming necessarily), I’ve thought there was something in it.

I also agree that school computers were still an option, based on what little we know.

The deafening silence around so much of this case says a lot I stg. I hate to say too much of even my own dumb speculations, for fear of how careful police seem to be to have so little information about anything out there.

 

[maamager]

yep, ever since it was pointed out that a PSP browser could be used this way, by getting on Wifi (not by connecting to the PSP store or partaking in networked gaming necessarily), I’ve thought there was something in it.

I also agree that school computers were still an option, based on what little we know.

The deafening silence around so much of this case says a lot I stg. I hate to say too much of even my own dumb speculations, for fear of how careful police seem to be to have so little information about anything out there.

agreed. a quick google search tells me the UK release for the PSP-2000 (the revised version) was September 14, 2007. same day AG vanishes. i'n inclined to believe this is a red herring, but just wanted to note that.

 

[ChatteringBirds]

The deafening silence around so much of this case says a lot I stg. I hate to say too much of even my own dumb speculations, for fear of how careful police seem to be to have so little information about anything out there.

Do you think LE know much more than they have released? I do hope so, but it's difficult for me to believe. Not that long ago they investigated some POIs for many months before stating they were confident the two POIs were not involved in Andrew's disappearance. So then I think, how much could they actually "know?"

You can discuss your speculation here, if you wish. I don't see how it would affect the case, as long as you're clear it's just your theory.

 

[Kittypoo]

agreed. a quick google search tells me the UK release for the PSP-2000 (the revised version) was September 14, 2007. same day AG vanishes. i'n inclined to believe this is a red herring, but just wanted to note that.

Why a red herring?
I recall people (mainly youths) queuing through the night for a new release of a games console or game. Is there a way to find out the RRP on that date given we know Andrew had taken a substantial sum of money with him.

 

[maamager]

Why a red herring?
I recall people (mainly youths) queuing through the night for a new release of a games console or game. Is there a way to find out the RRP on that date given we know Andrew had taken a substantial sum of money with him.

i say red herring because i’m not sure how much stock to take into the PSP. there’s just not enough material evidence to suggest that it was anything more than something to pass the time on the train (moo: i think there is something there with the PSP, just trying to stay measured).

also, if AG just wanted to do a trade-in or buy a game, you’d think there’d be a ton in the greater London area if not closer to his actual town. but he went to Kings X.

 

[Rey_nolds.]

snipped by me.

i’m a year (and some change) younger than AG but essentially the same age, and i remember thinking way back in 2007 how sophisticated the PSP web browser was compared to the browser on my Nokia phone. you could watch flash videos, youtube, and chat on FB + other chat rooms (albeit slowly, you had to refresh the page iirc). i wonder if comms were through his PSP that hasn’t been recovered.

I also had the same model of PSP around the same time as Andrew, but I can’t recall ever using the built-in browser.

Does anyone know for sure whether the Gosdens had Wi-Fi at home? I know they had broadband, but back in 2007, that didn’t automatically mean you had a wireless router. A lot of home internet was still wired at that point.

If they didn’t have Wi-Fi, that could seriously limit Andrew’s ability to get online privately from devices like a PSP. Just wondering if that’s ever been confirmed anywhere?

Why a red herring?
I recall people (mainly youths) queuing through the night for a new release of a games console or game. Is there a way to find out the RRP on that date given we know Andrew had taken a substantial sum of money with him.

The RRP for the PSP Slim & Lite console alone was £129.99 at launch, though the price could be higher if bought in a bundle with games or accessories.

That said, the idea of Andrew travelling to London just to buy a PSP doesn’t really make sense to me. I lived nearby at the time and I know for a fact that he could have picked one up easily in Doncaster — there were plenty of shops around selling the latest consoles.

One thing I do remember clearly from growing up in the area was the presence of truancy officers in Doncaster town centre. I was actually stopped once on my way to an orthodontist appointment — they were pretty active and would check why you weren’t in school if you were seen out during school hours. So I get the thinking that Andrew might have wanted to go somewhere he wouldn’t stand out.

But if he just wanted to avoid being seen locally, there were loads of closer alternatives to London — places like Parkgate retail park in Rotherham or Meadowhall in Sheffield would have had everything he needed without the three-hour train journey. That

 

[KathPlumber]

I also had the same model of PSP around the same time as Andrew, but I can’t recall ever using the built-in browser.

Does anyone know for sure whether the Gosdens had Wi-Fi at home? I know they had broadband, but back in 2007, that didn’t automatically mean you had a wireless router. A lot of home internet was still wired at that point.

If they didn’t have Wi-Fi, that could seriously limit Andrew’s ability to get online privately from devices like a PSP. Just wondering if that’s ever been confirmed anywhere?

Family home internet/wifi not what I was thinking of, more that you could get onto it at - cafes, public council areas, libraries, telecom companies with free hotspots and all that. Potentially unsecured wifi from neighbours houses too in those days! Source: was travelling at that era as a young person with a laptop

PSP that era absolutely had a browser.
Some had messaging services like msn. You can look up videos of this all on YT. Very interesting to watch.
If you search Reddit for Andrew Gosden you’ll find a good post called ‘the psp and the faulty narrative’ can’t link it here as SM not an official source but it’s a good run down.

 

[KathPlumber]

Do you think LE know much more than they have released? I do hope so, but it's difficult for me to believe. Not that long ago they investigated some POIs for many months before stating they were confident the two POIs were not involved in Andrew's disappearance. So then I think, how much could they actually "know?"

Yes. I think the reporting around those POI arrests was incredibly controlled. The UK has quite strict laws whereby a reporting restriction can be placed on a crime, I don’t fully understand the particulars but we have something similar in Australia but we call it a suppression order. IANAL and I don’t really understand it in the UK but the gist of it is that reporting on something can for want of a better work be gagged via a judge’s say so to protect privacy and investigative integrity.

There are also civil suppression orders that can be used in a similar way .

I am just saying this to point out that there is a way to ensure legally that only a very narrow and negotiated window of reporting is offered on an issue if there’s an injunction or reporting restriction in place.

That’s in addition to whatever tight lockdown an investigation body like law enforcement might also have in place.

There are so many unanswered questions in this case and I think they’re unanswered for a reason. The person/ people they are looking for already knows the answers

 

[KathPlumber]

Posing a purely hypothetical situation where Andrew was lured to London by someone with nefarious intent. That person would not have known about the month-ish delay to getting cctv footage or other problematic investigative follow ups. That person might have assumed Andrew would be found out quite quick appearing on the xc or other cameras. Which wouldn’t be ideal.

This makes me wonder if Andrew actually set off for London that day without an invitation. L Could he have been being extorted for imagery of himself and was hoping to hit town and stop the : situation? was that what the cash was for? Try to do it before anyone realised and get home? Or was he going to surprise someone - someone he really wanted to see?

 

[Lucy6226]

Yes. I think the reporting around those POI arrests was incredibly controlled. The UK has quite strict laws whereby a reporting restriction can be placed on a crime, I don’t fully understand the particulars but we have something similar in Australia but we call it a suppression order. IANAL and I don’t really understand it in the UK but the gist of it is that reporting on something can for want of a better work be gagged via a judge’s say so to protect privacy and investigative integrity.

There are also civil suppression orders that can be used in a similar way .

I am just saying this to point out that there is a way to ensure legally that only a very narrow and negotiated window of reporting is offered on an issue if there’s an injunction or reporting restriction in place.

That’s in addition to whatever tight lockdown an investigation body like law enforcement might also have in place.

There are so many unanswered questions in this case and I think they’re unanswered for a reason. The person/ people they are looking for already knows the answers

I suspect the POI's are involved in some way, the police just don't have enough evidence to take to CPS.

 

[ChatteringBirds]

I suspect the POI's are involved in some way, the police just don't have enough evidence to take to CPS.

I guess the POIs could have been involved but would have had to have all new devices, accounts, both having eliminated all traces of their involvement prior to LE closing in.

IMO that's possible, but then you have to wonder how the tipster would have known details about their involvement.

 

[espirtu pampa]

Were the POIs from Doncaster ?
Sorry I can't remember.
Thanks in advance.

 

[Rey_nolds.]

Were the POIs from Doncaster ?
Sorry I can't remember.
Thanks in advance.

FYI:

In December 2021, two men from London were arrested in connection with this case. The arrests were made by SYP.

The individuals, aged 38 and 45 at the time, were detained on suspicion of kidnap and human trafficking. Additionally, the older man was arrested on suspicion of possessing indecent images of children.

In September 2023, SYP announced that both men had been eliminated from the investigation, stating they were "confident the two men arrested played no part in Andrew's disappearance."

 

[Rey_nolds.]

Just to clarify what the CPS needs before charges can be made:

1. Realistic Prospect of Conviction: There must be enough evidence that a jury or magistrate is more likely than not to convict based on what’s presented. Suspicion alone isn’t enough.


2. Public Interest: Even if there’s enough evidence, the CPS has to decide if it’s in the public interest to prosecute. In serious cases like kidnap or trafficking, this is usually a yes.


If either of these tests isn’t met, charges won’t go ahead, which could explain why the two men arrested in Andrew’s case were later released without charge.

Hypothetically, even if one or both of them had indecent images of Andrew, if there was no proven link to Andrew personally (e.g. no communication, grooming history, or physical contact), they might only be charged for possession of those images, not for his disappearance.
The CPS needs direct evidence tying someone to the actual crime in order to pursue serious charges like kidnap or trafficking.

My theory is that they were either in possession of (or at some point had been in possession of) some form of indecent material containing Andrew. And that this material somehow reached the tipster, prompting the police investigation.

But without evidence of contact or involvement in Andrew’s disappearance, CPS couldn’t proceed further.