Found Deceased UK - Leah Croucher, 19, Emerson Valley, Milton Keynes, 14 Feb 2019 #4

Status
Not open for further replies.
Northants Live 27 Feb 2021:

Remains of missing man found in Northampton woodland

The remains of a missing man have been found in Northampton woodland.

Earlier this month, Northants Live reported how a walker had found what they believed to be human bones in a woodland known as Cherry Orchard in Hardingstone.

Dozens of police and a forensics team cordoned off the area and set up two tents where work was carried out to ascertain what happened. The large crime scene was visible from the A45, with the area being set up alongside the Nene Valley Way. Now police have said that they believe the remains to be those of a missing man.

Detective Inspector Tim Craven, said: “Our investigations into this incident have concluded and I am now in a position to confirm that we are not treating the discovery of these bones as involving any suspicious circumstances. We believe them to belong to a man registered as a missing person some years ago and his family have been informed. We are now in the process of presenting a report to the coroner.”

Further details have not been released but are likely to emerge at an inquest into the man's death.

Not related to Leah then. Interesting that the man had been missing for a number of years and his remains have only recently been discovered.
 
Northants Live 27 Feb 2021:

Remains of missing man found in Northampton woodland

The remains of a missing man have been found in Northampton woodland.

Earlier this month, Northants Live reported how a walker had found what they believed to be human bones in a woodland known as Cherry Orchard in Hardingstone.

Dozens of police and a forensics team cordoned off the area and set up two tents where work was carried out to ascertain what happened. The large crime scene was visible from the A45, with the area being set up alongside the Nene Valley Way. Now police have said that they believe the remains to be those of a missing man.

Detective Inspector Tim Craven, said: “Our investigations into this incident have concluded and I am now in a position to confirm that we are not treating the discovery of these bones as involving any suspicious circumstances. We believe them to belong to a man registered as a missing person some years ago and his family have been informed. We are now in the process of presenting a report to the coroner.”

Further details have not been released but are likely to emerge at an inquest into the man's death.

Not related to Leah then. Interesting that the man had been missing for a number of years and his remains have only recently been discovered.

Relieved this wasn’t Leah, but it shows people do go missing and turn up years later,
However that period of time where a body is exposed and isn’t covered hs to pass first.

Thoughts with the family of the man. Must feel like a very lonely.
 
I find it odd that when a young woman has disappeared that a person the parents of the young woman say was having an affair with her is allowed to say to the police no, you can't look at my phone. Is this normal? Surely the police would want to see the messages on that phone and refusal would be an immediate red flag and cause the police to make an arrest or do whatever they felt necessary to gain access to the phone messages?

I wondered this too but I believe in order to search someone's phone you need 'evidence' to be able to do so (please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on this). There was a case a few years ago where a husband had killed his ex wife. The police had asked for his phone which he gave,then changed his mind and asked for it back and then proceeded to delete all of his msgs in front the police. I can't remember the names now but someone mentioned it on one of the earlier threads. If someone remembers can you please post a link!
 
Northants Live 27 Feb 2021:

Remains of missing man found in Northampton woodland

The remains of a missing man have been found in Northampton woodland.

Earlier this month, Northants Live reported how a walker had found what they believed to be human bones in a woodland known as Cherry Orchard in Hardingstone.

Dozens of police and a forensics team cordoned off the area and set up two tents where work was carried out to ascertain what happened. The large crime scene was visible from the A45, with the area being set up alongside the Nene Valley Way. Now police have said that they believe the remains to be those of a missing man.

Detective Inspector Tim Craven, said: “Our investigations into this incident have concluded and I am now in a position to confirm that we are not treating the discovery of these bones as involving any suspicious circumstances. We believe them to belong to a man registered as a missing person some years ago and his family have been informed. We are now in the process of presenting a report to the coroner.”

Further details have not been released but are likely to emerge at an inquest into the man's death.

Not related to Leah then. Interesting that the man had been missing for a number of years and his remains have only recently been discovered.

Not leah, but does mean another family has some kind of closure. Thoughts are with them.
 
I wondered this too but I believe in order to search someone's phone you need 'evidence' to be able to do so (please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on this). There was a case a few years ago where a husband had killed his ex wife. The police had asked for his phone which he gave,then changed his mind and asked for it back and then proceeded to delete all of his msgs in front the police. I can't remember the names now but someone mentioned it on one of the earlier threads. If someone remembers can you please post a link!


Sarah Wellgreen case I think Holly. Ben Lacomba
 
I find it odd that when a young woman has disappeared that a person the parents of the young woman say was having an affair with her is allowed to say to the police no, you can't look at my phone. Is this normal? Surely the police would want to see the messages on that phone and refusal would be an immediate red flag and cause the police to make an arrest or do whatever they felt necessary to gain access to the phone messages?

The police cannot access your phone, unless you give permission or they have warrants whilst investigating terrorism or child sex offences. Refusal is not grounds for arrest. Claire Croucher said there were no records for Leah's (known) phone that indicated a secret relationship.
 
No-one is an a position to know the depth of Leah's feelings except Leah herself, and as i said in a previous post she is not around to give her point of view.

IMO DCI Howard should not be saying things like "There is evidence there was a relationship where her feelings were not requited - perhaps an unrequited love." (Source: MK Citizen 15 Feb 2021) because he has no way of knowing if this is 100% accurate without Leah around to confirm it.

He does not say 'in my opinion' or 'my suspicions are..' he states there is evidence. What evidence has he got to prove that Leah's feelings towards X were not requited? I wish the MK Citizen's reporter would have pressed him further on this, it would be good to know.

John and Clare said they provided evidence of a relationship, but possibly further digging has found a diary, secret blog or something written by Leah that gives a different story. Maybe even what she told her parents wasn't accurate.
 
I just took the DCI’s statement to mean that they didn’t think she was abducted, ie if she got into a vehicle, she did so of her own choice.

I don’t recall ever reading anything that made me think that X could be ruled out. Maybe if there had been an acknowledgement somehow that X had had some form of intimate relationship with her, but the police were satisfied with his alibi it would be different. Unrequited love is a strange phrase really. Crush maybe for someone you are infatuated with.

You mean you haven't seen all the police statements that nobody has been interviewed as a suspect, or arrested? An acknowledgment would be different for who, the users on this website? Why do they have to single out someone who isn't a suspect and put their details out in the public eye? That's not how it works. They aren't discussing named individuals, and rightly so.
 
I wondered this too but I believe in order to search someone's phone you need 'evidence' to be able to do so (please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on this). There was a case a few years ago where a husband had killed his ex wife. The police had asked for his phone which he gave,then changed his mind and asked for it back and then proceeded to delete all of his msgs in front the police. I can't remember the names now but someone mentioned it on one of the earlier threads. If someone remembers can you please post a link!
Thank you for explaining. It must be so frustrating for the police!
 
John and Clare said they provided evidence of a relationship, but possibly further digging has found a diary, secret blog or something written by Leah that gives a different story. Maybe even what she told her parents wasn't accurate.

Even if a secret diary or something had been found (although why would her family or the police keep this quiet?) it's still no real proof is it? Anyone can write what they like in a diary/blog it doesn't necessarily means it's the truth.

In MOO I think the police got this unrequited love info from their interviews with X, he has denied a relationship with Leah and said that she had fallen for him but he wasn't interested. Until Leah can give her version of events no-one can ever be 100% sure of what her feelings were.
 
Even if a secret diary or something had been found (although why would her family or the police keep this quiet?) it's still no real proof is it? Anyone can write what they like in a diary/blog it doesn't necessarily means it's the truth.

In MOO I think the police got this unrequited love info from their interviews with X, he has denied a relationship with Leah and said that she had fallen for him but he wasn't interested. Until Leah can give her version of events no-one can ever be 100% sure of what her feelings were.

That's a really good point actually. How can the police 100% say it was 'unrequited love' if Leah is not around to give her side of the story?
 
That's a really good point actually. How can the police 100% say it was 'unrequited love' if Leah is not around to give her side of the story?
Just a thought: would LE have interviewed/spoken with Leah's and/or X's work colleagues about an alleged relationship between them?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just a thought: would LE have interviewed/spoken with Leah's and/or X's work colleagues about an alleged relationship between them?

I don't think it's ever been reported in MSM if the police interviewed their work colleagues. It's one of those frustrating things we don't know in this case like what was X's alibi for the morning Leah disappeared - was he in work or not? And where did Leah meet him in the evenings when she paid for those taxi's to take her there and back?

Too many pieces of the puzzle missing if you ask me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just a thought: would LE have interviewed/spoken with Leah's and/or Xs work colleagues about an alleged relationship between them?

Well you would think so but as @WiseOwl says it's never been reported anywhere so we don't know. Really is a puzzling case, I feel (IMO) that there is a lot that has not been released to the public as there does seem to be a lot of missing info which doesn't add up hence why we all keep going around in circles on here speculating.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hesitate to add this post, as it may only add to the confusion. And this case has plenty of options, many of which could be swept away if we had a bit more guidance from LE.

DCI Kentish mentioned initially the sightings of someone like Leah was at the Teardrop lakes, and they searched them. The first part is a flow directly from Furzton Lake and I saw them searching this section. Large object cannot flow into the smaller lakes due to grills, but of course a person could fall or be pushed into them. So they were all searched including Culverts under the road.
But given the wide range of times when witnesses said they saw a person who looked like Leah on a phone, it made me wonder if Leah received a call on her way to work around the Lake and wished to delay her normal route, so she continued using the Red Route by the side of the hotel, which goes under Watling street and ends up at the Tear drop lakes. This area has one small public car park but there are lots of large offices with people using the paths to go to those offices. But if Leah then decided to delay going to work and walked back to Furzton Lake it would explain the huge time differences with the sightings. Clearly the time she switched off her phone does not fit in with this unless she only turned off the location part at that time, or as seems unlikely she had another phone. Also given how conscientious her mother said she was, she would probably have phoned in and said she would be delayed arriving at work, and there is no report of such a call. Only added this in as the initial reports mentioned Teardrop lakes not Furzton Lake. I have not stumbled across any retraction or correction of this early reporting.
As a newby to this forum, I am so impressed with the huge and respectful time and energy Ws members put into trying to help.
 
I agree that it does seem strange that Leah did not contact work to say that either she would be late or absent that day.
Perhaps someone she worked with told her that work would be informed about her not being there .
We have discussed the possibility of Leah having 2 phones, one used for her relationship with Mr X.
 
I hesitate to add this post, as it may only add to the confusion. And this case has plenty of options, many of which could be swept away if we had a bit more guidance from LE.

DCI Kentish mentioned initially the sightings of someone like Leah was at the Teardrop lakes, and they searched them. The first part is a flow directly from Furzton Lake and I saw them searching this section. Large object cannot flow into the smaller lakes due to grills, but of course a person could fall or be pushed into them. So they were all searched including Culverts under the road.
But given the wide range of times when witnesses said they saw a person who looked like Leah on a phone, it made me wonder if Leah received a call on her way to work around the Lake and wished to delay her normal route, so she continued using the Red Route by the side of the hotel, which goes under Watling street and ends up at the Tear drop lakes. This area has one small public car park but there are lots of large offices with people using the paths to go to those offices. But if Leah then decided to delay going to work and walked back to Furzton Lake it would explain the huge time differences with the sightings. Clearly the time she switched off her phone does not fit in with this unless she only turned off the location part at that time, or as seems unlikely she had another phone. Also given how conscientious her mother said she was, she would probably have phoned in and said she would be delayed arriving at work, and there is no report of such a call. Only added this in as the initial reports mentioned Teardrop lakes not Furzton Lake. I have not stumbled across any retraction or correction of this early reporting.
As a newby to this forum, I am so impressed with the huge and respectful time and energy Ws members put into trying to help.

Don't ever hesitate to add any new or fresh ideas to this forum @LINEOFDUTY, your input is important especially as you're a local in this case.

In the days after Leah went missing, the police said “We have carried out house to house enquiries, knocking on about 4,000 doors, searched areas including Furzton Lake, and have been handing out leaflets in the city." (Source: TOTAL MK FEBRUARY 22, 2019).

As you live overlooking Furzton Lake i presume the police knocked at your door?
If they did can you remember what questions they were asking at the time?

TIA
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
191
Guests online
1,982
Total visitors
2,173

Forum statistics

Threads
589,946
Messages
17,928,016
Members
228,009
Latest member
chrsrb10
Back
Top