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

[WestLondoner]

There have been several documentaries about this just in the last year. There was that dire channel 5 one, a Sky one, a BBC one too I think. What these all have in common is that they all fall for the Mr Kipper / JC narrative. The police think JC did it, but they can't quite get the evidence together.

A rational person watching would say Well, if they can't get the evidence together, why do the police think JC did it? The actual total case against JC is this: he was a recently released sex offender (how many others had recently been released?) who temporarily lived 4.5 miles away until just before she disappeared. He was later convicted of abduction and murder. He looks in some people's opinion like one of the three Mr Kipper sketches.

And that's it. That's the entire case. Every other bit of "evidence" surfaced years later or only after he'd been named.

Maybe the way in for a TV programme is to start by debunking that. Then the question of where SJL really went that day and whom else she was embroiled with gets surfaced. And thence to the railway embankment.

What is quite funny in a way is that JC has been trolling the police literally for years by suggesting that he might know more about this case. He's now started to backpedal frantically as he has realised that his having done this could be used to keep him in jail indefinitely...

 

[Crusader21]

Just thinking, if JC does win his upcoming parole case and gets released.

And then if someone were to state that JC murdered SL, would they then fall short of the liable laws in the UK?

After all JCs convictions would deem spent, he's a free man. And not only was never convicted of any crime concerning SL, but wasn't even charged!

 

[Crusader21]

In fact if you take that further, I wonder is there a possibility of JC seeking damages from the Met for publically naming him as the only / prime suspect?

 

[asyousay]

If he is innocent then suing them would be a wonderful thing as it would push the case forward.


It’s farcical they say he did it but literally don’t have a single bit of proof.

 

[WestLondoner]

IANAL but IIRC there are two defences against libel. One is that the defamatory statement is true, and the other is that a reasonable person might on the known facts think it was true. Furthermore, the party claiming to have been libelled has to show there's a "sting" of the libel i.e that it harmed their good name.

I reckon JC would struggle to make a libel charge stick because first, the actual plod have said he did it. This provides a defence of the "reasonable person might think it true" variety. The second problem is that he'd have to show it harmed his good name, the defence against which is that he doesn't have any good name because he's a repeat rapist and known murderer. So even if he won, the damages would probably be £0.

So if you wrote that JC did it and he sued for libel, you'd point the above out and offer him £1 in settlement. If he rejected it and a court then awarded him less, he'd usually be held liable for both sides' costs. As he hasn't got any money, I doubt many lawyers would care to represent him if they were relying on him to get paid....

He may, however, have some sort of case against the plod as Colin Stagg did. OTOH, Barry George did time for the murder of Jill Dando but when that conviction was overturned he got no compo IIRC because the police's suspicions were held to have been reasonable even though misplaced.

 

[asyousay]

So the 2.45 sighting by her friend why isn’t that covered in the book?


The women says she knew Suzy very well and it was her and she waved as the car went past. That seems quite credible and a man was in the passenger seat.


It’s strange how somebody who knew Suzy well the sighting isn’t a bigger deal. It always places a man in the car with her.

 

[WiseOwl]

So the 2.45 sighting by her friend why isn’t that covered in the book?


The women says she knew Suzy very well and it was her and she waved as the car went past. That seems quite credible and a man was in the passenger seat.


It’s strange how somebody who knew Suzy well the sighting isn’t a bigger deal. It always places a man in the car with her.

BW isn't in DV's book because the sighting of Suzy at 2.45 goes against his theory of her going to the pub that lunchtime.

The sighting of Suzy that afternoon is the only one of her after she had left work at 12.40, and if correct, is the last time anyone saw her alive.

The problem with this sighting is that it blows virtually all other theories out of the water, and would explain why DV didn't interview her for his book.

 

[asyousay]

BW isn't in DV's book because the sighting of Suzy at 2.45 goes against his theory of her going to the pub that lunchtime.

The sighting of Suzy that afternoon is the only one of her after she had left work at 12.40, and if correct, is the last time anyone saw her alive.

The problem with this sighting is that it blows virtually all other theories out of the water, and would explain why DV didn't interview her for his book.

That makes sense as it doesn’t fit his theory. But a friend who knew who well saw her so that’s credible to me. It also places a strange man with her in the car.


When you see a friend it’s not like you would forget that is it!

 

[WiseOwl]

That makes sense as it doesn’t fit his theory. But a friend who knew who well saw her so that’s credible to me. It also places a strange man with her in the car.


When you see a friend it’s not like you would forget that is it!

Yes, I have always thought BW's sighting was credible, she knew Suzy and was in no doubt it was her that she had seen that afternoon.

The police later said they believed that BW had seen Suzy driving the car with a male passenger, but on a different day.

Others have thought (including myself) that BW did see Suzy that day but maybe she had got the timing wrong, she said it was around 2.45 but perhaps it was earlier than this?

 

[Terryb808]

Yes, I have always thought BW's sighting was credible, she knew Suzy and was in no doubt it was her that she had seen that afternoon.

The police later said they believed that BW had seen Suzy driving the car with a male passenger, but on a different day.

Others have thought (including myself) that BW did see Suzy that day but maybe she had got the timing wrong, she said it was around 2.45 but perhaps it was earlier than this?

This witness sighting is IMO one of the most important, BW knew Suzy and it’s extremely unlikely that you’d wave to someone you don’t know.
Any doubts BW might have later had were most likely installed by the police, if you keep asking someone if they are sure, they start to think maybe they made a mistake.
The fact that Suzy didn’t respond is not surprising, BW said she looked serious, but not distressed. This could be because the male beside her made her ignore her friend.
If her car was left in Stevenage Road between 4.00 & 5.00pm and BW saw Suzy at 2.45pm where they were going could not have been that far.
Unfortunately for DV this (as said above) means she never made it to the PoW. Again IMO one suspect might have been taking Suzy in the direction of Hammersmith and I’m surprised that the police didn’t believe her because it fits the prime suspect very well. But at the time (Just one week after SJL disappeared) they had no prime suspect.

 

[asyousay]

To be honest though just say the car was dropped at 5pm that’s still over 2 hour widow. I wasn’t even Born when she vanished but traffic wouldn’t of been so bad in London back then. Now you could spend 2 hours in traffic in London but back then there would been way less traffic.

 

[Terryb808]

To be honest though just say the car was dropped at 5pm that’s still over 2 hour widow. I wasn’t even Born when she vanished but traffic wouldn’t of been so bad in London back then. Now you could spend 2 hours in traffic in London but back then there would been way less traffic.

I’m an oldie and lived / worked in London in the 80’s, compared to now traffic was lighter, but still now a breeze. If you knew the area well you could use back doubles to miss the worst bottlenecks.
The Fulham / Putney area I never had reason to visit. As you say he’s got 2 hours minus the travel time to his destination and back to Stevenage Road.
Take 25 minutes off the two hours and that’s likely how long he had with Suzy at his destination.
One thing that needs addressing is why leave the car in a hurry? Did he need to get back because Suzy was still alive and restrained or did he have to be somewhere else that he couldn’t avoid.

 

[Crusader21]

Let's assume that SLs car passed BW (Hammersmith direction) on the Fulham Palace Rd at 2.45pm, with a male passenger beside her.

How do you explain the 2 hour window (from 12.45 to 2.45) for someone out of work officially for a 1 hour max (house viewing plus buying a sandwich), or unofficially 1 hour max (nipping up to PoW for her items, buying sandwich on way back)?

1. Was SL abducted by someone as she left Sturgis at 12.45? Then forcibly held against her will, attacked / raped then traumatised, forced to drive the perpetrator to a place of his choosing? Could this explain the 2 hrs? Fits prime suspects MO.

2. Did she go directly to the PoW as DV said. And there meet her end. Then at 2.45 a male and female driver who resembled SL was driving past BW in the fiesta. Remember BW said 'SL' had her head turned towards driver slightly. We know that a good friend of SL was similar age, build, hair and clothing. In BWs glance, was it this person she saw? The male / female would be in the process of locating a Sturgis sign / looking for suitable place to leave SL's car after her murder.

3. Was SL going to pick her items up from the PoW some time later that Monday? And was there something even more pressing that caused SL to bluff her way out of the office and stay out longer than she intended? Even with hiring / firing big boss in the vacinity? A private proposed business venture which was hitting rocks? Receiving £3K, which SL was telling party-goers about less 48 hrs previously?

 

[WestLondoner]

Assuming she correctly identified SJL and her car and not a lookalike, the BW sighting says, at minimum, that whatever happened to her probably didn't happen at that pub. The only way to work it into DV's published outline (that I can see) is if she is intercepted en route - perhaps getting into her car - and then made or persuaded to drive somewhere else first. Shen then goes back, for some reason, to the PoW, where the rest of DV's scenario plays out.

I like Crusader's 2 and 3 above in combination. Without wanting to seem disrespectful, one should perhaps factor in that, on some measurements, SJL was not the sharpest knife in the drawer. She had 6 O Levels and one A Level but she was economically ambitious. Until she became an estate agent in 1985 she had been a beautician for six years. To be good at either you would need to be personable and well-presented, which she manifestly was. You don't need to be smart or quick-thinking to be a beautician nor even to be an estate agent during a property boom. So you could possibly con her into going somewhere to pick up a non-existent £3,000, and you'd advise her to make sure her diary gave no indication as to where that somewhere was.

 

[Terryb808]

Assuming she correctly identified SJL and her car and not a lookalike, the BW sighting says, at minimum, that whatever happened to her probably didn't happen at that pub. The only way to work it into DV's published outline (that I can see) is if she is intercepted en route - perhaps getting into her car - and then made or persuaded to drive somewhere else first. Shen then goes back, for some reason, to the PoW, where the rest of DV's scenario plays out.

I like Crusader's 2 and 3 above in combination. Without wanting to seem disrespectful, one should perhaps factor in that, on some measurements, SJL was not the sharpest knife in the drawer. She had 6 O Levels and one A Level but she was economically ambitious. Until she became an estate agent in 1985 she had been a beautician for six years. To be good at either you would need to be personable and well-presented, which she manifestly was. You don't need to be smart or quick-thinking to be a beautician nor even to be an estate agent during a property boom. So you could possibly con her into going somewhere to pick up a non-existent £3,000, and you'd advise her to make sure her diary gave no indication as to where that somewhere was.

Like the latter part of this scenario, this works, but in no way fits in with DV's narrative.

SJL had a longterm relationship with DH, he apparently has no alibi for the 28th July and could not be contacted by the Lamplugh's or Putney set until 5 days after SJL disappeared (from the Stephen book), and when he was, he was in London.

If you look him up in the Stephen book you'll see he was supposed to be teaching sailing in Corsica, so given the media coverage (especially in London) why didn't he contact the family or Putney set?

 

[asyousay]

Who is DH? I thought she had a boyfriend called LG?

 

[asyousay]

Also I have not seen this before reported . Is there any truth in it as I haven’t watched the C5 documentary.


“James Calvert said in a channel 5 Doc that Suzy asked him to get the keys for Shorrolds road for a quick viewing and then go for a quick lunch”


So then if he grabbed the keys for her then there must be more than one set. Unless somebody in the office killed her and took the keys off her after the fact and put them back in the office!



IMO MOO

 

[Pinkizzy]

Also I have not seen this before reported . Is there any truth in it as I haven’t watched the C5 documentary.


“James Calvert said in a channel 5 Doc that Suzy asked him to get the keys for Shorrolds road for a quick viewing and then go for a quick lunch”


So then if he grabbed the keys for her then there must be more than one set. Unless somebody in the office killed her and took the keys off her after the fact and put them back in the office!



IMO MOO

Who is LG? A member of staff may have told another person to kill SL before collecting her keys from them.

 

[Terryb808]

Who is DH? I thought she had a boyfriend called LG?

DH was her first boyfriend and remained close, AL was the current boyfriend that featured with her mother and father when the police had the first real press conference. It’s all in Andrew Stephen’s book, can’t print names as you know.

 

[asyousay]

Who is LG? A member of staff may have told another person to kill SL before collecting her keys from them.

I am a idiot I got the initials wrong. I meant AL her boyfriend.