UK UK - Keith Bennett, 12, Longsight, Manchester, 16 June 1964

Okay but, he isn't explaining why nobody else can find these supposed remains that he apparently found quite easily? Surely he could've taken them directly to them? Not buying it, at all
All he has to do is to produce the set of photographs that he sent to the experts to back up his story.

Why is he not doing this instead of arguing the toss all the time?
 
I can't figure out how to quote on my phone but I entirely agree, WiseOwl
 
I doubt it was a publicity stunt. I think the guy might have become emotionally over involved in the case to the extent that his perception of the facts is affected. Some cases have that affect on some people - see also Madeleine McCann and the amount of people who leaped from criticising her parents for leaving the children alone to openly accusing them of murder with no evidence.

We all want Keith Bennett found, we all want him to have a decent burial and his family to have some peace, but most of us can keep it in perspective enough not to lose touch with reality and start seeing what we want to see.
That's fair enough, but where does that leave the forensic archaeologist who backed his story up?

Last week Dawn Keen said that in the photograph she saw 'it was human, it was the left side of an upper jaw - no way was it an animal.'

So what exactly was she looking at then? And where are these remains now?
 
That's fair enough, but where does that leave the forensic archaeologist who backed his story up?

Last week Dawn Keen said that in the photograph she saw 'it was human, it was the left side of an upper jaw - no way was it an animal.'

So what exactly was she looking at then? And where are these remains now?
I think the clue is that she was looking at a photograph. She had no clue as to the provenance of said photograph, it could have been from anywhere. It looks like she was misled.
 
I think the clue is that she was looking at a photograph. She had no clue as to the provenance of said photograph, it could have been from anywhere. It looks like she was misled.
Edwards has misled everyone, not just the archaeologist.

Keith's brother called him out very early on this week, looks like he was spot on.

I wish some reporter would contact Dawn Keen, just to see what she thinks of the situation now - i'm pretty sure she wouldn't be best pleased to think she'd been hoodwinked.
 
Thank you for the updates WiseOwl.
I wish this author would just admit that he was wrong, deliberately or not, and apologise for not only raising hope for Keith's family but also for attacking them publicly.
 
This is what triggered the search for Keith (taken from The Guardian today):

Forensics officers undertook a week-long hunt for the boy’s remains after receiving information from an amateur investigator.

Russell Edwards, an author, said he was “convinced” he had found bones belonging to 12-year-old Bennett, who went missing in Manchester in 1964, but police ended their search on Friday.

The latest search began when Edwards, having given an extensive interview to MailOnline, telephoned GMP to say he had evidence to suggest that human remains were buried close to where the bodies of three other Moors murder victims had been found.

This material included soil samples taken by Edwards which, according to the geologist Lesley Dunlop, suggested that a human body had been buried there. Edwards said he had found some blue and white material at the site and took a picture of an item that, according to the forensic archaeologist Dawn Keen, looked like part of a human skull.

Cheryl Hughes, the detective leading the search, said on Friday that the material has been examined and “hasn’t yet indicated the presence of human remains,” although more analysis was required.

Hughes said the photograph appeared to show an item “considerably smaller than a juvenile jaw and it cannot be ruled out that it is plant-based”.


Full Story:

 
Regardless of whether his heart was in the right place or not, IMMEDIATELY tweeting that it had been an honour to find Keith when he knew full well nothing had even been looked at, never mind confirmed, was incredibly bad taste and I'm sorry, I have no sympathy for him
 
Manchester Evening News, yesterday evening:


I thought this snippet was paricularly interesting:

After a week of painstaking digging and analysis by police-commissioned experts, today (Friday) officers have been forced to admit defeat. No human remains have been found despite information from author and amateur sleuth Russell Edwards to the contrary. A picture he took - which has not been made public - purporting to show parts of a child's jaw may simply show vegetation, according to GMP.

If you click on the link, it goes on to say:

The Manchester Evening News understands Mr Edwards, who was working with a team he had gathered to carry out his own search, did not see the jaw bone at the site but noticed it when analysing photographs taken during the dig. None of his team actually saw the apparent jaw bone in the soil - only on a photograph.

So this latest update begs the following questions:

1. Why did Edwards not go back and visit the site to try and find the jawbone? Instead of doing this to confirm what he thought he saw in the photograph, he contacted the GMP and tweeted he had found Keith's remains.


2. Two so-called 'experts' have said they believe it was definitely a human jawbone they saw in the photograph, now we are told that it's probably just vegetation. How could they be so mistaken in what they thought they had seen?

3. Why doesn't Edwards just produce the photograph and explain his actions, instead of defending himself to the hilt and causing a rift with Keith's family? It's all so unnecessary, he didn't go about things in the right way and the least he could do is apologise to the Bennett family.
 
The arguments rumble on:


Alan Bennett is spot-on with these comments:

"From his supposed find of bone fragment, skull, hair, material and body tissue there is absolutely nothing to be found now and no trace of any of those things," said Mr Bennett, who added his family was feeling 'anger and pain'.

Over to you then Mr Edwards, speak to the Bennett family and show them your evidence.
 
From The Metro, Sunday 9 October 2022:

Alan Bennett, 66, was left fuming by after no human remains were found despite claims by amateur sleuth Russell Edwards that he had discovered an upper jaw with teeth in a remote area of the moorland. But after the forensic experts completed their excavation of the site and drew a blank, the search was called off on Friday.

Venting his frustrations on social media, Alan questioned Mr Edwards’s motives and queried why only a fragment of Keith’s jawbone would be left, when other Moors Murder victims’ bodies were found. Keith’s brother branded Mr Edwards’ conduct ‘thoughtless, heartless and publicity seeking’ and called for him to apologise. An interview with the author and his team appeared in the press within hours of his phone call to the police.

Alan wrote: ‘Why would there only be a fragment of jaw bone left of Keith, considering the condition of the other victims that were found? The two locations that Edwards referred to are not in the location of his supposed find. Does he always have a camera crew and photographer with him? If so I presume they have been trailing him for his, again supposed, seven year search. Or was it just by pure chance and coincidence that they were with him on his supposed find?'

He continued: ‘Seems a little strange that all his “experts” appear to be friends of his. How can he state that we have been searching in the wrong place when our 30 years of experience dwarfs his alleged seven years of investigation, whilst at the same time he puts place names of locations in different incorrect areas of the moor?

‘Will he apologise for the anguish, anger, hurt and distress he has caused by his thoughtless, heartless and publicity seeking actions?’

A spokesman for Mr Edwards said he ‘totally understands Mr Bennett’s frustration and anguish’, but remains ‘convinced’ he’s found the true location of Keith’s final resting place. The spokesman added: ‘He remains convinced that he has found the true location of the grave and is commissioning further scientific analysis of his evidence. Until he has concluded his ongoing research, he feels it would not be productive to continue debating the issues in public.’

Please Mr Edwards, forget your ongoing research. Apologise to the Bennett family and just walk away.
 
All he has to do is to produce the set of photographs that he sent to the experts to back up his story.

Why is he not doing this instead of arguing the toss all the time?
I suspect it is the provenance of the photos that he supplied the 'experts' that has caused this issue to backfire.

IMO
 
The Forensic Archaeology Expert Panel have released a statement to say Dawn Keen, who Russell Edwards sent pictures of his findings to, is not an accredited archeologist which is what some of the earlier media reports stated. The Daily Mail called her an "expert archeologist". She only ever saw photographs that Russell Edwards sent her.

Edwards also has a new book on the Moors Murder out soon, you may not be surprised to hear.

This is the statement -
 
Extremely unpopular opinion, but what if Brady and Hindley did not kill Keith at all and falsely confessed? There is NO physical evidence that he was a victim of the Moors Murders.

I will be ridiculed for this idea, but is there any ACTUAL evidence to support this claim other than the confession? I am not denying that it is extremely unlikely that Keith is still alive, but what if he died in an accident or was murdered by somebody else?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
189
Guests online
1,400
Total visitors
1,589

Forum statistics

Threads
589,952
Messages
17,928,094
Members
228,013
Latest member
RayaCo
Back
Top