***'Kos dig' starts 26 Sep 2016*** (was: Kerry Needham 'prepared for worst' by investigators)

Det Insp Jon Cousins, who is leading the inquiry, said: "During the course of the inquiries we have made over the last 19 months, we have closed off a large number of theories about what happened to Ben, many of which have been open for over 20 years.
 
"My team and I know that machinery, including a large digger, was used to clear an area of land on 24 July 1991, behind the farmhouse that was being renovated by the Needhams.
 
"It is my professional belief that Ben Needham died as a result of an accident near to the farmhouse in Iraklis where he was last seen playing."
 
…………………………………..
 
So is he calling whoever narrated the story for the book (Paperback p.84) a liar?
 
‘It was a blissful afternoon. Those who wanted the sun sat in it and those who didn’t sat in the shade of the trees. And it was so peaceful. Earlier in the day there had been a digger truck transporting rubble from a building renovation at the bottom of the lane to the top. The driver had to pass the farmhouse to dump the hardcore ready to be used to improve the dirt track before driving back down again, kicking up a trail of dust with it’s heavy wheels as it went. But now building work had stopped there for the day, and they were able to eat undisturbed.’
 
There are so many anomalies in Chapter Six, ‘the events of 24 July 1991’ that don’t marry up with the stories that we have been fed over the last few weeks that it will take some time to highlight them all.
 
However two from the above paragraph leap out.
 
They were not eating inside in the kitchen, which is what has been said over the last few weeks, so would have had a pretty clear view around much of the farmhouse and would have heard anything on the road. (The trees were both at the bottom end, either outside the kitchen or where the new extension was later built)
 
 
https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/nintchdbpict000192506809.jpg?w=960
 
Digger truck work had stopped for the day, (so how could the accident have occurred? Ben was eating lunch and therefore alive when the digger packed up for the day)
 
I suppose DI Cousins has a slight get-out in that he only insinuates that it was an accident with the digger truck in this statement, which doesn’t rule out a different kind of accident, so is he keeping an open mind that it could still have been Stephen and his motorbike, or even some other kind of accident?
 
Ben apparently went missing at 2.30, Stephen had been kept on by Michaelis for about an hour after lunch in case the delivery arrived, so it would be interesting to do a bit of shadow work to see where you would have to sit to be in the shade at about 1.00. The building lies roughly West-East.
 
Stephen’s bike and the vehicles were parked ‘behind the house’ (p.86), yet the driveway was in front of the house ‘across from where the lane joined the driveway stood the strange looking villa……….which seemed to have been built back to front.’ (p.93), so would he not have had to drive past everybody to get to the road, in which case they would have known that Ben was not with him?
 
Also, the ‘old lady’ who had seen Stephen leave on his motorbike (first or second time and where from?) ‘had seen the baby playing. Over there. She pointed to the back of the farmhouse’. What did she call the back of the farmhouse? Where the new extension was to be built or really round the back? How could she see round the back from her property?

Hi Dougd,thanks for revealing what had previously been put down on paper,perhaps DI Cousins needs to have a word with Dixon of Dock Green,Evening All or perhaps they had not studied what had been wrote down as an explanation of the Days events,when Ben disappeared?

I've never heard such crap from the Police.

Oh wait... I think I have.

plebgate wrote:I would still like to know how they can say it is Mr. Barkas who was using the digger.   Was he the only person who ever used the digger?

Will the ten grand reward be paid out?

I cannot believe that Mr. Barkas' family will accept this without seeking legal advice.

Barkas said publicly he was the one using the digger at the time, so i presume police asked him more about the details.

  Police have confirmed they found a toy car dating from the year Ben went missing and showed it to the family. This was found at the second site, so it seems his remains were taken there and possibly elsewhere. I'm not sure why people think this is so implausible.

I think people think the "accident with a digger" bit is implausible.

It's implausible because as Doug D pointed out, they said in their book that digging stopped for the day so they could eat undisturbed.

Ben was alive and still with them at this point. So it is not only implausible but totally impossible for the digger to have started up again, accidently run Ben over then dumped his body down the road - without the family hearing. Finding a discarded toy car at the second site proves nothing - maybe a shoe or sandal he was wearing at the time but not a toy car. I'm still finding discarded toys and balls in my own garden from when my kids were little from over 30 years ago!

Doug D wrote:
"Stephen’s bike and the vehicles were parked ‘behind the house’ (p.86), yet the driveway was in front of the house ‘across from where the lane joined the driveway stood the strange looking villa……….which seemed to have been built back to front.’ (p.93), so would he not have had to drive past everybody to get to the road, in which case they would have known that Ben was not with him?"

Likewise, they could have also known that Ben WAS with him. How long did it take them to report him missing - 5/6 hours?

For the MSM to report the DCIs theory as 'case solved' is pathetic and I'm very surprised the family appear to have accepted it as remotely credible. Why the Grandparents aren't jumping up and down screaming "... the digger had stopped for the day - so it's impossible!!!" I can't begin to imagine why they haven't pointed this out?
.

ChippyM wrote:

plebgate wrote:I would still like to know how they can say it is Mr. Barkas who was using the digger.   Was he the only person who ever used the digger?

Will the ten grand reward be paid out?

I cannot believe that Mr. Barkas' family will accept this without seeking legal advice.

Barkas said publicly he was the one using the digger at the time, so i presume police asked him more about the details.

  Police have confirmed they found a toy car dating from the year Ben went missing and showed it to the family. This was found at the second site, so it seems his remains were taken there and possibly elsewhere. I'm not sure why people think this is so implausible.

It is of course possible that Barkas had been on a break and someone had used the digger without his knowledge.  Even if there had been an accident more than one person would have been capable of using the digger.   Maybe there was a cover up if there was an accident but it doesn't mean that Barkas was the one using the digger at the time.   There are  reasons that any decent lawyer could come up with that can cast doubt on this "version" of events imo.

Finding a toy car at the site doesn't prove anything really unless the car was a one off.   Is it possible to get DNA to prove it was Ben's car?   

Anyway I know that if any member of my family was being put in the frame following their death I would take legal advice.

Thanks Doug D for the info from the book.   Very informative.

BlueBag wrote:I think people think the "accident with a digger" bit is implausible.

 I know there are questions re. the timeline but this was a toddler running around a building site alone where there was a large digger and other machinery in operation. There is no Gaspar statement or dodgy pictures to make us think there could have been any sinister motives or incidents. There is even a good explanation for why the body hasn't been found (the digger moving it) unlike the McCann case.

 The grandmother said she heard Ben 'go quiet'...you can't really hear someone being quiet can you? They have either stopped making noise or are too far away for your you to hear the noise. At the point she noticed he wasn't making noise he could have been out of range for or even killed a while before any of them noticed....that might have given someone time to take the body to another site.

plebgate wrote:

ChippyM wrote:

plebgate wrote:I would still like to know how they can say it is Mr. Barkas who was using the digger.   Was he the only person who ever used the digger?

Will the ten grand reward be paid out?

I cannot believe that Mr. Barkas' family will accept this without seeking legal advice.

Barkas said publicly he was the one using the digger at the time, so i presume police asked him more about the details.

  Police have confirmed they found a toy car dating from the year Ben went missing and showed it to the family. This was found at the second site, so it seems his remains were taken there and possibly elsewhere. I'm not sure why people think this is so implausible.

It is of course possible that Barkas had been on a break and someone had used the digger without his knowledge.  Even if there had been an accident more than one person would have been capable of using the digger.   Maybe there was a cover up if there was an accident but it doesn't mean that Barkas was the one using the digger at the time.   There are  reasons that any decent lawyer could come up with that can cast doubt on this "version" of events imo.

Finding a toy car at the site doesn't prove anything really unless the car was a one off.   Is it possible to get DNA to prove it was Ben's car?   

Anyway I know that if any member of my family was being put in the frame following their death I would take legal advice.

Thanks Doug D for the info from the book.   Very informative.

 The police said something about the rubble dating to. 1991, as in archeology, if they find objects at a certain depth thats how they date them. If they know where the toy was bought and it wasn't Greece and it got buried at the time Ben went missing, then whats the likelyhood of it belonging to someone else in that area?

 I agree it's possible someone else could have been driving the digger but I think the police where directed to the site the toy was found by the Barkas 'friend'. It generally makes sense but the reason they find that witness so watertight seems unclear without them releasing the information.

According to one newspaper this week the grandparents were inside the house because of the intense heat. IF this report is correct and the child was left outside in those conditions, I am at a loss to understand how this case differs from that of the McCanns, specifically on the neglect front. Three hours worth of that heat, according to what I have read.

The "friends" statement cannot be watertight.   Nobody knows who was definitely using the digger - if of course that is what happened.  Documentary evidence required not the word of a friend.   I believe the family have a strong case to take this to court.

Mirage wrote:According to one newspaper this week the grandparents were inside the house because of the intense heat. IF this report is correct and the child was left outside in those conditions, I am at a loss to understand how this case differs from that of the McCanns, specifically on the neglect front. Three hours worth of that heat, according to what I have read.

Yes, there is a chance at 30 degrees {correction, it was  42 degrees  } outside the kid got heatstroke. I'm thinking he could have been quiet and unresponsive for sometime making it easier for an accident to occur.

 If he had been in this state before they noticed he was missing, it gives a bigger time frame, it is no longer just a few minutes at Lunchtime, something could have happened before then.

Kerry Needham said in the Mirror, that they believe Barkas moved rubble from the house to the second site whilst the family where at the police station reporting Ben missing. Again, this leaves a bigger window for things to occur. Apparently he had no real reason to move rubble to the second site.

I find it odd that Barkas would confess to a "friend" without backing it up with some written documentation or indeed a professional person such as doctor or priest as witness.

If the family take this further and it ends up in court will be very interesting.

plebgate wrote:I find it odd that Barkas would confess to a "friend" without backing it up with some written documentation or indeed a professional person such as doctor or priest as witness.

If the family take this further and it ends up in court will be very interesting.

It could have been years ago when drunk or something who knows? I don't think it was necessarily a confession either, so not sure why a priest or doctor would be needed. If it had been playing on his mind and he said he feared he killed him to the friend, then the friend puts 2 and 2 together and tells police Barkas worked on a second site...they then find the toy car.

  I think it's plausible but on the other hand the statute of limitations (and the alleged suspect being dead) makes it hard for the Barkas family to object as there are not actually any charges.

I have been following this case closely over the last few weeks, and my heart breaks for Ben's family. Losing a child must be the worst thing possible for a parent to endure.  However, I have deliberately not commenting on this thread, but now, I have to ask, why was a 21 month old toddler playing outside when there was a huge digger right outside the door? Moreover, why, when I have looked at Youtube videos on this case, was it never mentioned that there was a digger close to the farmhouse on the day Ben disappeared?  If Ben was crushed close to where he was last seen, how can Dino have finished "early" that day?  Too many questions, too few answers.

ChippyM wrote:

plebgate wrote:I find it odd that Barkas would confess to a "friend" without backing it up with some written documentation or indeed a professional person such as doctor or priest as witness.

If the family take this further and it ends up in court will be very interesting.

It could have been years ago when drunk or something who knows? I don't think it was necessarily a confession either, so not sure why a priest or doctor would be needed. If it had been playing on his mind and he said he feared he killed him to the friend, then the friend puts 2 and 2 together and tells police Barkas worked on a second site...they then find the toy car.

  I think it's plausible but on the other hand the statute of limitations (and the alleged suspect being dead) makes it hard for the Barkas family to object as there are not actually any charges.

Chippy, I am inclined to agree with you in regards that Dino may have been drinking, but the onus for looking after a child in a building area (or anywhere else, for that matter)  is on the guardians of the child, not the driver of the digger. So, why was Ben's death covered up, and why did the grandparents wait until the late evening before calling the police. If I was Kerry, I would be demanding answers of what ACTUALLY happened the day that Ben went missing.

The sallypelt wrote:

ChippyM wrote:

plebgate wrote:I find it odd that Barkas would confess to a "friend" without backing it up with some written documentation or indeed a professional person such as doctor or priest as witness.

If the family take this further and it ends up in court will be very interesting.

It could have been years ago when drunk or something who knows? I don't think it was necessarily a confession either, so not sure why a priest or doctor would be needed. If it had been playing on his mind and he said he feared he killed him to the friend, then the friend puts 2 and 2 together and tells police Barkas worked on a second site...they then find the toy car.

  I think it's plausible but on the other hand the statute of limitations (and the alleged suspect being dead) makes it hard for the Barkas family to object as there are not actually any charges.

Chippy, I am inclined to agree with you in regards that Dino may have been drinking, but the onus for looking after a child in a building area (or anywhere else, for that matter)  is on the guardians of the child, not the driver of the digger. So, why was Ben's death covered up, and why did the grandparents wait until the late evening before calling the police. If I was Kerry, I would be demanding answers of what ACTUALLY happened the day that Ben went missing.

 I was referring the the time Barkas 'confessed' to the recent witness and speculating it could have involved being drunk or emotional. Etc. 

 It's also possible one or more people there on the day were having a boozy lunch and it is concerning the grandparents were sat inside whilst a toddler was outside on what was essentially a building site, I agree it was their responsibility to watch him and I beleive timelines may not be accurate because they wanted to minimise their responsibility for what might have happened or at least because they were distracted.

Mirage:
 
‘the intense heat’
 
Quite.
 
110 degrees, stated at least twice in the book. That’s 43 in old money. Too hot to do much, which is why they start early and finish early.
 
Unless we take everything in the book with a pinch of salt, in which case we have to start questioning why the falsehoods, we surely have to accept that the digger had finished for the day, which would be fairly normal practice, so the digger accident could not have occurred that afternoon.
 
ChippyM:
 
‘If he had been in this state before they noticed he was missing, it gives a bigger time frame, it is no longer just a few minutes at Lunchtime, something could have happened before then.’
 
Same again, not according to the book.
 
He was eating his lunch with them, just on the move all the time, coming back to grab more food.
 
Please read the book before you start creating other scenarios. If you want to start challenging the book’s accounts that is a different matter, but then you must start to ask 'why the fiction?' and what is being covered up.

@DougD wrote:   'So is he calling whoever narrated the story for the book (Paperback p.84) a liar?'

Does it say anywhere who narrated the story?  It reads more like a scene from Gerald Durrell's 'My Family and other Animals'.

Correct me if I'm wrong, the book 'Ben' authored (?) by Kerry Needham was first published in May (that month again) 2013.  A synopsis of the book reads as follows..

In 1991 Kerry and her son Ben followed Kerry’s parents to live on the Greek island of Kos.

On July 24th she was at work when her mum Christine arrived crying uncontrollably. Ben had been playing outside, and then disappeared. Someone had taken Ben.

In her heartbreaking memoir, Kerry describes the agony of being initially suspected by the police, which meant the closure of airport and ferry terminals were delayed, the early sightings that raised their hopes, and the hoaxes which dashed them completely. And the unbearable pain of knowing her baby boy was alone somewhere without his mum.

Back in the UK, the long years of waiting and hoping have been difficult on the whole family. Kerry has raised her daughter, Leighanna, while following up more than 300 leads.

In 2011 they had a breakthrough when South Yorkshire Police agreed to work with the Greek authorities to reopen the case. The chance that Ben will read about himself and come home becomes more real every day.

All of Kerry's royalties from the sale of this book will go toward the Help Find Ben campaign.
----------

Fifty one shades of McCann.  Oh dear..

The missing shorts
definitely pose a problem. I would have liked the police team to have pursued this with the grandparents. Were the shorts still hanging on the tree when Ben was found to be missing? If the grandparents  thought that their son had taken Ben  with him  on his motorbike I am presuming they weren't since common sense dictates ( to me anyway ) that a half dressed child wouldn't have been transported any distance by a responsible adult.  Nor  would a person not belonging to the family and  responsible for an 'accidental death' risk dressing the dead child before burying.................somewhere, anywhere. Would this person risk collecting the shorts? Would this person  know where they even  were?
As I've said before it's puzzling to me  that Kerry states in her book that Steven went off on his bike to collect fuel at his  father's instigation for work on the farmhouse the following day. The grandparents don't say this and Steven doesn't say this. Kerry also goes further in her book to say that her mother found the FULL can ( I think) outside the caravan door. In saying this she exonerated Steven . Not in a million years would he have buried his little nephew after a tragic accident and completed the job he was sent to do by his father . He would have too totally devastated, surely ?  So I would have liked the police to explore this discrepancy. Why is Kerry's recollection different than the others'?
IF  Steven was responsible for the tragic accident he must have had help in concealing poor Ben's body . The ground out there at that time of the year needs mechanical tools to dig to  any great depth and if he had help it must have been after the farmhouse owner took his leave.

@Doug D or anyone else who has read this book - is there any detail or even mention of Ben's father?  This aspect intrigues me having read differing accounts of his temporary stay on the island of Kos.

Also, does it clarify the reason (illness) for the Needhams return to the UK within weeks of Ben's disappearance?

I'm loathed to buy a book of this sort.

Doug D wrote:Mirage:
 
‘the intense heat’
 
Quite.
 
110 degrees, stated at least twice in the book. That’s 43 in old money. Too hot to do much, which is why they start early and finish early.
 
Unless we take everything in the book with a pinch of salt, in which case we have to start questioning why the falsehoods, we surely have to accept that the digger had finished for the day, which would be fairly normal practice, so the digger accident could not have occurred that afternoon.
 
ChippyM:
 
‘If he had been in this state before they noticed he was missing, it gives a bigger time frame, it is no longer just a few minutes at Lunchtime, something could have happened before then.’
 
Same again, not according to the book.
 
He was eating his lunch with them, just on the move all the time, coming back to grab more food.
 
Please read the book before you start creating other scenarios. If you want to start challenging the book’s accounts that is a different matter, but then you must start to ask 'why the fiction?' and what is being covered up.

 I've read the account in the book. I can't remember a part where they say Ben was eating with them, just that at some point he was coming to and fro from the terrace/ patio area.  I have doubts that the timings given were completely accurate. This may have been because the grandparents were distracted or genuinely estimated the timings differently. At the end of the day a child of not quite 2 was playing outside in 42 degree heat near a piece of plant machinery that was doing tracks around him. the most logical explanation is the one the police are going with.

kaz wrote:
Snipped...
Kerry also goes further in her book to say that her mother found the FULL can ( I think) outside the caravan door. In saying this she exonerated Steven. Not in a million years would he have buried his little nephew after a tragic accident and completed the job he was sent to do by his father.

Unless of course he collected the fuel and was returning with Ben to the farmhouse when the accident occurred.

Although the biggest red flag is the suggestion that when Ben went quiet they all went out searching for him in 110 degree heat!
On seeing no sign of him they presumed he had gone with his Uncle, seemingly without any proof that he had!
Anyone who's lost sight of their toddler even for a moment knows you would never presume anything in that situation.
It's either untrue or the grandparents are odd.

plebgate wrote:I find it odd that Barkas would confess to a "friend" without backing it up with some written documentation or indeed a professional person such as doctor or priest as witness.

If the family take this further and it ends up in court will be very interesting.

The Greek 'family' might just do 'that'.

•'We are very upset by the things [Ben's mother] has said about my father'
•‘There is no shred of evidence to support wild allegations against my dad'

And he has warned heartbroken mother Kerry Needham to ‘choose her words carefully’ after she condemned his father to ‘burn in hell’ for allegedly covering up her son’s death.

Ben's heartbroken mother Kerry accused Dinos of taking the truth about her son ‘to his grave’.  

She condemned him to ‘burn in hell’ after she was told the digger driver knew that Ben had died at the remote farmhouse but had never told anyone.

But now his son Valantis has accused Kerry of shaming his memory.

He told MailOnline: ‘We have always respected Kerry Needham but we are very upset by the things she has said about my father Dinos – such as that he should burn in hell.

‘I would tell Kerry please choose your words more carefully. ‘We have nothing against British people. Why is she trying to provoke us by saying that?

‘We have nothing to hide. It’s very upsetting for the whole family.

‘This whole affair has really upset my mother [widow Varvara Barkas] and our friends and neighbours.

‘I understand her despair but she should blame someone else not my father who is dead and cannot defend himself.

‘How is my dad going to be remembered after all of this?'

following the completion of South Yorkshire Police’s ‘Operation Ben’ Valantis Barkas said: ‘It’s been 25 years and they have found nothing at all – not a shred of evidence to support these wild allegations against my father.

‘My father has been accused of being a child killer and his picture has been published everywhere without a trace of evidence.'

‘I have remained calm throughout all of this. We have nothing to hide. We have tried to help [the Operation Ben police investigation].

‘It is too easy to blame the dead. My father is dead and his name has been dragged through the mud. He was a beautiful man. He was well respected.'

‘My daughter is called Konstantina, she is named after my father, she is six months old.'

‘But Dinos’ grandchildren will grow up and read all of these bad things against him.'

His wife Ioanna added: ‘Kerry Needham should come and apologise to my husband about what she said about his father.'

Last night regulars at the Deluxe Café condemned Kerry Needham for ‘ruining’ Dinos' reputation.

One said angrily: ‘How can this woman say these bad things about Dinos.'?

‘He was such a good man. He would help anyone. But now she has ruined his reputation!’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3846556/How-dare-drag-dad-s-mud-Ben-Needham-digger-driver-s-son-says-father-accused-child-killer-without-shred-evidence.html