alfiedug
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2019
- Messages
- 121
- Reaction score
- 244
Didn't mean it to be such a blunt posting of the headline, sorry. I meant to say , here it is.Thank you
It was stated in a couple of MSM reports, do you think it could have been misreported?Just be mindful of where the 'man running from the park' was reported.
It was stated in a couple of MSM reports, do you think it could have been misreported?
Ah. Ok, I'm probably confused about where these running men were located. I have to admit I've been a bit lazy about understanding the park and where everything is.Am not sure but was the first report of running from the park meant to mean running from park into Beresford? Whereas the cctv is running from park at the opposite end? Still an odd coincidence
All theories about the 4 have got to be interesting I think. It's deemed important by LE.So what do we think about the fact the four Oak Road witnesses still haven't come forward? Are there any possibilities beyond -
(a) they haven't seen the footage
(b) they were involved in some unrelated but illegal activity so keeping schtum
(c) they don't want to deal with police for some other reason
(d) they were involved with Libby's disappearance?
The walking pair have a very relaxed gait; they don't seem they have just committed a crime. Running man however does seem suspicious and might be linked with the cyclist in terms of one having witnessed the actions of the other.
He's seen at 1.13am just as Libby's reported missing on social media, emerging from the path at a hell of a lick for a jogger on an icy surface; he's on edge as he either reacts to something or glances over his shoulder to check something.
The visuals of running guy and the son's 12.15 witness statement are very similar: "The man he saw wasn't dressed for a night out. He wasn't dressed for the weather. He saw him running for around 40 yards, sprinting at times. He said he was on his own and he wasn’t looking back."
Because of the similarity, I'm going to assume this is the same slightly unfit running guy, and that our witness wasn't confused re time. What scenario could account for running guy being seen near the park at 12.15 after high-pitched screams from the pond area are heard; then again an hour on, still edgy and hunted-looking, still running, emerging from Oak Rd?
If I was spooked by overhearing screams from a park at 12.15, I wouldn't go back alone an hour later. But if I had just silenced someone, and was worried others had heard their screams, I might try to put a bit of distance between me and the scene. Once I calmed down, I'd return to clear up the scene; when I left for the second time, I would be extremely on edge; the rustle of anything, such as hearing a cyclist looping around the park, would give me a fright.
Any takers for the Double-Running Man theory? (Or maybe it was a glitch in the Matrix.)
All theories about the 4 have got to be interesting I think. It's deemed important by LE.
Freezing, late, dark and isolated. I'm guessing anyone using that path for innocent reasons (to / from work, pub, whatever) would be local. So for a) you'd be looking at a local that has remained completely oblivious to this. Not seen it on news, not heard anyone mention it. Probably makes a) less likely? Or does it?
All others likely.
These 4 are coming from Beresford direction which @Vermont24 has suggested as a place to park to get into the park on foot at 12.09 as car park is locked. Where was original running man spotted?
If new running man is the same and is / was PR he'd be leaving the park in a different direction to the nearest most convenient access to the park (Beresford) from Haworth. He'd have clothing and other evidence to get rid of so I guess he'd have driven? Where would his car be parked for the new visit?
The other common feature I noticed was the cyclist. It's already been noted that the cyclist Haworth is in black and in white in Oak Road and cyclists are common. So probably no connection. But like running man it's another thing that links two things. Is there any reason for him to cycle in both directions. Dealing, shop anything?
Me too. However I'd know I was there so I'd know it was me on CCTV. If the police then asked me to come forward I would like a shot.As for running man - if something truly had startled him, the subtext here being a scream or something potentially malevolent, he'd have kept running. There's a police station around the corner. As it is, he stops almost exactly as he reaches the 'civilisation' of Croda. I truly believe he's just ran along Oak Road because it's the middle of the night, it's creepy, and it's the most rational thing to do. That would get most people's adrenaline going, and accounts for the glance back as far as I'm concerned.
I think it'd be difficult to get in to watch and burgle while people were there. That would be very risky. Especially if it were in a student house or similar. Especially given most people keep underwear and sex toys in their bedrooms.Totally off track, just something on my mind that I want to offload! I realised today that I’ve been assuming that the burglaries P is accused of being involved in took place in empty homes, and that the purpose was petty theft for financial gain, as well as items for sexual gratification. But I’m wondering, did he actually enter houses when they were occupied, to watch people sleep (or for voyeurism of other acts.) I had been seeing the voyeurism and burglary incidences as separate, but maybe the driving force has always been voyeurism and then just opportunistic grabbing of low value items while there. All sexual offenders have some sort of fantasy I’d imagine, so what exactly is his, if he is guilty of these charges? And how much of that fantasy is he willing to act on?
Agreed.Some of those on the cctv might be afraid of coming forward because they fear criminal charges for drug dealing or whatever, police should publicly offer immunity from prosecution if they come forward
I think it'd be difficult to get in to watch and burgle while people were there. That would be very risky. Especially if it were in a student house or similar. Especially given most people keep underwear and sex toys in their bedrooms.
However that doesn't rule out a link. There could well be an element of watching / voyeurism beforehand I guess. If you're looking for young women's underwear and sex toys you wouldn't want to break into a house full of blokes, families or older folk. It'd take a bit of watching to know it was going to be worth your while.
I also wonder how far he'd go. If Libby hadn't been so unlucky that night I wonder if the getting into houses to watch out steal might have escalated.
Agreed as well. Or the couple are together and don’t want other partners to know?Agreed.
Well I’m well freaked out now.I’m not sure he is risk adverse though. Part of the thrill maybe?
I’ve had 2 brothers robbed as students. One woke to find a guy staring at him, who then fled down 3 flights of stairs and into the night with his wallet. A sister also had someone enter her house and come upstairs while her kids slept. They carried out the burglary first, so by time she heard him, woke and gave chase his pockets already contained her money and car keys. Burglars seem pretty brazen these days! I’m wondering if rather than breaking in specifically with the notion of stealing, he is breaking in to fulfil the need to observe and then if that goes well, he is opportunistically grabbing items.
I know. Sorry to say we might be sitting here in weeks/months to come with no posts for days on end. I don't know if you followed Corrie McKeague's case at all, it went very much like this one and we got to thread 23, but I just checked and there have been no posts since December! So sad.
Come on, Libby, we need to know where you are and how you got there.
Well I’m well freaked out now.