UK UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #3

Status
Not open for further replies.
The keys can only have come from Sturgis. MG cannot have seen SJL coming behind his desk to pick up the keys if he was at lunch at the time (which elsewhere he says he was). He was presumably knocking at the door because he assumed he didn't have a key. when later he found he did he went back.

This should have been bottomed out the same day or the next morning, but in any event before announcing to the world that the 37SR appointment was real and that SJL attended it. If Sturgis or the police got in using a set of keys it mattered whether there was more than one.

As had been said before, by more than one poster, it is quite possible that Sturgis obtained an additional set of keys from someone who was 'baby sitting' the property while the vendor was overseas.
 
Last edited:
JC had an explanation for why he had SB's car and tax disc (watch the video).

Yes it's a fabricated explanation but it's an explanation nevertheless and consequently would most likely result in a 'not guilty' verdict in court. For this reason it is not enough for a charge of abduction.

So circumstantial evidence, is just not enough for a charge....as in the case with SJ
Cannan had explanations for all kinds of things. So what? To jump from that to saying he'd have got off because the evidence was only circumstantial is an opinion on your part, and unlikely to be correct in view of the context of murder. Circumstantial and direct evidence are treated equally in a court of law. Both can convict. If there is sufficient circumstantial evidence alone, a jury can still convict.

The evidence against Cannan was overwhelming. The police needed sufficient time to gather it all which they did by charging him tactically then accumulating all the evidence, culminating in the fingerprint.

The assertion that Cannan would have been released or found 'not guilty' is mere subjective supposition on your part
 
Does JC look like this man to you?

It's a photofit of a man seen in 37SR. It's seen less often.

Meanwhile here are the HR derived sketch and MG, taken from the CW reconstruction:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52126607958_a3085b100d_b.jpg

In my opinion HR's 'Mr Kipper' looks nothing like JC or the photofit but does look like MG, who we know definitely did go to 37SR.

The explanations have been provided more than once. MG spoke directly to HR when he went to the address later that afternoon.

Kindly explain why you believe it is the case that HR would describe the man who knocked on his door and asked if her had seen SJL earlier that afternoon?

Such an argument it nonsensical!
 
So where did the keys come from?

In AS's book it clearly states that the estate agent manager (MG) remembers Suzy coming behind his desk to pick up the keys. In the Crimewatch reconstruction he can be clearly seen knocking on the door at 37SR, so we can assume that he didn't have a key.

If the police did indeed go to SR early that evening to enter and search, then how did they get in? If they didn't break in & MG didn't have any keys where did these other keys come from?

Things just don't add up, there has to be some misinformation along the line.
Depending on the type of lock it’s not difficult to open doors from this period without damaging the door.
Not within the police training, but I’m sure a reasonably experienced detective would know how to do this.
I know this doesn’t help, it just opens up another possibility, that being that the detectives searched SR that evening, even though they had no keys.
 
Cannan had explanations for all kinds of things. So what? To jump from that to saying he'd have got off because the evidence was only circumstantial is an opinion on your part, and unlikely to be correct in view of the context of murder. Circumstantial and direct evidence are treated equally in a court of law. Both can convict. If there is sufficient circumstantial evidence alone, a jury can still convict.

The evidence against Cannan was overwhelming. The police needed sufficient time to gather it all which they did by charging him tactically then accumulating all the evidence, culminating in the fingerprint.

The assertion that Cannan would have been released or found 'not guilty' is mere subjective supposition on your part

You couldn't be more wrong. That you don't want to listen means that you will continue to be wrong.

As I have suggested, watch the Crimewatch File programme and then you will be enlightened....then come back at me! What have you got to lose?

 
Does JC look like this man to you?

It's a photofit of a man seen in 37SR. It's seen less often than the HR derived sketch, probably because claims that Mr Kipper was JC are debunked by this photofit which does not resemble him at all.

Meanwhile here are the HR derived sketch and MG, taken from the CW reconstruction:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52126607958_a3085b100d_b.jpg

In my opinion HR's 'Mr Kipper' looks nothing like JC or the photofit, but does look like MG, who we know definitely did go to 37SR.
Mark Gurden has curly, uncombed hair, very different to Harry Riglin's Mr Kipper's with his sleek, combed look.

The other photofit shows similar hair and hairline to both Harry Riglin's photofit picture and to John Cannan. It's not curly hair and it's not hair that falls forward either. Both photofits depict a man ostensibly of groomed appearance.
 
The police needed sufficient time to gather it all which they did by charging him tactically

What is tactical charging?

Once there is sufficient evidence for charge then the arrested person MUST be charged.

Once charged the suspect CANNOT be interviewed any further about the offence for which they have been charged.

The police have to operate within the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, not make it up as they go along.

A breach of PACE will likely render evidence inadmissible or could result in the entire case collapsing.
 
Last edited:
The keys can only have come from Sturgis. MG cannot have seen SJL coming behind his desk to pick up the keys if he was at lunch at the time (which elsewhere he says he was). He was presumably knocking at the door because he assumed he didn't have a key. when later he found he did he went back.

This should have been bottomed out the same day or the next morning, but in any event before announcing to the world that the 37SR appointment was real and that SJL attended it. If Sturgis or the police got in using a set of keys it mattered whether there was more than one.
It was KP who said he went to lunch with MG that day in DV's book, I don't know whether he stated a specific time but this interview took place 33 years after Suzy's disappearance so it's understandable if he got the times wrong.

In the 2 reconstructions that MG took part in (the newspaper one in August & the BBC one in October), he clearly places himself at his desk towards the back of the office so I do believe he was in the office when Suzy left.
 
Does JC look like this man to you?

It's a photofit of a man seen in 37SR. It's seen less often than the HR derived sketch, probably because claims that Mr Kipper was JC are debunked by this photofit which does not resemble him at all.

Meanwhile here are the HR derived sketch and MG, taken from the CW reconstruction:
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52126607958_a3085b100d_b.jpg

In my opinion HR's 'Mr Kipper' looks nothing like JC or the photofit, but does look like MG, who we know definitely did go to 37SR.
I agree, IMO the photofit is definitely MG.

Look at MG when he's speaking towards the camera in the Crimewatch reconstruction, his features & hair are exactly like the photofit.
 
I agree, IMO the photofit is definitely MG.

Look at MG when he's speaking towards the camera in the Crimewatch reconstruction, his features & hair are exactly like the photofit.


How many sightings at SR was there?

I know about the couple and the champagne bottle. How can it be Suzy and MG?
 
WJ sees SJL’s car at approximately 12.45pm, (she was in the bank at 12.49pm.
Sturgis office has no clock, so the time placed on SJL leaving the office (IMO) can’t be 100% reliable.
While tight it is possible for WJ to have see SJL’s car at approximately 12.45pm.
She had a reason to notice it, its obstructing her friends garage access.
Detective Barley thought she was correct and IMO he’s and experienced officer and a good detective.
For this to be the case, SJL was either taken when she got to her car and an accomplice dumped her car there immediately.
Or as Detective Barley thought, she went straight to Stevenage Road.
You need to make up your own mind on this, I feel if her car never moved the is is the first option.

Whats even more tight is being at the bank at 12.49.

IN AS book WJ said she had taken the dog for a short walk at 12.40
In the Crimewatch reconstruction Oct 86 she was said to have left the house at 12.45 she and AM a neighbour went to the bank at Fulham Cross.
AM was exchanging a large amount of coins from the payphone she had in her house the transaction was taking time and AM felt embarrassed because she was holding up the queue of lunctime customers. She had glanced at the clock which said 12.49. The police checked the accuracy of the clock and found it to be accurate.
If you check the arial view of Stevenage road it looks like the garage belongs to the house on the corner of Stevenage and Langthorne St, this was also the direction WJ was walking.
The Crimewatch reconstruction shows WJ coming out of her gate and crossing the road in front of the Fiesta which does put a question mark over wether she was able to see a hat on the back sill, she never mentioned seeing the hat.
She then either walks to AM's or gets in a car and picks AM up, they then travel to the bank, park enter the bank and spend enough time making a transaction that AM becomes embarrassed that shes holding up the queue of lunchtime customers.
All this was done in 4 minutes? - this doesnt fit for me.

I noticed the time given for the dog walk 12.40 and the sighting of the car 12.45 - these are the same times SJL was said said to have left the office and the apt time for the 37 Shorrolds rd viewing.
She was away from home until 3.30 thats a crucial timeline in the case.

In Dv's book he says that WJ's original account suggested that she had seen the car around 12.30-12.45
She also says they she was exchanging her childrens pennies at the bank, So theres a change in the story originally it was AM changing coins from her home payphone Had WJ forgotten this detail or were they both exchanging coins - thats a possibility of course.
She was exchanging the childrens coins for a trip to the cinema to see Pinocchio they were going to the 2.30 matinee.
The 1986 film Pinocchio had a run time of 1.25 minutes ending approx 3.55
She now said she had returned home around 5.00 - so not returning home at 3.30pm as she had originally said.
Whats more DV claims WJ said she was convinced the car was silver and not white.
She said I probably didnt pay much attention to the car when coming back from the dog walk, just like there a car there parked a bit across RM drive.

Also in conversation with DV WJ's husband was present and she said to him I like cars dont I? her husband answered Yeah.

Im surprised DV didnt pick her up on these points perhaps his mind was focused elsewhere. It certainly got my attention
JMO


 
You couldn't be more wrong. That you don't want to listen means that you will continue to be wrong.

As I have suggested, watch the Crimewatch File programme and then you will be enlightened....then come back at me! What have you got to lose?

You're waffling now and not answering the point already put to you.

I've seen the various videos on Shirley Banks and I have the book. I agree with Richard Banks' friend's comment that once the car had been found, the case was presented to police on a plate. By his account, there was a large degree of police incompetence shown in this case too.
 
How many sightings at SR was there?

I know about the couple and the champagne bottle. How can it be Suzy and MG?

The detailed timeline created by the police will show where MG was and when.

If he had overlapped in Shorrolds Road with the witness sightings then it would have been identified and addressed.

The construction of the timeline is so critical but some seem to omit the fact.
 
I don't know about Suzy and MG?

All i'm saying is that IMO the photofit of the person seen outside 37SR that afternoon looks the spit of MG.



The problem is the timings wouldn’t match to it being MG? The office wouldn’t of become alarmed until 3ish so how can it of be MG at 1pm?
 
You're waffling now and not answering the point already put to you.

I've seen the various videos on Shirley Banks and I have the book. I agree with Richard Banks' friend's comment that once the car had been found, the case was presented to police on a plate. By his account, there was a large degree of police incompetence shown in this case too.

The car and tax disc in JC's possession was NOT sufficient for a charge of abduction.

Until the fingerprint was found there was not sufficient to support a charge of JC murdering SB.

Follow some crown court trials and see how the evidence is presented and rebutted.

Watch the video that I published the link to, then hopefully you will understand the issues.
 
Last edited:
Whats even more tight is being at the bank at 12.49.

IN AS book WJ said she had taken the dog for a short walk at 12.40
In the Crimewatch reconstruction Oct 86 she was said to have left the house at 12.45 she and AM a neighbour went to the bank at Fulham Cross.
AM was exchanging a large amount of coins from the payphone she had in her house the transaction was taking time and AM felt embarrassed because she was holding up the queue of lunctime customers. She had glanced at the clock which said 12.49. The police checked the accuracy of the clock and found it to be accurate.
If you check the arial view of Stevenage road it looks like the garage belongs to the house on the corner of Stevenage and Langthorne St, this was also the direction WJ was walking.
The Crimewatch reconstruction shows WJ coming out of her gate and crossing the road in front of the Fiesta which does put a question mark over wether she was able to see a hat on the back sill, she never mentioned seeing the hat.
She then either walks to AM's or gets in a car and picks AM up, they then travel to the bank, park enter the bank and spend enough time making a transaction that AM becomes embarrassed that shes holding up the queue of lunchtime customers.
All this was done in 4 minutes? - this doesnt fit for me.

I noticed the time given for the dog walk 12.40 and the sighting of the car 12.45 - these are the same times SJL was said said to have left the office and the apt time for the 37 Shorrolds rd viewing.
She was away from home until 3.30 thats a crucial timeline in the case.

In Dv's book he says that WJ's original account suggested that she had seen the car around 12.30-12.45
She also says they she was exchanging her childrens pennies at the bank, So theres a change in the story originally it was AM changing coins from her home payphone Had WJ forgotten this detail or were they both exchanging coins - thats a possibility of course.
She was exchanging the childrens coins for a trip to the cinema to see Pinocchio they were going to the 2.30 matinee.
The 1986 film Pinocchio had a run time of 1.25 minutes ending approx 3.55
She now said she had returned home around 5.00 - so not returning home at 3.30pm as she had originally said.
Whats more DV claims WJ said she was convinced the car was silver and not white.
She said I probably didnt pay much attention to the car when coming back from the dog walk, just like there a car there parked a bit across RM drive.

Also in conversation with DV WJ's husband was present and she said to him I like cars dont I? her husband answered Yeah.

Im surprised DV didnt pick her up on these points perhaps his mind was focused elsewhere. It certainly got my attention
JMO


Don't forget that DV has an agenda to put over for his book, and will tailor his narrative to fit with this. Also apart from the bank clock all other timing have to be approximate. No one will be precise when they are going about the daily routines.
We can't be certain exactly when SJL left the Stugiss office as they had no clock and unless her colleagues were actively monitoring what SJL was doing they wouldn't have noticed the exact time she left.
For WJ to be correct SJL's car was not there when she took the dog for a walk and appeared while she was walking the dog.
In this case SJL or the perpetrator would have literally missed being seen by WJ by seconds.
 
The problem is the timings wouldn’t match to it being MG? The office wouldn’t of become alarmed until 3ish so how can it of be MG at 1pm?
Good logic, and what about the other witnesses who saw a couple outside 37 SR at around 1.00pm, which of these is the most reliable?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
164
Guests online
2,541
Total visitors
2,705

Forum statistics

Threads
590,037
Messages
17,929,231
Members
228,044
Latest member
Bosie
Back
Top