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

[espirtu pampa]

@Rey_nolds.
Thank you ever so much for these clarifications.
Poor boy, poor family.

 

[davidt]

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.

I made a similar comment before but I have wondered why the police were so keen to publigly link the arrests to Andrew? They didn't need to do that as it seems the original arrests were for other potential offences. Instead they could have continued investigating any connection to Andrew's disappearance quietly in the background. It does make me feel that they really felt they were on to something at the time.

Am I right in thinking the two POIs were released without any charges whatsoever? If they were then presumably they couldn't have been in possession of any indecent images at all, let alone of Andrew. Unless possibly any images couldn't be linked to them personally perhaps?

 

[Rey_nolds.]

I made a similar comment before but I have wondered why the police were so keen to publigly link the arrests to Andrew? They didn't need to do that as it seems the original arrests were for other potential offences. Instead they could have continued investigating any connection to Andrew's disappearance quietly in the background. It does make me feel that they really felt they were on to something at the time.

Am I right in thinking the two POIs were released without any charges whatsoever? If they were then presumably they couldn't have been in possession of any indecent images at all, let alone of Andrew. Unless possibly any images couldn't be linked to them personally perhaps?

Yep you're correct, just checked the BBC article from 2023.
The article does state "Men released without charge". So you're probably right, if they did have indecent images then they would have been charged, just not with a charge directly relating to the alleged "kidnap and human trafficking"
Article for information: Redirect Notice

Unless they were charged with possession of indecent images, but this was overlooked by the media (possible) or they were protected, as a lot of sex offenders are (unlikely, as their names were never released anyway).

Or as I mentioned, they had that content at some point in time. Thinking about it, how many devices could people have potentially had from September 2007 to December 2021 (when arrests were made). This means people may have got rid of or destroyed old devices/media completely.


I suppose it's hard for us to say either way.
As we know, LE only drip feed information on this case. Then it has to go via the media, who often create their own narrative anyway.

My only thoughts are that the Gosden family apologiesed and felt "profoundly sorry for the inevitable distress that such allegations will have caused". Meaning that they were fully innocent, or the Gosdens also didn't know of any other charges.

One thing to consider is that prisons in the UK are very over populated. So even the worst sex offenders are getting away without a prison sentence and instead having to use monitored devices under a suspended sentence.

 

[davidt]

Yep you're correct, just checked the BBC article from 2023.
The article does state "Men released without charge". So you're probably right, if they did have indecent images then they would have been charged, just not with a charge directly relating to the alleged "kidnap and human trafficking"
Article for information: Redirect Notice

Unless they were charged with possession of indecent images, but this was overlooked by the media (possible) or they were protected, as a lot of sex offenders are (unlikely, as their names were never released anyway).

Or as I mentioned, they had that content at some point in time. Thinking about it, how many devices could people have potentially had from September 2007 to December 2021 (when arrests were made). This means people may have got rid of or destroyed old devices/media completely.


I suppose it's hard for us to say either way.
As we know, LE only drip feed information on this case. Then it has to go via the media, who often create their own narrative anyway.

My only thoughts are that the Gosden family apologiesed and felt "profoundly sorry for the inevitable distress that such allegations will have caused". Meaning that they were fully innocent, or the Gosdens also didn't know of any other charges.

One thing to consider is that prisons in the UK are very over populated. So even the worst sex offenders are getting away without a prison sentence and instead having to use monitored devices under a suspended sentence.

I do remember the police saying they had seized a number of devices which would take a significant amount of time to analyse. Not aware of any follow up, if any such follow up would be made public anyway.

 

[KathPlumber]

Yep you're correct, just checked the BBC article from 2023.
The article does state "Men released without charge". So you're probably right, if they did have indecent images then they would have been charged, just not with a charge directly relating to the alleged "kidnap and human trafficking"
Article for information: Redirect Notice

Unless they were charged with possession of indecent images, but this was overlooked by the media (possible) or they were protected, as a lot of sex offenders are (unlikely, as their names were never released anyway).

Or as I mentioned, they had that content at some point in time. Thinking about it, how many devices could people have potentially had from September 2007 to December 2021 (when arrests were made). This means people may have got rid of or destroyed old devices/media completely.


I suppose it's hard for us to say either way.
As we know, LE only drip feed information on this case. Then it has to go via the media, who often create their own narrative anyway.

My only thoughts are that the Gosden family apologiesed and felt "profoundly sorry for the inevitable distress that such allegations will have caused". Meaning that they were fully innocent, or the Gosdens also didn't know of any other charges.

One thing to consider is that prisons in the UK are very over populated. So even the worst sex offenders are getting away without a prison sentence and instead having to use monitored devices under a suspended sentence.

Yeah, I thought that was a very characteristically kind and empathetic response from the Gosdens whereas the police were more circumspect and just said they were “confident the two men arrested played no part in Andrew's disappearance".

I don’t think we can assume anything about these arrests.

I haven’t seen confirmation anywhere that they were based on an anonymous tip-off.

There was no follow up on whether the man with the CSAM was ever prosecuted for that.

The wording of the final announcements in the media all refer to the men being “released.” But they couldn’t have been held the whole time from Dec 2021 until Sept 2023 (in fact an early media report said they were “released under investigation while enquiries continue”). So that’s another example of weirdness. It feels like more than just an expression or “released from suspicion.” There’s something else.

All the media reporting is so controlled and really uses very few words. No press conference, no questions from journalists answered. There is a lot not being said.

So I guess we have to hope that is all a good sign that something is happening. As counter intuitive as it seems.

It’s a major matter of public interest too, I’d imagine you’d have celebrities and politicians potentially championing the cause if indeed it had truly been forgotten.

 

[KathPlumber]

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.

Do we even know for sure it was an anonymous tip-off? I feel like that’s one of those oft-reported but never confirmed things

 

[Fake Protagonist]

Do we even know for sure it was an anonymous tip-off? I feel like that’s one of those oft-reported but never confirmed things

It was reported by the mainstream news to be an anonymous tip. So I should think it's confirmed, otherwise that's poor reporting.

 

[ChatteringBirds]

Do we even know for sure it was an anonymous tip-off? I feel like that’s one of those oft-reported but never confirmed things

No, I feel it was probably anonymous, but we don't know for sure. LE might say so but be keeping info. close to the vest. I'm not confident they have any more strong leads right now, though.

I think because Andrew has such a sweet, outspoken, genuine family fighting for answers, this case is just the absolute most difficult one.

 

[Rey_nolds.]

I've checked all online news articles I could find on the arrests.
I have only found one that mentions the arrests being the result of an anonymous tip off.
The article states that "two men currently under investigation after an anonymous tip off".

Here is the article (15 July 2023):
'My son vanished 16 years ago without a trace - it's a living nightmare'

 

[KathPlumber]

It was reported by the mainstream news to be an anonymous tip. So I should think it's confirmed, otherwise that's poor reporting.

It’s only been found in one Daily Mirror article that was a “still waiting for answers” story with a photo of Kevin (ie focus was on the family). It wasn’t a contemporaneous report on the original arrests or on the men being ‘released.’

The link that followed the comment linked back to an earlier Mirror article in on arrests published when they occurred, and that article didn’t mention an anon tip at all.

I’m not saying it’s not the case, rather that that it’s yet another example of the weirdness surrounding the arrests.

You’d think it would be widely reported, and not just in passing in an article over a year later by one of the less reputable UK news sources. Absolute pure speculation but I wonder if it was the family who mentioned it to the reporter who wasn’t aware that wasn’t widely known.

 

[KathPlumber]

No, I feel it was probably anonymous, but we don't know for sure. LE might say so but be keeping info. close to the vest. I'm not confident they have any more strong leads right now, though.

I think because Andrew has such a sweet, outspoken, genuine family fighting for answers, this case is just the absolute most difficult one.

Absolutely agree. It haunts me. Especially the shocking period of LE mismanagement which went for way too long at the beginning (I’m talking years) and the fact that the family are also so reasonable and nice about THAT.

There is just no way LE don’t know more. The Gosdens narrative is also always about having to wait and be patient and how agonising that is. It’s not “I can’t believe no one is doing anything, someone please notice I’m writing to my local MP.”

 

[Inspector Evans]

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?


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

Leeds aswell. That's what I've always thought. If he wanted a day off school then there are 2-3 major cities within an hour or so of Donny he could've gone to, Manchester is reasonably close by.

Maybe he didn't like those cities and it was all about London for him?

 

[BlondeLau]

In the YouTube video shared a few pages ago during the summer holidays Andrew’s dad said to him..

‘You know how the trains work, you can go get on a train and do whatever you like in London..’ He decided not to go as he had already been to stay with family in Middlesbrough but it’s possible he took this as an open pass to go whenever he felt like it.

 

[TheRockingRev]

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.

Good points. The afternoon/evening is the key - could he have been invited somewhere where a perpetrator wouldn't even have to meet him in public? CCTV was still not as common in regular streets back then.

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?