Is it possible that that early image of AC vomiting came from another source? By definition it will have been captured outside the station, so perhaps it came from a business or similar, perhaps across the way from the station entrance. I'm bearing in mind the fact that the TfL images from inside the station seem to have taken some time to become available, so perhaps it was necessary for the police to approach other owners of CCTV cameras to speed things up and it was all that was forthcoming?
You'd know better than me if that's a plausible explanation
@Whitehall 1212.
It's fair to say we don't know exactly where AC allegedly vomited. It has been stated outside the station, but that only, so far as we know, comes from one source, C. Without independent corroboration I would always treat any such statement with scepticism.
In terms of the camera. Well having a good scout around on street view, the only ones immediately obvious are at the Magistrates Court and the traffic camera on Bow Road J/W Albert Street, but it faces west along Bow Street, away from the station. Maybe a TfL camera views outside from inside the station foyer?
To be honest it is not particularly evidential now as the hospitals have been checked and any patient status has been ruled out.
The police may quite rightly have held back the images. They can get them pretty quickly with their powers.
The offset of publishing the images is that the police have to field a lot of spurious info being phoned in and someone has to filter it out. They would often rather focus on the evidential tools available to them before deciding to release the images to the public.
As far a AC's whereabouts are concerned. What are the likely scenarios.
1. Fallen seriously ill and collapsed somewhere unseen. Highly unlikely at 12:46 on a Thursday afternoon on a busy London thoroughfare, albeit with quieter side streets. The weather was cloudy with sunny intervals and about 19 degrees Celsius, so people would have been out and about.
2. Assaulted and lying injured/killed unseen. Again as for 1, highly unlikely at such a time on such a day in such a location.
3. We are told AC's mobile was not connected to a cell site. If switched off by choice this would indicate he was going somewhere he knew or wss meeting a third party and wanted to hide his movements as far as possible.
4. His intent could have been to go off the grid. He may have got into a vehicle with a third party he had arranged to meet. An absence of sightings on CCTV or from witnesses, beyond the immediate vicinty of the station would indicate this.
5. Did AC know the area? Had he been there before? Without a phone to navigate with then either local knowledge or clear direction would be needed. An A-Z is unlikely methinks at 23 years old
6. So he's either staying at an address of his own free will or he's gone to an address and has come to harm.
7. What/who is he running away from or even towards?
Just my thoughts....but the simplest explanations are often the most likely.
I feel that the answers will lie in his the nature of his London life....work, friendships, acquaintances, social time.
