@Popejohn3 can tell us in a private conversation if he wants
UK UK - Claudia Lawrence, 35, York University, 18 March 2009 - Chef - #2
- Thread starter KateB
- Start date
- Status
Hi I thought the new lot were going to revisit the case so why not re visit me?
I don’t believe the first lot took me seriously.
And also for example never took any notes unless of course I was recorded secretly .
MajorLang
Former Member
@Pinkizzy Not sure if they can as a new member?
MajorLang
Former Member
@Popejohn3 Im losing the will to live here.
Did you have a hunch?
Was your conversation with Police based upon facts?
If the police were desperate to solve this, why would they not pay attention?
Ok I have to say I have no intention to give details here nor in private conversation.
The police just said that “ her mobile footprint “ does not support what I saw .
HongKongPhooey
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2019
- Messages
- 4,301
- Reaction score
- 47,417
What did you see?
Claudia Lawrence’s phone ‘was still active four hours after her disappearance’
June 2, 2019
"The phone belonging to Claudia Lawrence was still active four hours after she failed to turn up to work, it has been reported.
The chef’s Samsung D900 handset connected to a mast next to her place of work at University of York at 10am, when her manager called and left a voice message.
That is one reason why police believe her killer was known to the 35-year-old chef.
A source close to the North Yorkshire Police investigation told the Sunday Time
A mobile phone similar to that owned by Claudia
Claudia’s shift was due to start at 6am on Thursday, March 19, 2009, but she never arrived.
According to the paper, the call from her manager at 10am puts her handset within a nine-mile stretch between the university and Tockwith – and which includes her Heworth Road home.
It reports: “Telephone records show that two hours after Claudia’s manager placed the call, her mobile phone was switched off at 12.10pm."
"What may have happened is that the phone rings out at 10am and goes to voicemail simply because there is nobody there.
Then whoever it is, possibly the suspect, looks at the phone at 12.10pm, realises there is a missed call, realises the phone is still switched on and then switches it off.
That is one explanation. However, just because her phone rings at 10am, it doesn’t mean she is with her phone at that point. She could be absolutely anywhere. But what you have to do as an investigator is treat it as if that is her location until you can rule it out.
Once realising Claudia has a missed call, the most likely thing you would think a suspect would do is smash it or break it or throw it in the river, which would provide the network with an implicit detachment record.
However, that didn’t happen. It appears what we get here is an explicit detachment, meaning the suspect had the calmness of mind to think: ‘I’d better switch the phone off in the normal way.’
June 2, 2019
"The phone belonging to Claudia Lawrence was still active four hours after she failed to turn up to work, it has been reported.
The chef’s Samsung D900 handset connected to a mast next to her place of work at University of York at 10am, when her manager called and left a voice message.
That is one reason why police believe her killer was known to the 35-year-old chef.
A source close to the North Yorkshire Police investigation told the Sunday Time
- Her mobile phone never left the area of York.
This is part of the reason why the police believe she fell victim to an attack by somebody that she knew who was familiar with the area.
A mobile phone similar to that owned by Claudia
Claudia’s shift was due to start at 6am on Thursday, March 19, 2009, but she never arrived.
According to the paper, the call from her manager at 10am puts her handset within a nine-mile stretch between the university and Tockwith – and which includes her Heworth Road home.
It reports: “Telephone records show that two hours after Claudia’s manager placed the call, her mobile phone was switched off at 12.10pm."
"What may have happened is that the phone rings out at 10am and goes to voicemail simply because there is nobody there.
Then whoever it is, possibly the suspect, looks at the phone at 12.10pm, realises there is a missed call, realises the phone is still switched on and then switches it off.
That is one explanation. However, just because her phone rings at 10am, it doesn’t mean she is with her phone at that point. She could be absolutely anywhere. But what you have to do as an investigator is treat it as if that is her location until you can rule it out.
Once realising Claudia has a missed call, the most likely thing you would think a suspect would do is smash it or break it or throw it in the river, which would provide the network with an implicit detachment record.
However, that didn’t happen. It appears what we get here is an explicit detachment, meaning the suspect had the calmness of mind to think: ‘I’d better switch the phone off in the normal way.’
MajorLang
Former Member
Don't think he / she is going to say? No reason they can't reveal?
Of course she may have been separated from her mobile and that's a reason why mobile footprint didn't need to fit.
Ok please stop asking me question if you do not want to feel ‘weird ‘ or ‘distracted’ or ‘loosing the will to live ‘
So as to put your mind at ease and for you to carry on thinking and exploring I tell you that I have contacted the family and told them where I work.I’ll be more than happy to speak with them .
HongKongPhooey
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2019
- Messages
- 4,301
- Reaction score
- 47,417
Might be good to phone 101 too. For your personal safety apart from anything else.
MajorLang
Former Member
@Popejohn3
I'm sure if you believe you have something important to report that the Police will be interested, why wouldn't they?
Of course there are some Nut Jobs out there so they do have to be aware of this so as not to waste time.
If you have something to say-tell Police
Hmm the police contacted me THREE years after I first made contact !
MajorLang
Former Member
@Popejohn3
Well the Police will be watching this thread so this is a good pace to get there attention more quickly than wait 3 Years
Even cold case police ?
HongKongPhooey
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2019
- Messages
- 4,301
- Reaction score
- 47,417
I think its possible. The thread has had a lot of activity recently. It will be attracting attention.
MajorLang
Former Member
This is interesting and how you could ask to identify the suspect.
The law here talks about the procedure the police would have to take you through to identify the Perp(s)
Identification | The Crown Prosecution Service
Thelastleg
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2019
- Messages
- 375
- Reaction score
- 1,655
Hi PJ3 we
Hi PJ3 Welcome. You have made interesting comments. Regardless if the first team dismissed your tip the first time because of the mobile footprint, I would be approaching the new team now. People make mistakes, technology moves on, disregarded clues can become relevant, evidence gets lost. Its not about egos. I'm not telling because LE won't ask is unacceptable. Please try again. You might end Claudia's family and friends anguish. How good would that make you feel?
MajorLang
Former Member
And you must have a reason for wanting to tell us some of the story, we would all support you telling NYP I'm sure?
- Status