UK UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #7

[Ljh21]

I'm inclined to think BW is the most credible witness. Not only did she know Sjl pretty well, she was out and about from her own office so was able to verify her timings with them.

But, and it's a pretty big but, for me it simply does not make sense given what we think we already know about sjl's possible motivation for leaving the office. We know she left at between 12.30/40pm that day, with or without keys to a real or concocted viewing. She knew one if the Sturgis bosses was at CT with MG. If the viewing was real, she'd be back in the office within what? 3/4 hour tops? If the viewing was a cover, she'd probably want to be back, for the sake of appearances, by around the same time.

Yet according to BW, she's driving on FPR two hours later, apparently under no duress. What has she been doing for those two hours?

Just a thought, the neighbour in shorrolds rd would conceivably have been the last person to have seen sjl alive, was any check done on him or his address?
Could have possibly chatted to sjl about a possible sale or move, done the deed and moved the car.

 

[Eastend Eagle]

The car still exists in police hands. It was recently revisited for further forensics. What is utterly bewildering is that it was taxed and MoT'ed until 1990. This says that it was maintained in a driveable road legal condition for four years after it featured in a crime, and was presumably driven. You have to wonder WTF that was all about. It's as though a gun were retrieved from a crime scene and then issued to a police firearms unit for them to fire off for a few years.

Clearly questions for the police to answer here MOO

 

[tes1984]

Clearly questions for the police to answer here MOO

Not necessarily. It was a missing persons enquiry, rather than a murder enquiry.

It was also pre DNA, so they might not have considered the car worth holding in storage for potential later evidence.

The car wasn't really police property to just keep either. I've seen this sort of thing in a couple of other cases.

 

[Kasparthecat1]

Not necessarily. It was a missing persons enquiry, rather than a murder enquiry.

It was also pre DNA, so they might not have considered the car worth holding in storage for potential later evidence.

The car wasn't really police property to just keep either. I've seen this sort of thing in a couple of other cases.

They took tapings at the time, didn't they?

As it was a company car, and probably driven/ travelled in by many people, any evidence gathered may well have been spoiled/ inconclusive/ not particularly useful. And it was used, if memory serves, in the Crimewatch reconstruction?

So perhaps unwise, but understandable given the mores of the time.

 

[Salah11]

I think the boyfriend should have been looked into more deeply. He had a axe to grind and had a motive and that would explain why nobody saw a struggle anywhere as she met him somewhere private.

Moo

 

[WestLondoner]

Which boyfriend do you mean? The one she dumped on Friday, the new one she found over the weekend, the FWB who'd just got back from the Med or one of the others?

 

[Ljh21]

I think

Very strange on the crimewatch reconstruction mg states he went round to 37 shorrolds and it shows him tapping on the door and trying to look in the windows but on record he checked inside and out.

sturgis had other white fiestas most likely ending in gan too

I think personally she took her purse so i would assume knowing she had a conversation with someone at the pow had arranged to collect her items then, and the purse would have been taken as she would have wanted to buy the sandwiches. So from leaving work and driving to 123 sr was someone who had the items or a pub worker living near to where her car was left? Was marianna a cleaner at the pow?

 

[Kasparthecat1]

Which boyfriend do you mean? The one she dumped on Friday, the new one she found over the weekend, the FWB who'd just got back from the Med or one of the others?

Was ot ever established whose knee she was sitting on at that party?

 

[Salah11]

Which boyfriend do you mean? The one she dumped on Friday, the new one she found over the weekend, the FWB who'd just got back from the Med or one of the others?

The one she apparently dumped that weekend and who acted weird in DV’s book. In most cases it’s somebody you know and not a stranger and he had been absolutely humiliated by the sounds of it.

Moo

 

[WestLondoner]

He was conclusively eliminated in 1986.

 

[Salah11]

He was conclusively eliminated in 1986.

The case was botched so that means absolutely nothing.

 

[Ljh21]

How did her purse and straw hat get in the car if she was never in the car?

BW put her and her car together and the car was allocated to her so it's beyond argument she was in that car that day.

The question is how it came to be left where it was. For me the simplest answer is she stopped for some brief purpose rather than parked intending a longer stay, then never returned to her car, but someone else did.

Someone from the office had already driven her car that morning so it is not beyond argument that she was never in the car also in the photo taken 2 days prior was that mg in the background?

 

[Ljh21]

Someone from the office had already driven her car that morning so it is not beyond argument that she was never in the car also in the photo taken 2 days prior was that mg in the background?

Sciencedirect.com
A sample study of 147 murders involving missing people found
71 out of 147 were by co-worker, employee,neighbour or acquaintance 48.3%
54 out of 147 were by boyfriend, mother or father
So 125 out of 147 leaving 22 out of 147 by a no known relationship
I know it is only a small sample but gives people an idea

 

[WestLondoner]

How did she get to work that morning if she wasn't in her car?

 

[Eastend Eagle]

How did she get to work that morning if she wasn't in her car?

What if the office junior didn't return the car to the vicinity of Sturgis after taking it out that morning but left it out of view somewhere near to where it was eventually found JMO

 

[Ljh21]

How did she get to work that morning if she wasn't in her car?

She drove to work as normal and during the morning her car was used by a staff member

 

[Ljh21]

What if the office junior didn't return the car to the vicinity of Sturgis after taking it out that morning but left it out of view somewhere near to where it was eventually found JMO

As we know the office junior used her car in the morning, why were their prints not found in the car??

 

[Eastend Eagle]

As we know the office junior used her car in the morning, why were their prints not found in the car??

Presumably they were but were dismissed as insignificant as a known user of the car

 

[Ljh21]

Presumably they were but were dismissed as insignificant as a known user of the car

I have another vague connection which i am working on and it is kh and the yom kippur connection, i think atm it could be strong but am looking for the link between kh and a n other.

 

[Kasparthecat1]

Presumably they were but were dismissed as insignificant as a known user of the car

I think I read somewhere that there were no prints taken from the interior of the car. There were tapings, and a print taken from the driver's mirror, but the plasticky composition of the interior meant that no fingerprints were left.