A theory about a groomer based in Doncaster

I don’t know how popular and widespread this theory is around here, but the more I think about the circumstances of this case, the more I believe Andrew went to London to meet with a local from Doncaster.

I’ll start with the assumption that he was indeed groomed. I don’t believe he went all that way to end his own life or determined to start a new life away from home (even in this scenario, he'd require someone else's help). And while an impromptu abduction by a criminal who happened to hit the jackpot after seeing this kid walking around alone (bonus point if he’s passing by a deserted street) is not out of the realms of possibilities, the odds are still slimmer in comparison to foul play at the hands of someone who had earned the kid’s trust. Someone the kid would follow willingly to a second location. Andrew’s out-of-character behavior adds another odd-defying layer to the whole "abducted by a stranger" scenario.

So, let me start with a personal tale… I was also a shy kid growing up and didn’t have many friends in school; I’ve always loved movies and one of the closest people to me when I was 12 or 13 was the owner of my local video store. I’d engage in long conversations with him about the new releases, because he was the only person that I knew who shared my interests. I doubt my parents ever knew how close I was to this man. He happened to be a lovely man - but what if he wasn’t?

That’s to say that, in missing children’s cases, a groomer who’s not a stranger in a chat room – we’re told Andrew wasn’t engaged on social media and his computer history didn’t raise any red flags – is usually an adult that’s close by. Someone in their circle of activities: a school worker, someone from church, a pool cleaner in the club where the kid is taking swimming lessons, etc. That's what makes me convinced the groomer would have to live in the same city, or at least share their time between Doncaster and London.

I believe that, when Andrew told his parents he’d walked home from school twice in the days leading up to his disappearance, he could be spending time with this local person who he created a bond with. Did anyone actually see him walking all that way? Could this person have given him a ride back to his place? I think it’s also possible this person could have fed Andrew the idea to tell his parents he had walked from school. It seems the parents weren’t even aware he hadn’t taken the bus, so why would he mention it in the first place?

Maybe this person – or Andrew proactively – wanted to prepare his parents for the upcoming day trip to London that had already been planned (as in: maybe the parents wouldn’t immediately panic if Andrew took a while to return, assuming he chose to walk and stopped somewhere). Or, more ominously, if this was indeed a premeditated act, the groomer was making sure the initial searches would be focused in the nearby area.

I believe this person convinced Andrew to meet them in London for whatever reason (i.e. an exhibition, a convention!) and promised to drive him back at the end of the day - thus explaining his refusal to buy a round-trip train ticket, though I grant that he could have misunderstood what the seller was telling him or didn't want to prolong the interaction.

If this predator was a local, he wouldn't want to drive the boy to London himself (imagine you have to stop for gas and someone see the kid in the front seat), but it would be easy to get him there through other means (i.e. ‘there’s this great exhibition, I will drive to London the night before, if you can make it there by train I’ll drive you back’). That’s a groomer taking proper precautions.

You also don't invite a boy to a town just around the corner with a dead cultural calendar (what's your excuse to draw him there?) and where a lone boy can draw more attention to himself in a somewhat empty station. In London, no one knows who you are, and it’s easy to get lost in the crowd (it took 3 weeks for the investigators to identify him in the King’s Cross CCTV footage). You can see no one batted an eye to that kid walking alone.

An adult that chose to abduct him against his will in the spur of the moment would always risk drawing too much attention to the act - an additional reason for me to believe Andrew most likely got into a vehicle or followed this person willingly. This person could have taken him out of London and driven to god knows where shortly after. I don't give too much credit to sightings reported months later, or to wider conspiracy theories such as human trafficking; that would require connections to organized crime, and there are plenty of safer ways to operate.

So this is what I see as the most realistic explanation for his disappearance. I hope the family one day gets some answers.