UK UK - Kevin Hicks, 16, Croydon, 2 March 1986

[THX]

As always, thanks for replying!

I had read in newspaper archives about searches but couldn't find anywhere specific. Something about the similarity with Reece Collins, and the proximity to the Reece Collins case makes me think it could be nearby woodland that should be/should've been searched to rule it out as a deposit site.

It's interesting what you said there about a lad looking so much like Kevin, because I believe I also read a similar thing in a newspaper archive that happened with Kevin's mother after his disappearance. She was driving about and happened to see a lad that looked so much like Kevin!

It makes me wonder how reliable the supposed 10pm sighting actually is. He was seen by a girl who he worked with at the Co-Op, but I'm assuming it was from a distance or across the road because it's not ever been mentioned that they spoke. As I'm sure anything that Kevin could've said would've been seen as extremely significant.

So what if the girl, some distance away and only lit by streetlights as it was dark, only saw a boy that looked like Kevin, as it's been established that Kevin must've had a kind of 'look' that was popular at the time.

On another note, Alex Hicks has started up an Instagram in the hopes of renewing interest and raising awareness in Kevin's case. With it being 40 years yesterday, I really hope she gets somewhere and hopefully gets a new investigation into Kevin's disappearance started.

2nd March is a really horrible day for unsolved cases of missing young men. Apart from Kevin, there is the case of Mark Garvey in Liverpool in 1987 and more recently Jack O'Sullivan in 2024. All missing on 2nd March.

The thing with the stereo is really interesting isn't. It really does make you wonder what evidence the police have that it formed part of the grooming. As I recall, it was said at the time that Kevin bought it with a bonus from his job at the Co-op. Perhaps they checked with the Co-op and there was no such bonus.

So, it seems that Kevin used money to pay for it rather than being given the stereo outright. That made me think of something that my friend who grew up in Croydon told me. He said that it was not unknown for some teenagers in Croydon to "pose for photos" *ahem* for a bit of money. Thinking about it, I actually knew a couple of lads I was at university with who'd done something similar, although they were 18 / 19 when they did it. I wonder if Kevin had been given money for something similar. He's also told his dad the night before that he was broke, and borrowed money from him to go ice skating. I wonder perhaps if on the night he disappeared, he'd been hoping to get some extra money from someone who had been giving him money before. As I recall, it would not have been illegal at the time for a 16 year old back then to appear in photos, although worth remembering that Kevin had only just turned 16 a couple of weeks earlier.

I had another look through the newspaper archives and it was shocking just how violent the local area was back then, including in Lower Addiscombe Road where Kevin was supposed to be going to the shop. Rapes, assaults, burglaries, hold ups, all just on that one street alone.

There were a couple of interesting articles about Shirley Hills. One was from just a few weeks before Kevin disappeared, saying that a man in his 50s who was walking his dog was violently attacked by a 25 year old man in Shirley Hills, and the description of the man matched another attack also in Shirley Hills. Interestingly, the policeman the newspaper quoted in the article was one of the policemen who later got caught up in the Daniel Morgan murder scandal, Derek Haslam. Another reminder of just how much was going on in the local area at that time.

The second article was in the Daily Mirror in 1985. It said that Shirley Hills was not only a well known gay cruising area, it was also very popular with straight people, engaging in what the tabloids used to love to call in their awful sexist language "wife swapping", but what we'd probably call dogging now. They said that it was quite a sophisticated set up, and the straight people involved often arranged meet ups through what would have been coded "adverts" in newspapers. It's a good insight into how a lot of covert sexual encounters used to be arranged back then before the internet, through personal columns etc in newspapers. I'm sure somebody could do quite a detailed academic study of it.

 

[THX]

Any fingerprints found on the stereo?

Sending my love to your family, Kevin, and to you. I really hope you come home soon. I'm so sorry x

As I recall, they said that Kevin bought the stereo with his money, which probably means that they believe Kevin was being given money as part of the grooming, rather than being given the stereo

 

[BrutishGoose32]

2nd March is a really horrible day for unsolved cases of missing young men. Apart from Kevin, there is the case of Mark Garvey in Liverpool in 1987 and more recently Jack O'Sullivan in 2024. All missing on 2nd March.

The thing with the stereo is really interesting isn't. It really does make you wonder what evidence the police have that it formed part of the grooming. As I recall, it was said at the time that Kevin bought it with a bonus from his job at the Co-op. Perhaps they checked with the Co-op and there was no such bonus.

So, it seems that Kevin used money to pay for it rather than being given the stereo outright. That made me think of something that my friend who grew up in Croydon told me. He said that it was not unknown for some teenagers in Croydon to "pose for photos" *ahem* for a bit of money. Thinking about it, I actually knew a couple of lads I was at university with who'd done something similar, although they were 18 / 19 when they did it. I wonder if Kevin had been given money for something similar. He's also told his dad the night before that he was broke, and borrowed money from him to go ice skating. I wonder perhaps if on the night he disappeared, he'd been hoping to get some extra money from someone who had been giving him money before. As I recall, it would not have been illegal at the time for a 16 year old back then to appear in photos, although worth remembering that Kevin had only just turned 16 a couple of weeks earlier.

I had another look through the newspaper archives and it was shocking just how violent the local area was back then, including in Lower Addiscombe Road where Kevin was supposed to be going to the shop. Rapes, assaults, burglaries, hold ups, all just on that one street alone.

There were a couple of interesting articles about Shirley Hills. One was from just a few weeks before Kevin disappeared, saying that a man in his 50s who was walking his dog was violently attacked by a 25 year old man in Shirley Hills, and the description of the man matched another attack also in Shirley Hills. Interestingly, the policeman the newspaper quoted in the article was one of the policemen who later got caught up in the Daniel Morgan murder scandal, Derek Haslam. Another reminder of just how much was going on in the local area at that time.

The second article was in the Daily Mirror in 1985. It said that Shirley Hills was not only a well known gay cruising area, it was also very popular with straight people, engaging in what the tabloids used to love to call in their awful sexist language "wife swapping", but what we'd probably call dogging now. They said that it was quite a sophisticated set up, and the straight people involved often arranged meet ups through what would have been coded "adverts" in newspapers. It's a good insight into how a lot of covert sexual encounters used to be arranged back then before the internet, through personal columns etc in newspapers. I'm sure somebody could do quite a detailed academic study of it.

I've seen a few articles lately on Jack O'Sullivan, and was recently reading about Mark Garvey. Spooky coincidence that they all happened on the 2nd March. It happens too often where boys or young men just disappear completely without a trace.

Yeah, the stereo is really interesting because so much about what's known isn't even concrete. I wonder if it's a case of Kevin told his parents he bought it with his parents but the police determined it was too expensive for him to have been able to afford. Were any cash withdrawals, or receipts looked into that would've proved whether he bought it himself? Was he skint because he'd spent all his money on the speakers?

It's a bit of a sickening thought that men would be out there getting under 18s to pose for photos for their own gratification, but the more I read about crime in the 80s, it starts to pale in comparison.

I can't help but think Kevin's trip to the shop was genuine, as it was fairly late at night to be going out, and it would only be a 5 - 10 minute trip. He would have to have come home with eggs! He never took more than £1 with him or even his keys. Hypothetically, If he went off to do something else and was gone until let's say 10pm when he was supposedly last sighted, and came home without eggs, he'd surely have been in a lot of bother?

I do feel it's likely he stumbled into something he didn't expect to, and maybe seen something he shouldn't have, but to completely disappear without a trace ever being found just baffles me.

It's a shame the 40th anniversary has come and gone without a new investigation being launched, makes me think the police really do have nothing to go on. Interestingly, I read on a page for Lee Boxell, that someone had submitted a FOIA to the police for Lee's and Kevin's cases and was denied.

 

[THX]

I've seen a few articles lately on Jack O'Sullivan, and was recently reading about Mark Garvey. Spooky coincidence that they all happened on the 2nd March. It happens too often where boys or young men just disappear completely without a trace.

Yeah, the stereo is really interesting because so much about what's known isn't even concrete. I wonder if it's a case of Kevin told his parents he bought it with his parents but the police determined it was too expensive for him to have been able to afford. Were any cash withdrawals, or receipts looked into that would've proved whether he bought it himself? Was he skint because he'd spent all his money on the speakers?

It's a bit of a sickening thought that men would be out there getting under 18s to pose for photos for their own gratification, but the more I read about crime in the 80s, it starts to pale in comparison.

I can't help but think Kevin's trip to the shop was genuine, as it was fairly late at night to be going out, and it would only be a 5 - 10 minute trip. He would have to have come home with eggs! He never took more than £1 with him or even his keys. Hypothetically, If he went off to do something else and was gone until let's say 10pm when he was supposedly last sighted, and came home without eggs, he'd surely have been in a lot of bother?

I do feel it's likely he stumbled into something he didn't expect to, and maybe seen something he shouldn't have, but to completely disappear without a trace ever being found just baffles me.

It's a shame the 40th anniversary has come and gone without a new investigation being launched, makes me think the police really do have nothing to go on. Interestingly, I read on a page for Lee Boxell, that someone had submitted a FOIA to the police for Lee's and Kevin's cases and was denied.

There's an old newspaper article where they speak to the family about the events of the night. They weren't overly concerned for the first hour or two - his mother said "I expect he's bumped into someone and is just chatting". His sister Alexandra complained that they treated him differently to her and they would have made a fuss if she'd stayed out late. It maybe implies that him being away for a while wasn't too unusual. Certainly I know my friends and I used to string out walks as long as we could because we were so bored. There really was nothing you do back then, and kids just used end going for long walks round and round the local area to kill time, or end up sorting in places like the local park. There's a good article I read a while back about how it was the era of absolute boredom for teenagers, and it really was.

I think again it also goes back to the different way 16 year olds were treated back, effectively as young, semi independent adults. Kevin also had a key for the house so was probably used to coming and going. The general view among the working class was "You're 16, you've left school, you should be working full time now and earning and contributing to the house because you're effectively an adult".

I came across this schools programme the other day from 1984. It looks at the real problem there was back then with glue sniffing amongst teenagers and the grime and violence it caused. I don't think there's any evidence that Kevin was involved in that at all, but a lot of kids of his age around him will have been, and it's a really good look at how desolate the 1980s were. It's well worth a watch if you want to get a feel for the era that Kevin lived in and what it was like to be a teenager back then. The link is below:

 

[THX]

I've seen a few articles lately on Jack O'Sullivan, and was recently reading about Mark Garvey. Spooky coincidence that they all happened on the 2nd March. It happens too often where boys or young men just disappear completely without a trace.

Yeah, the stereo is really interesting because so much about what's known isn't even concrete. I wonder if it's a case of Kevin told his parents he bought it with his parents but the police determined it was too expensive for him to have been able to afford. Were any cash withdrawals, or receipts looked into that would've proved whether he bought it himself? Was he skint because he'd spent all his money on the speakers?

It's a bit of a sickening thought that men would be out there getting under 18s to pose for photos for their own gratification, but the more I read about crime in the 80s, it starts to pale in comparison.

I can't help but think Kevin's trip to the shop was genuine, as it was fairly late at night to be going out, and it would only be a 5 - 10 minute trip. He would have to have come home with eggs! He never took more than £1 with him or even his keys. Hypothetically, If he went off to do something else and was gone until let's say 10pm when he was supposedly last sighted, and came home without eggs, he'd surely have been in a lot of bother?

I do feel it's likely he stumbled into something he didn't expect to, and maybe seen something he shouldn't have, but to completely disappear without a trace ever being found just baffles me.

It's a shame the 40th anniversary has come and gone without a new investigation being launched, makes me think the police really do have nothing to go on. Interestingly, I read on a page for Lee Boxell, that someone had submitted a FOIA to the police for Lee's and Kevin's cases and was denied.

Do you know what the FOI request was specifically about? It's not uncommon for them to be refused, especially if giving out information may compromise an investigation or provide information about people / deeds that haven't been publicly named or gone through the trial process. Potential libel in some cases. The data protection laws are pretty strict. Another reason why requests are often turned down is if they might provide a source of public distress for relatives of people involved. For example, a lot of Kenneth Williams' diaries are still locked away in the British Library with nobody allowed to see them because of the data protection laws - because of what he said in those diaries about certain people and what they had been up to.

I suppose the key thing we need to explain is why Kevin was seen on Shirley Road well over an hour after he left the house, when it's only a 10 minute walk away from his home and nowhere near where shops were. Where had he been for that time? Also worry noting that the people in the shop he was meant have gone to had no memory of seeing him that night. So it seems as if he may not have gone there.

 

[BrutishGoose32]

Do you know what the FOI request was specifically about? It's not uncommon for them to be refused, especially if giving out information may compromise an investigation or provide information about people / deeds that haven't been publicly named or gone through the trial process. Potential libel in some cases. The data protection laws are pretty strict. Another reason why requests are often turned down is if they might provide a source of public distress for relatives of people involved. For example, a lot of Kenneth Williams' diaries are still locked away in the British Library with nobody allowed to see them because of the data protection laws - because of what he said in those diaries about certain people and what they had been up to.

I suppose the key thing we need to explain is why Kevin was seen on Shirley Road well over an hour after he left the house, when it's only a 10 minute walk away from his home and nowhere near where shops were. Where had he been for that time? Also worry noting that the people in the shop he was meant have gone to had no memory of seeing him that night. So it seems as if he may not have gone there.

The person who posted said it was for independent research into historic missing persons in the UK and not seeking anybody's personal data. Their aim was to understand the review process and current status of such cases. They wanted to know if both cases were regarded as open, inactive or closed. Whether the case had been reopened or reinvestigated at any point, and if anybody had been formally interviewed or arrested in either case. All of which was denied. The specific post is on the "Someone Knows What Happened To Lee Boxell" Facebook Group.

I am a bit unsure on whether that sighting was correct or not, as I said in a previous post there's not much to go on there. I'm assuming Kevin didn't speak to the girl, as that has never been reported, despite them knowing each other (Surely if they spoke it would be significant no matter what was said). It was also dark at that point and as I've pointed out previously, there's a few instances of someone looking like Kevin but not being Kevin. I know it's always been reported that the last confirmed sighting was outside the Cricketer's Pub at 10pm, but I just personally don't feel convinced by that sighting.

 

[THX]

The person who posted said it was for independent research into historic missing persons in the UK and not seeking anybody's personal data. Their aim was to understand the review process and current status of such cases. They wanted to know if both cases were regarded as open, inactive or closed. Whether the case had been reopened or reinvestigated at any point, and if anybody had been formally interviewed or arrested in either case. All of which was denied. The specific post is on the "Someone Knows What Happened To Lee Boxell" Facebook Group.

I am a bit unsure on whether that sighting was correct or not, as I said in a previous post there's not much to go on there. I'm assuming Kevin didn't speak to the girl, as that has never been reported, despite them knowing each other (Surely if they spoke it would be significant no matter what was said). It was also dark at that point and as I've pointed out previously, there's a few instances of someone looking like Kevin but not being Kevin. I know it's always been reported that the last confirmed sighting was outside the Cricketer's Pub at 10pm, but I just personally don't feel convinced by that sighting.

I believe it was a woman rather than a girl who saw him, I may be wrong. As I recall, it said in the newspaper articles in 1986 that the police were taking that sighting seriously. I don't know why they did (perhaps she was able to say how he was dressed or had spoken to him) or if they subsequently changed their minds and thought it wasn't him that she saw. This is part of the problem with the case. Nobody who knew Kevin apart from his sister has ever really spoken about what they knew or saw, and I think a lot of that is because the case has never had any real publicity. They really need to do a programme about it like they did with Lee Boxell, where his friends and family were interviewed. There's just so little concrete information out there. It's a shame for example that Kevin's friend whom he went ice skating with the night before and I think spent Sunday afternoon in the park with him has not said anything publicly.

I think the main difference with the Lee Boxell case is that there is a suspect who has been publicly named, William Lambert, and people seem to have agreed that it was most likely him, including Lee's dad (he spoke about it on a podcast).

Regarding the status of cold case investigations in general, there is further info in the link below about the guidelines on how police should approach them, and how often cases are looked at again:

Police reviews and long term searches

In most situations a missing person investigation is considered long term after 12 months, at this point the investigation will be reviewed to consider if it ca

www.missingpeople.org.uk

I thought you might also find this article interesting in relation to the Jack O'Sullivan case. It was written in 2019, 5 years before he disappeared, about the number of young men who fall into water and drown. It said that a disproportionate amount are students (which Jack was), most are in the cold months including March (when Jack disappeared) and many had been drinking (which Jack had been)

Why Do So Many Young Men Go Missing And Drown After A Night Out?

On average 17 men disappear each year after, and most are later found dead in rivers and canals.

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk