Obviously no one knows what happened and all we can do is theorize but here are a couple questions I have about two of the most popular I see:
Grooming: I’ve personally never heard about someone killing their grooming victim. Is this actually common? I was always taught groomers basically want romantic/sexual relationships not to kill their victims.
Suicide: if you don’t believe he did it into a large body of water how do you possibly explain nothing being found after all these years? Though I recently came across something that makes me think suicide theory is more likely than I thought it just doesn’t make sense for a body to not be found after 18 years no matter how secluded and area he did it in.
Well, I'm sure there's plenty of people who were groomed and sadly ended up dead, but it isn't really a modus operandi for murder. It's about making someone trust an abuser.
The problem with this theory is that to groom someone, you need to have access to that person, and there is zero evidence that this happened. This is where you have to make leaps in the narrative - Used a Library computer, phone box walking home from school, secret MySpace profile etc. There's zero evidence for any of this, and the more leaps you have to make to back up a theory, the less likely it's going to be (unlikely, not impossible).
It's a similar problem with the suicide. Even if Andrew had managed to kill himself in one of the most populous cities in Europe without anyone seeing anything, and if his body had somehow never been discovered, there is zero evidence of anything that could hint at him being suicidal. So again, it's highly unlikely if not impossible.
Just to tag on:
Your point about zero real evidence for either theory is why I don’t think “went to London for a totally innocent reason [gig, PSP launch, day out, etc.] and met with some kind of accident/opportunistic crime” should be discounted.
This is where I sit. I don't think the reason for him going to London was linked to the reason why he didn't come home
This is my main thought. Decided to have a day/evening out. Panicked later on as it was getting dark, wandered around thinking what to do next and then had an accident.
I think we're probably dealing with a random chain of events that would be near impossible to guess, but would make sense if you knew all the details.
When I was a student in the late 90s, we were completely broke and planning a Friday night with my housemates playing playstation. I popped out first to return some books to the library a 15 mins walk away, but ended up calling my housemates from a phone box wasted at about 9am, from a city 3hrs away (long story). If I'd have met my end that night, I'd probably have my own subreddit.
I would expect everyone has their own random story that could've become a huge mystery if they'd somehow met their end. "Million to one" bad luck things do happen. I don't think there's any mystery in why he went, nor do I think that any detail that we know is related to why he didn't come home. Whether it was an accident or opportunistic foul play, I think we're dealing with an unguessable random chain of events that led to it.
I wonder if he actually did go to a gig, and - whether by design or accident - met a crowd where everything was totally above board (apart from the whole skipping school thing), then something just went wrong.
Something like a small argument got out of hand, someone in the group pushed him and he tripped, banging his head as a result. They panicked and somehow hid the body.
Or an unwitnessed car accident - again, the driver panicked and managed to cover it up.
I know it’s all speculative, but it would help explain the total lack of any kind of trail.
Or missed a direct, mainline train, panicked, and tried to make his way north using branch lines and ended up somewhere completely random.
I think it unlikely these theories are right, just because there are so many random things that could've happened to him. I think this thinking is more on the right lines though, rather than some overarching conspiracy.
As an aside but related to what you say, many years ago, one of my uni friends who lived in a rural area went missing after leaving a party in a country pub. He was last seen leaving to get a cab home. A couple of days went by, and his friends and family decided to comb the local area and searched every route he could've taken home if he decided to walk. He had decided to walk and they sadly found his body obscured in a ditch down a lonely country lane. He'd been killed in a hit and run (he'll have been drunk walking in the road). Obviously, they had an idea of where they could look, otherwise, there is a chance that his body may never have been found, had there been no reason to look for him there.
Or he fell in the Thames whilst wandering about. Possibly lost or broke his glasses at a gig?
I sort of find myself leaning to that, although having a pedo that close to his home is surprising
Not sure if they have it in the UK, but here in the states they have public websites where you can find registered sex offenders and their addresses. Most people would be surprised how many live in close proximity to them.
I did that once staying in a florida trailer park, very traumatic
I agree with you on everything you wrote. We can’t just speculate without having some kind of evidence he did something. There isn't any evidence I have ever heard of, about Andrew being suicidal. And there isn’t evidence of him being groomed. So we can’t just say he was depressed or something because there is no evidence if it.
So I’ve been following Andrew’s case from the states for about 15 years now. One thing about the grooming theory that has never sat well with me is not the people that say Andrew could have had a secret phone or social media accounts but the ones who say a local groomer would ask him to meet up in London to avoid being seen. Based on my research Doncaster in 2007 had a population of just over 200k residents which would put it roughly on par with the population of Cincinnati in 2007. Not a huge city like Chicago, LA, or NYC but a fairly populated midsized city. To me it wouldn’t make sense that someone local would run the risk of having Andrew bunk off school and take a separate train into London. There are too many unknowns with that, that could go wrong. The train being significantly delayed for one.
If ever I wondered what Cincinnati is like, I know now that it’s an American Doncaster.
It is extremely common for bodies to not be found in water
But would he take his bag?
He could’ve took the bag for any reason. If it was hypothetically suicide, suicidal people don’t tend to make rational decisions. I assume he took his bag to hold his PSP and whatnot. As to what happened to the bag, I don’t know. It’s possible it could’ve washed up somewhere but if anyone saw it they would probably dismiss it as trash, or it could’ve been disposed of by a groomer, he could’ve been robbed for it etc. We’re not 100% sure what he even took with him in the bag.
Well his game thing. It's usually they leave their stuff as to not want to take it upon death as it's a prize.
Like common they would leave it somewhere.
Maybe misadventure. I watch. And I have no idea. Because it's just poof.
Never heard of breck bednar? Groomed and killed in England by another older male.
Also the Kayleigh Haywood case, which happened quite quickly. She had only been messaging the groomer for 2 weeks when she met him for the first time and was murdered.
Don't get me wrong, but there are and were ton of pedo's in Uk that time as laws weren't strict. I also think suicide theory is wrong. If he had to commit suicide then he would have done it in his house or nearby why even go to london ? and he was smart for his age but not some overly mentally aged / someone who had seen enough of life to go to london and end his life so that no one finds his body.
Was waiting for someone to mention Breck Bednar. Exactly, we dont know who Andrew was engaging with on his Xbox
IIRC, he didn't have an Xbox Live account and the PSP wasn't connected to the internet
How do we know that though? The police botched up so much of this investigation I don’t think they really had any idea
As I understand it, Andrew only owned the original Xbox, which would have required a wired internet connection via ethernet. There’s no way he would have been able to sort that out without it being obvious and I’m pretty sure you had to pay for Xbox Live back then too.
He was saving up for a 360, which had a wireless adaptor.
The PSP is (obviously) a different matter, and without the device itself we can only be sure that it didn’t connect to Sony’s services. Whether other online applications were ever accessed by it is obviously a different situation and one we cannot prove or disprove with currently available evidence.
100% the SYP screwed this investigation up so badly it’s unreal. Especially relating to the PSP and possible net access.
The SYP didn’t understand the device nor what Sony could share with them. Read this if you’re interested.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AndrewGosden/s/WSspaaKfUr
That's interesting thanks.
No I very clearly never have or I wouldn’t have said I never heard of one
I think the most likely things are: 1) He went to London for a specific event or purpose and an unrelated incident occurred that prevented him from coming home (freak weird incident and he hasn’t been found / met the wrong person and came to harm). 2) He ran away for a different life. Maybe he’s still out there. Maybe he’s since passed from drugs, exposure to weather or incidents that occur on the streets due to transient lifestyles.
Other theories such as grooming, suicide etc, I personally don’t feel I have seen convincing evidence for.
Agree apart from your second point. I just don't see how that's possible from what we know about Andrew's personality and circumstances.
He also probably would have been found by now if he was still alive or if he died in some way on the streets.
Well tbf theories are all we've got to go on, no real motive, no body, no new confirmed sightings, no death bed confessions all we can do is speculate and hope one day to have evidentual answers
IF grooming happened, it had to have happened face to face IMO. I find it really unlikely Andrew was groomed online as he had virtually no digital footprint and the people that knew him described him as not being interested in it at all. His own sister believed Andrew would have hated modern day social media.
It makes sense to hide secret communications with a groomer but it doesn’t make any sense to hide your interest in social media, IMO.
I wouldn't say it's unlikely as parents weren't really aware of what their kids were up to on the Internet in 2007. Chatrooms, MSN messenger, bebo, myspace, gore sites, torrents, silk road were all accessed by kids around that time whilst parents had no idea.
Except we know Andrew wasn’t interested in the internet and barely used it. He had virtually 0 online presence.
It's highly unlikely that a 14 year old in 2007 who was into technology and gaming had zero online presence. It's more likely that his parents weren't aware of it. Internet was huge amongst teens at that time, even the most socially isolated kids were online in one way or another.
He didn’t use his consoles online, he didn’t have an email address, the only computer in the house was his sisters and they only got it 6 weeks before he went missing and Andrew barely used it or showed interest in it.
So what secret method of communication could he have had over the internet that avoided even forensic detection? And why would he pretend not to be interested in going online?
It's impossible to know whether he had an email address or not. If you were around Andrews age at the time you would understand that parents knew literally nothing you were doing online. Ask anyone of that age if their parents knew their email address at 14. At that age I had multiple friends who met up with people from chatrooms unbeknownst to their parents, it wasn't uncommon. He had access to potentially 3 devices (2 phones and a PSP) which could access the Internet and without them devices you would never know - none have ever been recovered. To say with 100% certainty that he had no Internet footprint or communicated with someone online is patently naive.
The police confirmed his PSP never accessed the internet. If he still had a mobile phone, why’d he say he lost it?
You still can’t access the internet without a WiFi connection. The family only got WiFi a few weeks before he went missing.
I don’t think we can really assume his PSP ect was checked properly by the police
Why not? It wasn’t the police that checked it anyway it was Sony.
Because you would need the physical device to check it, Sony can only confirm that it didn't connect to their servers.
Wrong, Sony confirmed his PSP never connected to Sony services, their DNAS would only log when a user signed in or their DRM was triggered when launching a game online. The browser, MSN messenger, IRC etc didn't route through Sonys services, all data was client side.
He may have lost it or chose to hide it because he didn't want his parents checking it. I'd say he probably did lose them as phones at that time weren't as important as they are today, their functionality was fairly basic - but who knows, they've never been recovered.
As for WiFi, most routers were unsecured so you could piggyback off a neighbours or even sit on the wall outside random people's houses and use theirs.
100% this. I have no idea why you're being down voted.
Agree with you!
there are so many cases where a body was never found, I could name about 2 dozen from all the disappearance cases I read about and follow. I do not think suicide is a viable answer. If he did commit suicide, then I think there would be a better chance of the body being found.
The grooming theory is nonsense. It is popular because media and Reddit lead people to believe that grooming and sex trafficing is much more common than it actually is. Also, there would be some evidence of contact and there is none. No, he did not have a secret cell phone in 2007. Yes, it was common for people (especially kids) to not have a cell phone then. There is not a single shred of evidence that he was groomed.
Suicide is, statistically speaking, the most likely thing that happened. As far as a lack of a body, there are plenty of ways for that to happen (the river, a dumpster, a very secluded place, etc). I'm not saying that is the only answer, just the most likely.
It is also possible that something crazy happened like when they found that kid in a chimney or the one who fell behind the cooler. Not likely, but possible and there would not be an evidence unlike the groomer theory.
Finally, he may have just ran away. People don't understand how many children run away and are on the streets. The transient population will usually take these children in and they form groups. It is not nearly as difficult as people imagine to stay off the radar, especially with the help of people who are already off the radar. It was even easier in 2007 vs today. If this happened, there is a good chance he ended up in drugs and sex work. Anything is possible at that point.
All of it is illogical, but you have to remember that Andrew was 14 at the time and 14-year-olds are not known for their logical and well thought out decisions.
This is just completely wrong
How can certain situations be nonsense, when the only real proof we have is Andrew leaving that day apparantly of his own accord, withdrawing money, and arriving at Kings X?
Groomers often don’t leave trails.
If you know what happened to him to make you so sure that certain situations didn’t, call the police and report.
I don’t understand people on here who rule out stuff that could’ve happened, when there’s literally no proof of anything. Or those who say Andrew was too smart to be groomed.
It's odd that there seems to be a coordinated effort on here to discredit plausible theories.
Agreed, it’s very weird.
Cell phone? You american?