UK UK - Claudia Lawrence, 35, Chef, York University, 18 March 2009 #14

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vixey said:
Two parts I find Interesting in this article.
Click to expand...

I found this part interesting
Mr Fox said some of the information received by the force “appears extremely interesting and sparks a whole new line of investigation”, and he urged anyone providing this information to get back in touch with as much detail as possible.

Im very keen to know what what info has sparked a whole new line of investigation and who has provided it?
Looks like it was given annonymously as he appeals for them to get back in touch with as much detail as possible.
 
FromGermany said:
"a whole new line" .....!! :rolleyes::cool:
Click to expand...

I wonder if this is recent information is from a new source @FromGermany or has he uncovered some detail previously overlooked in the previous investigations?

Is the new info related to the Wayne Couzens?
Or someone else previously dismissed by the previous investigation teams.
 
shadwell said:
And going back to car behind the Ranger - there’s never been an appeal regarding this vehicle and I think it’s generally supposed that it was eliminated early on - does anyone know if that is actually the case?[/QUOTE
Click to expand...
keep-it-real said:
Unfortunately there is not enough detail in either of the sightings to draw any conclusions. We know nothing about the person who spotted the rucksack at the Uni and nothing about the person who went in the NH.

It often appears in this case that so much is held back it doesnt allow you to gain any traction in going forward with 'anything'
Neither of these "concerned citizens" brought evidence to the police. Why didnt Melsom call the police? Both incidents are lies and distractions, and to support a narrative that she was still alive on Thursday and or went to work.
If nothing else Jim must have been able to give a discription of the person who went in the NH. Did the discription match that of the person who spotted a rucksack at the Uni or was the Uni sighting given annonymously.
Click to expand...
 
keep-it-real said:
I wonder if this is recent information is from a new source @FromGermany or has he uncovered some detail previously overlooked in the previous investigations?

Is the new info related to the Wayne Couzens?
Or someone else previously dismissed by the previous investigation teams.
Click to expand...
It looks like Interviews are still well placed!
 
I seem to have failed to understand how to post things on here! A woman goes missing, you see what you think is her rucksack, a vital piece of evidence, but it mysteriously vanishes before the police get there and you give the information anonymously? Really? Second person finds personal effects, photographs them, doesn't call the police at all, takes them not to the police but her local pub. There, the people who all love her an want her back, casually advise he takes his photos to the police. They don't call the police, they don't take his name, the don't ask him to wait, they don't ask him where he found the items, they don't get upset because if she was missing and alive, she would be wearing one shoe now?
 

@DameAgathaPoirot Can I ask if you have asked Cold Case for some clarity on the two. :)
They make ref to the Uni sighting on the NYP website but chose not to mention J.M's acount of the person who went into the NH.
It would be interesting to how NYP stand on this, and help everyone focus on what is correct and substantiated.
 
Last edited:
keep-it-real said:
I wonder if this is recent information is from a new source @FromGermany or has he uncovered some detail previously overlooked in the previous investigations?

Is the new info related to the Wayne Couzens?
Or someone else previously dismissed by the previous investigation teams.
Click to expand...
What has @FromGermany reported to the police?
 
DameAgathaPoirot said:
I seem to have failed to understand how to post things on here! A woman goes missing, you see what you think is her rucksack, a vital piece of evidence, but it mysteriously vanishes before the police get there and you give the information anonymously? Really? Second person finds personal effects, photographs them, doesn't call the police at all, takes them not to the police but her local pub. There, the people who all love her an want her back, casually advise he takes his photos to the police. They don't call the police, they don't take his name, the don't ask him to wait, they don't ask him where he found the items, they don't get upset because if she was missing and alive, she would be wearing one shoe now?
Click to expand...
And a Scarf, Did Claudia usually wear a scarf. I ask as maybe it would indicate the likelihood of those Items belonging to Claudia.I fail to leave home without a scarf ,even now we are in march x
 
keep-it-real said:
I found this part interesting
Mr Fox said some of the information received by the force “appears extremely interesting and sparks a whole new line of investigation”, and he urged anyone providing this information to get back in touch with as much detail as possible.

Im very keen to know what what info has sparked a whole new line of investigation and who has provided it?
Looks like it was given annonymously as he appeals for them to get back in touch with as much detail as possible.
Click to expand...
There’s the rub - with no hint as to what the potential new line is, how do the people giving the information relating to it know NYP want them to get back in touch?
 
I seem to have failed to understand how to post things on here! A woman goes missing, you see what you think is her rucksack, a vital piece of evidence, but it mysteriously vanishes before the police get there and you give the information anonymously? Really? Second person finds personal effects, photographs them, doesn't call the police at all, takes them not to the police but her local pub. There, the people who all love her an want her back, casually advise he takes his photos to the police. They don't call the police, they don't take his name, the don't ask him to wait, they don't ask him where he found the items, they don't get upset because if she was missing and alive, she would be wearing one shoe now?
keep-it-real said:
@DameAgathaPoirot Can I ask if you have asked Cold Case for some clarity on the two. :)
They make ref to the Uni sighting on the NYP website but chose not to mention J.M's account of the person who went into the NH.
It would be interesting to how NYP stand on this, and help everyone focus on what is correct and substantiated.
Click to expand...
No, I haven't, both were anonymous, they cant follow either up. Melsom couldn't remember the man in the pub. No one else there could either. Why would anyone photograph one shoe and a scarf of a possible murder victim, and then take it to the woman's local pub? Ridiculous lies. My guess is they don't want to totally discount the back pack just in case, however, there isn't any solid evidence she either made it home on 18th, or left for work from home on 19th. That why the childminder and lift have been removed from the timeline.
 
keep-it-real said:
I wonder if this is recent information is from a new source @FromGermany or has he uncovered some detail previously overlooked in the previous investigations?

Is the new info related to the Wayne Couzens?
Or someone else previously dismissed by the previous investigation teams.
Click to expand...
We don't know. WC might be. I often think so these days, when I'm reading about the many searches in case Sarah. It seems, police are looking for more victims perhaps, otherwise I wouldn't know, what they are expecting to find.
 
No, I haven't, both were anonymous, they cant follow either up. Melsom couldn't remember the man in the pub. No one else there could either. Why would anyone photograph one shoe and a scarf of a possible murder victim, and then take it to the woman's local pub? Ridiculous lies. My guess is they don't want to totally discount the back pack just in case, however, there isn't any solid evidence she either made it home on 18th, or left for work from home on 19th. That why the childminder and lift have been removed from the timeline.[/QUOTE]

If you read back you will see that I contacted Cold Case re the timeline on the 18th they confirmed that Claudia walked home that day and did not receive a lift before or after posting the letter/item at Melrosegate post box. They confirmed the last sighting was by the childminder and Claudia was caught on cctv returning home by the cctv camera sighted at the property opposite her house.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 76 more.
Total: 4,010 (members: 77, guests: 3,933)

Online statistics

Members online
77
Guests online
3,933
Total visitors
4,010
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,114
Messages
17,963,448
Members
228,687
Latest member
Pabo1998
Back
Top