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

[Whitehall 1212]

He was certainly given a lot more than DV it seems who they won’t even listen to or look into what he is saying.

Is it any wonder? DV is not a respected journalist.

Also, remember that DV has history with the Met as an employee. I suspect that the Met and DV did not part on ideal terms and that DV's motivation is more than just the PoW quest.

 

[Cluesleuth]

He was certainly given a lot more than DV it seems who they won’t even listen to or look into what he is saying.

AS gives an unbiased account of the case which I feel is important.

 

[Cluesleuth]

Well AS certainly was given access back in the day to a lot of stuff.

Pg 191 of his book he remembers the feeling of first touching some of SJL's belongings, cheque book stubbs, her cheque card,diaries and purse.

 

[WestLondoner]

Thanks for the replies

That’s my issue is all my theory’s have holes to them. I still think her personal life holds clues to who did this.


I don’t buy JC as the guilty party and POW makes zero sense.

Moo

Exactly - every theory is challenged bleu in some way.

 

[Terryb808]

Exactly - every theory is challenged bleu in some way.

The more you look, additional suspects appear, you can effectively fit them into one narrative or another.
For example JC could fit with BW’s sighting at approximately 2.45pm. As he’s more likely to have had a place in the Acton area.
An abduction from SR tends to suggest an organised gang with more than one member.
To vanish with no real concrete witnesses is unusual and the key to understanding this is within SJL’s complicated and secretive lifestyle.
Someone knows something important, but may not understand just how important that info is.
Why was she so secretive and why does this trend seem to continue today.
For example IMO AL knows more than he’s letting on. I can’t believe he didn’t know what SJL was up to?

 

[Cluesleuth]

Agree, if WJ sighting of SJL’s car is correct then she was snatched as she reached her car after leaving the office.
This would involve at least two people, one to take SJL away and the other to abandon her car in Stevenage Road.
I don’t believe DV’s assessment of WJ, he had good reason to cast doubt on her as a witness, if she’s a good witness (and Detective Barley must have thought she was) the DV has no narrative.

Im just wondering which time you are working off for the WJ sighting
In AS book WJ says she sighted the car at 12.45
IN DV book its 12.30-12.45

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Thanks for the replies

That’s my issue is all my theory’s have holes to them. I still think her personal life holds clues to who did this.


I don’t buy JC as the guilty party and POW makes zero sense.

Moo

In which case it must be an unaccounted for offender who abducts women a very similar MO and victim type to JC, without seeking a ransom, and so by implication must murder them too.

What do we think the odds are on two such offenders being in Fulham on the 28th July 1986? Because JC was there.....the police have confirmed so.

How do we explain no offences with a similar MO and victim demographic that jump out in the years immediately preceding or after, other than those known to be committed by JC?

No one has managed to produce any evidence to rebutt that it can't be JC.

All these elements, even without the significant additional circumstantial evidence that the police have, directly point towards JC.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

An abduction from SR tends to suggest an organised gang with more than one member.

In terms of such an MO, I have never come across one involving a gang, in broad daylight taking a woman off the street in such an area. What would be the likely motive and why take such a huge risk?

SJL has to have known her abductor or he placed her at such ease that she was confident enough to go somewhere with him that enabled him to overpower her out of public view/hearing. I suggest SJL accepted that he was wealthy and she didn't want to lose a potentially lucrative commission by being cautious.

It's really helpful to consider all hypotheses and then to consider how similar offences occur in that such offenders have use fraud to enable them to get the victim into a situation from where they can overpower them.

Think time, place, MO using fraud/false legend, means of restraint.

Consider Bundy, Sams, Haliwell, Couzens and how they engineered the situation to take the victim off guard and overpower them.

 

[ruby925]

I recently watched the Alan Whicker programme made in the 1980s about the QE2, which included the crew off duty in Thailand. I was hoping to see a contemporary pic of SW, who was in 2006 (approx) convicted of 5 murders of prostitutes in Suffolk, as he worked on the QE2 at the same time as SJL. I know he was discounted by the SJL police investigation, but I do think he looks more like the photofit than JC and he very probably knew SLJ. Having read various bit of info on the net, none of which may be true..., it seems SW became besotted with women and turned violent when things didn't go his way. I am thinking that someone like him might fit the stalker pattern, checking SJL out, even to making an appointment to view property with or without SJL knowing his true identity. Apparently he may have used Kipper as slang for face too.
Has this guy as a suspect been completely discounted by the sleuths on here too? How many people know someone that commits murder at any time...is this just a co-incidence? in 2021, police were looking at SW for a murder committed earlier than the ones for which he was convicted.
All just my opinion of course, no evidence. I bet he did know her though, even if from afar...

 

[asyousay]

In which case it must be an unaccounted for offender who abducts women a very similar MO and victim type to JC, without seeking a ransom, and so by implication must murder them too.

What do we think the odds are on two such offenders being in Fulham on the 28th July 1986? Because JC was there.....the police have confirmed so.

How do we explain no offences with a similar MO and victim demographic that jump out in the years immediately preceding or after, other than those known to be committed by JC?

No one has managed to produce any evidence to rebutt that it can't be JC.

All these elements, even without the significant additional circumstantial evidence that the police have, directly point towards JC.

Where has it been confirmed he was in Fulham that day?

 

[WestLondoner]

He did see MG. MG and another colleague must have spoken to him in person when they went to 37SR looking for SJL because this is when HR said he had seen the male he described with a female outside the property.

MG went back to 37SR later that day before going to the police to report the disappearance. AS notes that when he did report the disappearance, HR was "now saying" that he recalled the woman being bundled into a car or vehicle by the male, which is why the police took it so seriously. As HR was "now saying" something this suggests MG spoke to him twice and while we don't know how it happened, the most likely is when he went back to SR a second time.

The idea that HR recalled MG when later asked about the male he saw outside the property doesn't really make much sense. It might have if HR and MG hadn't spoken in person. The police would have known exactly how HR got involved and that he had seen and spoken to MG in person.

There is a lot of mystery around SJL's Kipper appointment but I don't think that this is part of it. We can accept that there is some doubt over if the appointment was a real one without needing to explain away the evidence that points toward it being real (real in the sense that SJL attended 37SR, not that there was a real live man whose government documents list him as surname Kipper).

The problem with this for me is that none of this was bottomed out before the story went public. SJL was reported missing at 6.45, Sturgis staff have gone home, her car was found at 10pm, Sturgis staff turn up for work by 9 and by maybe 10 it has already been decided she did go to 37SR and did meet someone. This cannot have been based on any meticulous examination of timings etc derived from statements, because there hadn't been time to take any, much less cross-compare them. It is also not based on any reliable information because HR isn't reliable and he never claimed to have seen her there anyway. The assertion that she'd been there was what Wikipedia would sniffily call 'original research' and was not backed up by the only witness. A look around the Sturgis office would have told you that a bloke in a suit and a woman with highlights described any of the men and any of the women. From there it's not a big leap to wonder if HR just saw the search party.

 

[WestLondoner]

I think the issue or number, of front door keys is irrelevant. Missing one? You call the owner and explain the problem. It's not as if the owner has given up possession of his property.

Nowhere is it reported of a problem obtaining access to 37 Shorrolds Road, whether by the manager in the afternoon, or subsequently by police. This indicates there were other keys to enter the house. Videcette himself has established that the police didn't break in. Has it been established definitively anyway, that there were only one set of keys held by the agent?

Conversely, it is known and reported that the front door to Suzy Lamplugh's flat was forced, presumably because police couldn't find her tenant, Nick Bryant, in time (ASage 12).

The owner was a helicopter pilot in (IIRC) the Middle East. He wasn't around to provide spare keys.

For SJL to have taken the keys and others to have got in using keys, there would need to have been several sets. Nobody inquired at the time whether this was likely or usual. DV asked KP what was usual and he said one set and if you had more than one you'd keep them together. The only person who seems to have thought about this is DV. Here again the rush to go public clearly led to things being overlooked. One thing overlooked was whether HR could have been describing visits by MG and SF; another was whether SJL ever went to the property if there was one set of keys and Sturgis still had them. This surely needed to be bottomed out before asserting that SJL went to and was seen at 37SR.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Where has it been confirmed he was in Fulham that day?

I posted this link to MSM a few weeks ago.

All I would say is that before anyone dismisses JC find some viable evidence to rebutt what the review SIO tells us. After all he knows a hell of a lot more than any of us do.

Suzy Lamplugh: John Cannan remains 'firmly in the frame'

Former detective Jim Dickie led a review of the estate agent's disappearance.

www.bbc.com

 

[WestLondoner]

You're probably right. I had the impression that if he spoke to MG it was on MG's second visit, but of course HR should have recognised that he was the same man he'd seen through the window earlier.

That said, it depends on how good his recognition of faces was, as this is something that varies a lot with individuals. I'm practically face-blind, I recognise people I know well or see often, but often fail to do so if I see them after a long gap, or just out of context.

Also, he saw 'Mr Kipper' for 5 to 7 seconds through a net curtain. We know MG went there. MG looks like Mr Kipper. What's the heat-seeking bit of proof that Mr Kipper was not MG?

When first seen MG's in a suit. Second time, suppose he's in a shirt and tie. You've had a 7-second look 2 hours ago. What are the chances you realise it's the same guy again? Was this clarified before the Mr Kipper sighting was made public? How and when was there time?

 

[Whitehall 1212]

One thing overlooked was whether HR could have been describing visits by MG and SF

MG spoke directly to HR. It was MG that HR provided his first description to. This is in AS

Now why would HR describe a chap who spoke to him a few hours later?

 

[WestLondoner]

Although MG never reported a problem about gaining access to 37 Shorrolds Road, In the Crimewatch reconstruction he is clearly shown, along with another (male) colleague, knocking on the door and looking through the window to see if anyone was there. This surely indicates that, when he visited Shorrolds Road that afternoon, he did not have a key to enter the property?

If so it undermines HR, who somehow noticed SJL and Mr Kipper leaving 37SR in unremarkable fashion but failed to notice MG and SF,'s much noisier visit later.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

For SJL to have taken the keys and others to have got in using keys, there would need to have been several sets.

We need to consider if the vendor had provided additional local contact details e.g. parent, partner, whilst he was overseas.

This alternative may also have had a key. It may be this key that was obtained to enable the police to enter later that evening.

JMO

 

[WiseOwl]

I recently watched the Alan Whicker programme made in the 1980s about the QE2, which included the crew off duty in Thailand. I was hoping to see a contemporary pic of SW, who was in 2006 (approx) convicted of 5 murders of prostitutes in Suffolk, as he worked on the QE2 at the same time as SJL. I know he was discounted by the SJL police investigation, but I do think he looks more like the photofit than JC and he very probably knew SLJ. Having read various bit of info on the net, none of which may be true..., it seems SW became besotted with women and turned violent when things didn't go his way. I am thinking that someone like him might fit the stalker pattern, checking SJL out, even to making an appointment to view property with or without SJL knowing his true identity. Apparently he may have used Kipper as slang for face too.
Has this guy as a suspect been completely discounted by the sleuths on here too? How many people know someone that commits murder at any time...is this just a co-incidence? in 2021, police were looking at SW for a murder committed earlier than the ones for which he was convicted.
All just my opinion of course, no evidence. I bet he did know her though, even if from afar...

SW did know Suzy, his father found a picture of them together from their days on the QE2:

Family of Suzy Lamplugh want cops to quiz Suffolk Strangler

Steve Wright's ex-wife says he flirted with Suzy Lamplugh before denying ever knowing her when her disappearance hit the headlines. Suzy vanished after leaving her London office in 1986.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[asyousay]

I posted this link to MSM a few weeks ago.

All I would say is that before anyone dismisses JC find some viable evidence to rebutt what the review SIO tells us. After all he knows a hell of a lot more than any of us do.

Suzy Lamplugh: John Cannan remains 'firmly in the frame'

Former detective Jim Dickie led a review of the estate agent's disappearance.

www.bbc.com

Thanks - I had never seen it confirmed he was in Fulham that day. I wonder what evidence they have that places him there.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

If so it undermines HR, who somehow noticed SJL and Mr Kipper leaving 37SR in unremarkable fashion but failed to notice MG and SF,'s much noisier visit later.

MG spoke directly to HR. HR provided the first description of who he had seen directly to MG!

You have AS I assume? Check the index under HR and read one of the earlier pages.