UK UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #6

[Pinkizzy]

As you say there a lot about this in AS’s book and in the media of the time.
DR seems to have not answered an awful lot of important police questions. Plus there’s no evidence as to where Suzy went when she left the office and why she choose to put the Mr Kipper appointment in her desk diary.
So nothing (no matter how unlikely) can really be ruled out.
Some believe Suzy went:
1. To the PoW pub.
2. Others that she actually went to Shorrolds Road.
3. And Detective Barley that she went straight to Stevenage Road.
All are valid theories, but there’s no concrete evidence to support any of them.

Her killer knew about her workplace, why else would he park the car outside a Sturgis property without having the Sturgis fob?

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

Her killer knew about her workplace, why else would he park the car outside a Sturgis property without having the Sturgis fob?

If Suzy's car had really been parked on Stevenage Road since 12:45PM (a big IF, as with everything else in this case) the logical assumption would be that Suzy drove it straight there after she left work, since she only left work at 12:30-12:40PM.

But then there's the problem of the seat being pushed back, like a larger person had been driving the car.

Suzy's male colleague drove the car earlier in the day. Is it possible he pushed the seat back and Suzy never pushed it forwards again? Otherwise, IF the car had really been parked since 12:45PM, and IF a larger person drove it there, I'd have to think the larger person met Suzy outside work and she never drove the car herself at all.

 

[Terryb808]

If Suzy's car had really been parked on Stevenage Road since 12:45PM (a big IF, as with everything else in this case) the logical assumption would be that Suzy drove it straight there after she left work, since she only left work at 12:30-12:40PM.

But then there's the problem of the seat being pushed back, like a larger person had been driving the car.

Suzy's male colleague drove the car earlier in the day. Is it possible he pushed the seat back and Suzy never pushed it forwards again? Otherwise, IF the car had really been parked since 12:45PM, and IF a larger person drove it there, I'd have to think the larger person met Suzy outside work and she never drove the car herself at all.

Her colleague James C was almost the same height as SJL, so it’s unlikely he moved the drivers seat.
Like all things in this case you can make many scenarios about why the drivers seat was all the way back.

 

[Eastend Eagle]

You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something that you later rely on in Court.

 

[Eastend Eagle]

If Suzy's car had really been parked on Stevenage Road since 12:45PM (a big IF, as with everything else in this case) the logical assumption would be that Suzy drove it straight there after she left work, since she only left work at 12:30-12:40PM.

But then there's the problem of the seat being pushed back, like a larger person had been driving the car.

Suzy's male colleague drove the car earlier in the day. Is it possible he pushed the seat back and Suzy never pushed it forwards again? Otherwise, IF the car had really been parked since 12:45PM, and IF a larger person drove it there, I'd have to think the larger person met Suzy outside work and she never drove the car herself at all.

Alternatively, the car was never returned to the vicinity of Sturgis after being driven out earlier that morning but was left at or near to where it was eventually found later that evening.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

Her colleague James C was almost the same height as SJL, so it’s unlikely he moved the drivers seat.
Like all things in this case you can make many scenarios about why the drivers seat was all the way back.

This is probably not helpful, but my friend had a MkII Fiesta in the late 80s/early 90s and I clearly remember how difficult it was to reach the back seats. Moving the front seats *forward* was not only common, but frequently necessary. Moving the driver's seat *backward* didn't really happen unless someone bigger was driving the car.

The only other scenario which immediately comes to mind, based on my limited experience with that model of Fiesta, is if someone who was in a hurry had to get something out of the back seat. If they kind of haphazardly "threw" the front seat back without much care, they might leave it further back thinking they'd correct it when they next got in the car.

The lack of handbrake does suggest the car was parked in a hurry, by someone who possibly wasn't overly concerned for the security of the vehicle. Was it ever ascertained if Suzy was known to leave the handbrake off? Such a seemingly small detail as that can make all the difference, because no matter how strange something appears when you first look at it, it isn't actually strange if it's something a person (in this case Suzy) is known to do.

And of course there's the timing. I don't think the car was seen on Stevenage Road in the morning, prior to 12:45PM? But was it really seen as early as 12:45PM, and did it really never move after it was first seen parked there. So many questions with few definitive answers.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

Alternatively, the car was never returned to the vicinity of Sturgis after being driven out earlier that morning but was left at or near to where it was eventually found later that evening.

Are you suggesting that Suzy's colleague, JC, never returned the car? Not that there is much evidence of *anything*, but is there even the slightest suggestion the car wasn't returned and that Suzy didn't leave in it at 12:30PM?

 

[Eastend Eagle]

Are you suggesting that Suzy's colleague, JC, never returned the car? Not that there is much evidence of *anything*, but is there even the slightest suggestion the car wasn't returned and that Suzy didn't leave in it at 12:30PM?

The fact is there is no reported sighting of Suzy leaving in her car.

 

[WestLondoner]

The car was allegedly seen by a schoolboy in Stevenage Road as early as 12 noon. This is a bit jaw dropping if accurate. It would mean JamesC did not bring the car back to the office but told SJL he had, and that she went out to where it was supposed to be and, not finding it, did not come back to the office to ask JamesC where it really was.

For me this both validates the 12.45 sighting in StevRd but also undermines it. The 12 noon sighting was obviously in error as to whose Fiesta that was, because it can't have been SJL's. But it does corroborate WJ's sighting of a Fiesta at 12.45. There really was a white or whitish Fiesta there at 12 and 12.45, because two people saw one. But the car seen later and found at 10pm wasn't the same white Fiesta. I still tend to trust BW on this and think she did indeed see SJL in her car at 2.45.

The door being left open, the purse left inside, the handbrake off and the seat pushed back all say to me that a man drove the car there, dumped it and left the area either on foot or after he had switched into a different vehicle left there earlier. It seems unlikely that SJL drove it there because of the seat position.

 

[WestLondoner]

Her killer knew about her workplace, why else would he park the car outside a Sturgis property without having the Sturgis fob?

I can't help thinking this could be entirely random.

Say for argument's sake you are meeting a woman - whom you intend to abduct - in the street, and you intend to take her to a place where you can attack her. If she and you arrive separately in said street by car, you've got a bit of a logistical problem. If you leave the initial meeting place in two cars, you don't control where she goes. If you leave together in one car, the other car obviously has to be retrieved later. And until you do, that car's still in the last place she was known to be going. You really don't want to be going back there even to pick up your own car, in case when you get there the street is full of plods.

Ideally you'd leave in her car, because hers will soon be compromised and searched for, whereas yours is unknown and you'll be needing it. So you need to manage where her car is found. What you maybe do is park your car somewhere well away from your hideout, but at a walkable distance from the meeting place. You then leave 37SR in her car and later you drive in her car back to where you left yours.

You possibly didn't notice any Sturgis sign at 123SR because you left your car around the corner in Kenyon Street or Langthorne Street. You arrived back from the south via SR, intending to ditch her car away from your own and then walk around the corner to fetch it.

In this sequence of events, the driver had never been in SR before and where he stopped was driven not by any Sturgis sign, but by which road off it he'd left his own car.

The imperative to get rid of the car applies in DV's PoW theory too. It's unclear that either CV or JC had much local knowledge but CV clearly had further to go to get back to the PoW afterwards. All JC would have had to do to get to either Shorrolds or Star Road was cut through the park and keep heading east.

 

[Terryb808]

I can't help thinking this could be entirely random.

Say for argument's sake you are meeting a woman - whom you intend to abduct - in the street, and you intend to take her to a place where you can attack her. If she and you arrive separately in said street by car, you've got a bit of a logistical problem. If you leave the initial meeting place in two cars, you don't control where she goes. If you leave together in one car, the other car obviously has to be retrieved later. And until you do, that car's still in the last place she was known to be going. You really don't want to be going back there even to pick up your own car, in case when you get there the street is full of plods.

Ideally you'd leave in her car, because hers will soon be compromised and searched for, whereas yours is unknown and you'll be needing it. So you need to manage where her car is found. What you maybe do is park your car somewhere well away from your hideout, but at a walkable distance from the meeting place. You then leave 37SR in her car and later you drive in her car back to where you left yours.

You possibly didn't notice any Sturgis sign at 123SR because you left your car around the corner in Kenyon Street or Langthorne Street. You arrived back from the south via SR, intending to ditch her car away from your own and then walk around the corner to fetch it.

In this sequence of events, the driver had never been in SR before and where he stopped was driven not by any Sturgis sign, but by which road off it he'd left his own car.

The imperative to get rid of the car applies in DV's PoW theory too. It's unclear that either CV or JC had much local knowledge but CV clearly had further to go to get back to the PoW afterwards. All JC would have had to do to get to either Shorrolds or Star Road was cut through the park and keep heading east.

CV might have known about Stevenage Road because the PoW was popular with Fulham supporters back then. I don’t recall DV mentioning this in his book. It far enough away from the PoW to throw the police off.
Not sure why JC would have chosen Stevenage Road.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

The car was allegedly seen by a schoolboy in Stevenage Road as early as 12 noon. This is a bit jaw dropping if accurate. It would mean JamesC did not bring the car back to the office but told SJL he had, and that she went out to where it was supposed to be and, not finding it, did not come back to the office to ask JamesC where it really was.

For me this both validates the 12.45 sighting in StevRd but also undermines it. The 12 noon sighting was obviously in error as to whose Fiesta that was, because it can't have been SJL's. But it does corroborate WJ's sighting of a Fiesta at 12.45. There really was a white or whitish Fiesta there at 12 and 12.45, because two people saw one. But the car seen later and found at 10pm wasn't the same white Fiesta. I still tend to trust BW on this and think she did indeed see SJL in her car at 2.45.

The door being left open, the purse left inside, the handbrake off and the seat pushed back all say to me that a man drove the car there, dumped it and left the area either on foot or after he had switched into a different vehicle left there earlier. It seems unlikely that SJL drove it there because of the seat position.

Did the schoolboy say the car was parked in exactly the same place as the later sightings? The sightings from 12:45 onwards all seem to place the Fiesta parked partially in front of a garage entrance, unmoving and quite conspicuous because of the awkward position.

Indeed, in the reconstruction I've seen, the owner of the garage returned at some point in the afternoon, and had some difficulty parking his own car in the garage because a white Fiesta was partially blocking it. If the reconstruction is accurate, the garage owner's car actually appeared to be a very pale blue Fiesta--perhaps relevant, perhaps not.

I completely agree that the condition in which the car was found has all the hallmarks of it having been quickly dumped. I can also easily believe there was more than one similar vehicle in the area; but if both had been parked in exactly the same place, and in exactly the same manner, that would be an impressive coincidence.

 

[WestLondoner]

Did the schoolboy say the car was parked in exactly the same place as the later sightings?

This is mentioned only in AS. All he says is that, mystifyingly, the car was seen even earlier than 12.45 - by a schoolboy, at noon.

the owner of the garage returned at some point in the afternoon, and had some difficulty parking his own car in the garage because a white Fiesta was partially blocking it. If the reconstruction is accurate, the garage owner's car actually appeared to be a very pale blue Fiesta--perhaps relevant, perhaps not.

The garage owner gives the most reliable sighting, in that as you say, he noticed the Fiesta since because of it, he could barely get into his garage. He was sure of the time because he'd arrived home from work.

I've thought about this quite a bit. There was a huge number of Fiesta colours, especially if you go back to the original Fiesta of 1976 (if you saw the top half of a Mk I from the side, it would be mistakable for a Mk II quite easily, as it's the bonnet and wheels that are different). A Fiesta enthusiasts' website I've found lists 118 different colours or two-tone combinations.

It's impossible now to know what were the commonest colours, but you can filter out those that were only in the range for a a year or two, i.e. they were special editions with a unique colour for marketing purposes. On that basis, the most consistently-available colours were

• Diamond White
• Strato Silver
• Black
• Venetian Red
• Cosmos Blue
• Ivory White
• Midnight Blue
• Nimbus Grey

So three of these eight are either white or could look white (Strato Silver). As well as these, there was Sierra Beige, Platinum, Cordoba Beige, Dove Grey, Crystal Green, Pastel Grey, Ceramic Blue, and Cameo Beige. These are all light colours that you might mistake for - or misremember as - white.

ChatGPT reckons Ford sold 1.76 million Fiestas between 1976 and 1986. The commonest colours seem likely to have been white, silver, black or red.

Two different white Fiestas, or one Diamond White (SJL's) and one Ivory White, or Strato Silver, or Platinum, or Cameo Beige one (the 12 noon Fiesta) does not seem out of the question. If it were two Maserati Boras you'd assume otherwise.

This is why it's so frustrating if the lead about a LHD BMW came in at the time. Finding a random LHD BMW in 1986 should have been doable because it's not like there are 1.75 million of those to sift through.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

This is mentioned only in AS. All he says is that, mystifyingly, the car was seen even earlier than 12.45 - by a schoolboy, at noon.



The garage owner gives the most reliable sighting, in that as you say, he noticed the Fiesta since because of it, he could barely get into his garage. He was sure of the time because he'd arrived home from work.

I've thought about this quite a bit. There was a huge number of Fiesta colours, especially if you go back to the original Fiesta of 1976 (if you saw the top half of a Mk I from the side, it would be mistakable for a Mk II quite easily, as it's the bonnet and wheels that are different). A Fiesta enthusiasts' website I've found lists 118 different colours or two-tone combinations.

It's impossible now to know what were the commonest colours, but you can filter out those that were only in the range for a a year or two, i.e. they were special editions with a unique colour for marketing purposes. On that basis, the most consistently-available colours were

• Diamond White
• Strato Silver
• Black
• Venetian Red
• Cosmos Blue
• Ivory White
• Midnight Blue
• Nimbus Grey

So three of these eight are either white or could look white (Strato Silver). As well as these, there was Sierra Beige, Platinum, Cordoba Beige, Dove Grey, Crystal Green, Pastel Grey, Ceramic Blue, and Cameo Beige. These are all light colours that you might mistake for - or misremember as - white.

ChatGPT reckons Ford sold 1.76 million Fiestas between 1976 and 1986. The commonest colours seem likely to have been white, silver, black or red.

Two different white Fiestas, or one Diamond White (SJL's) and one Ivory White, or Strato Silver, or Platinum, or Cameo Beige one (the 12 noon Fiesta) does not seem out of the question. If it were two Maserati Boras you'd assume otherwise.

This is why it's so frustrating if the lead about a LHD BMW came in at the time. Finding a random LHD BMW in 1986 should have been doable because it's not like there are 1.75 million of those to sift through.

This is just my own observation, but it helps to prove the point you're getting at.

I have walls in my house painted in a Dulux colour named "Polished Pebble". It's a really pale grey. I have all frames, skirting and architrave painted brilliant white.

When you see the grey *next to* the white, it's obvious that the grey is in fact grey. But when you just look at the grey walls, depending on how the light hits it, the grey is so pale that it can easily be mistaken for a slightly off-white despite not being white at all.

 

[WestLondoner]

This is just my own observation, but it helps to prove the point you're getting at.

I have walls in my house painted in a Dulux colour named "Polished Pebble". It's a really pale grey. I have all frames, skirting and architrave painted brilliant white.

When you see the grey *next to* the white, it's obvious that the grey is in fact grey. But when you just look at the grey walls, depending on how the light hits it, the grey is so pale that it can easily be mistaken for a slightly off-white despite not being white at all.

Excellent point. I have this thought every time we repaint. We faff about for ages over whether we want Shaded White or Strong White or Dimpse, but they only look different alongside one another. Once on the wall they're just off-white.

The wall opposite 123SR is wholemeal bread brickwork brown and the garage door in question is now baby poo brown. I don't know what colour the door was in 1986 but the wall can't have changed; it would be very interesting if its colour had the effect of making beige cars look white.

 

[WiseOwl]

In the Crimewatch reconstruction (1986), there is a glimpse of the garage door through WJ's kitchen window (at 4.26 on the video).

It appears to be a pale grey or possibly a pale green?

The owner of the garage arrived back at 5.15PM.

 

[WestLondoner]

The identikit picture at 3.30 really isn't Cannan, is it? No wonder they mostly only show the other one.

It looks like MG to me. I still wonder if this guy got confused about the time, and actually walked past 2 hours later when MG and SF were standing outside trying to see inside.

I also think it's interesting that BW concedes she could be mistaken about seeing SJL's car in the FPR, but nobody else admits they might be mistaken about having seen her car outside 123SR. Somehow this makes me more confident in BW, not less.

 

[Terryb808]

The identikit picture at 3.30 really isn't Cannan, is it? No wonder they mostly only show the other one.

It looks like MG to me. I still wonder if this guy got confused about the time, and actually walked past 2 hours later when MG and SF were standing outside trying to see inside.

I also think it's interesting that BW concedes she could be mistaken about seeing SJL's car in the FPR, but nobody else admits they might be mistaken about having seen her car outside 123SR. Somehow this makes me more confident in BW, not less.

I agree 100% with your conclusion, BW’s honesty make me think she saw SJL at 2.45pm. Her killer realised he’d been seen and IMO that why he returned SJL’s car to Stevenage Road.
Leaving it elsewhere (in the direction it was travelling) would have changed the police’s focus entirely.

 

[WestLondoner]

I agree 100% with your conclusion, BW’s honesty make me think she saw SJL at 2.45pm. Her killer realised he’d been seen and IMO that why he returned SJL’s car to Stevenage Road.
Leaving it elsewhere (in the direction it was travelling) would have changed the police’s focus entirely.

I can't help whether the BW sighting actually sealed SJL's fate. If her killer was in the car and realised the car had been seen, this meant there might be someone who could identify him, so SJL had to disappear. Very grim thought.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

In the Crimewatch reconstruction (1986), there is a glimpse of the garage door through WJ's kitchen window (at 4.26 on the video).

It appears to be a pale grey or possibly a pale green?

The owner of the garage arrived back at 5.15PM.

Thank you, this is the reconstruction I was referring to. At 4:28 into the video I can't help thinking the garage owner's pale blue Fiesta is SO pale that you could almost think it was a white car reflecting the blue sky. It's only a few seconds later, when the car passes Suzy's white Fiesta, that you see how obviously different the two colours are.