Damien Nettles: Language analysis of Unsolved: The Boy Who Disappeared interviews – Part 1

In this third post that examines the disappearance of 16-year-old Damien Nettles on 3 November 1996 from Cowes in the Isle of Wight, I will be applying language analysis techniques to some of the interviews contained in the Unsolved: The Boy Who Disappeared documentary series that aired on BBC3 in 2016. If you haven't read the previous posts in this series about the case, the first, which examines the facts about the night that Damien disappeared, can be found here, and the second, which considers whether Damien could have been a victim of murder, manslaughter or misadventure, can be found here. Although Unsolved: The Boy Who Disappeared didn’t uncover any new information about Damien’s disappearance, the interviews with people who knew Damien well, the programme’s anonymous sources, and those suspected of being involved in his disappearance, contain a wealth of language ‘tells’ that may help to identify potential truths, lies and cover-ups.

The write-ups of my analyses ended up being much longer than I had anticipated, and so this will be the first of two posts that scrutinise the interviews with those who were close to Damien at the time of his disappearance.

First, the language analysis techniques:

Linguistic analysis: Linguistic analysis is the analysing of a person’s written or spoken words in terms of whether or not they are telling the truth, for example, their choice of words, the use of buffer words such as ‘erm’ and ‘like’, speaking with more vocal fill (repeating words/phrases in close succession, repeating the beginning of words, elongating words) vocal volume and tone, level of detail, and whether the truth inadvertently leaks (or in some instances slips) out. Linguistic analysis is widely accepted as a useful investigative tool, and some forms of forensic linguistics and phonetic evidence are routinely used in criminal courts.

Behavioural analysis: Body language or behavioural analysis involves observing a person’s face, body and mannerisms in terms of whether or not they are lying, for example, micro-expressions, whether, when, how often and for how long they blink, whether they fidget, and what they do with their hands. Behavioural analysis practitioners claim that to apply behavioural analysis correctly and as reliably as possible, it is necessary to obtain an individual’s ‘baseline’ behaviour first, with subsequent indicators of deception being cues that are different from this baseline. However, research tells us that at the barely-greater-than-chance lie detection ‘hit rate’ of 54% is no higher for professionals (police investigators, psychiatrists, etc.) than it is for lay persons. The behavioural sign that appears to carry the most weight as a ‘tell’ to lying is deliberate, unblinking eye contact (>70%). Other research identifies micro-expressions of the upper face as being more indicative of deceit than lower face micro-expressions, and liars are more likely to gesture with both hands (40%) than people who tell the truth (25%). The overall conclusion though is that the significant majority of behavioural cues to deceit are at best faint, and no reliable non-verbal signs have been identified.

In isolation, verbal and non-verbal cues are not reliable indicators of truth or deception. For example, buffer words, vocal fill, fidgeting and grooming behaviours (stroking/pulling beard hair, neck scratching, etc.) are actually indicators of emotional and/or cognitive load – the amount of feelings and/or thoughts or information that our working memory can process at any given time. Whether under pressure or not, truth-tellers can be as much subject to these types of ‘loading’ as liars, and can be just as nervous as liars too. Therefore, to increase the veracity of any language analysis, particularly in the absence of any baselines, it is important to consider what the scientific research advises, which is:

• avoid examining the wrong cues
• verbal cues are typically more diagnostic than non-verbal cues to deceit
• pay attention to the more diagnostic verbal and non-verbal cues to deceit
• listening carefully to what is said is necessary
• most verbal indicators of deception are cues to truthfulness
• slips of the tongue are truth-tells
• under initial questioning, truth-tellers typically provide more details than liars
• liars may add or change details when they repeat a lie
• liars may use self-handicapping strategies to justify why they can’t provide information (e.g. I really can’t remember because…)
• liars are more likely than truth-tellers to use common knowledge details (e.g. we walked through the market and then had dinner in a Chinese restaurant)
• maintaining direct eye contact is the strongest behavioural indicator of deceit, and liars do this to check the other person’s face for believability cues to gauge whether or not they bought into the lie
• micro-expressions of the upper face are more indicative of deceit than micro-expressions of the lower face
• liars use both hands when gesturing more so than truth-tellers
• non-congruent gestures – bodily movements that don’t match the words being spoken – are truth-tells (e.g. saying ‘no’ whilst nodding)
• only paying attention to behaviour significantly impairs lie detection
• the most accurate classifications of truths and lies are made when the most diagnostic verbal and non-verbal cues are considered together 

Chris Boon’s episode 1 interviews

All episodes of Unsolved: The Boy Who Disappeared are available on YouTube. Although they are accompanied by transcripts, these contain many inaccuracies and in several instances are incomplete. The only way to conduct linguistic analysis of spoken interviews properly is to manually transcribe them (which believe me, takes hours) and so the following episode 1 interviews with Chris Boon (CB) and the Unsolved reporters, Alys Harte (AH) and Bronagh Munro (BM) are my own transcriptions.

Chris Boon was Damien’s best friend at the time of his disappearance. The first exchange between Chris Boon and Alys Harte is made up of part question and answer, and part Alys Harte’s narration. Here’s the link to episode 1 on YouTube  so that you can watch the interview that accompanies my analyses should you wish to. The numbers mark the minutes:seconds start of each exchange:

AH 4:40 What kind of a lad was he?

CB 4:42 He really did have a kind of lust for life. He was one of those guys that... He was quite exciting to be around. Things would happen when he was there. You know, a party would be a lot more ex-exciting when he was there. You know, I-I've recalled the story so many times… I'm… n… even mm-myself not 100% sure of ww-which bit I really remember.

AH 5:07 The boys' night started around 7:30 at a house party. But the party wasn't up to much so they headed out to buy cider.

CB 5:17 Damien was quite a… a tall lad so he was definitely on the buying-the-drinks duty. A bottle of Special Red each erm… which was a kind of cider at the time.

AH 5:31 When they took the ferry from East to West Cowes, witnesses said that they were chatty but not drunk.

CB 5:39 We went into town because he-ee-erm believed his sister was there so we started t-to, kind of like, stalk the pubs, and I'd be hanging outside cos they would just throw me out instantly.

AH 5:53 Many witnesses report that Damien was going from pub to pub looking for his sister.

CB 6:00 It really started to rain. I'm wet… drunk… I've had enough, we're not getting served anywhere, we've got no money. Then we walked up… up the er… park road, up the street, and I remember we got to the steps of the park. I turned round and-and-and left. I was absolutely convinced that Damien walked off through the town, er… through the park. In fact, I-kn I-know he did. I remember seeing him, sort of, going up the stairs, walking up the... and then I turn around. And of course, we know now that he never carried on that way.

It reads and sounds like a pretty normal conversation on the surface, doesn’t it? But the surface doesn’t need to be scratched hard to reveal what’s beneath. The first thing of note that Chris says is:

I-I've recalled the story so many times… I'm… n… even mm-myself not 100% sure of ww-which bit I really remember.

It’s not when or why Chris says what he says here – it’s clear that the interview has been edited and spliced and may not follow the originally recorded timeline, and so although we don’t hear him being asked about what he remembers about the night that Damien disappeared, he may have been, and this particular excerpt may have been tacked onto him talking about Damien being exciting to be around. What stands out is Chris’ choice of words and accompanying behaviour:

Analysis: – Chris says that he’s 'recalled the story so many times', and the use of ‘the story’ is a linguistic point of interest. Maybe he was asked to ‘tell us the story of what happened that night’ by one of the reporters, and in which case he was simply repeating the words in the question. If it wasn’t a repeat of the words in the question, his use of ‘the story’ as opposed to ‘the events’ or ‘what happened’, suggests narrative license – that ‘the story’ is Chris’ version of the truth. Additionally, saying that he’s ‘recalled the story so many times’ makes what he says next somewhat of a contradiction – ‘not 100% sure of ww-which bit I really remember’ – and so this could indicate self-handicapping. He also uses ‘bit of the story’ rather than ‘bits’, which is suggestive of a single fact, truth, incident or event. The elongation of ‘mm-myself’ and ‘ww-which’ indicates that he may be experiencing cognitive load, which on its own is neither an indication of truth nor deception. However, the use of ‘100%’ and the emphasis on ‘really’, together with him holding deliberate, unblinking eye contact with the reporters for the entire duration of ‘even mm-myself not 100% sure of ww-which bit I really remember’, indicates that he may be trying to gauge whether they are buying in to what he is saying. All of this together suggests that Chris may be lying either about not being able to remember a particular detail, and/or he has fabricated or changed a particular detail, and/or he never tells the complete truth.

It's important to remember that we don’t know what Chris’ language baselines are. He may have been nervous about being interviewed for television, or he may be a naturally anxious person. However, at the time of filming for Unsolved and for at least 12 years prior, Chris confidently performed in bands on stages in front of audiences. In 2014, his band at the time, Pleasurade, even made it to the final of Bestival. It is therefore unlikely that stage fright or trait anxiety are behind his pretty much constant fidgeting and use of buffer words (erm… kind of like) and vocal fill (a… a, he-ee-erm, t-to) during his 5:17 and 5:39 interview excerpts, and instead his verbal and non-verbal language together indicate the cognitive load associated with having to think about his answer. Whilst what he says at 5:39 is reflective of the use of common knowledge (‘we went into town’, ‘stalk the pubs’), this cannot be used on its own as an indicator of deceit because it is known that the boys went into town and Damien (at least) was seen going from pub to pub, looking for his sister. However, the lack of detail is worth noting and raises the question why doesn’t Chris give a detailed account of which route they took into town? Which pubs did they ‘stalk’?

The next part of Chris’ interview is made up of pieces to camera and him talking over various reconstruction scenes. Chris says: ‘it really started to rain’, and then speaks to camera:

CB 6:03 I'm wet… drunk… I've had enough, we're not getting served anywhere, we've got no money.

Analysis: Chris uses a double open-handed/palms forward gesture three times during this sentence when he says ‘wet’, ‘drunk’ and ‘had enough’. Palms forward indicates the giving of information, but the use of both hands may indicate that this information is not completely truthful. Additionally, he closes his eyes when he says ‘drunk’, and says it with less volume than ‘wet’ and ‘had enough’. Together, this may indicate that he’s embarrassed about being drunk, that he wasn’t really that drunk, or that he was something other than, or in addition to, drunk. 

The footage cuts to Chris talking over a reconstruction scene:

CB 6:13 Then we walked up… up the er… park road, up the street, and I remember w-we got to the steps of the park. I turned round and-and-and left.

Analysis: Previous to this, Chris had used buffer words and vocal fill occasionally. However, in this sentence their use multiplies, which may indicate increased emotional and/or cognitive load: ‘walked up… up the er… park road, up the street’, ‘w-we’, ‘and-and-and’. Additionally, despite living in Cowes and knowing the town well, he chooses to use common knowledge – ‘park road’, ‘up the street’ – instead of specific road/street names. Therefore, increased cognitive load associated with the use of multiple buffer words/vocal fill, indicating that he may be thinking about what to say next even though he has recalled the story ‘so many times’, together with the use of common rather than specific knowledge, may indicate that he is being deceitful. However, we don’t see him speaking and therefore any behavioural indicators that may support this remain unknown.

The footage cuts back to Chris speaking to camera:

CB 6:26 I was absolutely convinced that Damien walked off through the town, er, through the… through the park. In fact, I kn-I know he did.

Analysis: Chris says: ‘I was absolutely convinced that Damien walked off through the town’. His eyes widen/flash for a split second as realises what he has said. The truth has inadvertently slipped out. He knew that Damien headed back into town. He then closes his eyes, and the use of buffer words and vocal fill (‘er, through the… through the’) here are indicators of emotional and/or cognitive load as tries to recall what he meant to say instead. He quickly says ‘through the park’, and as he says it, he subtly shakes his head from side to side in a non-congruent ‘no’ gesture. This may be an indication that ‘the park’ is incorrect, thereby further confirming that ‘the town’ is the truth. He then says ‘In fact, I kn-I know he did’ whilst holding eye contact with the reporters. The use of vocal fill here (‘I kn-I know’) is minor, but the use of ‘in fact’ and emphasis on ‘I know’ whilst maintaining deliberate, unblinking eye contact whilst subtly shaking his head in a ‘no’ gesture, may indicate that he is being deceitful, and overcompensating in an attempt to bolster the lie whilst trying to gauge whether the reporters bought the cover-up.

The footage then cuts to the reporters faces and we hear Chris speaking to them:

CB 6:34 I remember seeing him, sort of, going up the stairs...

Analysis: Use of ‘sort of’ implies doubt or not quite/completely. Also, the use of ‘stairs’ is interesting. Previous to this, Chris had said ‘steps of the park’. Although ‘steps’ and ‘stairs’ are similar, they suggest ‘outdoors’ and ‘indoors’ – garden steps, steps up to the monument, steps to the carpark, steps down to the beach – it’s never ‘stairs’. Stairs are associated with dwellings. For reference, the image below shows the steps of Northwood Park directly opposite the bend on Granville Road as seen in the footage at 6:26. There is a central railing, which may make someone think ‘stairs’ instead of ‘steps’. It is unknown if the railing was there in 1996. There is also another similar, but slightly narrower stepped entrance to Northwood Park on the corner of Church Road and Union Street. 

The footage cuts back to Chris speaking to camera:

CB 6:37 walking up the... and then I turned around…

Analysis: In saying 'walking up the...  and then', he chooses not to commit to saying what Damien was walking up.

The footage then cuts back to the reconstruction with Chris speaking over it:

CB 6:42 … and then of course, we know now that erm he-he never carried on that way.

Analysis: Because we don’t see Chris speaking, we don’t know whether ‘… and then of course, we know now that erm he-he never carried on that way’ is consecutive to ‘walking up the... and then I turned around…’, and so it’s impossible to conduct a meaningful analysis about his choice of words here.

Summary: Together, these analyses suggest that Chris knew that Damien intended to remain in Cowes before they parted ways on the evening of 2 November 1996, or at the very least he knows that Damien didn’t walk off through the park. We only have Chris' word that he and Damien parted at or near the steps to Northwood Park, and in relation to both boys heading to their respective homes, it would have been the obvious place for them to do so. The use of ‘stairs’ instead of ‘steps’ may be nothing, but it could indicate that he and Damien parted company at a dwelling. 

Applying these analyses to the timeline of events on 2 November 1996

There is an eyewitness account of the boys being seen together at 22:30 outside The Arcade by a girl who knew Chris and recognised Damien from Cowes High School. The Arcade is a 5-minute walk away from where Chris says that he and Damien parted near the steps of Northwood Park at about half past ten. However, ‘near’ could mean any point in the region of Northwood Park, and ‘about’ half past ten could have been some time before or after. Another BBC source reports that the boys parted company by Granville Road at 22:30, which could mean the steps of Northwood Park opposite the corner of Granville Road, or the junction of Granville Road with Terminus Road.

Chris lived on Fellows Road and so to walk home, he would have continued south on Granville Road from the Terminus Road junction. 

An eyewitness who knew Damien placed Damien on his own outside The Fountain pub on the High Street at 22:20 – Damien had chips with him, but he didn’t buy them from Yorkies when he was sighted there twenty minutes earlier. The landlord of The Fountain also saw a lad eating chips and trying to get into the pub at 22:30, and a witness who knew Damien saw him eating chips outside the Midland Bank (numbers 46-47) on the High Street at 22:45. To end up back on Cowes High Street alone, with chips, Damien could have continued along Granville Road with Chris, turned left onto Victoria Road, stopped and bought chips at Chip Ahoy on the corner of Victoria Road and St Mary’s Road where he and Chris could have parted company, and then continued along St Mary’s Road in a north-easterly direction to the High Street via Cross Street and The Cut. Chip Ahoy (35-36 Victoria Road), which closed in 2022 after 30 years of trading, had a couple of wide steps leading up to the door.

From the last sighting of Damien and Chris together, to the Midland Bank sighting of Damien alone eating chips (which would have likely taken him no more than a minute to buy based on the later Yorkies CCTV footage) spans no more than 19 minutes. As an able-bodied, 6’ 3” 16-year-old, Damien would have easily covered the distance in this time, or maybe less. 

Damien’s other routes back to the High Street if he parted company with Chris near the steps to Northwood Park opposite the bend on Granville Road – either back along Terminus Road, or up Union Road then Sun Hill – would not have taken him past a chip shop. There was another chip shop at the time – Corries Cabin on Shooters Hill near the St Mary’s Road short stay carpark – and so there is a possible fourth route that he could have taken to the High Street back along Terminus Road, right onto Cross Street to buy chips from Corries Cabin on the corner of Shooters Hill, and then left onto Shooters Hill to rejoin the High Street walking north in the direction of The Fountain. This route would have taken him around 13 minutes.

There is another alternative that involves Chris and Damien parting company outside a known drug-dealer’s flat on the corner of Terminus Road – a flat that Damien is rumoured to have been outside at some point that night, shouting up for drugs. The flat was on the middle floor, and was accessed by a zig-zag staircase:

This doesn’t explain the chips that Damien had with him when he was seen outside The Fountain at 22:20 and 22:30 and Midland Bank at 22:45, but he could have left the flat had no one been home and walked to Corries Cabin and back, or perhaps someone else at the flat went to Yorkies on a chip run. Certainly of all the places that Chris wouldn’t want to say that he and Damien had parted company, a known drug-dealer’s flat would be top of the list.

The next extract of Chris Boon’s interview shows him watching the Yorkies CCTV footage with the Unsolved reporters:

AH 11:50 We showed the footage of Damien in the chip shop that night to Chris Boon, the best friend who had left Damien an hour beforehand.

CB 11:59 He looks pre... He looks pretty out of it.

AH 12:02 He does, actually.

CB 12:03 Mm… Yeah. Very distant erm... yeah-yer-yeah-he-c-he possibly could've taken something. I’d-I'd always been adamant that, no, he was just drunk, but actually now I’ve seen it you kind of does… does make you think, well… hm… I don't know… maybe… you know, like if-if he'd had a trip or something like that… thet-would thet-would then-it-would definitely lead you to being confused.

BM 12:25 Do you think, at any point, Damien could have taken something when you were with him that you didn't know about?

CB 12:33 Um... Er... No. Erm...

Unsolved: The Boy Who Disappeared aired between 25 July and 1 August 2016. The Yorkies CCTV footage was uploaded to YouTube by Damien’s mother, Valerie, on 25 October 2016. A shorter segment of the footage had been in public circulation previous to this, but accounts suggest that it was without audio. Therefore, despite Damien having been missing for twenty years in 2016, there is no reason to believe that this wasn’t the first time that Chris had viewed this longer piece of CCTV footage or heard the audio. 

Analysis: Multiple uses of buffer words and vocal fill throughout indicates that Chris may be experiencing an increased level of emotional and/or cognitive load. This in itself indicates neither truth nor deception, but there is little else to suggest that Chris is lying about anything that he says in this section. What he actually says between all the buffer words and vocal fill may be truthful: ‘He looks pretty out of it’, ‘he possibly could've taken something’, ‘I'd always been adamant that, no, he was just drunk, but actually now I’ve seen it’, ‘it does make you think’, ‘I don’t know’, ‘if he'd had a trip or something like that’, and finally ‘No’ in response to BM asking him if Damien had taken something while he was with him that he didn’t know about. The only phrase that may be indicate deception is 'it does make you think' because this is said in the third person. Up until this, Chris uses 'I'd' and 'I've', and so the use of 'you' may indicate that he is distancing himself from the possibility that Damien had taken a trip.

Chris' use of ‘just drunk’ instead of 'drunk' may imply that he had already thought about the possibility that Damien may have taken something as well as being drunk – and Damien may well have been ‘just drunk’ when he and Chris parted company – but the purpose of showing the Yorkies CCTV footage to Chris was because Yorkies’ staff thought that Damien had been on drugs when ordering chips. Therefore in isolation, this can’t be taken as an indication that Chris is being deceptive. However, it’s worth bearing in mind that Damien’s use of cannabis wasn’t a secret, which begs the question: why did Chris specifically mention ‘a trip or something like that’, implying a hallucinogenic drug rather than other drugs such as cannabis, speed, cocaine or heroin?

When Chris says ‘No’ it is accompanied by a subtle and very brief right-left-right-left headshake as he leans forward. The headshake isn’t quite on the horizontal plain, but it happens whilst he is saying ‘no’ as opposed to before or afterwards, and so he’s telling the truth here – Damien could not have taken something when Chris was with him without Chris’ knowledge.

Summary: All analyses considered, when confronted with the possibility that Damien had taken something in addition to the cider that he and Chris had been drinking earlier that evening, Chris had until the point of watching the Yorkies CCTV footage been able to categorically say that Damien had been ‘just drunk’. However, upon seeing the Yorkies CCTV footage of Damien trying to order food, he could no longer maintain that this was the case – that actually, Damien was ‘pretty out of it’. Based on the final 13 seconds of the interview, Chris is likely telling the truth – that Damien couldn’t have taken something without Chris’ knowledge while Chris was with him.

However, this leaves a question mark over why Chris specifically says ‘a trip or something like that’. Could Damien have taken a trip with Chris’ knowledge? Chris wasn’t asked this and so we don't know what his answer might have revealed, and even if Damien had taken a trip with Chris' knowledge, it may not have taken effect by the time they parted company. Had Damien told Chris that he was staying in town to try and score some acid? Again, we don’t know what Chris’ answer to this might have been, however, later interviews may shed some light on this, and so 'Part 2' of my language analyses of the interviews with those who were close to Damien at the time of his disappearance will follow soon.

Damien's disappearance remains an active missing person case. If you have any information that could help find Damien, please contact Hampshire Police on 101, quoting ‘Operation Ridgewood’, or if you would prefer to remain anonymous, Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

Sources

Brennan, T. & Magnussen, S. (2020) Research on Non-verbal Signs of Lies and Deceit: A Blind Alley. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(613410).

Google Maps.

Mann, S., Ewens, S., Shaw, D. & Vrij, A. (2013) Lying Eyes: Why Liars Seek Deliberate Eye Contact. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 20 (3): 452-461.

Mann S., Vrij A., Leal S., Granhag P., Warmelink L. & Forrester D. (2012) Windows to the soul? Deliberate eye contact as a cue to deceit. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 36: 205–215.

Nettles, V. (2019) The Boy Who Disappeared. London: John Blake Publishing.

Nettles, V. (2024) Email to Elizabeth Angel, 17 April.

Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (2015) Forensic Language Analysis. Post Note number 50.

Pérez-Rosas, V., Abouelenien, M., Mihalcea, R. & Burzo, M. (2015) Deception Detection using Real-life Trial Data. Proceedings of the 2015 ACM on International Conference on Multimodal Interaction November 2015, 59-66.

Unsolved – The Boy Who Disappeared: 1. The Night (2016) BBC3, 25 July. 

Vrij, A., Fisher, R. & Leal, S. (2023) How researchers can make verbal lie detection more attractive for practitioners. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 30(3): 383-396.

Vrij, A., Granhag, P. & Porter, S. (2011) Pitfalls and Opportunities in Non-verbal and Verbal Lie Detection. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 11(3): 89-121.

Vrij A., Oliveira J., Hammond A. & Ehrlichman H. (2015) Saccadic eye movement rate as a cue to deceit. Journal of Applied Research, Memory & Cognition, 4:15-19.

Zeng, X., Wu, Q., Zhang, S., Liu, Z., Zhou, Q. & Zhang, M. (2018) A False Trail to Follow: Differential Effects of the Facial Feedback Signals From the Upper and Lower Face on the Recognition of Micro-Expressions. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(2015). 

Damien Nettles: Murder, manslaughter or misadventure?

This is the second post that examines the case of 16-year-old Damien Nettles who vanished without a trace from Cowes, Isle of Wight, on 3 November 1996. If you haven't read the first post about the confirmed facts of the case, it can be found here. This post will consider the potential reasons for Damien’s disappearance in relation to personal, geographical and behavioural risk factors, statistical data, and criminological theories. The aim is to try and assess the likelihood that he disappeared of his own volition, as a result of a crime, or due to some kind of misfortune or accident. 

Although some sources claim that Damien’s disappearance remains under investigation as murder – and his case was escalated to suspected murder in 2011 when certain properties were searched and arrests were made for conspiracy to murder – it was de-escalated again, and has remained a missing person case since. The police define a missing person as ‘anyone whose whereabouts cannot be established and where the circumstances are out of character or the context suggests the person may be subject of crime or at risk of harm to themselves or another.’ Around 2000 missing people remain missing after a year, and on average 20 missing people a week are found deceased. Therefore, regardless of whether or not Damien is still alive, there is no doubt that he is a missing person.

Whilst the numbers of males and females that go missing in the UK are roughly equal, almost two-thirds of all missing person reports relate to under 18s with the most frequently reported missing age group being 15- to 17-year-olds. Whilst the drivers for children and teenagers going missing are complex, they tend to fit an ‘intentional-unintentional’ continuum, ranging from decided through drifted, and accidental to forced. Overlaying this continuum are all the possible reasons for going missing, or ‘push’ and ‘pull’ factors. These include social problems associated with mental health issues, alcohol use, psychological abuse, emotional abuse, neglect or rejection by a parent, and bullying, threats or intimidation from peers; a combination of social problems and criminal activity including domestic violence, sexual or physical abuse, illicit drug use, abduction by an estranged parent, and criminal and sexual exploitation; crimes such as homicide or kidnap by a stranger; and excitement, exploration, peer pressure, suicide and accident.

Alongside the reasons for children to go missing, there are certain risk factors. Some of these risk factors overlap with reasons, such as mental health issues, bullying, abuses, exploitations and substance misuse. Others stand out as being predictors of the risk of going missing, in particular, looked after children (children in care) are more likely to go missing than those who live with their parents, and 10% of looked after children are reported missing every year. 

In relation to Damien’s disappearance, there is no suggestion of his home life being anything other than stable and loving. His parents were together, he had an older sister who was studying at Portsmouth University, and a younger brother and sister living at home. He appeared to have a close group of friends, many of whom he had grown up with and gone to school with. He had split up with a girlfriend six months prior to his disappearance, but they had remained friends, and he had a new girlfriend who he’d met through his summer job at Gurnard Pines holiday camp. She lived in Suffolk. He loved music – he played the guitar and was in a band with some of his friends. He had done well in his GCSEs. He had changed schools to Carisbrooke High in the September of 1996 because Cowes High didn’t offer Psychology A Level, but a handful of people he knew had transferred there also. He had ambitions of becoming a marine biologist.

Damien was known to drink alcohol – cider and beer are mentioned – however, this was and still is true for 85% of 16-year-olds in the UK. He also used cannabis. It is difficult to find precise data on cannabis usage among 16-year-olds specifically, particularly historical data, however, it can be reasonably estimated from various sources combined that around 50% were using or had used cannabis in 1996. The use of certain illicit drugs including cannabis, amphetamines (speed), LSD (lysergic acid diethylamide, commonly known as acid or a 'trip') and ecstasy (methyl​enedioxy​methamphetamine or MDMA) rose sharply during the first half of the 1990s, peaked to significant and all-time high in 1995, and had declined to pre-1990s levels by 2000 – undoubtedly driven by ‘90s rave culture.

Speaking to Damien’s brother, James, in episode 3 of Unsolved: The Boy Who Disappeared, Damien’s best friend, Chris Boon, said that he and Damien “used to do speed if we got hold of it”, and that there was a good chance that they “had taken some trips”. Understandably, Damien’s mother, Valerie, finds it difficult to believe or accept that her son may have been dabbling with hard drugs, but Chris’ words suggest otherwise (I will be discussing my language analysis of Chris Boon’s Unsolved: The Boy Who Disappeared interviews in a future post. It makes for very revealing reading). 

So, underage drinking was normal for the large majority of 16-year-olds in the mid-1990s. Half of 16-year-olds were using cannabis. Even taking speed and acid in the mid-1990s was considerably more common among teenagers than it has been at any other time. In these respects, and in spite of his good upbringing, Damien was behaving like any normal, risk-taking-due-to-adolescence, 16-year-old boy. However, his developing, risk-taking adolescent brain will also have been particularly vulnerable to the acute effects of alcohol and drugs. If he had taken acid the night that he disappeared as Chris Boon’s interview transcript suggests, this may explain the difficulty that he was having in verbally articulating himself in the Yorkies chip shop CCTV footage. Yorkies' staff who saw Damien in the shop are reported to have said that he seemed high rather than drunk.

One well-studied effect of LSD in particular is difficulties with speech and talking due to the way that LSD affects the mind’s semantic networks (how words are stored in relation to each other). LSD doesn’t cause physical effects such as lack of coordination and slurred speech – the kind of effects that are associated with alcohol. Phenylcyclohexyl piperidine or PCP, another hallucinogenic drug commonly known as angel dust and often combined with marijuana (the parts of the Cannabis sativa plant that contain the most amounts of tetrahydrocannabinol), is also known to cause speech difficulties.

Did Damien go missing intentionally?

Highly unlikely. There is little reason for Damien to have wanted to run away. There had been an incident a few weeks prior to his disappearance where he had gone to a party with some new friends from school who he said had humiliated him – drawn on him with a marker pen, scorched his jacket and shot a pellet gun at his head – but he went to school the following Monday and the incident wasn’t mentioned again.

Did Damien go missing unintentionally?

If Damien didn’t run away, then yes, he went missing unintentionally, and unintentionally going missing applies to many of the theories that have been put forward about his disappearance, such as slipping and falling off the cliffs at Thorness, swimming to Portsmouth to see his sister who he had stayed with in the days prior to his disappearance and who had said would visit him that weekend, becoming the victim of a homicide, and being kidnapped by a paedophile. Long-term disappearances of people who are either found alive or escape are exceptionally rare. There have been a handful cases such as 11-year-old Jaycee Dugard who was kidnapped on her way to school in Lake Tahoe and was held captive until her rescue 18 years later, and Ricardas Puisys, a victim of modern-day slavery who was found alive after 5 years of being missing. However, Damien has been missing now for 28 years, and so whilst he may have been kidnapped or taken alive somewhere by someone initially, the likelihood of him still being alive is incredibly small.

Murder and manslaughter

To date, Hampshire Constabulary have arrested eight individuals for conspiracy to murder in connection with Damien’s disappearance. All were released without charge. In the UK, the crime of murder has a specific definition in law and can only be committed during peacetime by an individual who is sane and not acting in self-defence or in any other way that would make killing another living, breathing human being justifiable, and whose intention is to cause that person serious physical harm or death. Intent, which must be proven for a killing to be classed as murder, is not the same as motive, which doesn’t have to be proven. Intent is also different from outcome, which, like motive, does not have to be proven – hence why a person can be found guilty of murder in the absence of a body. Additionally, whilst a suspect's act must be a substantial cause of a victim’s death for it to be murder, it does not need to be the sole or principal cause. All of this is important when considering whether Damien could have been murdered because it means that someone had intended to harm him.

Manslaughter is more complex than murder. It can be committed voluntarily with the intent for murder, but where a partial defence applies such as loss of control or diminished responsibility, or it can be committed involuntarily, where conduct that was grossly negligent gave the risk of death and did kill (gross negligence manslaughter) or took the form of an unlawful act involving a danger of some harm that resulted in death (unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter). The latter includes what has come to be known as ‘one-punch manslaughter’.  

Homicide, which in addition to murder and manslaughter includes infanticide, and causing or allowing the death or serious injury of a child or vulnerable adult, is rare as violent crimes go. The total number of recorded homicides in England and Wales in 1996 was 482, of which 42 (8.7%) were victims aged between 15 and 19. There were an estimated 3,045,548 15- to 19-year-olds living in England and Wales in 1996, making a 1 in 72,513 chance that a 15- to 19-year-old would fall victim to homicide. The trends and drivers for homicide provide some additional perspective on whether Damien could have been a victim of homicide:

The homicide-geographical-deprivation relationship

Homicide in England and Wales shows a strong geographical relationship with deprivation that has remained true for the past 45 years. More than 50% of homicides in England occur within the 30% most deprived areas, with more than 50% of victims and suspects residing in the 30% most deprived areas. The England multiple deprivation index for 1996 is unavailable online, however, when using multiple deprivation indices to compare trends in deprivation over a period of time, it is recommended that the 2010 (covering 2001 to 2010), 2015 (covering 2011 to 2015) and 2019 (covering 2016 to 2019) versions are used. Therefore, as the image below illustrates, Cowes High Street was broadly in line with the England deprivation average in 2010, and more specifically a 6^th decile area in 2019. Given that the multiple deprivation index for Cowes is unlikely to have been different in 1996, this places the last confirmed sighting of Damien within a 50% least deprived area of England. If Damien had turned left onto Sun Hill, within a matter of minutes he would have been within a 20% (in 2010, 9^th decile in 2019) least deprived area. This is also the least deprived area of the Isle of Wight as a whole. This not to say that the least deprived areas don’t have hidden pockets of deprivation, but what Cowes wasn’t back then, and still isn’t now, is a ‘rough town’ as suggested in episode 2 of Unsolved: The Boy Who Disappeared.

Homicide trends also indicate that the majority (on average around 70%) of homicide victims in England and Wales are male, with large swings in numbers of homicides between males aged 15 to 44 having driven the overall trend since the 1970s. Additionally, the homicide rate is higher for teenagers than for adults, and victim-suspect data show that 40% of male victims of homicide are most commonly killed by a friend or acquaintance. The link between risk for criminal victimisation and involvement in criminal or delinquent activity – the victim-offender overlap – is well-established and robust, and is stronger for violent crimes than for non-violent offending. Therefore, whilst the homicide-geographical-deprivation relationship will have reduced the risk of Damien becoming a victim of murder or manslaughter, as a 16-year-old male he fits the profile of the majority of homicide victims, and his involvement in illicit drug use will have increased his risk of violent victimisation.

Alcohol and drugs as drivers of homicide

Over the long term there has been a strong correlation between homicide and alcohol consumption. However, it is not clear to what extent this is causal and to what extent alcohol is a correlate of other drivers – probably because the association between alcohol and violence appears to be governed by differentiating factors. For example, in men, childhood aggressiveness combined with adult alcoholism is the strongest predictor of interpersonal violence, whereas the presence of trait hostility suggests that violent men are violent men – violent when drunk, and when sober.

There is good evidence that illicit drug markets can drive serious violence (and therefore homicide trends) in three ways:

1. Psychopharmacological. In a similar way to alcohol, illicit-drug takers may experience psychological effects such as increased aggression or disinhibition that make them more likely to be homicide victims or perpetrators.

2. Economic-compulsive. If illicit-drug users have to steal to fund their habit, it is possible that homicide could occur in the act of robbery or burglary.

3. Systemic. These are homicides that arise from the fact that prohibition of drugs creates an illegal market, in which grievances cannot be reconciled through normal judicial channels and therefore may be settled through violence, for example, during disputes over drug-selling territory, hierarchy enforcement, or punishment for failing to pay drug debts.

Though the mechanisms are not mutually exclusive, most studies agree that the systemic category is most important. However, individual drugs such as PCP, cocaine and amphetamines, are well-documented as being associated with hostile behaviour.

Hallucinogens and alcohol are associated with disinhibition, and therefore out-of-character, out-of-control or excessive behaviour – behaviour that could lead a person to fall victim to manslaughter, as has been the circumstance in numerous alcohol-related one-punch manslaughter cases. One of the rumours surrounding Damien’s disappearance involves Damien as the victim of a single punch thrown in anger that was not intended to kill him. 

One of the most extensively applied and cited criminological theories – routine activity theory – argues that the opportunity to commit crime happens with the combination of a motivated offender, a suitable target, and the absence of capable guardians. The last confirmed sighting of Damien showed him walking alone and out of range of CCTV, and so the absence of capable guardians applies. Being alone and cognitively impaired from the effects of alcohol and/or drugs would have increased his risk as a suitable target, and so all that is needed to complete this crime equation is a motivated offender.

Circumstances surrounding homicide in the UK

Around half of homicides are the result of a quarrel, and this proportion is higher when the suspect is known to the victim. Homicides are more likely to occur in or around a dwelling, and though the ratio of female to male victims killed indoors is around 2:1, male victims are still more likely to be killed in or around a dwelling than in the street. Whilst most crime occurs during the day, violent crimes happen mostly at night, with homicides more likely to occur after midnight in the small hours of the morning. Additionally, Crime Survey of England and Wales (CSEW) data show that violent crime peaked to an all-time high in the mid-1990s.  

Misadventure  

Misadventure is the most commonly concluded type of death in the UK (25%) and may be the right conclusion ‘when a death arises from some deliberate human act which unexpectedly and unintentionally goes wrong’. Death by misadventure involves a risk that was taken voluntarily and deliberately that results in an untimely and unnatural death. It is not merely an accident, such as slipping and falling off a cliff (that would be accidental death). Unlike accidental deaths where alcohol or drugs may be a factor, for example, falling over when drunk and sustaining a fatal injury, alcohol and drugs can be a cause of death by misadventure, for instance, an unintended drug overdose. However, other examples of misadventure include a nurse misreading a doctor’s order and administering the incorrect dose of a drug resulting in the death of a patient, or death from asphyxiation resulting from a police officer restraining a prisoner, or deaths unintentionally resulting from medical procedures such as elective surgery. In this respect, it’s easy to see why misadventure is the most commonly concluded type of death in the UK.

One of the police’s theories at the time was that Damien, having decided to swim across the Solent to see his older sister in Portsmouth, had drowned. Though this seems like an unlikely scenario, he was reported by several eyewitnesses to have been going from pub to pub in Cowes looking for his sister on the evening of 2 November 1996, and his sister had said that she would visit him that weekend but didn’t, and he may have taken something that evening that could have caused him to make a risky yet deliberate decision. Additionally, his sister had told their mother that Damien was interested in what it felt like to take drugs (unspecified) and that if he ever was going to do so, that she wanted to be there to make sure that he was okay. This is the approach many people take when trying LSD for the first time – in the company of a trusted friend who is able to look after them should the 'trip' turn bad, and stop them from getting themselves into trouble due to disinhibited behaviour. The conversation between Damien and his sister happened on his visit to her in Portsmouth in the days prior to his disappearance. Could this be why he was looking for his sister that night, because she said that she wanted to be with him if he took ‘drugs’? Even so, looking for his sister and deciding to swim to Portsmouth to be with her are two very different thought processes, and if he did enter the sea deliberately – or even accidentally – and drowned as a result, his body would surely have washed up by now.

Currents are strong in the Solent off Cowes, but they are cyclical and change direction from west to east and east to west with the tides. Low tide at Cowes was at around 10:45 on 2 November 1996 and high tide between 04:00 and 06:30 the following morning, and so the tide would have been on the rise when Damien was most likely to have entered the sea and the currents would have pulled his body west. It’s not impossible that he could have been swept out into the Atlantic, and if his body had been returned on the easterly currents, it would likely have washed up on the section of coast between Yarmouth and The Needles at Freshwater. The opinion of the harbour master at Cowes at the time was that if Damien had drowned, his body would have washed up within days.

Summary

Damien had very few reasons and risk factors to go missing intentionally. The only known risk factors for him going missing unintentionally were alcohol and illicit drug use, and at 16 years of age his developing adolescent brain would have been particularly susceptible to their acute effects, which may have caused him to behave in a disinhibited, out-of-character manner. He went missing within a 50% least deprived area of England. If he had turned left onto Sun Hill, he would have been within a 20% least deprived area in minutes, reducing the risk that he became a victim of homicide. However, the last confirmed sighting showed Damien walking alone, which in addition to increasing his risk of coming face-to-face with a motivated offender and therefore a victim of crime, may also have increased his risk of misadventure – he wasn’t with trusted friends who might have stopped him from having an accident (or at least been able to get help if he had) or making a bad decision. Finally, as a 16-year-old male he fits the identity of the majority of homicide victims, and his involvement in illicit drug use will have increased his risk of criminal victimisation, and potentially violent victimisation driven by the psychopharmacological effects of certain drugs and (possibly) systemic motivators. Therefore, the most likely scenario based on individual risk factors, statistical data and criminological theories, is that he went missing unintentionally, the reason for which is more likely to be homicide than accident or misadventure, and that he was more likely to have been the victim of manslaughter than of murder.

In the next post, I will be analysing the language of some of the interviews contained in the Unsolved: The Boy Who Disappeared documentary series, and discussing whether what has been said by certain people holds the key to Damien’s decisions and behaviour on the night that he disappeared, and ultimately, who may have killed him. 

Damien's disappearance remains an active missing person case. If you have any information that could help find Damien, please contact Hampshire Police on 101, quoting ‘Operation Ridgewood’, or if you would prefer to remain anonymous, Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

Sources

ABPMer (2016) Isle of Wight Tide.

Anderson, P & Bokor, G. (2012) Forensic aspects of drug-induced violence. Journal of Pharmacy Practice, 25 (1): 41-9.

Allen, G. & Mansfield, Z. (2023) Homicide statistics. Research briefing: House of Commons Library.

Bean, P. (2014) Drugs and Crime. Fourth edition. London & New York: Routledge.

Channel Swimming and Piloting Federation (2024) Dover tide tables for 1 Nov 1996 – 30 Nov 1996.

Courts and Tribunals Judiciary (2021) Chief Coroner’s Guidance No.17 Conclusions: Short-Form and Narrative.

Crown Prosecution Service (2023) Homicide: Murder, manslaughter, infanticide and causing or allowing the death or serious injury of a child or vulnerable adult.

Doring, D. (2006) Murder in Britain. Prison Service Journal, 166: 3-10.

Fagan, J. (1990) Intoxication and Aggression. The University of Chicago Press Journals, 13: 241-320.

Institute of Alcohol Studies (2016) Underage drinking.

Lancashire Police (2024) What is a missing person?

Lipsey, M., Wilson, D., Cohen, M. & Derzon, J. (1997) 'Is there a causal link between alcohol use and violence? A synthesis of evidence' in: Galanter, M. (ed.) Recent developments in alcoholism, Volume 13: Alcoholism & violence. New York: Plenum Press. 245- 278.

Ministry of Justice (2023) National statistics: Coroners statistics 2022: England and Wales.

Morgan, N., Shaw, O., Mailley, J., Channing, R., Sweiry, A., Kruithof, K., Bloom, J., Kent, A., Smith, K. & Romaniuk, A. (2020) Trends and drivers of homicide: Main findings. Research Report 113: Home Office.

Mulford, C., Blachman-Demner, D., Pitzer, L., Schubert, C., Piquero, A. & Mulvey, E. (2018) Victim Offender Overlap: Dual Trajectory Examination of Victimization and Offending among Young Felony Offenders over Seven Years. Victims & Offenders, 13 (1): 1-27.

National Coastwatch Institution (2024) Solent Tides and Currents.

National Crime Agency (2023) UK Missing Persons Unit: Missing Persons Data Report 2021/2022.

Nettles, V. (2019) The Boy Who Disappeared. London: John Blake Publishing.

Office for National Statistics (2018) Number of homicides in England and Wales, 1993 to 2017.

Office for National Statistics (2019) Population estimates for the UK and constituent countries by sex and age; historical time series. Table 9.

Office for National Statistics (2022) The nature of violent crime in England and Wales: Year ending March 2022.

Office for National Statistics (2023) Drug misuse in England and Wales: year ending March 2023: An overview of the extent and trends of illicit drug use.

Office for National Statistics (2023) Homicide in England and Wales: year ending March 2022.

Public Health England (2020) Measuring inequalities by deprivation over time in England – guidance on selecting the most appropriate Index of Multiple Deprivation to use.

Safeguarding Network (2024) Missing Children.

Stevenson, O., Parr, H., Woolnough, P. & Fyfe, N. (2013) Geographies of missing people: processes, experiences, responses. Economic and Social Research Council.

Turnbull, R. (2010) The Coronial Process in Western Australia: A Handbook for Medical Practitioners and Medical Students.

UK Parliament (1996) Cannabis update.

UK Parliament (1996) Common illegal drugs and their effects.

Unsolved – The Boy Who Disappeared: 5. The CCTV (2016) BBC3, 29 July. 

Winters, K. & Arria, A. (2011) Adolescent Brain Development and Drugs. Prevention Research, 18 (2): 21-24.

Damien Nettles: The facts

Before I began looking into the disappearance of Damien Nettles, I was unaware of just how much information I was going to have to sift through. It became clear pretty quickly that I wasn’t going to be able to write up my analysis in only one post, and so what follows is the first of what maybe several posts. Also, my intention had been to only examine publicly available information – which for the most part remains the case – however, discrepancies about the last confirmed sighting of Damien emerged almost immediately, and so I decided that the best way forward was to contact Damien’s mum, Valerie, for clarification. 

The following account of Damien’s last movements is, I believe, the most accurate of any that can currently be found online.

Last confirmed sighting of Damien

The last confirmed sighting of 16-year-old Damien Nettles from Gurnard, Isle of Wight, was on 3 November 1996 at two minutes past midnight in nearby Cowes. Footage from a Cowes Business Association CCTV camera located on the corner of number 92 High Street showed Damien walking alone in a northerly direction towards the junction with Sun Hill. His movements after this point remain unknown.    

1 – Arial map of the High Street showing locations of Yorkies fish and chip shop (now a Ladbrokes), Cowes Tandoori, and the CCTV camera on the corner of number 92 High Street that captured Damien’s last known movements before he disappeared from view as he approached the Sun Hill junction.

2 – The view along the High Street looking north from the CCTV camera. The red arrow marks the Sun Hill junction.

3 & 4 – Location of the CCTV camera that captured Damien’s last known movements.

Yorkies fish and chip shop CCTV footage

Previous to this final confirmed sighting of Damien, he was captured on Yorkies’ internal CCTV camera between 23:34 and 23:39 (the clock on the camera is an hour fast). He waited while other people, all young men, were being served between 23:34 and 23:38, and can be seen chatting to some of them. By 23:38, he was the only customer in the shop. The footage audio indicates that Damien was having trouble articulating what he wanted to say:

Damien: “Can I have er… one… er… please.”
Male server: “One?”
Damien: “Please…” [inaudible as he looks down, fiddling with the coins in his hand]
Male server: “Mate I can’t hear you…”
Damien: “Can I have one please!”
Male server: “One what?”
Damien: “ONE! PLEASE! One [inaudible, possibly ‘choose’] please.”
Male server: “Do you want some chips?”
Damien: “Yes.”

Damien then turns and walks (sways) slowly away from the counter, and stands in the shop doorway briefly where he looks left (north), right, then left again up the High Street. He then wanders back to the counter. The female server asks him: "Are you alright?" and Damien answers "Yes." The male server says: “That’s 75p then please.” Damien hands the male server some money and takes his chips. He puts vinegar on them, then takes his change from the server and slowly puts it in the right front pocket of his jeans. He says "Thank you" to the male server. He shakes some salt over his chips and eats one. He then turns slightly to his left and reaches his right hand across himself towards what looks to be an empty food tray on the counter that the server had placed there at 23:33, but that in fact appears to contain some chips – one of the previous customers can be seen taking a chip from it just before Damien enters the shop. He takes a chip from this tray and puts it into his mouth. He then turns to head out of the shop, raising his right hand to the servers, his fingers splayed, and says “Trah…” (something else is said at this point but it’s unclear what and by who). Damien looks right (south) as he steps through the doorway, and then walks north past the shop window.

Fact 1: Damien came into Yorkies at 23:34. He bought chips between 23.38 and 23.39. His ability to articulate himself verbally, and to a lesser degree, physically, was evidently impaired.

Fact 2: The last confirmed sighting of Damien was at 00:02 on 3 November 1996 walking alone in a northerly direction along Cowes High Street. He walked out of range of the CCTV camera that captured his last known movements as he approached the Sun Hill junction.  

The above account contains the two most important, observable facts within the half hour leading up to Damien’s disappearance at 00:02 on 3 November 1996. In addition, he was captured on street CCTV at 23:50 in the Carvel Lane/Terminus Road area. He was also known to have been drinking cider that evening with his friend, Chris Boon, having purchased three bottles plus two one litre bottles at 21:30 in Alldays on Ferry Road, East Cowes.

In the next post, I will examine the validity of the reasons why someone might vanish without a trace as they relate to Damien’s disappearance. This and subsequent posts are going to take time to put together. I have a lot of information to sift through, examine and analyse, including all eight transcripts of the BBC3 series Unsolved: The Boy Who Disappeared that was made about Damien in 2016. So, please bear with me!

Finally, although it was not my intention to turn this into an ‘investigation’, any new facts that come to light could potentially be useful in helping to progress Damien’s case. If you have any information that could help, please contact Hampshire Police on 101, quoting ‘Operation Ridgewood’, or, if you would prefer to remain anonymous, Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

Sources

BBC (2016) Unsolved: Interactive map.

Nettles, V. (2024) Email to Elizabeth Angel, 2 April.

Nettles, V. (2024) Email to Elizabeth Angel, 4 April.

Unsolved – The Boy Who Disappeared: 1. The Night (2016) BBC3, 25 July. 

valnettles (2016) Missing Damien Nettles in Yorkies Chip Shop.