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

[WiseOwl]

I am late to this thread, so forgive me if I am missing something, but how can the identity of the other person(s) at the Travelodge be a mystery? The hotel will know who else was in the room and even if a false name was used to check in, there will be cctv footage of them. I think the police must know who it was or they would have appealed with the footage.

Earlier in the thread someone asked why the police might keep it secret if they had found a diary or blog. One answer is because they need information that only a perp would know in order to verify potential confessions later.

Welcome to the thread @EmMaBu.

Unfortunately they didn't find out that Leah stayed at the Travelodge until a few weeks after she disappeared. She lied to her parents about where she was staying that night and it was only until they checked her bank statements much later that they discovered she had stayed at the Travelodge in February.

Also by the time the police found out any footage from CCTV would have been erased by then. What a pity.

 

[EmMaBu]

Ah ok, yes what a shame.

 

[Alyce]

I am late to this thread, so forgive me if I am missing something, but how can the identity of the other person(s) at the Travelodge be a mystery? The hotel will know who else was in the room and even if a false name was used to check in, there will be cctv footage of them. I think the police must know who it was or they would have appealed with the footage.

Earlier in the thread someone asked why the police might keep it secret if they had found a diary or blog. One answer is because they need information that only a perp would know in order to verify potential confessions later.

Hi and welcome to WS

Leah could have rented the room on her own...with Mr X ( or whoever it was ) arriving later. In fact if Leah was meeting up with the Mr X that we have previously referred to on this thread, it seems his usual method of working was to allow Leah to pay for taxis and accommodation, so no footprint back to him...and no cost to him either.

 

[Miss_French]

Hi and welcome to WS

Leah could have rented the room on her own...with Mr X ( or whoever it was ) arriving later. In fact if Leah was meeting up with the Mr X that we have previously referred to on this thread, it seems his usual method of working was to allow Leah to pay for taxis and accommodation, so no footprint back to him...and no cost to him either.

But if Leah met someone, you don't know that she wasn't reimbursed in cash.

 

[NorthernSoul]

Welcome to the thread @EmMaBu.

Unfortunately they didn't find out that Leah stayed at the Travelodge until a few weeks after she disappeared. She lied to her parents about where she was staying that night and it was only until they checked her bank statements much later that they discovered she had stayed at the Travelodge in February.

Also by the time the police found out any footage from CCTV would have been erased by then. What a pity.

It makes me wonder why the police did not look at Leah's bank account earlier on when she went missing or does it take a long time for them to get permission to do this? Right at the beginning her parents will have told the police that Leah stayed at the Jury's Inn (I think this is where she told them she was staying) overnight, so did the police go there to see if they could find out who she was with? If they did they would have found out she had not stayed there and examining her bank details, or even a bit of detective work ringing around hotels, would have showed them where she did stay in time to get CCTV footage and for staff to remember who was with Leah. Even without access to the bank account surely they should have done this?

 

[HollyHunter9]

It makes me wonder why the police did not look at Leah's bank account earlier on when she went missing or does it take a long time for them to get permission to do this? Right at the beginning her parents will have told the police that Leah stayed at the Jury's Inn (I think this is where she told them she was staying) overnight, so did the police go there to see if they could find out who she was with? If they did they would have found out she had not stayed there and examining her bank details, or even a bit of detective work ringing around hotels, would have showed them where she did stay in time to get CCTV footage and for staff to remember who was with Leah. Even without access to the bank account surely they should have done this?

Agree totally with this! I also think if they had access to her phone details to know it was switched off that morning at 8.34am. According to MSM her phone location settings were only turned off the night before when she went out after coming in from work so you would assume her phones location settings were ON for the two weeks previously when at the travel lodge. If they checked the phones location during the travel lodge rendezvous 2 weeks previously they might have been able to check cctv of places nearby either for that evening or the next morning when leaving the hotel...did she pop in any shops or leave the hotel to go out for a drink to a pub somewhere that would have shown who she really meeting?

"5.45pm. Leah walks home from work. Strangely, the location settings on her Samsung phone were switched off in the Furzton Lake area. Nobody knows why. It could be that she was downloading another app that disabled them. But the mobile phone company has confirmed Leah had never turned off her location settings before."

Missing from Milton Keynes: Leah Croucher the timeline, everything we know so far

*Edited to highlight last paragraph

 

[EmMaBu]

It makes me wonder why the police did not look at Leah's bank account earlier on when she went missing or does it take a long time for them to get permission to do this? Right at the beginning her parents will have told the police that Leah stayed at the Jury's Inn (I think this is where she told them she was staying) overnight, so did the police go there to see if they could find out who she was with? If they did they would have found out she had not stayed there and examining her bank details, or even a bit of detective work ringing around hotels, would have showed them where she did stay in time to get CCTV footage and for staff to remember who was with Leah. Even without access to the bank account surely they should have done this?

Yes, it implies shoddy detecting doesn't it. Presumably they didn't investigate the Jurys stay at all at first, though I suppose because of the girlie night lie it didn't seem relevant. If it was me investigating I would want to check up on all recent non-routine activity though. No doubt it all boils down to presumption of voluntary disappearance, which is still such a problem. They should start by assuming a worst-case scenario of someone goes missing.

 

[LINEOFDUTY]

@LINEOFDUTY

Can I ask some questions about the doorstep questions you were asked as local residents?
There have been appeals for local information in the form of sightings of Leah but were you asked any questions about the location and specific search area/ last seen area?
can you recall specific questions they asked?

Hi thanks for the questions
The lake started to be searched on the 18th and continued to at least the 21st as far as I could see walking around the lake. I took some photos on the 20th of the search in the main lake but they had already been in the Teardrop lakes.
They knocked on our door on 19th. Two officers asked a typical range of questions. Had we been around on 14th or 15th. Had we noticed anything unusual. Had we been walking around the lake or to the Tesco shop. That was about it as I gave them copies of photos I had taken on 13th of the lake area and marked up where Parks Trust had been working on those days from 8 to 4pm plus the Fishermen on the West shore and dismantling of the Fairground.
A couple of other thoughts not related to your question.
It always sticks in my mind when we say Leah lied, as if none of us avoided telling our parents exactly what we were doing when we were teenagers. Better to say Leah was not always truthful with her parents about where she was going and with who..

Re her phone. I am sure HollyHunter or others will correct me but although her phones LOCATION SETTING was turned off on Valentines evening ( possible because she knew her brother and parents were unhappy about a relationship) Do we know if she then turned it back ON afterwards? Before the whole phone was turned off the next morning at 8,34.
If so what does that say about her thinking. Was she alone when the location setting was turned off?

Going back two years I notices there are lots of locals on the case some living nearby and others that have lived here, so if we need to band together at some time that is possible.
Re travel times and the £13 fares it had been mentioned this was a fare to Wolverton and even mentioned the taxi company involved due to a potential link between a work colleague and directors of that company.
Not sure where some of the information came from and some has since been deleted due to coming from Social media.

CovermeCagney, back on 20th February 2019 came to a similar conclusion as many of us have, that whilst there are lots and lots of routes from her home to Davy Avenue the nicest route is along the park red route which ends up by the Pavilion Car Park and long bridge. That route goes near two car parks where a meeting might have been pre-arranged.
It might be difficult to overpower Leah if she was standing up due to her kick power but in a car it would be easy aided by a stun gun or similar device.
Horrible to think of it but most of us have sadly come to the conclusion Leah did not go away of her own accord. The facts tell us
that much.

Someone who is reading these posts possible knows what happened. There is still a £10,000 reward as well as the person will be doing the right thing for the Family, whose hearts have been torn out. Come on make that phone call, do it.

 

[Jenesaisquoi]

Public Portal

And here’s the link for online reporting...

 

[HollyHunter9]

Re her phone. I am sure HollyHunter or others will correct me but although her phones LOCATION SETTING was turned off on Valentines evening ( possible because she knew her brother and parents were unhappy about a relationship) Do we know if she then turned it back ON afterwards? Before the whole phone was turned off the next morning at 8,34.
If so what does that say about her thinking. Was she alone when the location setting was turned off?

Snipped so I could answer this part your post/question. The answer is I really don't know whether the phone location stayed off after 14th or switched back on again at some point before the whole phone switched off on morning of 15th. I can't find it anywhere in MSM. But IMO i do think something happened during the window of time on the 14th when she went out and no one knows who with that was the catalyst for her disappearance the next morning. (Either that, it was something completely random like a stranger abduction but I really don't think she disappeared off her own accord).

 

[Miss_French]

If they checked the phones location during the travel lodge rendezvous 2 weeks previously they might have been able to check cctv of places nearby either for that evening or the next morning when leaving the hotel...did she pop in any shops or leave the hotel to go out for a drink to a pub somewhere that would have shown who she really meeting?

"5.45pm. Leah walks home from work. Strangely, the location settings on her Samsung phone were switched off in the Furzton Lake area. Nobody knows why. It could be that she was downloading another app that disabled them. But the mobile phone company has confirmed Leah had never turned off her location settings before."

Missing from Milton Keynes: Leah Croucher the timeline, everything we know so far

*Edited to highlight last paragraph

Depends on the type of phone mast. For one with a larger range, Jury's Inn and the Travelodge are so close that Leah's phone would most likely be on the same mast for both locations, and for local amenities.

 

[HollyHunter9]

But she must've gone home at some point the next day. Was she picked up? Did she walk? Get a taxi? Was she dropped off? Get a bus? Go in any shops along the way? If her phone pinged a different mast at some point next day when going home then maybe it could of been looked at to see if there was any cctv from anywhere else nearby?

 

[WiseOwl]

I do believe the TVP missed some opportunities early on in Leah's case, particularly involving CCTV footage. I still don't understand why they asked for footage on the Friday morning between 8 - 11, why just those hours and why just Friday morning? Potentially Leah could have still been around MK somewhere that afternoon or even over the weekend. Who knows, maybe CCTV might have caught her in a vehicle at a petrol station or something?

I also don't understand why the police think Leah decided to go off on her own accord, what evidence do they have for this? She didn't drive so how did she leave the area? They checked both the bus and train station's CCTV that day and no sign of Leah, and if she got a taxi why not just get one from home that morning after her parents had gone to work instead of appearing to walk to work as normal? And why not take money out of her bank account? Or extra clothing? It doesn't make sense.

I firmly believe at the heart of Leah's disappearance is relationship issues. How many cases on Websleuths are there of women going missing (many ending up deceased) and issues between them and their husbands/partners/lovers being the cause of their disappearance? Too many to mention.

I really hope the TVP go back to the beginning and review Leah's case from the start; I'm sure there is something they have missed or overlooked that could lead to finding out what happened to Leah.

 

[HollyHunter9]

I also don't understand why the police think Leah decided to go off on her own accord, what evidence do they have for this? She didn't drive so how did she leave the area? They checked both the bus and train station's CCTV that day and no sign of Leah, and if she got a taxi why not just get one from home that morning after her parents had gone to work instead of appearing to walk to work as normal? And why not take money out of her bank account? Or extra clothing? It doesn't make sense.

I totally agree with your whole post but this particular part I've snipped for focus, you've made some great points here! Like if her parent's had already left for work and she was home alone why get dressed and walk almost to work? There's no cctv of her getting on any public transport and like you say if she was going to get a taxi why not get it from home if her parent's had left already?

The recent missing persons case of Sarah Everard is quite similar to Leah's disappearance; young girl walking alone seems to just vanish but it has already been upgraded to possible criminal investigation after only 4 days...so why after 2 years do the police still seem unconvinced anything criminal has happened to Leah?

 

[WiseOwl]

I totally agree with your whole post but this particular part I've snipped for focus, you've made some great points here! Like if her parent's had already left for work and she was home alone why get dressed and walk almost to work? There's no cctv of her getting on any public transport and like you say if she was going to get a taxi why not get it from home if her parent's had left already?

The recent missing persons case of Sarah Everard is quite similar to Leah's disappearance; young girl walking alone seems to just vanish but it has already been upgraded to possible criminal investigation after only 4 days...so why after 2 years do the police still seem unconvinced anything criminal has happened to Leah?

I agree Holly, the police don't seem as though they want to dig any deeper and leave it as 'Leah has decided to take herself off' scenario. Her family must be desperately frustrated and disappointed with the TVP.

 

[LINEOFDUTY]

I also don't understand why the police think Leah decided to go off on her own accord, what evidence do they have for this? She didn't drive so how did she leave the area? They checked both the bus and train station's CCTV that day and no sign of Leah, and if she got a taxi why not just get one from home that morning after her parents had gone to work instead of appearing to walk to work as normal? And why not take money out of her bank account? Or extra clothing? It doesn't make sense.

This is a Brilliant and Powerful point WiseOwl, thank you.
If TVP think she went off of her own accord, why pretend you are going to work. As both parents had already left for work, she had time in the privacy of her home to pack anything she needed, take her important documents like Passport, and empty her bank account. As far as we can tell she did none of those things so why did TVP say they still think she went of her own accord? We can only hope LE know a lot more than we do as there is no logic at the moment.

 

[WiseOwl]

When the MK Citizen reporter asked DCI Howard what he thought had happened to Leah and he replied with 'I think she left of her own accord', I would of asked him why did he think that and what proof did he have, and also how he thought Leah had left the area. The answers would have been very interesting!

 

[Skigh]

I think the Crouchers should insist on another police force doing a thorough review of the case.

Her disappearance into thin air is similar to the case of Sarah Everard which is now , after 5 days , being treated as a murder case.

 

[WiseOwl]

I think the Crouchers should insist on another police force doing a thorough review of the case.

Her disappearance into thin air is similar to the case of Sarah Everard which is now , after 5 days , being treated as a murder case.

I couldn't agree more @Skigh, they should insist on a new review or at the very least get a PI on the case.

 

[HollyHunter9]

I think the Crouchers should insist on another police force doing a thorough review of the case.

Her disappearance into thin air is similar to the case of Sarah Everard which is now , after 5 days , being treated as a murder case.

I agree Skigh. Although the optimistic part of me hopes the police are taking this stance as a way of luring any possible suspects into letting their guard down and perhaps inadvertently revealing evidence in some way. However, 2 years down the line, if this was the case, it might be time to change tactics as it's clearly not working.

Seeing how Sarah Everards case has evolved over the past few days and very quickly gained momentum, media coverage and extra police resources makes me sad for both Leah and Leah's family.