Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #15

[29 Acacia Road]

Although the police divers were in the water pretty quickly and they are well trained and good at what they do, it would seem to me they likely missed Nicola's body and sadly over the days it moved further and further, potentially she didn't go in roughly in line with the bench and maybe walked a bit of a distance before entering, which maybe meant the searches of the water stayed in an area that was perhaps not expanded quickly enough, but they did search considerably before PF turned up.

There are several cases you can find in the UK of people going into rivers and canals and police divers searching quickly but not finding the person, only for the body to surface weeks or months down the line. As the SIO said, water is a very difficult area to search.

PF really didn't help with his comments, such as 'impossible', because as he was pushed by the media as a leading expert, many of the public believed he must be correct and the police wrong, the public didn't bother to do even a little bit of basic google research that would have show nothing is impossible when it comes to bodies in water.

 

[flysleuthD]

Water levels. That makes sense yes.

This buildings use has been confirmed and discussed on a previous thread and been searched as part of the investigation

 

[29 Acacia Road]

I agree regarding newspaper articles but as far as I can see the red van has not been discounted the SIO just didn't see it as suspicious. They were still trying to trace it at the press conference. I have been unable to find anything to say the owner has been located and discounted?

If a local witness who uses the warehouse found a van being parked outside suspicious and it's on the same day that a woman disappears in the immediate area then I would think that was worthy of attention? perhaps they went to the press because they thought it should be brought to the attention of the local public sooner and were frustrated.

The red van - We're really really grateful to members of the public for ringing into the enquiry. We wouldn't have got this far without everybody's help, but I think it's also really obvious that we are being inundated with false information, accusations and rumours, which is distracting us from our work. The red van has been reported that it was in the area on the morning of the 27th., like many other hundreds of cars that morning. We're really grateful for the witness who has told us about that and we are continuing to make enquiries to try and track down that specific van, but from my perspective, being in possession of all the facts and information of his case, I do not believe that to be suspicious, but we are continuing to investigate that, so that we can identify whoever was in the area at that time to make sure that they can't give us any further information that will assist the investigation.

Yeah I was hesitant to include the red van, the only reason I did was that it seem to appear in the media first, so even if the witness was genuine, I just start to wonder why the need to complain to the media that the police haven't acted quickly enough.

 

[Mr X]

Although the police divers were in the water pretty quickly and they are well trained and good at what they do, it would seem to me they likely missed Nicola's body and sadly over the days it moved further and further, potentially she didn't go in roughly in line with the bench and maybe walked a bit of a distance before entering, which maybe meant the searches of the water stayed in an area that was perhaps not expanded quickly enough, but they did search considerably before PF turned up.

There are several cases you can find in the UK of people going into rivers and canals and police divers searching quickly but not finding the person, only for the body to surface weeks or months down the line. As the SIO said, water is a very difficult area to search.

PF really didn't help with his comments, such as 'impossible', because as he was pushed by the media as a leading expert, many of the public believed he must be correct and the police wrong, the public didn't bother to do even a little bit of basic google research that would have show nothing is impossible when it comes to bodies in water.

Interesting to see the levels data for today. It definitely is partly tidal above the Weir . Kirkland bridge which is Upstream has seen a big rise today.

This must mean river flows in and out at some higher tides and the disappearance time did IiRC coincide with a high tide.

Last week (correction as said 24h originally) at Kirkland bridge



So presumably a body could indeed be washed over that Weir if the timing was right.

I wonder if the body of someone who has been killed would float rather than sink. Maybe a different outcome allowing it to move further away in the flow of the water.

 

[Mr X]

I was never really suspicious of a third party, or god forbid someone she knew, until I just rewatched that Sky News interview with Ron.

There’s a quick blink-and-you-miss-it reaction he has that struck me as very odd. He says something like “I thought someone had gone to the toilet,” then looks at the interviewer and starts to say “That would have been my first (thought?)…” but stops himself, turns his face aside and makes a strange sound, then picks up immediately by talking about walking towards the brick house.

I’m sure this is farfetched and I don’t typically speculate about anyone, but that little tic seemed almost like he realized “That would have been…” was NOT what he wanted to say. If he were simply recounting what happened, he would have said “That was my first thought.” But “would have been” sounds like conjecture, like he’s talking about something that didn’t happen. It almost seems like he had a moment of panic.

If I misspoke in that situation and realized I’d said “would have been” by accident, I would have corrected myself - “Not ‘would have been,’ that WAS my first thought.” I know I’m innocent, so correcting a mistake, even drawing attention to it, wouldn’t cause me stress.

His near choking on his words and then skipping to a new subject without correcting or finishing his thought bothers me now. And it got my brain spinning into how people return to the scene of their crime, become “helpers” to LE, etc.

P.S. I’ve probably watched “Jinxed” too many times and have Robert Durst’s odd vocal tics stuck in my brain.

He was hesitant. Possibly just being in front of camera. My immediate thought was perhaps he heard something in the bushes and systemised it in his head as someone going to the loo.

IMO this could happen then when you find out missing person your brain changes the story but you still have the original story in your head.

 

[Mr applebee]

I was never really suspicious of a third party, or god forbid someone she knew, until I just rewatched that Sky News interview with Ron.

There’s a quick blink-and-you-miss-it reaction he has that struck me as very odd. He says something like “I thought someone had gone to the toilet,” then looks at the interviewer and starts to say “That would have been my first (thought?)…” but stops himself, turns his face aside and makes a strange sound, then picks up immediately by talking about walking towards the brick house.

I’m sure this is farfetched and I don’t typically speculate about anyone, but that little tic seemed almost like he realized “That would have been…” was NOT what he wanted to say. If he were simply recounting what happened, he would have said “That was my first thought.” But “would have been” sounds like conjecture, like he’s talking about something that didn’t happen. It almost seems like he had a moment of panic.

If I misspoke in that situation and realized I’d said “would have been” by accident, I would have corrected myself - “Not ‘would have been,’ that WAS my first thought.” I know I’m innocent, so correcting a mistake, even drawing attention to it, wouldn’t cause me stress.

His near choking on his words and then skipping to a new subject without correcting or finishing his thought bothers me now. And it got my brain spinning into how people return to the scene of their crime, become “helpers” to LE, etc.

I think that the whole situation around the people who found Willow and the phone next to a river minus a human that was completely missing from the picture, along with the delay in reporting the suspicious scene that they had stumbled upon is more bizarre than the fact that a woman has gone missing. Sounds like they took the most absurd and round about way of reporting their findings possible. It sounds like they spent enough time with Willow and discussing what they’d found, to come to the conclusion that whoever owned the dog and the phone was not on the field surely? The fact they walked away truly baffles me.

I’ve seen in some places that the dog lead was found at the scene? Others have said it wasn’t. Any confirmation either way?

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

or walk under the bridge (locals say river is shallow at low tide here) and out the otherside to join the riverbank path on the otherside - she could choose to walk on the right or left bank downstream and enter the water where ever - or walk into wide open countryside/woodland. It also doesn’t look too far to walk from the left bank cross country home to Inskip across fields.

At low tide it might be possible, but at 9.30am the tide was apparently coming in, so I'm not sure how likely it is that NB could have done it at the time she went missing.

 

[sriraaacha]

Honestly Ron just seems like an average 70 year old guy who didn't really want to be interviewed and just wanted to walk his dog. He's probably also worried about messing his words up, being on camera and/or coming across guilty, same as Paul. It's also possible he doesn't really remember details specifically and he's slightly estimating it. Since there aren't really many potential known options to become suspects here, they're all in the front seat and god I'm just glad I'm not one of them...

 

[Normanly]

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>I actually thought the whole interview was conducted terribly by Kay Burley and Sky News.

The poor fella was ambushed and clearly didn't want to stop and talk. He is an elderly witness and probably has trouble recalling exactly what happened 3 weeks on, I know I would

The whole point from when Willow and the phone were found is very muddled and is yet another void of information

 

[Sarahlou]

Honestly Ron just seems like an average 70 year old guy who didn't really want to be interviewed and just wanted to walk his dog. He's probably also worried about messing his words up, being on camera and/or coming across guilty, same as Paul. It's also possible he doesn't really remember details specifically and he's slightly estimating it. Since there aren't really many potential known options to become suspects here, they're all in the front seat and god I'm just glad I'm not one of them...

Me too! The speculation about witnesses is really unnecessary IMO.

 

[bringmeacupoft]

I actually thought the whole interview was conducted terribly by Kay Burley and Sky News.

The poor fella was ambushed and clearly didn't want to stop and talk. He is an elderly witness and probably has trouble recalling exactly what happened 3 weeks on, I know I would

The whole point from when Willow and the phone were found is very muddled and is yet another void of information

It was like he initiated the conversation to the reporters ‘do you live here….’

Anyway, LE can’t operate in spider senses so I’ll just leave my thoughts to that.

 

[SpideySense]

I actually thought the whole interview was conducted terribly by Kay Burley and Sky News.

The poor fella was ambushed and clearly didn't want to stop and talk. He is an elderly witness and probably has trouble recalling exactly what happened 3 weeks on, I know I would

The whole point from when Willow and the phone were found is very muddled and is yet another void of information

I don’t know about being ambushed. He had spoken to the reporter before, apparently, and I’m assuming he saw the cameraman. Looks more like he walked right into it, to me. I mean, he could have turned around if he didn’t want to be interviewed on live tv.

 

[29 Acacia Road]

I don’t know about being ambushed. He had spoken to the reporter before, apparently, and I’m assuming he saw the cameraman. Looks more like he walked right into it, to me. I mean, he could have turned around if he didn’t want to be interviewed on live tv.

I had read elsewhere he had refused all previous interviews with the media, that he lives right next to where he was walking and they basically waited for him to come out. Not sure how accurate that is, but I saw several people saying it when the Sky news footage appeared.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

I feel sorry for Ron. He has obviously spoken to reporters over the past three weeks and now knows them fairly well, but I didn't at all get the sense this interview was a set-up. He's probably so used to seeing reporters and camera crews by now that he just walks right past them, as he was trying to do yesterday until big guy reporter blocked his path.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

I don’t know about being ambushed. He had spoken to the reporter before, apparently, and I’m assuming he saw the cameraman. Looks more like he walked right into it, to me. I mean, he could have turned around if he didn’t want to be interviewed on live tv.

But how would he know it was live TV if he was out walking his dog and not watching Sky News? Reporters have been all over the village for the past three weeks. Walking right past them has probably become second-nature by now.

 

[Pinkizzy]

I think his comment was a joke.

It was like he initiated the conversation to the reporters ‘do you live here….’

Anyway, LE can’t operate in spider senses so I’ll just leave my thoughts to that.

 

[SpideySense]

I had read elsewhere he had refused all previous interviews with the media, that he lives right next to where he was walking and they basically waited for him to come out. Not sure how accurate that is, but I saw several people saying it when the Sky news footage appeared.

Ah, if that’s true, I wasn’t aware. I thought they were on the path near the bench. And I don’t want to make too much of a witness’ odd phrasing. Just because it stood out to me doesn’t make it significant in any meaningful way.

 

[Agatha3]

So who was the online conference with?

Exclusively Mortgages I would guess as she worked for them and mentioned them on her Facebook site.

 

[29 Acacia Road]

Ah, if that’s true, I wasn’t aware. I thought they were on the path near the bench. And I don’t want to make too much of a witness’ odd phrasing. Just because it stood out to me doesn’t make it significant in any meaningful way.

I don't know how accurate it is, I am just repeating what I read as it struck me as the opposite as your first thoughts on it. I think it was twitter I read that on, considering that place has been a cesspit of conspiracy nutters and nasty comments about family, friends and witnesses ever since the case became known, I found it interesting people on twitter were actually sticking up for Ron and having a go at Sky news and Kay Burley, so I just wanted to share.

 

[Bibitty]

What would stop the dog following - assuming it wasn't tied up ?

No one knows why the dog didn’t follow NB - into the water or even past the gate (LP said the dog could have got through) - maybe it is well trained to ‘stay’