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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cherwell

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
6,336
Reaction score
15,600
JC was asked about the ownership of the document. The questions were put in such a way that JC ultimately confirmed that the document was from his flat and had been there from a time that pre-dated the abduction of SB.

Then police dropped the bombshell that they had found SB's thumb print on the document, which proved that she must have been in JC's flat at the time of the abduction. JC had previously denied that she had ever been there before. That's enough for a charge!
Hmmm. Not the sharpest knife in the box, is he?
 

EddietheEagle

Active Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2020
Messages
88
Reaction score
175
You are fundamentally wrong in understanding the relevance of the evidence and how the arrest/charge/remand process operates.

Everything before the fingerprint was circumstantial evidence (the tax disc and the car in JC's garage).

It was not enough for the CPS to charge.

There is no temporarily locked away after the police custody time limit has expired, unless there is a charge and subsequent remand into prison custody.

If it hadn't been for the remand for the robbery in Warwickshire then JC would have been free to wander.

Only the later fingerprint of SB found in JC's flat provided the evidence required for JC to be brought from prison, re-interviewed about the fingerprint and then charged with the abduction and murder of SB.
I think you're being unnecessarily patronising and personal with this type of comment. You're not the only person on here with an appreciation of police/CPS procedures.
 

EddietheEagle

Active Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2020
Messages
88
Reaction score
175
The author Christopher Berry-Dee was given extensive access to the police files on the Shirley Banks case. The book Prime Suspect authored jointly by him with Robin Odell is an available authority on the case. Berry-Dee later exchanged hundreds of letters with John Cannan building up important insight into Cannan's mindset.
 

Whitehall 1212

Verified Law Enforcement and SAR (UK)
Joined
Aug 29, 2019
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
7,109
How can you possibly know all that to be exactly what happened?

Because that's how investigations and investigative interviewing work and the information is also in the public domain.

The fingerprint element starts at 36:25

 

Whitehall 1212

Verified Law Enforcement and SAR (UK)
Joined
Aug 29, 2019
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
7,109
I think you're being unnecessarily patronising and personal with this type of comment. You're not the only person on here with an appreciation of police/CPS procedures.

Hardly patronising!

I was correcting the clear misapprehension that:

'The discovery of the tax disc and re-painted car alone would have been more than enough to keep Cannan temporarily locked away.'

Not my words!
 

WiseOwl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
1,030
Reaction score
7,098
Detectives went to Shorrolds Rd within minutes of her disappearance being reported at 6.45 pm, acting under an order to "enter and search" (Andrew Stephen page 10). A police guard was put on the door.
Good point.

However, in DV's book (starting on page 94) he interviews MJ, one of the two officers who were on duty that evening In the Fulham CID Department (the other was SH). MJ states that both he & SH (together with Suzy's father) were asked later that evening to check Suzy's flat, but MJ has no recollection of them or anyone else being asked to go to Shorrolds Road. Of course, to be fair to MJ, it was 32 years later he was interviewed so i guess it's only logical to presume he has forgotten a lot since then.

I do wonder if possibly some confusion had arisen from MG telling the police that he had visited the property that afternoon, and maybe whoever had initially spoken to him had assumed he had been inside the propery when, in fact, he hadn't.

So if the detectives went to SR early that evening with an order to enter and search, presumably they must have broken in as they didn't have a key.

Blows a hole in DV's theory of the missing keys then!
 

WestLondoner

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2021
Messages
843
Reaction score
1,713
The author Christopher Berry-Dee was given extensive access to the police files on the Shirley Banks case. The book Prime Suspect authored jointly by him with Robin Odell is an available authority on the case. Berry-Dee later exchanged hundreds of letters with John Cannan building up important insight into Cannan's mindset.
He did, although he makes a number of mistakes which tend to undermine his reliability as a source. For example, CBD relates how JC told him that he was a well-regarded employee at Superhire. CBD then says that this is a lie, as JC was fired after it was discovered he had a criminal record. Yet JC's account is actually the correct one here. DV tracked down the guy at Superhire who gave him his reference, who confirmed that JC was indeed a well-regarded employee. The company was completely aghast when they later found out what he had been in for, but they didn't find that out until three years later.

JC's supposed resemblance to the HR-derived sketch is wholly suppositious because HR never said JC looked like the man he reckoned to have seen. So any claim that X looked like Mr Kipper unpacks into a claim that someone subjectively thinks X looks like an artist's impression of unknown accuracy of a witness's 5-second impression over his shoulder through a net curtain of a bloke whom the witness never saw properly, and whom the party claiming a resemblance has never seen at all. What value does that have, really? Furthermore, HR later claimed the Antwerp diamond dealer looked like Mr Kipper, but the Antwerp man is short, pudgy, 44 and has cropped hair. If that is true then the sketch must be grossly inaccurate anyway.
 

WestLondoner

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2021
Messages
843
Reaction score
1,713
Good point.

However, in DV's book (starting on page 94) he interviews MJ, one of the two officers who were on duty that evening In the Fulham CID Department (the other was SH). MJ states that both he & SH (together with Suzy's father) were asked later that evening to check Suzy's flat, but MJ has no recollection of them or anyone else being asked to go to Shorrolds Road. Of course, to be fair to MJ, it was 32 years later he was interviewed so i guess it's only logical to presume he has forgotten a lot since then.

I do wonder if possibly some confusion had arisen from MG telling the police that he had visited the property that afternoon, and maybe whoever had initially spoken to him had assumed he had been inside the propery when, in fact, he hadn't.

So if the detectives went to SR early that evening with an order to enter and search, presumably they must have broken in as they didn't have a key.

Blows a hole in DV's theory of the missing keys then!
Well, it doesn't because he covers this. He looked at contemporary photos of 37SR, found one with a PC outside that the shadows show was taken next morning. There is no sign of damage to the door. Also, SR, the detectives he put his idea to, confirmed that they had keys but he doesn't know where they came from
 

EddietheEagle

Active Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2020
Messages
88
Reaction score
175
Hardly patronising!

I was correcting the clear misapprehension that:

'The discovery of the tax disc and re-painted car alone would have been more than enough to keep Cannan temporarily locked away.'

Not my words!
Point taken. Wrong choice of words on my part. I appreciate you need a charge in order to prolong detention.

The wider point though, still obtains. Cannan left an almost unbelievable trail of indicative and corroborating evidence to implicate him in the murder of Shirley Banks. Not the sharpest tool, as already noted above. How many murders would be left unsolved were that quantity of evidence available to police?

It is said that serial killers get better at covering their tracks as they go along, learning empirically on the job, so to speak. Yet Cannan proceeds to pulling off a near perfect murder or certainly one where the evidence is lacking to confidently charge, to the Shirley Banks murder where he is literally scattering clues as he goes. I don't know how you square that particular circle. Luck perhaps?
 

Cherwell

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
6,336
Reaction score
15,600
Well, it doesn't because he covers this. He looked at contemporary photos of 37SR, found one with a PC outside that the shadows show was taken next morning. There is no sign of damage to the door. Also, SR, the detectives he put his idea to, confirmed that they had keys but he doesn't know where they came from
I would expect there to be another keyholder somewhere. At one time I used to work abroad regularly, and I gave a spare key to my flat to a relative who lived a couple of miles away so he could check on the place periodically, pick up the post and let me know if there was anything urgent etc.
 

Whitehall 1212

Verified Law Enforcement and SAR (UK)
Joined
Aug 29, 2019
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
7,109
I disagree. He was also charged with thieving Shirley Banks car. That was done, clearly, as a tactic to hold him. Whether the Leamington charges were necessary on top of that is a matter of conjecture and opinion on your part. This was a serious murder case and the police were closing in. There was no question of Cannan getting bail at all.

Far from being conjecture and opinion it is fact.

JC was initially arrested for abduction NOT murder. JC was not arrested for murder until the fingerprint evidence had been put to him some weeks later.

Theft of a solitary motor vehicle would not result in being remanded in police custody until the next court session, let alone a remand in prison custody.

JC was charged with the Leamington robbery in Warwickshire on 2nd November, 4 days after the arrest. In the intervening period he was interviewed by Bristol police about SB's abduction.

The robbery charge from Warwickshire meant JC was remanded in custody and took the heat off Bristol as the custody time limits had almost expired.

If JC had not been remanded for the Warwickshire robbery then JC would have to had been released as there was not enough evidence for a charge of abduction of SB.

It's worth watching this, which explains most of the investigation.

 
Last edited:

WiseOwl

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
1,030
Reaction score
7,098
Well, it doesn't because he covers this. He looked at contemporary photos of 37SR, found one with a PC outside that the shadows show was taken next morning. There is no sign of damage to the door. Also, SR, the detectives he put his idea to, confirmed that they had keys but he doesn't know where they came from
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.
 

Whitehall 1212

Verified Law Enforcement and SAR (UK)
Joined
Aug 29, 2019
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
7,109
The wider point though, still obtains. Cannan left an almost unbelievable trail of indicative and corroborating evidence to implicate him in the murder of Shirley Banks. Not the sharpest tool, asready noted above. How many murders would be left unsolved were that quantity of evidence available to police?

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 SJL.
 

EddietheEagle

Active Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2020
Messages
88
Reaction score
175
He did, although he makes a number of mistakes which tend to undermine his reliability as a source. For example, CBD relates how JC told him that he was a well-regarded employee at Superhire. CBD then says that this is a lie, as JC was fired after it was discovered he had a criminal record. Yet JC's account is actually the correct one here. DV tracked down the guy at Superhire who gave him his reference, who confirmed that JC was indeed a well-regarded employee. The company was completely aghast when they later found out what he had been in for, but they didn't find that out until three years later.

JC's supposed resemblance to the HR-derived sketch is wholly suppositious because HR never said JC looked like the man he reckoned to have seen. So any claim that X looked like Mr Kipper unpacks into a claim that someone subjectively thinks X looks like an artist's impression of unknown accuracy of a witness's 5-second impression over his shoulder through a net curtain of a bloke whom the witness never saw properly, and whom the party claiming a resemblance has never seen at all. What value does that have, really? Furthermore, HR later claimed the Antwerp diamond dealer looked like Mr Kipper, but the Antwerp man is short, pudgy, 44 and has cropped hair. If that is true then the sketch must be grossly inaccurate anyway.
Harry Riglin obtained a sufficiently good look of Mr Kipper to enable him to produce a photofit which, certainly in my opinion, looks uncannily (!) like Cannan in his dating video. He watches Mr Kipper for long enough to note his smart suit and groomed appearance. Andrew Stephen notes that HR took less notice of the woman. He does report though, some kind of kerfuffle between the two, as though Mr Kipper was ushering the woman into a car, perhaps before whisking her off to Bishops Park or an altogether more sinister destination.
 

Whitehall 1212

Verified Law Enforcement and SAR (UK)
Joined
Aug 29, 2019
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
7,109
It
He did, although he makes a number of mistakes which tend to undermine his reliability as a source. For example, CBD relates how JC told him that he was a well-regarded employee at Superhire. CBD then says that this is a lie, as JC was fired after it was discovered he had a criminal record. Yet JC's account is actually the correct one here. DV tracked down the guy at Superhire who gave him his reference, who confirmed that JC was indeed a well-regarded employee. The company was completely aghast when they later found out what he had been in for, but they didn't find that out until three years later.

JC's supposed resemblance to the HR-derived sketch is wholly suppositious because HR never said JC looked like the man he reckoned to have seen. So any claim that X looked like Mr Kipper unpacks into a claim that someone subjectively thinks X looks like an artist's impression of unknown accuracy of a witness's 5-second impression over his shoulder through a net curtain of a bloke whom the witness never saw properly, and whom the party claiming a resemblance has never seen at all. What value does that have, really? Furthermore, HR later claimed the Antwerp diamond dealer looked like Mr Kipper, but the Antwerp man is short, pudgy, 44 and has cropped hair. If that is true then the sketch must be grossly inaccurate anyway.

It makes no odds though as the sketch is the recall of one witness, as is a statement.

The purpose of the sketch and photo fit is to generate information to the police, which prompts further lines of enquiry as well as providing a visual representation of HR's evidence.

Identification evidence for evidential purposes is a whole different ball game and is covered in Code D of PACE 1984.
 

WestLondoner

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2021
Messages
843
Reaction score
1,713
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.
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.
 

Whitehall 1212

Verified Law Enforcement and SAR (UK)
Joined
Aug 29, 2019
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
7,109
He did, although he makes a number of mistakes which tend to undermine his reliability as a source. For example, CBD relates how JC told him that he was a well-regarded employee at Superhire. CBD then says that this is a lie, as JC was fired after it was discovered he had a criminal record. Yet JC's account is actually the correct one here. DV tracked down the guy at Superhire who gave him his reference, who confirmed that JC was indeed a well-regarded employee. The company was completely aghast when they later found out what he had been in for, but they didn't find that out until three years later.

JC's supposed resemblance to the HR-derived sketch is wholly suppositious because HR never said JC looked like the man he reckoned to have seen. So any claim that X looked like Mr Kipper unpacks into a claim that someone subjectively thinks X looks like an artist's impression of unknown accuracy of a witness's 5-second impression over his shoulder through a net curtain of a bloke whom the witness never saw properly, and whom the party claiming a resemblance has never seen at all. What value does that have, really? Furthermore, HR later claimed the Antwerp diamond dealer looked like Mr Kipper, but the Antwerp man is short, pudgy, 44 and has cropped hair. If that is true then the sketch must be grossly inaccurate anyway.

It makes no odds though as the sketch is the recall of one witness, as is a written statement.

The purpose of the sketch and photo fit is to generate information to the police, which prompts further lines of enquiry. It also represents the person that HR saw.

Identification evidence for evidential purposed is a whole different ball game and is covered in Code D of PACE 1984.
 

Eastend Eagle

Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2022
Messages
44
Reaction score
54
It has been posted on this thread before that after SJL'S car had been found by the police on Stevenage Road, the police found that it had not been ' wiped '. This leaves 3 possibilities :
1) SJL drove the car there herself, presumably alone, unless her passenger was wearing gloves.
2) The car was driven there by someone who was also known to have access to regularly driving the car e.g. a colleague of SJL'S, or,
3) The car was driven there by A N Other wearing gloves.

It seems unlikely to me that it would have been SJL who drove the car there. She was supposedly off to Shorrolds or the POW or somewhere with no indication that she intended travelling to Stevenage Road, and she didn't take many of her belongings with her when she left the office that lunchtime indicating that she didn't intend being out of the office for long. In addition, there is no convincing evidence that she was seen that day in Stevenage Road.
If the car was driven there by someone who didn't have known access to the car, then the theory would be that they abducted SJL somewhere else ( while wearing gloves on a summer's day if they had to touch SJL'S car to carry out the abduction or without gloves if they didn't have to touch the car to do so ) and then drove the car while wearing gloves to Stevenage Road to throw investigators off the scent.
Alternatively, could SJL'S car have been driven to the Stevenage Road area by someone other than SJL who was also known to have access to SJL'S car?
I would be interested to know what other Sleuthers think on this point.
 

WestLondoner

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2021
Messages
843
Reaction score
1,713
Harry Riglin obtained a sufficiently good look of Mr Kipper to enable him to produce a photofit which, certainly in my opinion, looks uncannily (!) like Cannan in his dating video. He watches Mr Kipper for long enough to note his smart suit and groomed appearance. Andrew Stephen notes that HR took less notice of the woman. He does report though, some kind of kerfuffle between the two, as though Mr Kipper was ushering the woman into a car, perhaps before whisking her off to Bishops Park or an altogether more sinister destination.
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.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top