UK UK - Andrew Gosden, 14, Doncaster, South Yorks, 14 Sep 2007 #2

AliceInPain

On Time Out
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
2,192
Reaction score
5,693
I hope this will lead to a solution in Andrew's case.
Not what I wanted to hear, there may be pictures and other horrible stuff involved, but I've been thinking about him for so long.
When I lived in London I used to look for him whenever I saw young, homeless people. :(

And yes, releasing strong suspects like that is crazy. Now we have two probable paedophiles/ traffickers walking around among young boys (and parents aren't allowed to know where), and they have all the time in the world to get rid of any evidence/ bodies not yet found. I thought that law or whatever you call it would have changed after Dale Cregan but :rolleyes:
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2022
Messages
5
Reaction score
63
Hi I'm new to this case and the website so please be kind!

I have to say this case rang alarm bells for me the other day when I saw the rap sheet on the BBC website.

The last couple of years I have been really interested in grooming gangs cases and have read loads of books on the subject, getting to know the modus operandi of these gangs.

One book in particular (and I can't now think which it was but it might have been one about Oxford) included a chapter on how the author, a girl, who had been groomed and absued for years by a network of paedophiles, was encouraged to take the train to London. There she was met by a close associate of the Oxford(?) network and taken to be abused by different men in the capital. These men differed in race from the original network, who I think were mostly Pakistani heritage, and were mostly Middle Eastern and Mediterranean. She would take the train to London in this way quite regularly from what I remember.

This story immediately came into my mind when I heard about Andrew the other day. Children abused by these gangs are not always in care, transient or troublemakers, or whatever sterotype one may have. Plenty have been from lovely, caring, middle class homes. Their only common identifying factor is that they have something 'vulnerable' about them. Andrew, to me, strikes me as someone who would be seen as vulnerable. He was extra clever, he has an extremely sensitive face, he wore clothes that marked him out as 'different' from his peers.

I'm interested if anyone knows: was he known to visit takeaways in Doncaster? Even very infrequently? Can anyone dig up what takeaways there were on that four mile walk home from school? It really strikes me that he didn't take the bus home those couple of days. Either he was avoiding something (ie. bullies) or he was walking that way to visit somewhere or someone. Maybe both?

It also strikes me that he had just passed the summer holidays with all those free days he could have gone to London for the day. A hallmark of the grooming gangs is that they love to encourage the kids to skip school - their aim is to separate them from everything that anchors them to a stable life like school and family.

Is it possible that Andrew had contact with someone in the grooming gang network who then passed his details on to these men in London. The age of the London men fits, 23 and 30 at time of crime I think? That's very typical, and then the wider network would typically include older men.

Another theory that came to me is a catfish scenario, where Andrew believed he was going to meet a young person. It must have been something with a big emotional hold over him to make him do something so out of character.

In either or these scenarios, grooming gang or catfish, I think those men knew not to meet him in the train station where there are cameras and loads of people. They knew to get him somewhere out of the public eye.

(All above is pure speculation and not based on anything factual.)
 

OrlandoJames

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
229
Reaction score
1,066
I think it was because he never activated an online account through it. Never had a games machine myself so I'm not really clear how it all works. I know I've read they discounted it though.
Sony confirmed that his PSP had not been used to access the internet. His family apparently only purchased their first PC a few months before Andrew disappeared and that was a laptop for his sister, which Andrew never used. The school's computers were all examined and no evidence was found of any activity by Andrew. He had no social media presence and didn't even have an email address.

The 'groomed online' theory is popular because we know that this is how victims of abuse are often targeted. However, it just doesn't seem to fit in Andrew's case. In order to become tech savvy enough to disguise his online presence, Andrew would surely have needed a lot of practice with computers - yet there is no evidence of him ever showing any interest in computers other than his PSP.

In my opinion this suggests one of two things: a) either he wasn't planning to meet anybody in London and was targeted when he got there; or b) he was planning to meet somebody he'd previously met in person and was communicating with via a secret phone (possibly the one he'd told his parents he'd lost, or one given to him).
 

davidt

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2019
Messages
137
Reaction score
499
Sony confirmed that his PSP had not been used to access the internet. His family apparently only purchased their first PC a few months before Andrew disappeared and that was a laptop for his sister, which Andrew never used. The school's computers were all examined and no evidence was found of any activity by Andrew. He had no social media presence and didn't even have an email address.

The 'groomed online' theory is popular because we know that this is how victims of abuse are often targeted. However, it just doesn't seem to fit in Andrew's case. In order to become tech savvy enough to disguise his online presence, Andrew would surely have needed a lot of practice with computers - yet there is no evidence of him ever showing any interest in computers other than his PSP.

In my opinion this suggests one of two things: a) either he wasn't planning to meet anybody in London and was targeted when he got there; or b) he was planning to meet somebody he'd previously met in person and was communicating with via a secret phone (possibly the one he'd told his parents he'd lost, or one given to him).

I tend to agree tbh. There seems to be very limited opportunities for him to have been groomed. A secret phone or something similar may well be the answer. Or possibly a local connection. Someone he knew in the area? He doesn't seem to have mixed socially much.
 

asyousay

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
5,821
Reaction score
15,672
Andrew would of just had 7 weeks off for the Summer holidays so who knows who he could of met in that time.


The problem you have though is this person was obviously London based as he was alone on the train and his journey from Doncaster he wasn’t seen with anybody. So he had to have communicated with this person somehow.
 

cuecard

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
95
Reaction score
1,059
I've always maintained the thought that he was communicating with someone, via which method I am still not sure. It just makes the most logical sense to me. This is one of those cases where questions just lead to even more questions. It's very frustrating.
 

Grouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2020
Messages
930
Reaction score
5,415
i dont put any weight onto him not buying a return ticket. He was a shy introverted kid who was travelling alone and probably wracked with anxiety or worry. Likely he just dismissed the offer of a return ticket in his mind and went with the option he felt the most sure about. Plus his father already confirmed that it’s not unusual for the family to buy one way tickets when they travelled together before.

RSBM.

Yes I agree about the ticket. Also, if the return option was almost the same price as the single, then it was quite likely for a DAY return - so of no use if you have no intention of coming back that same day.
 

Grouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2020
Messages
930
Reaction score
5,415
So difficult for the family. Good to have news, but it's the type of news that rather leaves you hanging. If there was any pictorial evidence linking them to Andrew surely they wouldn't have been released at all?

It must indeed be difficult and my heart goes out to them. The need for closure versus getting this type of potential outcome!
 

MrsWatson

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2018
Messages
4,129
Reaction score
50,033
I do think there is also a possibility Andrew was not in contact with these people until he got to London. They saw a youngster, on his own, and swooped in. No previous contact at all. Andrew may have bunked off school for an entirely different reason we may never know.

MOO
 

Kitkat28

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
585
Reaction score
3,350
I do think there is also a possibility Andrew was not in contact with these people until he got to London. They saw a youngster, on his own, and swooped in. No previous contact at all. Andrew may have bunked off school for an entirely different reason we may never know.

MOO
This is what I think and have always thought.
 

dotr

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2009
Messages
42,858
Reaction score
102,914
Hi I'm new to this case and the website so please be kind!

I have to say this case rang alarm bells for me the other day when I saw the rap sheet on the BBC website.

The last couple of years I have been really interested in grooming gangs cases and have read loads of books on the subject, getting to know the modus operandi of these gangs.

One book in particular (and I can't now think which it was but it might have been one about Oxford) included a chapter on how the author, a girl, who had been groomed and absued for years by a network of paedophiles, was encouraged to take the train to London. There she was met by a close associate of the Oxford(?) network and taken to be abused by different men in the capital. These men differed in race from the original network, who I think were mostly Pakistani heritage, and were mostly Middle Eastern and Mediterranean. She would take the train to London in this way quite regularly from what I remember.

This story immediately came into my mind when I heard about Andrew the other day. Children abused by these gangs are not always in care, transient or troublemakers, or whatever sterotype one may have. Plenty have been from lovely, caring, middle class homes. Their only common identifying factor is that they have something 'vulnerable' about them. Andrew, to me, strikes me as someone who would be seen as vulnerable. He was extra clever, he has an extremely sensitive face, he wore clothes that marked him out as 'different' from his peers.

I'm interested if anyone knows: was he known to visit takeaways in Doncaster? Even very infrequently? Can anyone dig up what takeaways there were on that four mile walk home from school? It really strikes me that he didn't take the bus home those couple of days. Either he was avoiding something (ie. bullies) or he was walking that way to visit somewhere or someone. Maybe both?

It also strikes me that he had just passed the summer holidays with all those free days he could have gone to London for the day. A hallmark of the grooming gangs is that they love to encourage the kids to skip school - their aim is to separate them from everything that anchors them to a stable life like school and family.

Is it possible that Andrew had contact with someone in the grooming gang network who then passed his details on to these men in London. The age of the London men fits, 23 and 30 at time of crime I think? That's very typical, and then the wider network would typically include older men.

Another theory that came to me is a catfish scenario, where Andrew believed he was going to meet a young person. It must have been something with a big emotional hold over him to make him do something so out of character.

In either or these scenarios, grooming gang or catfish, I think those men knew not to meet him in the train station where there are cameras and loads of people. They knew to get him somewhere out of the public eye.

(All above is pure speculation and not based on anything factual.)
Welcome to Ws @cardiologist4976257, thanks for the interesting post!
 

Kiranerys

#LiveLikeLizzy
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
2,134
Reaction score
22,157
Hi I'm new to this case and the website so please be kind!

I have to say this case rang alarm bells for me the other day when I saw the rap sheet on the BBC website.

The last couple of years I have been really interested in grooming gangs cases and have read loads of books on the subject, getting to know the modus operandi of these gangs.

One book in particular (and I can't now think which it was but it might have been one about Oxford) included a chapter on how the author, a girl, who had been groomed and absued for years by a network of paedophiles, was encouraged to take the train to London. There she was met by a close associate of the Oxford(?) network and taken to be abused by different men in the capital. These men differed in race from the original network, who I think were mostly Pakistani heritage, and were mostly Middle Eastern and Mediterranean. She would take the train to London in this way quite regularly from what I remember.

This story immediately came into my mind when I heard about Andrew the other day. Children abused by these gangs are not always in care, transient or troublemakers, or whatever sterotype one may have. Plenty have been from lovely, caring, middle class homes. Their only common identifying factor is that they have something 'vulnerable' about them. Andrew, to me, strikes me as someone who would be seen as vulnerable. He was extra clever, he has an extremely sensitive face, he wore clothes that marked him out as 'different' from his peers.

I'm interested if anyone knows: was he known to visit takeaways in Doncaster? Even very infrequently? Can anyone dig up what takeaways there were on that four mile walk home from school? It really strikes me that he didn't take the bus home those couple of days. Either he was avoiding something (ie. bullies) or he was walking that way to visit somewhere or someone. Maybe both?

It also strikes me that he had just passed the summer holidays with all those free days he could have gone to London for the day. A hallmark of the grooming gangs is that they love to encourage the kids to skip school - their aim is to separate them from everything that anchors them to a stable life like school and family.

Is it possible that Andrew had contact with someone in the grooming gang network who then passed his details on to these men in London. The age of the London men fits, 23 and 30 at time of crime I think? That's very typical, and then the wider network would typically include older men.

Another theory that came to me is a catfish scenario, where Andrew believed he was going to meet a young person. It must have been something with a big emotional hold over him to make him do something so out of character.

In either or these scenarios, grooming gang or catfish, I think those men knew not to meet him in the train station where there are cameras and loads of people. They knew to get him somewhere out of the public eye.

(All above is pure speculation and not based on anything factual.)

Excellent first post! Welcome to websleuths @cardiologist4976257
 

asyousay

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
5,821
Reaction score
15,672
I do think there is also a possibility Andrew was not in contact with these people until he got to London. They saw a youngster, on his own, and swooped in. No previous contact at all. Andrew may have bunked off school for an entirely different reason we may never know.

MOO

I live in London and I don’t believe for one second he just happened to be picked up randomly on the streets of London.


This was all carefully planned by the people involved hence why they found zero clues. Even in 2007 loads of CCTV camera’s around and the Police would of spent 100’s of hours trying to find some trace of him from Kings cross and yet they found zilch. This comes across as carefully orchestrated.


MOO IMO
 

cuecard

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2021
Messages
95
Reaction score
1,059
I live in London and I don’t believe for one second he just happened to be picked up randomly on the streets of London.


This was all carefully planned by the people involved hence why they found zero clues. Even in 2007 loads of CCTV camera’s around and the Police would of spent 100’s of hours trying to find some trace of him from Kings cross and yet they found zilch. This comes across as carefully orchestrated.


MOO IMO

I agree with this. The chance of him just randomly deciding to take a day off school and then just randomly being picked up by someone/people who had bad intentions that same day is astronomical. Not impossible but the odds are just too stacked against it imo.
 

Bluebear15

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2021
Messages
103
Reaction score
551
I live in London and I don’t believe for one second he just happened to be picked up randomly on the streets of London.


This was all carefully planned by the people involved hence why they found zero clues. Even in 2007 loads of CCTV camera’s around and the Police would of spent 100’s of hours trying to find some trace of him from Kings cross and yet they found zilch. This comes across as carefully orchestrated.


MOO IMO

It took the police three weeks to get the CCTV footage from kings cross, so a lot of the footage from elsewhere will have been wiped by then.

Bear in mind that Dennis Nilsen got all his victims by picking them up randomly.

I see no evidence that he was groomed prior to getting to London. I think he went to London to buy or see something, and met the wrong person there.

jmo imo
 

Bluebear15

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2021
Messages
103
Reaction score
551
I hope this will lead to a solution in Andrew's case.
Not what I wanted to hear, there may be pictures and other horrible stuff involved, but I've been thinking about him for so long.
When I lived in London I used to look for him whenever I saw young, homeless people. :(

And yes, releasing strong suspects like that is crazy. Now we have two probable paedophiles/ traffickers walking around among young boys (and parents aren't allowed to know where), and they have all the time in the world to get rid of any evidence/ bodies not yet found. I thought that law or whatever you call it would have changed after Dale Cregan but :rolleyes:

Why do you think they are strong suspects? They've been released under investigation, not even bail, which means there is little to no actual evidence against them. They could easily be innocent.

Personally I'm against locking potentially innocent people up based on solely on suspicion, which could have devastating effects (loss of jobs, family, homes).

Jmo imo
 

Ardoch

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2019
Messages
833
Reaction score
3,545
If someone had made contact and arranged to meet him in London, they probably would have disguised it as a casual meeting - band/concert etc. Therefore, he wouldn't know exactly what train he'd get back after a concert finished hence the single ticket. I would imagine though that a ticket bought on the day would eat into his £200. IMO JMO
 

Eam001

Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2022
Messages
3
Reaction score
35
and the Police would of spent 100’s of hours trying to find some trace of him from Kings cross.

I was listening to a podcast with Andrew's father only yesterday and he explained that CCTV from the underground and bus network around the wider area where Andrew was last seen wasn't even requested by the police. There was no 'big coming together' to carefully scour all the CCTV across London, such as at stations like St Pancras where you can get to France which is very near to King's Cross, or the tubes and the buses to track Andrew's every move for 'hundreds of hours', they just didn't do it or at least nowhere near adequately.

At the time, the police were more of the attitude that Andrew was just another runaway kid probably from some kind of abused background. Because, statistically that was most likely to them. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR THIS. The police grilled Andrew's father and the family which is what led to/contributed to Andrew's father's breakdown and suicide attempt. The fact is, the police didn't get their act together to immediately and decisively dedicate huge manpower into tracking Andrew's every move on CCTV, probably there wasn't enough people, or time, or money in the budget, or inclination, interest, whatever, or all of the above, you know, the usual ''lessons will be learned''.

Andrew looked very young for his age and he did have that kind of excited-tourist look about him as he stepped out of King's Cross and this is very noticeable to the kind of nefarious creeps that hang out at those places watching people, whether they're on the lookout for mugging victims or God knows what. We've all seen those types. I don't think it's impossible that someone 'befriended' Andrew, and Andrew was more open to making friends with older people due to his very high IQ/lack of stimulation at school. I can picture some goth type, maybe with hair like Andrew's and possibly wearing a band t-shirt, a band that Andrew liked, offering to show Andrew the sights. Perhaps. Basically, extremely bad luck for Andrew. Yes, Andrew was very clever but he was only 14. And then, goodness knows what happened (well, we know to some extent now, sex abusing monsters got hold of him).
 
Last edited:

Grouse

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2020
Messages
930
Reaction score
5,415
I was listening to a podcast with Andrew's father only yesterday and he explained that CCTV from the underground and bus network around the area wasn't even requested; there was no big coming together to look at all the CCTV in the area - the train stations, the tubes, the buses to track Andrew's every move for 100's of hours, it simply wasn't done.

At the time, the police were more of the attitude that Andrew was just another runaway kid most probably from an abused background. Because, statistically that was most likely to them. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR THIS. The police grilled Andrew's father and the family which is what led to/contributed to Andrew's father's breakdown and suicide attempt. The fact is, the police didn't get their act together immediately and dedicate big manpower into tracking Andrew's every move on CCTV, there wasn't enough people, time, money in the budget, inclination, interest, whatever, or all of the above, you know, the usual ''lessons will be learned''.

Yes I listened to a couple of podcasts a while ago and that was a key point that the early investigation was all centred on the family. At what point though, when a kid goes missing in Doncaster, do you start looking at CCTV in London? I'm not sure at what point the ticket seller came forward.

(Well, we know to some extent now, sex abusing monsters got hold of him).

I'm trying to keep an open mind at this stage, though it's not sounding good.
 
Top