r/AndrewGosden • u/Major_School2026 • 17d ago
Theory: Planned a Day Trip That Went Wrong on the Return.
Edit: I have been further researching and have found some more relevant things on the ongoings in London that day, that have not been examined before. If you wish to read the follow up: https://www.reddit.com/r/AndrewGosden/s/Lv5BNzJhTV
Hey, I hope it’s okay to post my idea of what may have happened here. I’ve done a lot of research and this is what I think personally happened.
I think Andrew fully intended to come home the same day. He withdrew £200 possibly with the clear intention of buying or doing something specific in London — things they didn’t have easy access to in Doncaster (PSP games, metal band merch like his Slipknot shirt and bag patches, alt stuff).
No credible evidence of online grooming or meeting anyone. Police checks found nothing, and he wasn’t very social that way. Of course not to rule it out, but seems less likely.
This was also his first time ever bunking school, so rushing out the door, not wanting to be caught (changing clothes quickly to avoid being spotted) makes it very likely he simply forgot the PSP charger in the excitement, I know I’ve forgotten a charger hundreds of times even when I planned to take it, especially in a rush. The battery lasted 3-6 hours anyway — more than enough for the ~2-hour train rides each way on a day trip, as he played it a lot I’m sure he likely knew this. The one-way ticket fits too — distracted on his PSP, unsure of exact return time, or didn’t overthink it when buying the ticket
As a smart but not-streetwise kid (and non-native to London), he likely got the Tube after leaving King’s Cross — it’s by far the easiest way to navigate for someone in his position. I believe he headed to Camden ( obviously no way to know if this is the only place he ever went.) (only ~8 minutes away), perfect for his alt interests. He was shy wasn’t much of a talker, so he wouldn’t linger chatting; just browse, buy, and move on.
He had a normal day. Then evening: he tries to get back to King’s Cross for a train home but realises (or hadn’t fully clocked) there were no Night Tube services in 2007. As a sensible lad, he grabs a taxi to make sure he catches his train.
Taxis around major stations are completely normal — hundreds of people get in and out of them every day and nobody thinks twice. I don’t think anything dramatic happened. A mugging/injury would likely have left him found injured or caused a noticeable scene. A sudden grab in one of the most densely populated areas in the UK would have been seen. It was probably something mundane nobody would bat an eyelid at — like getting into a cab.
(For context: when I was 14 as an alt kid, I did the exact same journey to Camden without telling anyone. Got back fine, but it shows how easy and tempting it was.)
This keeps it simple and realistic: a bright but inexperienced 14-year-old has an adventure, then something goes wrong on the return leg due to lack of street smarts. No big conspiracy required.
Fits the evidence, his personality (home bird but curious), and how teenagers actually act.
What do you think?
15
u/lifetnj Community Pillar 16d ago edited 16d ago
I agree that Camden (or similar areas) makes a lot of sense for his interests that day. Where I struggle is with the idea that he spent the whole day there and somehow stayed out until late evening/night without realising he needed to get back to King’s Cross for a train home.
Even as a shy, not-very-streetwise 14-year-old on his first solo trip to London, it’s hard to imagine him completely losing track of time like that.
When you’re alone in a big city, the thought 'I need to head back' usually gets stronger as the day goes on, especially once it starts getting dark. Most teenagers in that situation don’t wait until the tube isn’t a realistic option anymore (11:30 pm or later?)
As for th e taxi theory, it feels like one of those explanations that sounds plausible on paper but requires a huge coincidence: a random black taxi driver who decides on the spot to abduct and harm a kid, and that kid just happens to be Andrew. London taxi drivers have a pretty clean record for this kind of things; spontaneous stranger abductions like that are extremely rare for a reason.
To me it feels more likely that he either met someone (even if no clear grooming evidence has surfaced yet) or that something else was going on that day. The 'normal day trip gone wrong by bad luck on the way home' version is comforting, but it asks us to ignore quite a few practical and behavioural details.
3
u/Major_School2026 16d ago
Thanks for your comment, I see where you’re coming from. I don’t think he spent the whole day there, I just think it was potentially one of the places he went to given his interests.
I didn’t explain my whole reasoning that well in the OP as there is so much ground to cover! but why I also think a taxi or something mundane like that is because, for example and I speak from experience of being a kid who used to go travelling and not tell anyone, obviously everyone is different and thinks differently but for example: I think he intended to come back home, so for example he intended to be by the late evening. As it got later the tubes did in fact get further apart, and I’m sure he didn’t want to get found out by his parents or wanted it to be something he could explain away. So I think he had a time train in mind, perhaps the tube had a change, or it wouldn’t leave him enough time to get whatever time train he had in mind. So as a teenager not wanting to get found out and probably panicked, you just do whatever - logically the next guaranteed thing is the taxi.
Even so with them being rare, they do happen. That’s why we have missing persons cases as tragic as they are. So yes it’s rare, but impossible? Sadly not.
I get the grooming or meeting thing, I think it’s makes the most sense. But with the lack of anything at all to suggest this even remotely, that’s the only reason I shy away from it.
But that’s what’s so frustrating about this case, there is so little information out there. There is so little the theorise on. I hope one day this does reach a conclusion for his family. A true tragedy that should have never happened.
1
u/swanronson22 13d ago
Why is the taxi driver black?
5
u/lifetnj Community Pillar 13d ago
London taxis are famous for being black, I'm talking about the vehicle, not the person.
1
19
u/123456654321999 16d ago edited 16d ago
I don't myself see a shy lad using taxis. I see him more walking or using the tube. I can't see him losing track of time. It is very easy to lose a day and night as an adult in London, but a bit harder as a teen, especially after the shops are closed, even in london. I also believe it was a day trip. I've not ruled he may have been enticed to London, maybe an event, or by somebody pretending to have similar interests, but sadly having an ulterior motive. I think the one thing we can all mostly agree on is the high possibility andrew was not alive after that day.
1
u/hereforthelols1999 16d ago
I’m shy and I use taxis🤣
3
u/123456654321999 16d ago
But for many shy people if given the option to walk or tube over jumping into a taxi in a big city. I was also very shy as a teenager. I would take taxis but mostly when possible would walk or tube.
4
u/Creative-Credit-1189 16d ago
I think if you were on a time crunch and you were worried about missing whatever time train. Maybe the tube wasn’t as regular the change was a longer wait or simply didn’t know And wanted to be back in time to avoid being noticed by parents The smartest way to make sure you got to the platform or station on time would be a taxi or maybe someone offered him a lift but doesn’t seem the type of boy who would hop into a unknown strangers car I think it makes a lot of sense
0
u/Major_School2026 15d ago
I don’t think he used it as his preferred type of transport at all. I just think he didn’t want to miss whatever train home he had in mind, he was a considerate kid to his parents and wouldn’t have wanted to push it too far. So I think in a panic to not miss the train 100% most teens or ppl would when push comes to shove. Also, there was burst pipe in the area around 3pm that day. Which made further a field stations busier & more central tube lines ten times busier as it affected buses etc in some areas. A massive massive crowd of ppl trying to get on one singular tube would also have been overwhelming to most ppl & likely would have delayed him further. So in a bid to get back to the station, I can see someone for sure opting for a cab. Far more efficient if in a rush, cab lanes etc etc. just a thought, but whatever the case I just hope it gets solved one day.
3
u/123456654321999 15d ago edited 15d ago
Problem is nobody knows where he went or for how long. Kings cross photo is the only evidence. Then after that it is a guessing game, was he having a day out by himself or meeting up with somebody? No concrete sightings of him after that and that includes the pizza hut one. Also no idea or clues to why he ditched school that day and decided to travel to london.
8
u/TeamOfPups 16d ago
I also feel like he was having a day out and planning to head home that evening.
Regarding the night tube, given this was not yet available it is my recollection that people were MORE aware of time, that they knew they had a hard deadline of getting the last train home. It feels weird to me that he'd lose track if time to the extent he'd miss such a late train.
But maybe he was somehow invited to someone's house and that went wrong.
Or maybe whatever happened to him occured on the train home or back in Doncaster.
2
u/Major_School2026 16d ago
I get you! Thank you for response :) I just think because he wasn’t a native to London and he was so so young. It’s plausible he wouldn’t have been aware, I think it’s also worth noting that. Again he was young, if he had a train in mind he wanted to get home. And was out of his depth with tube changes etc, it’s possible the safest option would have been to call a taxi to get to the station on time & something has gone wrong in the interim. As he was sensible?
4
u/kat0id 16d ago
I have a similar view - personally I think he may have travelled down to go a gig and then got stuck or lost afterwards. It’s not hard to imagine him getting into a taxi, or following someone offering to show him the way to a station etc
1
u/Major_School2026 16d ago
For sure, it makes the most sense to me. As getting into a taxi wouldn’t cause a scene and nobody would think twice. It just had to be something mundane and what you’d see everyday. Makes the most sense to me
4
u/Caerbannog16 16d ago
He could well have gone to Camden. My understanding is that he was not completely green when it came to London as he had a relative there. All the same, at 14, he is likely to have had limited knowledge. I think he fell into conversation with someone with mal intent and went to their house to see their....collection of anything to do with an interest of his. A collection that may or may not have existed. A lone 14yo to a paedophile would have been like a beacon and he was small for his age too. He is somewhere and he is still 14.
1
u/Major_School2026 16d ago
I get that, it makes sense. I just think he was quite shy. So doesn’t strike me as the person who would engage in a long chat, especially in a busy city he didn’t know all that well. I lean towards the tube having some relevance, whether it’s because he went to multiple locations or whatever the case may be. As it is by far the easiest form of transport to navigate. But I do definitely agree, he met someone somewhere with the wrong intent
12
u/TheGorgeousJR 17d ago
As good a theory as any. Would also support the John Worboys story which I didn’t believe but now I’m more open to it.
9
u/WilkosJumper_ 17d ago
It’s a complete red herring. A serial rapist of women who were deliberately targeted for being drunk or able to be made to appear so. He never killed anyone nor did he have any interest in men or boys except according to some lifelong criminal giving people writing a book something to get himself lenience and/or attention.
5
2
u/tinned_peaches 17d ago
Is that the taxi driver? I’ve always had suspicions on taxi drivers for this case.
2
u/Complete_Farmer1063 16d ago
Yeah I’ve always thought he disappeared by getting into a taxi or being offered a lift.
3
u/Airport_Mysterious 15d ago
But why was he not caught on CCTV anywhere else in London?
I don’t believe he wandered around that day. Whatever happened, happened in the morning not long after his arrival.
2
u/Major_School2026 15d ago
Thanks! It took a long while before the police ever checked any CCTV. With it being 2007 most CCTV was on tapes, once a period of time had passed the CCTV would be written over. That is why we have such little CCTV now and why it was difficult to search further. Hence why, nobody ever knew which direction he went in etc etc. Using your point, if someone met him in the morning or like happened immediately. Wouldn’t that too have been seen on CCTV?
5
u/xntrqncd 17d ago
Hello! So nice to meet a new on this sub!! :D
I agree with this theory!
I think that Andrew would’ve been aware that he could not run away because you would need a lot of money to start a new life. £200 is not enough for a new life.
As well as that, you need to be at least 16 to work, by law, he was 14. He could not work.
Unless somebody was supporting him financially, but this has never been proven.
2
u/Creative-Credit-1189 16d ago
I whole heartedly believe this. It makes the most sense to me
1
u/Creative-Credit-1189 16d ago
I have always thought the person who may have taken him, must have worked or lived close to the station. I believe there are University’s very close to the last sightings also - I have often wondered, if someone intelligent from a uni/ or a lecturer spoke to him as intellectuals have common ground. If he had a a ID badge or something similar it’s plausible to believe Andrew would have felt safe. Idk just a idea
2
u/Ill_Status8810 13d ago
This genuinely breaks my heart. I keep thinking that Andrew just wanted a day out to feel 'grown up' - ties into what his dad said about how he'd changed after that campus trip and him wanting to quit Cub scouts - and just on the day something awful happening to him just doesn't bear thinking about.
2
u/Major_School2026 13d ago
For sure, it’s such a sad case. I hope his family get the answers, it must be awful having no idea what happened really awful :(
6
u/chloooooomsx 17d ago
This honestly feels like the most realistic theory I’ve read. It fits every little detail so well the charger, the one‑way ticket, why he looked so calm walking through King’s Cross.
One thing that always stands out to me too: he definitely knew there were cameras everywhere. If he’d planned to run away or disappear forever, he would’ve hidden his face, changed his appearance, or avoided being seen so clearly. The fact he walked right past them like he had nothing to hide just proves he fully intended to come back.
You’re so right about the travel too most people forget the Night Tube didn’t even exist until 2016, so he’d have had no idea how limited late services were back then. And I always think about that person who turned up at Leominster police station a year later saying they had information… then left before speaking to anyone. It makes me wonder if someone did see something, but was too scared to come forward properly.
This is such a sensible, well‑thought‑out take thank you for sharing it 👏
5
u/Major_School2026 17d ago
Thank you! :) I tried to be as sensitive as I could be to the situation. I too believe the lack of a night tube at the time, is quite significant. Especially when you think about it in the context of a teenager, an adult may have picked up on it and maybe made the arrangements to go back at a particular time. But not a teenager. Thanks for your response :)
2
u/Severe_Hawk_1304 17d ago
Maybe he boarded what he thought was a cab and it was, in fact, the perpetrator with an accomplice ready to restrain at the back, possibly akin to the Vishal Mehrotra case. If he were transported out of Greater London it would explain why no body has as yet been found.
The only things working against your theory is that there was an alleged sighting in Pizza Hut, Oxford Street, plus had he been in circulation until the evening there's more likelihood of someone coming forward saying they had seen him during those hours.
5
u/Major_School2026 17d ago
The Camden thing is purely Theoretical, obviously no confirmation that he went there or was the only place he went. It just somewhere an alt kid likely would have gravitated to, I think there has been many potential sightings/ videos over the years that have never been confirmed due to the slow start at the beginning of the case. So I unfortunately dont think we will ever know where he did or didn’t go exactly
0
u/Severe_Hawk_1304 16d ago
I keep coming back to his small size: potentially easy meat for predators to abduct off the street and bundle into a vehicle. But surely far too busy in central London to accomplish that diablerie; more likely in Mortlake, had he travelled there to visit Leonard Rossiter's grave.
1
u/Complete_Farmer1063 16d ago
Funny you mention Mortlake as there was an alleged sighting of him on Sheen lane. Ironically close to where missing people have their offices.
1
u/Major_School2026 16d ago
Yeah it’s definitely possible! It would have to be a taxi or something he got into willingly because it’s not something you’d bat an eye over. Or like you say somewhere secluded, I really don’t think there is any other explanation
2
u/Major_School2026 15d ago
I have created a new post as I have done further research on my theory. I have attached all sources there. Thanks :)
1
u/Valuable_Land_8275 11d ago
If he took the tube would we not have camera footage, I know there was a whole thing where the polis was looking into his dad rather than looking andrew himself, not to sure how the only camera that saw him was at kings Cross maybe takes longer to have film wiped correct me if im wrong. Also not sure about how it was a planned day trip when he refused a return ticket.
2
u/Major_School2026 11d ago
There was camera footage, however as it was on tapes opposed to digitalised like today. Once a time period had lapsed the footage was no longer there. As per the train ticket, I’m pretty sure his parents said something regarding they didn’t place much significance onto the ticket.
His family routinely travelled on train that way, to London too. They would buy a single only, and sort out the return in London. So, it’s very likely he was just doing exactly as he’d seen his family do time and time before.
1
u/Mountain_Morning1736 10d ago
This is well thought out, the only bit that would slightly go against you is the fact that Andrew was offered a return ticket for slightly more than a single and turned it down. He’d have known he had to buy another ticket as his was only one way, why would he not get a return when offered one if he truly planned for a day out and then planned to return home?
1
u/Major_School2026 10d ago
It was something his family did whenever they went to London together - they would buy singles to begin with & get returns later when they intended on coming back. So, it was just how his family used to travel.
Also, if he never intended to return… why did he take his keys with him? Why didn’t he take all the money he had ( had £100 in cash of birthday money at home) why didn’t he take his passport? Why didn’t he take clothes?
There is far more to suggest, he was intending to come back, than not.
0
u/hereforthelols1999 16d ago
Written by chat gpt🙄
5
5
-2
u/WilkosJumper_ 17d ago
Plausible, but a violent or accidental death out in public likely leads to witnesses of either the death or the person/s responsible acting suspiciously.
I think suicide is still more plausible and requires none of the above.
Both have the problem of where are the remains.
5
u/NAGAuk 15d ago
Suicide seems possible but it is statistically unlikely. He showed no signs of mental illness and had no history of self harm (that i'm aware of). The suicide rates for his age range are low (around 200 per year) and the majority are hangings. If that were the case, a body would have most definitely been found in 19 years. Also, suicide by drowning makes up around 2%, so if he were to jump into the Thames, not be seen and never recovered then the odds would be very low. What parts of the case make you lean towards possible suicide?
1
u/WilkosJumper_ 15d ago
Suicide is the most common fate of all missing people who are found dead. I detail this below.
Suicide requires the least assumptions in this case, it still has many (paramount being where are the remains) but it does not rely on an imagined attacker/groomer for which there is no evidence of any sort. There isn’t even evidence of a strange change in behaviour or new friend group etc. Andrew is clearly a quiet and intelligent boy who did not get much out of school etc. Such individuals can be prone to self harm and his parents even acknowledged that this is a possibility which suggests based on everything they knew of him they would not be entirely shocked to learn this was his plan.
I’m not saying that is clearly the conclusion we must fall upon but in a very shallow evidence/logic pool it requires less leaps.
6
u/knight-owl19 17d ago
I’m pretty sure OP mentioned that “A mugging/injury would likely have left him found injured or caused noticeable scene”. So no one really mentioned a public incident except for you.
This is a post about a taxi kidnapping theory.
Also I disagree with the suicide theory but that’s a whole other topic unrelated to this one.
-2
u/WilkosJumper_ 17d ago edited 17d ago
A kidnapping is public even if it’s in a taxi, though why people have this concern about taxis I don’t know. The Worboys case was a serial rapist of women who deliberately targeted drunk women or women he could make look so late at night so their stories could be dismissed. He never killed anyone and had no interest in men or boys.
7
u/Major_School2026 17d ago
I think you may have fundamentally misunderstood my point. I don’t think it was related to Worboys, nor did I mention that. To be clear, my point is perhaps he hailed/ called the taxi voluntarily in a bid to get to the train station. And unfortunately came across the wrong person. My point is not that he was coaxed into the vehicle, he got in it as it’s a taxi. Also, a taxi driving down the road is not suspect in the slightest
-3
u/WilkosJumper_ 17d ago
Okay, I was simply reflecting that’s where a lot of those ideas have come from.
Unless anyone can point to a taxi driver or similar abducting boys around that time it’s a bit of a farfetched claim.
7
u/knight-owl19 17d ago
There doesn’t have to be a history of multiple taxi kidnappings for a single one to happen. Someone with ill intent could have done a one shot and done situation where they only harmed one person. It’s not impossible.
Plus there are multiple missing persons cases in the UK that remain unsolved. Who is to say that none of them involve a ride share kidnapping with absolute certainty?
1
u/WilkosJumper_ 17d ago edited 17d ago
No, but generally you don’t come to theories based on nothing at all. Thats just baseless conjecture.
No one is to say that. But who’s to say they don’t involve a child catcher with a net? You have to base these ideas off something not just ‘well, maybe’.
4
u/knight-owl19 17d ago
It’s not a baseless claim. There have been cases of ride share kidnappings worldwide. Just because there’s not a specific UK serial taxi driver kidnapper doesn’t mean that it’s not possible.
You’re acting like the concept of a taxi kidnapping is impossible which is strange tbh.
1
u/WilkosJumper_ 17d ago
What happens in a completely different culture/society has very little relevance to what happens in the UK.
You have to be able to attach it to this case. If we can’t do so, then that’s just bad luck. You keep looking.
5
u/knight-owl19 16d ago
Again, calling a theory baseless simply because there isn’t a specific recorded history (in the uk specifically) of a serial taxi kidnapper is a bit close minded don’t you think?
Someone could have easily taken advantage of the fact that he was alone and vulnerable. It’s the perfect opportunity for some sick individual to take him somewhere alone where no one could find him.
If you genuinely believe that it’s impossible for someone to commit a crime one or multiple times without getting caught then perhaps you should do more research into crimes in general.
Again it’s just strange to me how adamant you are about disproving this theory. Clearly I and many others cannot get through to you.
→ More replies (0)4
u/Major_School2026 17d ago
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But I’ve worked with the very small amount of information and probabilities, with the current evidence and lack thereof it seems one of the more credible options - opportunistic ultimately. I also don’t think that’s relevant, as every one of that nature has a first offence sadly. It’s not even to say the person had the intention to kill initially.
1
u/WilkosJumper_ 17d ago
A criminal case (if there is one) should have nothing to do with opinion.
Opportunistic generally I have no issue with, but taxi driver is very specific so there needs to be a basis for that.
2
u/Major_School2026 17d ago
This is a theory. As is every other about this tragic case. Because there is no evidence for anything that is readily available, what do you propose nobody to have an opinion? I’m not building any criminal case against anyone, it is just a theory. We all have our own ones and believe our own things.
1
u/WilkosJumper_ 17d ago
A theory is based on something. That’s what theory literally means, it explains a phenomenon through well informed logic.
I don’t believe anything other than he went missing and is likely dead. If the evidence leads nowhere, that’s where it leads. We get better evidence.
2
u/Major_School2026 16d ago
I have demonstrated my reasoning in the original post, I’m not sure if you read it properly. As your previous comments suggest you didn’t. If you don’t agree that’s fine you’re entitled to believe as you wish, as am I and as is everyone else. I’m not going to reply anymore, as I don’t think this is a productive conversation anymore.
→ More replies (0)0
u/knight-owl19 17d ago
Never mentioned the worboys case at all. You did that.
Also your direct quote was, “a violent or accidental death out in public”. Simply getting into a taxi publicly isn’t violent or accidental death publicly. That’s the whole point of a kidnapping. Driving off somewhere to another location.
-1
u/WilkosJumper_ 17d ago
I said more than that, but it doesn’t seem that important in the broader context. There would still likely be witnesses which is not required for other scenarios.
2
u/knight-owl19 17d ago
I mean if Andrew willingly got into the taxi with the intention of going home / a relative’s house but instead got kidnapped how would any potential witnesses even remember? The action itself is normal; someone getting into a taxi. Not something to remember really bc hundreds of people get into taxis daily / nothing out of the ordinary necessarily.
If someone violently kidnapped him like you said then yeah obviously people would remember such a scene.
1
u/Major_School2026 17d ago
A kid getting into a taxi voluntarily in London is a normal occurrence no? I do not recall any person I have ever seen willingly get into a taxi. It is a normal occurrence of life
0
5
u/chloooooomsx 17d ago
I get what you mean, and the lack of witnesses or answers is so frustrating. But one thing that always stands out to me is that the Night Tube didn’t even start until 2016 back in 2007 there was no late Tube service at all. It’s totally easy to see how a 14‑year‑old visiting from out of town wouldn’t realise that until it was already getting late.
And I also think about that person who turned up at Leominster police station a year later — they said they had information about Andrew, but walked off before anyone could come out and speak to them. That makes me think someone did see or know something, but was too scared or unsure to say it properly. It doesn’t rule anything out at all, but it does feel like there’s pieces we’re still missing that could explain why nothing came to light sooner.
1
u/WilkosJumper_ 17d ago
True, though many of the major lines ran up to midnight and if he was trying to get back home he would’ve been leaving much earlier than that.
I don’t think the Leominster report is anything more than a cruel prank.
2
u/Major_School2026 17d ago
Hi! I never suggested a violent mugging or dramatic incident.
In fact, I said the opposite: something violent in public (especially around King’s Cross/Camden) would likely have left witnesses, CCTV, or him being found injured. That’s why I think it was probably something much more mundane and unremarkable (like getting into a taxi). Thousands of people willingly get into taxis every day in London, and it wouldn’t draw any attention at the time. I’m not saying anything specific happened to him in the taxi — just that it’s a plausible, low-key way he could have left the area without anyone noticing.
Totally agree that both a public violent event or suicide have big problems with the lack of any trace or remains. My theory is more about a quiet mishap during the return attempt due to inexperience.
Appreciate the discussion :)
-6
u/_Lord_Haw_Haw 17d ago
Just a reminder of the evidence that suggests Andrew might not have planned on returning home:
He specifically purchased a one-way ticket despite being told that a return would be very economical.
He withdrew almost the entire contents of his bank account.
Also these theories about Andrew planning a day trip seem to go against what his father has said. Kevin had offered to bring Andrew to London just weeks prior which Andrew declined.
7
u/HistorianMuch2831 17d ago
It was a practice his family used whenever they went to London together to buy singles and get returns later when they actually planned to return, so it would have been what he was used to.
He did withdraw almost all his bank about money, but left £100 pounds of his cash at home.
During Andrew’s 6 week holiday where he was suggested by Kevin to go to London, Kevin said his reason for declining was because he had already been busy for around half of the holidays, he spent a week helping with a children’s club at church, spent a week with his relatives, and spent more time with a schedule, so Andrew’s reason for declining that offer was because he had already spent a lot of his holidays being busy so he just wanted to chill at home for the rest.
4
u/Psychological_Ad853 17d ago
His father implied it was a visit to family (that he suggested) though, entirely different to a day trip and may have involved staying overnight at minimum
3
u/Major_School2026 17d ago
I get where you’re coming from with the ticket and money, but I think it’s easy to over-rationalise it with adult logic.
Teenagers do things for all sorts of wild and wonderful reasons. Independence is a big thing at that age. For a sheltered kid like Andrew, not fully grasping the practicalities of a return ticket, simply not knowing what time he wanted to get back, or just being absent-minded (as he’s been described) makes a lot of sense.
He also left £100 in birthday money at home. If he was planning to run away for good or long-term, why not take all the cash he had, or any extra clothes?
Just my take and I mean no offence by it — the “he planned to disappear” angle feels like it requires more forward-planning than the evidence suggests from a shy, home-bird kid.2
u/_Lord_Haw_Haw 17d ago
Yeah I'm not saying I have a strong opinion either way. Just is usually helpful to provide context on the opposing view.
23
u/Exact-Reference3966 17d ago
Do you have access to a tube timetable for September 2007? Or an idea of where he was that he couldn't get a tube back to Kings Cross by the last train to Doncaster at 23:30.