UK UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 July 1986

Discussion in '1980's Missing' started by Pinkizzy, May 31, 2021.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Terryb808

    Terryb808 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I think you’re 100% on the money with your summary.
    Even after all this time some things remain in the memory banks and hurt when a seemingly simple question is asked.
     
    WiseOwl and Crusader21 like this.


  2. WestLondoner

    WestLondoner Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    217
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I think MG's occasional awkwardness is simple enough to understand. Between the lines, he was clearly the one who should have remembered to tell the police that there was only one key to the house SJL supposedly visited. The police got in to that house using what they probably assumed - unforgivably - to be another key. They then went on to assume that SJL had gone there using some other key and they staged a TV reconstruction that cemented this pretty dubious assumption into the public consciousness.

    Every bit of subsequent "witness" information has fallen completely into line with this narrative. Any that might have shed light on a different course of events has never seen the light of day. If you saw CV emerging from the basement of the PoW on the relevant day, carrying a spanner and running towards a white Fiesta, you have never come forward because everybody knows where SJL went and your recollection has no relevance to the known facts. The official narrative has surfaced only dubious corroborative evidence, while suppressing any that would undermine it.

    It was not MG's job to do the police's job for them, and the fault for this clearly lies with the plod for not asking how many keys there were, not with MG for not volunteering it. But he may, 35 years on, be feeling a bit sheepish.
     
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2021
    WiseOwl and Crusader21 like this.
  3. Pinkizzy

    Pinkizzy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    2,212
    Trophy Points:
    113
    MG knew about SLs shopping trip to Putney during her lunchhour and the staff at Sturgis knew about the missing items at the pub. When did the cops visit the pub? Was it a week after SLs disappearance?
     
    Konstantin, WiseOwl and Terryb808 like this.
  4. WestLondoner

    WestLondoner Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    217
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Iirc MG was aware that SL might leave the office to go shopping, but I can't see why he would object to her doing this in her lunch hour.
     
  5. Pinkizzy

    Pinkizzy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    2,212
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If the cops knew about her shopping trip then they would have focused their search on Putney.
     
    Konstantin and Terryb808 like this.
  6. Terryb808

    Terryb808 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    63
    The thing with witnesses is that they only remember events that are in some way out of the ordinary. As you go about your daily routines you’ll most likely not notice a person unless they are strikingly different.
    However, if you know that person, then you’ll remember, that’s why BW is important, she knew SJL and she seemed so sure it was her she saw on Monday afternoon.

    MG probably knew SJL nicked an odd hour to do personal errands, but as she worked evenings and delivered the good he let it pass.

    What I still feel is strange is AL’s reaction to DV’s interview, yes somethings are painful to recall, but I’d not expect that much emotion.
    I base this on personal experience with a similar event and in my case it was far more harrowing. Yet a similar amount of time has passed and while the memory is painful, it doesn’t generate such an emotional response. This is why I find AL’s outburst so strange.

    On the police entering 37 Shorrolds Road, its possible that they didn’t need a set of keys at all. They could have opened the front door without keys and without damaging it, its not that difficult (depending on the door and type of lock) especially back in 1986.
     
    WiseOwl likes this.
  7. Terryb808

    Terryb808 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Abduction of Melanie Hall
    Some time back (and maybe in the thread that was zapped) JC was linked to the disappearance of this poor victim. It was said that he coached someone while in prison and they then committed this abduction. Goes to show how JC seems to be to blame for everything, even when in prison.
    Seems he has a rival.
    IMO Christopher Halliwell is far more evil.
    Serial killer Christopher Halliwell linked to unsolved murder of Melanie Hall
     
  8. Pinkizzy

    Pinkizzy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    2,212
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Steve Wright is familiar with Middlesbrough, he may have killed the prostitutes
     
    WiseOwl likes this.
  9. Konstantin

    Konstantin Active Member

    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    33
    I wonder if maybe AL's outburst was because he realizes or now knows that the narratives set in motion by the investigation and DL are in fact pointing in the wrong direction, and so having believed and gone along with the "SJL was abducted from Shorrolds Road or met her abductor there" he is now realising that SJL most likely never went there and the key to her disappearance might lie with events on the Sunday night (when AL wasn't with her, and now he thinks well, hang on, maybe she was with someone else then...maybe she went to the pub (the pub that he might have seen as "their place") with another person.

    At first AL did say that he and SJL went to the pub on the Saturday night, right?

    Now he has to confront the idea that SJL might have been lying to him and gone out on the Sunday to the same pub, lost her stuff then (maybe she'd had a few), we only have his word for it that they spoke on the phone on the Sunday.

    So its less that there is an emotional impact now, all these years later, of realizing that SJL might have not been really his gf any more or might have been cheating or two timing him -- its more perhaps the awful feeling that the person responsible for what happened to her was allowed to slip through the net because he and DL and the police investigation believed his story about him and SJL being exclusive/ her going to Shorrolds/ not really wanting to think about what she might have been up to on the Sunday night.

    "You'll never find her" could be an emotional reaction to AL's own guilt over this, that SJL will never be found because its too late now to figure out what happened and the opportunity to follow the trail has been lost.
     
    WiseOwl, Pinkizzy and Terryb808 like this.
  10. Konstantin

    Konstantin Active Member

    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    33
    DV explains why in his book -- the company had a policy of one person having to be in the office at all times at lunch time, and SJL would have been alone in the office, so the only way she could leave during that time window was if she had a legit house viewing appointment, hence she made one up to allow her to skip off and do whatever she needed to do.

    She'd had a bit of a row with MG that morning, and MG had already gone to lunch with SF who was actually his gf at the time and who should have been in the office...

    And the big boss was floating around too, who was very strict and would have taken a dim view of MG letting SJL go off on personal business during the lunch hour.

    So it does point to her having something pressing to do that lunch time as she had never made a bogus client up before as her diary showed.

    Meaning it was likely not a shopping trip.

    And since she was on the phone about her diary to the pub before she left -- as was reported in the Stevens (?) book who must have got it from the police investigation at the time -- its actually pretty reasonable to hypothesize that she was skipping off there to grab her precious diary since she could not do so at 6pm when she had a legit house viewing.
     
    WiseOwl and Terryb808 like this.
  11. Terryb808

    Terryb808 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Yes, the newspaper article was about the girl from Bath, however, I have looked into the there girls that disappeared in Middlesborough. Two were found, one is still missing and one person has been charged with the murder of Rachel Wilson (he confessed to manslaughter). The other two remain unsolved, its become very clear that the area they frequented was not short of men capable of abduction and murder.
    My reason for looking was a possible link to SJL's disappearance, I have to say its tenuous, and unlikely. It's been a shocking revelation the life these poor three girls lived.
     
    WiseOwl and Pinkizzy like this.
  12. Terryb808

    Terryb808 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    63
    As you say DV worked this out because he did what every re-investigation should have done. Ignore what's gone before and start from the beginning.
    You've made things very clear, the disagreement with MG and seeing MG & SF go out to lunch must have made SJL very angry.
    We're all assuming that she had something very important to attend to during her lunch break, this may be so, however, she may have decided to spite MG and go anyway.
    If its the latter, then the most likely destination would be the PoW to collect her things, it was the last call she made (or received) was from someone at the PoW.
    On this basis its not unreasonable to conclude that's where she went and following DV's advise "just follow the timeline" is where I concluded she was going.
    As I've said before I think we have three possible options:
    1. SJL went to the PoW and actually made it into the pub.
    2. SJL never made the PoW and was abducted when she got to her car.
    3. SJL actually had an important appointment and met an unknown male.
    Maybe we should have a vote and see which is the most likely?
     
    Konstantin and WiseOwl like this.
  13. Pinkizzy

    Pinkizzy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    2,212
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Stephens wrote that SL lost her items in or on the steps outside Mossops. DV suggests that SL lost her items when making a call from the phone box outside the PoW
     
    Konstantin and WiseOwl like this.
  14. Pinkizzy

    Pinkizzy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    2,212
    Trophy Points:
    113
    @WiseOwl Did you watch John Cannan on Faking it (Quest Red)?
     
    susie sixpence and WiseOwl like this.
  15. WestLondoner

    WestLondoner Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    217
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    63
    It wasn't MG she had an altercation with, it was NH.
     
    Konstantin, WiseOwl and Terryb808 like this.
  16. Terryb808

    Terryb808 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I watched it, don’t know much about the experts, however, my take on it was that JC was admitting other crimes, but saying he didn’t abduct SJL.
    Seems he was obsessed with SJL’s disappearance and the notoriety it generated and (as others have said) wished he’d committed it.
    He is an attention seek control freak.
     
    WiseOwl and WestLondoner like this.
  17. Terryb808

    Terryb808 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Yes, got the the wrong way round, the principal remains, she was by all accounts a head strong girl. She would have needed to be to succeed.
     
  18. WestLondoner

    WestLondoner Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    217
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    63
    This is a really good point. Not enough attention is given to the possibility that JC might simply have quite enjoyed being linked to this famous crime, because he's a psychopath. It keeps the attention on him, makes him feel important, breaks the routine of prison with entertaining interviews, and allows him to pontificate at coppers. These are all appealing to a psychopath. Best of all, it carries no risks, because he didn't do it, he doesn't know who did it any more than the police do, and if a body's ever found nothing will connect him to it.

    What he didn't envisage was the change in the law that allowed him to be kept in jail on pure suspicion, which is no doubt why he's now back-pedalling so much.
     
    WiseOwl and Terryb808 like this.
  19. WiseOwl

    WiseOwl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    826
    Likes Received:
    5,819
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Yes I did watch it. I don't think it shed any new light on if JC was involved in Suzy's disappearance, he is very manipulative and a pathological liar.

    As others have said he probably would liked to have been the person responsible for Suzy's disappearance, but I really don't think that he was responsible.

    Did you watch the show @Pinkizzy?
     
  20. WestLondoner

    WestLondoner Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    217
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Thinking about these calls to the pub the afternoon SJL disappeared, both are intriguing. The one from the supposed police officer makes no sense because why would they get involved in a found cheque book; so I tend to think this was from the killer checking when and where she was expected.

    The one from the woman is really interesting because this was apparently from a "Sarah" asking that SJL be kept there until she herself arrived. This was looked into at the time and SJL apparently did not know any Sarah. Could SJL have been meeting a married man that day, whose wife's name was Sarah? Thus SJL knows the man who has edged out AL (and others) is married, and she knows his wife's name is Sarah, and Sarah has worked out who SJL is and where she will be, and Sarah intends to go there and confront her husband's mistress. SJL won't be keen to meet Sarah, neither will her diary contain Sarah's phone number.

    Did not AS indicate that SJL had become involved with a married man?
     
    WiseOwl and Terryb808 like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice