Trevor Deely case - new witness

Fr Tod Umptious

Asitis2019 wrote: »

I've been rereading the Irish Times articles from 2015

One thing that has always puzzled me over the years about this case is that it has always been assumed that he never made it home on the morning of December 8. Has it ever been disclosed why this is the case? For example, was his apartment examined? What about his flatmates?

It is the one thing about the case that seems odd - that there has been no attention to his place of residence and his flatmates.

People need to stop coming to this case with the mindset that they are the first people to come up with obvious questions.

Of course his flat was examined, of course his flatmates were talked to.

And from that it was concluded that he did not make it home.

The last known whereabouts of Trevor was him heading east on Haddington Rd as per the CCTV.

If the Gardai thought he had been home we would have been told.

The only odd things about this case are
1. Trevor has vanished without a trace
And
2. The man sheltering at the pillar of BOIAM has never come forward.

noodler

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

[/b]

People need to stop coming to this case with the mindset that they are the first people to come up with obvious questions.

Of course his flat was examined, of course his flatmates were talked to.

And from that it was concluded that he did not make it home.

The last known whereabouts of Trevor was him heading east on Haddington Rd as per the CCTV.

If the Gardai thought he had been home we would have been told.

The only odd things about this case are
1. Trevor has vanished without a trace
And
2. The man sheltering at the pillar of BOIAM has never come forward.

Watching the videos again, it's amazing how the guy from CCTV 1 managed to get ahead of Trevor in CCTV2 (outside the gate) even though he started behind him and the distance was so short.

Not a new observation, just watching the video above where it's suggested there was two ppl but I don't see the second guy (if he existed) hiding at the gate pillar in CCTV2 without being seeing for a significant period of time

Fiftyfilthy

Just watched a cold case top 5s in YouTube regarding the case (373k views)

The narrator has a completely ridiculous take on Alaska and his apartment

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jZEEP90T6kk

20Wheel

Just had another gawk at the CCTV there, and although it's nothing new I just got to thinking about man in blacks movements.

I can not believe he wasn't waiting for Trevor, here's what occurred to me that didn't before.

Take the weirdness of him stepping out from the pillar at the exact moment of Trevors arrival, after 30 mins, and just imagine if you will that Trevor never actually arrived. Edit out Trevor.

What you would then be left with is the following: a man stands at a pillar at 3am in the rain, then suddenly decides to just walk 20ft and look through a gate. For the craic.
Then walk away.

Like hmm let me just wait here, then walk 20ft round a corner, gawk through a fence and walk away. As you do.

(but no, he had to take his fence gawking trip on the same night that a man within meters of him goes missing for years, never identifying himself to police in the meantime)

Back in reality, Man in black walks ahead (crucial) of Trevor who just so happens to be going the same direction as mib on his 3am fence gawking exercise.

This is beyond coincidence, astronomical odds.

He either knows Trevors route, or he's just into random fence gawking.

The lack of a good reason to go fence gawking at 3am, and the timing of the call mib takes, seconds before Trevors arrival, all line up to premeditation. Its too much.

(edit. To be more precise here are mibs movements in a tape which edits out Trevor. Arrive at corner 3am, take call, wait 30 mins, take call, step out from pillar, look one direction, do a 180, walk round a corner, look through a fence for the craic, shuffle about, walk away.

Day Lewin

@20Wheel, Exactly this, well said.

and - following the train of thought - IF that is so (and I agree with you) then some theories must be ruled out, and others considered as possible. (Just speaking as an amateur Sherlock, you understand)

Logic, my dear Watson!

I said that in the previous deleted thread....phonecall etc is just beyond coincidence.

oneilla

noodler wrote: »

Watching the videos again, it's amazing how the guy from CCTV 1 managed to get ahead of Trevor in CCTV2 (outside the gate) even though he started behind him and the distance was so short.

Not a new observation, just watching the video above where it's suggested there was two ppl but I don't see the second guy (if he existed) hiding at the gate pillar in CCTV2 without being seeing for a significant period of time

Trevor was on the phone as he approached BOIAM. He stopped on the footpath between the CCTV1 at the pillar and CCTV2 facing the gate to finish up the call - affair the call was to Peter the security man. Trevor stopping to finish the call is what allowed the man dressed in black to walk passed him and make it to the gate before him.

I've not seen it suggested before that the man at the pillar CCTV and the man at the gate CCTV are two different people. Gardaelieve it's the same man - they even seem to believe that it's the same man on the Haddington Rd atm CCTV.

snotboogie

noodler wrote: »

Watching the videos again, it's amazing how the guy from CCTV 1 managed to get ahead of Trevor in CCTV2 (outside the gate) even though he started behind him and the distance was so short.

Not a new observation, just watching the video above where it's suggested there was two ppl but I don't see the second guy (if he existed) hiding at the gate pillar in CCTV2 without being seeing for a significant period of time

There is 20ft between the two cctv cameras, it took the mystery man 20 seconds to walk it and it took Trevor 45 seconds. Trevor was on the phone so may have stopped to finish his call.

juno10353

Okay, I have read the entire thread but am confused on one or two points. Where exactly was Trevor's work building. Ie Leeson st bridge or canal bank. The CCTV on baggot street bridge corner, is Trever heading south on Baggot street or east down haddington rd ie where is the camera facing. Sorry if this is already answered

noodler

juno10353 wrote: »

Okay, I have read the entire thread but am confused on one or two points. Where exactly was Trevor's work building. Ie Leeson st bridge or canal bank. The CCTV on baggot street bridge corner, is Trever heading south on Baggot street or east down haddington rd ie where is the camera facing. Sorry if this is already answered

Wilton Terrace.

jr86

One thing that always struck me was the time it took TD to get from his office, to when he was last seen on CCTV footage. iirc it took him about 11 minutes, when it is very much a 6 minute walk - I've done it many times.

I know he called his mate during this time but it wasn't a night to be stopping and hanging around, any call would be made while walking surely. And it didn't take him 5 minutes as it went straight to voicemail

I'd be very surprised if TD didn't encounter and engage with someone during this walk. Whether someone sinister or not who knows

jr86

juno10353 wrote: »

Okay, I have read the entire thread but am confused on one or two points. Where exactly was Trevor's work building. Ie Leeson st bridge or canal bank. The CCTV on baggot street bridge corner, is Trever heading south on Baggot street or east down haddington rd ie where is the camera facing. Sorry if this is already answered

Camera is facing down Haddington road. That was an old BOI branch where that CCTV was taken from. It's now a Milanos. He worked in Wilton Terrace, near the Leeson Street side, very near Buck Whaley's. The distance between his office and the CCTV camera at Haddington road would be no more than a 6 minute walk, not even factoring in that there would be no traffic on road to cross, and given the pace he's walking at when captured on CCTV

tdf7187

jr86 wrote: »

One thing that always struck me was the time it took TD to get from his office, to when he was last seen on CCTV footage. iirc it took him about 11 minutes, when it is very much a 6 minute walk - I've done it many times.

I know he called his mate during this time but it wasn't a night to be stopping and hanging around, any call would be made while walking surely. And it didn't take him 5 minutes as it went straight to voicemail

I'd be very surprised if TD didn't encounter and engage with someone during this walk. Whether someone sinister or not who knows

we dont know that for sure. he was a smoker so he could have paused to light a cig and taken longer than usual due to weather.

castletownman

Just on the discrepancy of taking 11 mins to walk the usual 6 mins to where he was last seen, and the possibility he was on the phone. I don't know about anyone else, but if I have ever felt uneasy walking a street at night-time, or felt there was someone following me, I have often taken out my phone to "make" a phone call, as a safety blanket/aversion tactic.

He may well have stopped for a cigarette or dipped under shelter for a couple of minutes too, again under the belief he was being followed in the hope they would walk by. Not beyond the realms of possibility.

80j2lc5y7u6qs9

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MznGtmseO2o



This says he was in Alaska on some dodgy business and on return was tailed by three people. That they followed him to his apartment and the other gang members were waiting there.



I don't believe that and had not heard it before. and the maker seems to think the garda shouldshare what they know with him or us as he says

noodler

Lina Limited Workaholic wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MznGtmseO2o



This says he was in Alaska on some dodgy business and on return was tailed by three people. That they followed him to his apartment and the other gang members were waiting there.



I don't believe that and had not heard it before. and the maker seems to think the garda shouldshare what they know with him or us as he says

Of course you don't believe it.

You'd want to be mental to believe it.

cj maxx

castletownman wrote: »

Just on the discrepancy of taking 11 mins to walk the usual 6 mins to where he was last seen, and the possibility he was on the phone. I don't know about anyone else, but if I have ever felt uneasy walking a street at night-time, or felt there was someone following me, I have often taken out my phone to "make" a phone call, as a safety blanket/aversion tactic.

He may well have stopped for a cigarette or dipped under shelter for a couple of minutes too, again under the belief he was being followed in the hope they would walk by. Not beyond the realms of possibility.

I was going to post similar. Very very reasonable scenario

80j2lc5y7u6qs9

noodler wrote: »

Of course you don't believe it.

You'd want to be mental to believe it.

It also says a theory is the man in black was a MAN IN BLACK ala conspiracy about something supernatural he saw in alaska:D



How come the man in black reached the gate before T when T had passed him and was in front. Was he hassling T beteween the gates.T walks to the centre and turns in while the mib goes down along beside the wall. He does look quite rejected after speaking with t head down

KWAG2019

20Wheel wrote: »

I can not believe he wasn't waiting for Trevor, here's what occurred to me that didn't before.

Take the weirdness of him stepping out from the pillar at the exact moment of Trevors arrival, after 30 mins, and just imagine if you will that Trevor never actually arrived. Edit out Trevor.

I see no reason to believe he was waiting for TD.
You have to start with the fact that this is a police edited CCTV. It shows what they think is significant i.e. the interaction between TD and the man. They want that man to come forward to help with enquiries.
There are 28 minutes missing from the man's arrival to the arrival of TD. We don't know how many times or if at all he stepped out to the path and looked up and down. We don't know how many calls he made if any or how many calls he received if any. We don't know if he stepped out at the exact moment of other people's arrival or if others arrive before TD. And bear in mind that we don't know if that man was visible on CCTV or to patrol Gardai or residents or others who know that area at nighttime in weeks before TD's arrival or after it.

When we don't know so much we can't build definitive accounts of events. Likelihoods yes: I can think of other likelihoods but they add nothing to the thread and are as unprovable as any other.

20Wheel wrote: »

What you would then be left with is the following: a man stands at a pillar at 3am in the rain, then suddenly decides to just walk 20ft and look through a gate. For the craic.
Then walk away.

Like hmm let me just wait here, then walk 20ft round a corner, gawk through a fence and walk away. As you do.

(but no, he had to take his fence gawking trip on the same night that a man within meters of him goes missing for years, never identifying himself to police in the meantime)

There is no doubt that the interaction between TD and the man is of huge significance to the police. It keeps that significance if the meeting was random. It doesn't need a backstory to be created for it to be significant. It is significant because it happened.

20Wheel wrote: »

Back in reality, Man in black walks ahead (crucial) of Trevor who just so happens to be going the same direction as mib on his 3am fence gawking exercise.

This is beyond coincidence, astronomical odds.

He either knows Trevors route, or he's just into random fence gawking.

The lack of a good reason to go fence gawking at 3am, and the timing of the call mib takes, seconds before Trevors arrival, all line up to premeditation. Its too much.

No. The interaction can be seen as just as significant without there being some premeditated plan involving others to target TD.

Look at what we know. TD walks past on phone. Man has no reaction. Man looks around. Sees TD stopped? (I'm going by time delay to get to gate). Man approaches TD hears chat about security opening gate (?) and goes down into the next available gateway. (That is a busy junction)

Interaction takes place. It was previously noted that there are passersby on other side of road and at least one car passes on road. Man seems to keep head down. Interaction ends.

It was previously said that the man seemed to have little awareness of or was indifferent to presence of CCTV in both locations.

I believe the police would have speculated about what persons are likely to be hanging around that area at that time. Their speculation would be based on knowledge of the area, access to more CCTV footage than we have and other intelligence. They have drawn attention to these few minutes again and they are hoping that by raising awareness of TD that someone will come forward.

TL:DR The interaction with the man at the pillar is what matters. It does not need to be premeditated to be significant.

EmmetSpiceland

KWAG2019 wrote: »

I see no reason to believe he was waiting for TD.
You have to start with the fact that this is a police edited CCTV. It shows what they think is significant i.e. the interaction between TD and the man. They want that man to come forward to help with enquiries.

TL:DR The interaction with the man at the pillar is what matters. It does not need to be premeditated to be significant.

The first mention of the MIB was at the time of the disappearance. He was mentioned when it was stated that TD had a “brief chat” with a man at the gate.

The next time he’s mentioned was only a couple of years ago when the footage of him waiting around for over half an hour and only moving around to the gate when TD passes.

Why was this not mentioned before? The only “stills” of the MIB released, at the time of the disappearance, was of his side profile and it was very dark. Why on earth was the shot of him looking directly through the gate facing the camera not put out?

From what I gather that image was first published by a “regional” newspaper, again a couple of years ago, and they got it from that McIntyre documentary but it was never mentioned that this was the MIB in that doc.

20Wheel

KWAG2019 wrote: »

I see no reason to believe he was waiting for TD.
You have to start with the fact that this is a police edited CCTV. It shows what they think is significant i.e. the interaction between TD and the man. They want that man to come forward to help with enquiries.
There are 28 minutes missing from the man's arrival to the arrival of TD. We don't know how many times or if at all he stepped out to the path and looked up and down. We don't know how many calls he made if any or how many calls he received if any. We don't know if he stepped out at the exact moment of other people's arrival or if others arrive before TD. And bear in mind that we don't know if that man was visible on CCTV or to patrol Gardai or residents or others who know that area at nighttime in weeks before TD's arrival or after it.

When we don't know so much we can't build definitive accounts of events. Likelihoods yes: I can think of other likelihoods but they add nothing to the thread and are as unprovable as any other.



There is no doubt that the interaction between TD and the man is of huge significance to the police. It keeps that significance if the meeting was random. It doesn't need a backstory to be created for it to be significant. It is significant because it happened.



No. The interaction can be seen as just as significant without there being some premeditated plan involving others to target TD.

Look at what we know. TD walks past on phone. Man has no reaction. Man looks around. Sees TD stopped? (I'm going by time delay to get to gate). Man approaches TD hears chat about security opening gate (?) and goes down into the next available gateway. (That is a busy junction)

Interaction takes place. It was previously noted that there are passersby on other side of road and at least one car passes on road. Man seems to keep head down. Interaction ends.

It was previously said that the man seemed to have little awareness of or was indifferent to presence of CCTV in both locations.

I believe the police would have speculated about what persons are likely to be hanging around that area at that time. Their speculation would be based on knowledge of the area, access to more CCTV footage than we have and other intelligence. They have drawn attention to these few minutes again and they are hoping that by raising awareness of TD that someone will come forward.

TL:DR The interaction with the man at the pillar is what matters. It does not need to be premeditated to be significant.

If you have additional CCTV footage then please go ahead and provide a link.

In the meantime, given what we have, I can only reach the previous conclusions.

I see a pattern that fits what the gardai have made available.
If they made the full tapes available then those conclusions might change.

But until they do I can't help but see a definite pattern.

That which is available all fits very well with a set up.
That which isn't available could feature UFOs for all we know.

Go with what we have.

KWAG2019

If the police did not release an image of him facing directly through the gate there are several possibilities: incompetence is one in that the CCTV was not processed properly. Or it could be that they already had a very good idea who he was.

tdf7187

KWAG2019 wrote: »

I see no reason to believe he was waiting for TD.
You have to start with the fact that this is a police edited CCTV. It shows what they think is significant i.e. the interaction between TD and the man. They want that man to come forward to help with enquiries.
There are 28 minutes missing from the man's arrival to the arrival of TD. We don't know how many times or if at all he stepped out to the path and looked up and down. We don't know how many calls he made if any or how many calls he received if any. We don't know if he stepped out at the exact moment of other people's arrival or if others arrive before TD. And bear in mind that we don't know if that man was visible on CCTV or to patrol Gardai or residents or others who know that area at nighttime in weeks before TD's arrival or after it.

When we don't know so much we can't build definitive accounts of events. Likelihoods yes: I can think of other likelihoods but they add nothing to the thread and are as unprovable as any other.



There is no doubt that the interaction between TD and the man is of huge significance to the police. It keeps that significance if the meeting was random. It doesn't need a backstory to be created for it to be significant. It is significant because it happened.



No. The interaction can be seen as just as significant without there being some premeditated plan involving others to target TD.

Look at what we know. TD walks past on phone. Man has no reaction. Man looks around. Sees TD stopped? (I'm going by time delay to get to gate). Man approaches TD hears chat about security opening gate (?) and goes down into the next available gateway. (That is a busy junction)

Interaction takes place. It was previously noted that there are passersby on other side of road and at least one car passes on road. Man seems to keep head down. Interaction ends.

It was previously said that the man seemed to have little awareness of or was indifferent to presence of CCTV in both locations.

I believe the police would have speculated about what persons are likely to be hanging around that area at that time. Their speculation would be based on knowledge of the area, access to more CCTV footage than we have and other intelligence. They have drawn attention to these few minutes again and they are hoping that by raising awareness of TD that someone will come forward.

TL:DR The interaction with the man at the pillar is what matters. It does not need to be premeditated to be significant.

Yep, you're on the ball here I think.

tdf7187

20Wheel wrote: »

If you have additional CCTV footage then please go ahead and provide a link.

In the meantime, given what we have, I can only reach the previous conclusions.

I see a pattern that fits what the gardai have made available.
If they made the full tapes available then those conclusions might change.

But until they do I can't help but see a definite pattern.

That which is available all fits very well with a set up.
That which isn't available could feature UFOs for all we know.

Go with what we have.

No, you're engaging in supposition here. You're right that the behaviour of the MIB is odd, but it's assuming too much in my view to say the phone call he took or made was anything directly got to do with Trevor.

KWAG is the one being realistic. As per KWAG's post:

I believe the police would have speculated about what persons are likely to be hanging around that area at that time. Their speculation would be based on knowledge of the area, access to more CCTV footage than we have and other intelligence. They have drawn attention to these few minutes again and they are hoping that by raising awareness of TD that someone will come forward.

wyrn

KWAG2019 wrote: »

If the police did not release an image of him facing directly through the gate there are several possibilities: incompetence is one in that the CCTV was not processed properly. Or it could be that they already had a very good idea who he was.

A lot of this was covered in the previous thread. The CCTV was sent to the UK a few years ago because technology had allowed them to clean up the image. Here's a 2017 article that mentions it https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/trevor-deely-the-search-ends-and-continues-1.3230396

Footage captured on CCTV from the bank entrance on that night was sent to Britain some months ago, and was re-examined, using specialised software to significantly enhance the existing images.

Raconteuse

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

It was an asset management office
Not a commercial bank that would hold cash.

I don't see how that negates my point though. It's not noteworthy that Trevor looked uncomfortable while this strange man was right next to him while he was trying to get the locks open. Anyone would be uncomfortable anywhere in that situation. And a financial services office would expect particular attention to security. He actually looked relatively calm given the situation, and he never mentioned the man to his workmate.

My view anyway remains that he was targeted at the late bar over something innocuous to him and any right minded person (as I said, that poor girl Marioara Rostas did nothing either). And that the man was involved. I don't think the man walking behind him later on Haddington Road is the same man. He's much slimmer. I also don't see how it's a definite that he's following him, but the guards likely know more than they're making public. Maybe he's an associate of the man lurking around Trevor's office.

A woman following him? I cannot see her at all.

Calling into his office? He needed an umbrella and his friend was stuck on the night shift so missed the Christmas party and no doubt would have enjoyed the chat.

The falling in the water theory (which does make sense at first) - the head garda diver said this wasn't deemed plausible once they had combed the water ways. He said Dublin Bay would have acted as containment.

The Clintons were visiting that very area over the next number of days and with unfortunate timing the Secret Service did a sweep of that part of the city, possibly disposing of his umbrella.

Wanting just to disappear? I don't think that ever makes sense as a possibility in a missing person case. Unless the person has mental health issues or has been through a severe trauma or needs to go into hiding.

wyrn

Here's another article about the images with timestamps including https://www.thejournal.ie/trevor-deely-footage-3328863-Apr2017/

jr86

tdf7187 wrote: »

we dont know that for sure. he was a smoker so he could have paused to light a cig and taken longer than usual due to weather.

He's not smoking in the CCTV footage passing Haddington road so I think that's unlikely, it'd only take a second to light up anyway not 5 minutes. There's nowhere to stand in either around there to stop and have a peaceful smoke, in any case on a wet night you'll always smoke and walk!

The distance is so short for the weather to add 5 minutes to a walk between those 2 points. He's not exactly strolling either acc to the footage at Haddington Road. Unless the time is way off on the CCTV it's very significant imo

Honestly if anyone is ever in that area I'd recommend them to walk between the two, it will give you a real appreciation as to how short it is. You'd honestly do it in 5 minutes if walking quickly. I took my time and it took me exactly 6 and that actually included having to wait to cross at the bridge, which wouldn't be an issue at nighttime

20Wheel

tdf7187 wrote: »

No, you're engaging in supposition here. You're right that the behaviour of the MIB is odd, but it's assuming too much in my view to say the phone call he took or made was anything directly got to do with Trevor.

KWAG is the one being realistic. As per KWAG's post:

Kwag basically says 'let's not assume' then goes on to write a list of assumptions.

All while saying likelihoods add nothing to the thread.

tdf7187

jr86 wrote: »

He's not smoking in the CCTV footage passing Haddington road so I think that's unlikely, it'd only take a second to light up anyway not 5 minutes. There's nowhere to stand in either around there to stop and have a peaceful smoke, in any case on a wet night you'll always smoke and walk!

The distance is so short for the weather to add 5 minutes to a walk between those 2 points. He's not exactly strolling either acc to the footage at Haddington Road. Unless the time is way off on the CCTV it's very significant imo

Honestly if anyone is ever in that area I'd recommend them to walk between the two, it will give you a real appreciation as to how short it is. You'd honestly do it in 5 minutes if walking quickly. I took my time and it took me exactly 6 and that actually included having to wait to cross at the bridge, which wouldn't be an issue at nighttime

Fair point that he's not smoking in the Haddington Rd footage.