• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

People Who Just Disappear (Go Missing)

Latest development in the Anthony Parson's case

Two men charged in connection with death of Anthony Parsons​

The cyclist from Tillicoultry was first reported missing in 2017 and his body was later found on January 12 this year.



Parsons had intended to cycle home but was never heard from again
Two men have been charged in connection with the death of Anthony Parsons.
Parsons was first reported missing after travelling from his home in Tillicoultry to Fort William on September 29, 2017.
He had gone south along the A82 and was last seen at around 11.30pm that night outside of the Bridge of Orchy Hotel.
Parsons had intended to cycle home but was never heard from again so was reported missing on October 2, 2017.
On January 12 this year, his body was discovered in a remote area of ground close to a farm near the A82 at Bridge of Orchy.
Click to expand...
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/two-men-charged-anthony-parsons-25597021
 
escargot said:
Two men have been charged in connection with the death of Anthony Parsons.

One wonders what they've been charged with. We'll hear in due course.
Click to expand...
My guess would be manslaughter involving some sort of accident then coverup. He didn’t appear to have been a likely target for murder unless they were homicidal types. Or maybe there’s a back story to come out..
 
The charges are murder, attempting to defeat the ends of justice, conspiracy to murder and causing serious injury by dangerous driving

Twin brothers have been charged with the murder of charity cyclist Tony Parsons.
Alexander and Robert McKellar, aged 29, were also charged with attempting to defeat the ends of justice when they appeared at Dumbarton Sheriff Court.
Click to expand...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-59503667
 
Investigators are hoping that the discovery of a 1974 Pinto could finally solve the disappearance of a university student 45 years ago.

The vehicle was pulled from a creek near Cusseta, Alabama, on Tuesday after a member of the public spotted it and called police.

Inside the car, investigators found what they think are human bones, along with identification and credit cards belonging to Kyle Wade Clinkscales.

The car belonged to Mr Clinkscales, although the bones have not yet been confirmed as his remains.

The 22-year-old disappeared on 27 January, 1976, after leaving LaGrange, Georgia, to return to Auburn University in Alabama.....
Click to expand...
https://news.sky.com/story/remains-...student-who-disappeared-45-years-ago-12490420
 
I always wonder how they are found out, nothing was found at the time
then suddenly seemingly out of the blue a body is found on what appears
to be private land, my thoughts are that someone must have talked maybe
under the influence of beer.
:omr: :dunno:
 
CALGACUS03 said:
I was speculating (and I'm most likely wrong) whether they accidentally knocked him off his bicycle and then 'finished him off' in case he identified them? :(
Click to expand...
That's what occurred to me too.

In fact I have such a vivid mental picture of it that just now, I was trying to remember what TV scene you'd reminded me of! :omg:
 
RaM said:
I always wonder how they are found out, nothing was found at the time
then suddenly seemingly out of the blue a body is found on what appears
to be private land, my thoughts are that someone must have talked maybe
under the influence of beer.
:omr: :dunno:
Click to expand...
My money's on the bike. It's turned up somewhere and been identified and tracked back.
 
escargot said:
My money's on the bike. It's turned up somewhere and been identified and tracked back.
Click to expand...

This is the scenario I suggested back in January (at post #68):

...I'm just wondering if the arrests might be in relation to the bike, rather than an accident. That is, was Mr Parsons taken ill and his apparently unattended bike left in plain view of the road while he himself was elsewhere. Someone driving along the road saw the apparently abandoned bike and decided to take it away with them. If the bike's serial number was noted (maybe for insurance purposes, or simply recorded at home), it may be that the peelers have flagged this with second hand bike and repair shops, and it eventually turned up - leading to the arrest of those who presented it.
Click to expand...

However, although I can imagine this reappearing bike scenario being a fit with a manslaughter or negligence related charge, it doesn't seem to suit murder quite as comfortably.

I mean, I get that some criminals are just plain stupid - and might risk a murder charge for the sake of not getting rid of a mountain bike forever. I'm just not sure that it feels quite as likely.

That said, there's one very important thing to note here, which is that there is no such thing as 'manslaughter' in Scottish law.

Instead, in 'the killing of a person in circumstances which are neither accidental nor justified, but where the wicked intent to kill or wicked recklessness required for murder is absent the charge of culpable homicide may apply'...

and

'...the difference in distinguishing between the crimes of murder and culpable homicide is objective. That means that a judge may withdraw a murder charge from a jury to allow for a conviction for culpable homicide to be considered and to take place.' (Quotes from the Law Society of Scotland's briefing on Culpable Homicide - available here)

This means that, even though couched under terms of 'homicide', there is the possibility that the circumstances of the charge in Scotland may not be too far off what would constitute a manslaughter charge south of the border. From what I can make out, such a development will be a matter for the courts to sort out, whatever the original charging decision.
 
Last edited:
Spookdaddy said:
This is the scenario I suggested back in January (at post #68):



However, although I can imagine this reappearing bike scenario being a fit with a manslaughter or negligence related charge, it doesn't seem to suit murder quite as comfortably.

I mean, I get that some criminals are just plain stupid - and might risk a murder charge for the sake of not getting rid of a mountain bike forever. I'm just not sure that it feels quite as likely.

That said, there's one very important thing to note here, which is that there is no such thing as 'manslaughter' in Scottish law.

Instead, in 'the killing of a person in circumstances which are neither accidental nor justified, but where the wicked intent to kill or wicked recklessness required for murder is absent the charge of culpable homicide may apply'...

and

'...the difference in distinguishing between the crimes of murder and culpable homicide is objective. That means that a judge may withdraw a murder charge from a jury to allow for a conviction for culpable homicide to be considered and to take place.' (Quotes from the Law Society of Scotland's briefing on Culpable Homicide - available here)

This means that, even though couched under terms of 'homicide', there is the possibility that the circumstances of the charge in Scotland may not be as far off what would constitute a manslaughter charge south of the border. From what I can make out, such a development will be a matter for the courts to sort out, whatever the original charging decision.
Click to expand...
What I thought was that someone perhaps acquired the bike after the fact and the police thought it might surface in some way later.

The bike might not have been damaged if he hadn't been actually knocked off it.

If a man'd been having a slash in a lay-by, for example, while wearing unsuitable low-visibility clothing, and been accidentally run into by a passing vehicle for some reason, the bike could be intact and worth £50 of anyone's money.
 
It's always been my feeling (but I have, of course, zero knowledge of the law) that the procurator fiscal only pursues a murder charge if he or she (and the Crown Office) is 100% certain that they can prove the "wicked intent" part of Spookdaddy's post above. Sometimes it seems to me that you just about have to kill someone in cold blood and then be caught with the weapon still in your hand to face a murder charge in Scotland.

That's why I was astonished when I read that the accused were being charged with murder - I just couldn't imagine a scenario where it would apply to the death of a charity cyclist on a Highlands road. :dunno:

Culpable Homicide would seem a far 'safer' (i.e. more likely to secure a conviction) charge to lay against them in almost any situation I can imagine; especially as we still have a three verdict system here, so juries have the option of returning 'not proven' if they have any doubts at all regarding delivering a verdict of 'guilty'.
 
escargot said:
If a man'd been having a slash in a lay-by, for example, while wearing unsuitable low-visibility clothing, and been accidentally run into by a passing vehicle for some reason, the bike could be intact and worth £50 of anyone's money.
Click to expand...

Yes, that would be an extremely plausible scenario. Or if they'd knocked him off his bike and killed him as they were driving home from the pub, drunk. But neither of those are situations where a murder charge would seem to fit. The brothers would be culpable in his death, but not his murder - there surely would be a clear lack of intent?

For the PF to be going after them for murder; I'm afraid something pretty awful must have occurred.

Note: just saw the line above posted by BigPhoot: "The charges are murder, attempting to defeat the ends of justice, conspiracy to murder and causing serious injury by dangerous driving"

"Causing serious injury by dangerous driving", not "death by dangerous driving" and then "murder" and "conspiracy to murder" (one brother getting murder and the other conspiracy to murder?). F@ck, I'm creeping myself out a bit imaging what Tony Parsons might have gone through. :worry:
 
The way I read it they hit him with the car then murdered him,
maybe started as a drink drive car accident and led to worse.
I think the idea that they then sold on the bike and it attracted
interest and led to investigation is likely.

:omr:
 
Or they clip him with a car, he's injured but not dead, and instead of just pulling him to the side of the road to be found, they take the bike and reverse back over him...
 
catseye said:
Or they clip him with a car, he's injured but not dead, and instead of just pulling him to the side of the road to be found, they take the bike and reverse back over him...
Click to expand...
That's my main scenario. An accident that they could have dealt with in a process of damage limitation.

OK, they'd be in trouble, but a life might have been saved and they'd be in a lot less bother.
 
escargot said:
That's my main scenario. An accident that they could have dealt with in a process of damage limitation.

OK, they'd be in trouble, but a life might have been saved and they'd be in a lot less bother.
Click to expand...
I guess panic, theft, possibly driving a stolen car or otherwise illegally, maybe without a licence or something, speeding, all may have played a part in complete and utter panic. It's the 'murder' thing that gets me. Surely it would be very hard to tell injuries subsequent to the actual accident to injuries incurred in the accident, if they did finish him off afterwards. Why not just leave him there and make an anonymous call to someone?
 
catseye said:
I guess panic, theft, possibly driving a stolen car or otherwise illegally, maybe without a licence or something, speeding, all may have played a part in complete and utter panic. It's the 'murder' thing that gets me. Surely it would be very hard to tell injuries subsequent to the actual accident to injuries incurred in the accident, if they did finish him off afterwards. Why not just leave him there and make an anonymous call to someone?
Click to expand...
It's possible one grassed up the other if things happened as we've imagined. In fact that's the only way the police would know.

This happens when two or more people commit a crime together and subsequently try to shift the blame. Their story might be that, for example, I went with Bill and Fred to burgle the shop but we didn't know the owner was still there and Bill hit him and Fred joined in. I shouted them to stop and ran outside to start the car.

In the instance under discussion they might have realised they'd hit someone, both got out, inspected the damage and then one panicked for whatever reason. He jumped back in the vehicle and deliberately ran the victim over again. Each might accuse the other of that.

Anyway, don't we have a separate thread on this?
If not we should have one ready for the mods to lock off when the trial starts and/or they begin worrying about contempt of court.
I reckon we're OK so far with our gentle speculation (though I'm no expert) as we're not making public accusations.

This aspect has puzzled me in regard to the current Maxwell case. There are already two documentary series and another one-off about her and Epstein. That lot would get her off in Britain on the basis of compromising her trial.
 
escargot said:
Doesn't look good, does it? :(
Poor lad.
Click to expand...
No, doesn't sound very good. But they may be able to provide some sort of closure for the family if he is no longer alive. I am sure it will be reported in the news eventually if the police investigation has proof of the young man's death/getting a conviction.

Poor boy was so young.

It would be nice to think he could be living somewhere under a new identity but how likely is it that he could avoid being discovered/found for this length of time? The poor family too. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top