Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #7

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'll look into that. In the meantime, this is how many sexual assaults there were on women within one year in this country:
40,572. Yep.

Great

It's a bit like comparing apples & oranges isn't it?
( When factoring risks you'd need to separate out accidental deaths vs actual crimes and then you'd need to input presence of a known threat to life within yards of the person. Known threats to life including a big river with signs saying 'Danger' next to it otherwise it's GIGO)
 
Ah yes! I see what you mean! That also popped into my head when she said about the 10 minute window.. it doesn't really count as a 10 minute window because they still don't have a clue where she was at the end of that 10 minute window and nobody was searching yet
Exactly. The witnesses may have been incorrect in their times as well. There could have been an hour or longer window.
 
Does anyone know if the path over the stile by the bench is a dead end and only goes to the weir or if it carries on?

I initially assumed NB stopped at the bench to put the harness back on Willow before going through the gate and back to the path and to the main road/car park. If she was carrying on over the stile she wouldn't have needed to put Willow back on harness at that point. Also I thought she put the phone on the bench to use both hands for harness but again if phone was on the ground then that also discounts this theory.
It goes to the weir and from there I believe there is wide (ie vehicle) access up across the river path to Allotment Lane. This exit has been ruled out by police (CCTV coverage most likely).

I wonder if there is a fordable part of the river upstream from the the weir which could have been used by NB or an abductor but it's hard to tell from aerial maps so is just idle speculation JMO
 
Yeah, I agree with your thinking.

My point was that it was a very long time (0930-1050) from the phone being found (0930) until someone phoned the partner/police (1050).

This potentially opens up a bigger window than the 10 minutes the police are going on.
I think this small window is simply the to positively exclude the "window for NB walking out of the area of her own volition straight after the dog walk" options, a procedural thing. If there is a perp and his theoretical future defence counsel asks the police "did you exclude all possibilities of NB walking out of there to start a new life" type thing, and they can't answer yes, then ....... ?

I'd imagine the police have a few other windows that they are not telling us about, no need for them to do so unless they have specific information they would like from the public.
 
Great

It's a bit like comparing apples & oranges isn't it?
( When factoring risks you'd need to separate out accidental deaths vs actual crimes and then you'd need to input presence of a known threat to life within yards of the person. Known threats to life including a big river with signs saying 'Danger' next to it otherwise it's GIGO)
Agree. The chances of falling into a river if you live in a desert are very small.
 
There was a woman who posted on here questioning that women never get abducted or assaulted in daylight. Wow that's a staggering figure!! but not at all surprising.
When I was younger I was grabbed in broad daylight by a river by a man who pulled me into some bushes. There were other people around and it must have taken all of 20 seconds. Ironically, I was saved by a dog belonging to another walker.
 
I think if they shift the search area upstream of where the harness was found they will find what they are looking for. Physical searches rather than relying solely on computers.
 
23 deaths recorded in rivers. And 6903 kidnappings in the space of one year.
I suspect that most of these are children taken by the non-resident parent. The figure doesn't reflect adults being abducted in suspicious circumstances.
 
In the latest LP update the aerial picture they use to illustrate points has the 9:10 sighting marked at "Sighting 3..." yet there are only two sightings on their timeline and neither of the other two (or is it one?) sightings are marked.

Are they referring to the witness who describes seeing NB 'laughing and joking' as sighting 1, the lower field witness as sighting 2 - if so, why is sighting 1 not on the timeline?

More confusion?

[Edit: In the timeline on 3rd Feb there are three sightings specifically mentioned :-
8:43 a.m. - Nicola was seen on the river path
8:47 a.m. - She was seen in the lower field with her dog
9:10 a.m. - She was seen in the upper field

So these will be the 3 sightings and the first one is probably the 'laughing and joking' sighting.

On the latest update (6th Feb) there are only two sightings mentioned, the 8:43 on now just says
8.43am: Nicola walked along the path by the River Wyre

and the other two are now
8:47am (approximately): A dog-walker – somebody who knows Nicola – saw her walking around the lower field with her dog
9.10am (approximately): A witness – somebody who knows Nicola – saw her on the upper field walking her dog

Transcription errors or intentional changes? If the latter, why?]
Almost everything seems uncertain in this case but one thing seems absolutely certain: information previously stated as factual seems to change on an almost daily basis!
 
When I was younger I was grabbed in broad daylight by a river by a man who pulled me into some bushes. There were other people around and it must have taken all of 20 seconds. Ironically, I was saved by a dog belonging to another walker.
Awful experience.

The only route out for the kidnapper & NB as hostage or incapacitated is surely via Garstang Road.
And although the last statement says they have collected footage for this exit, looks like more will help them to eliminate or pursue their other lines of inquiry

'Our enquiries now focus on the river path which leads from the fields back to Garstang Road – for that we need drivers and cyclists who travelled that way on the morning of January 27 to make contact. We have already done a lot of work around this, but every piece of footage helps us build up a picture of movements on that morning.

We will be making contact with drivers, who we believe were travelling down Garstang Road that morning via letter. If you receive one of these letters and have dashcam footage, we would urge you to make contact using the dedicated email NicolaBulleyInvestigation@lancashire.police.uk so that a member of the enquiry team can make contact and review your footage to establish whether it assists. We would ask that only drivers that do have dashcam footage reply to this request.'



Fingers crossed that some of the vehicles whose reg they picked up on the road have dash cam ( otherwise they'll surely have to make a bigger trawl for all vehicles)
 
Last edited:
Not sure if anyone's mentioned it... would be interesting to know how frequently her fitbit had been syncing historically to see whether not syncing for a few days was abnormal. Joining a lot of dots but it could be a sign someone purposefully stopped it syncing (her or someone else)
Real detective work at last!! I like it
 
Try influencing a strange dog in any of those ways next time you meet an apparently unaccompanied one. I guarantee it will either totally ignore you, or if it doesn't, it will do so as soon as it smells a squirrel, another dog, etc.

Dogs are not four-legged hairy people.

I volunteer for a rescue who finds people stuck up mountains and are lost in very rural places moors etc. Many have a medical emergency. Frequently they have dogs with them, many of which will be found some way from the person as the anxiety the dogs feel makes them want to reverse their movements and go home. Others will run at the sound of us approaching, which often will be a single rescuer as we split up in some areas, to cover more ground.

Neither myself or the team have ever had to chase after a dog. They’re without fail, overjoyed to see us. They’re pack leader isn’t able to lead, so they are very, very relieved to have another one.

Dogs are dogs.

Just my several decades of experience including some high profile cases.
 
Having followed this case over the last 10 days & everything that has unfolded & not unfolded although i tended to go with the LA theory that NB fell into the water there’s still something telling me if she didn’t that can only mean at least one of the witness statements cannot be accurate for whatever reason & can only mean foul play. We don’t even know for certain she actually made it into the park - my initial thoughts were this whole thing looks staged, could somebody else of taken the dog & phone off her to the park & she went in another direction after the school ?
 
When I was younger I was grabbed in broad daylight by a river by a man who pulled me into some bushes. There were other people around and it must have taken all of 20 seconds. Ironically, I was saved by a dog belonging to another walker.
It literally only takes a couple of seconds for something to happen. When I was 14 on a day out in London with my friends an older man tried to pull me onto a tube train with him that I had just got off. I froze and didn’t scream or react. I was in absolute fear. My friends were ahead of me and run back towards me when they realised what was happening. This was during the day at a busy tube station.
Very easy for someone to do something in that time period, plus Nicola was fairly short and petite which would make it easier for someone to overcome her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
151
Guests online
2,966
Total visitors
3,117

Forum statistics

Threads
593,411
Messages
17,986,756
Members
229,130
Latest member
MissingPersonsMatter
Back
Top