UK UK - Claudia Lawrence, 35, Chef, York University, 18 March 2009 #5

[Jude Merlin]

Or picked up for a lift to work before the post office camera .
And since the police believed she set off to work that morning they must have found a ‘window’ of opportunity for her to do so without being caught by cctv[/QUO

Easily done

 

[Jude Merlin]

Or picked up for a lift to work before the post office camera .
And since the police believed she set off to work that morning they must have found a ‘window’ of opportunity for her to do so without being caught by cctv[/QUO

 

[An_Owl]

I think the police felt that there was no evidence of any struggle or "event" taking place in her home, and thus concluded that she had most likely left for work that morning. But that does not mean that she absolutely *did* leave for work that morning or that nothing happened in the hours beforehand.

 

[Jude Merlin]

I saw a real crime program on TV last night about a young mother who was abducted within about 10 yards of her front door when she went outside at 8am to collect her mail. Her father and her two young children were in the house and there were neighbors living on both sides of her but still, in daylight and still wearing her pjs, she disappeared without trace. And no one saw or heard a thing. If that can happen .....

 

[Yozzer]

@An_Owl and others interested in timings of cctv: here is an old post of mine from Sep 2019. It refers to an article from May 2009 which mentions a different time for the morning Lime Court/Heworth Place cctv! As I mentioned earlier today, there was confusion about timings in the early stages of the case.

If the timing of this cctv is correct, the male was seen walking around in the alley at 5.50 on Thursday 19th March 2009
New CCTV released in hunt for Claudia

8 minutes after the silver Ford Focus was seen to brake outside her house at 5.42.

This is a compelling case for the Ford driver and the alley man being one and the same person.

 

[An_Owl]

@An_Owl and others interested in timings of cctv: here is an old post of mine from Sep 2019. It refers to an article from May 2009 which mentions a different time for the morning Lime Court/Heworth Place cctv! As I mentioned earlier today, there was confusion about timings in the early stages of the case.

If the timing of this cctv is correct, the male was seen walking around in the alley at 5.50 on Thursday 19th March 2009
New CCTV released in hunt for Claudia

8 minutes after the silver Ford Focus was seen to brake outside her house at 5.42.

This is a compelling case for the Ford driver and the alley man being one and the same person.

If they're the same person then the hard braking suggests they've been in a rush to get there. At 5.40am.

Who is rushing anywhere at 5.40am?

 

[Popejohn3]

If they're the same person then the hard braking suggests they've been in a rush to get there. At 5.40am.

Who is rushing anywhere at 5.40am?

Might be interesting to note that the clocks went forward about 7 days after the news broke 29 th March.
Do people bother to change the clock on cctv ?ive known drivers who do not put their car clock forward

 

[Yozzer]

Might be interesting to note that the clocks went forward about 7 days after the news broke 29 th March.
Do people bother to change the clock on cctv ?ive known drivers who do not put their car clock forward

And if you moved the clock forward an hour on the cctv, would that affect the date stamp on a recording taken a fortnight earlier (before clocks changed?). Any tech experts on here?

 

[Jude Merlin]

And if you moved the clock forward an hour on the cctv, would that affect the date stamp on a recording taken a fortnight earlier (before clocks changed?). Any tech experts on here?

Or did anyone bother to even change it since it was installed? I have a clock for a timer on a water softener system that I have not changed since it was installed over 3 years ago. There's no need. Bit different from a public CCTV though although I can understand a private house security system. Yes, I have one of those too!

 

[Yozzer]

If they're the same person then the hard braking suggests they've been in a rush to get there. At 5.40am.

Who is rushing anywhere at 5.40am?

Well....we know 'something' happened either overnight from approx 9pm or early morning so it wasn't a regular day for some folk in Heworth.
I know of some who believe she might not have been killed until later on the 19th or even early hours of the 20th as she wasn't discovered missing until Friday morning. It seems unlikely, given her texting habits though.

 

[Andyboy]

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit

Didnt seem to hold back the careers of Oscar wilde or Jack dee, and I'd say it was more like irony than sarcasm

 

[Jude Merlin]

Didnt seem to hold back the careers of Oscar wilde or Jack dee, and I'd say it was more like irony than sarcasm

We'll agree to differ

 

[Unelectedspokesperson]

Is it only me that feels it unusual that SC defends the 4 that were arrested and JK?

There is something very strange about this case. It's almost as though the only people who are able to make controversial comment are Suzy Cooper and Jen King. They are wheeled out in every TV documentary as the most affected friends when Claudia had many other friends.
They have attempted to excuse previous comments in their latest documentary and their latest appearance was filmed with "crocodile tears"
In social media JK attacks anyone with a view that is not aligned to hers and SC always takes the moral high ground

If I was Suzy or Jen then I would welcome anyone who wanted to assist and find out what happened to Claudia. But somehow there is a hard resistance that comes from these two ladies who apart from reserving their own dedicated space to be the pure commentary, feel that anyone else cannot have an interest or possibly be a friend of Claudia.
Almost a position reserved for close family.

I find this unhealthy and if I was a Senior Investigating Officer I would want to ask many questions of these two ladies to ensure that there was more clarity than "Mist over Pendle" IMO of course.
We all now know that The Nags Head was a local cocaine pick up point and that the alleyway behind Claudias house was the pick up and drop off point. The police won't admit to this but they were observing this for some time. The Alley man was a courier and if you frequented this pub you would be aware that you could purchase drugs here.

lots to think about and when you take all of this together you start to see that it was not only Claudia was complex.
In addition we now know that Heworth was not the most desirable area of York but even after Claudia went missing, some of her friends decided to stay put in this manor. Perhaps because they had continuing business interests in the area of a lucrative nature?

Apologies, have had to edit as my phone crashed and cocked my post up!

Heworth is a pretty decent area- good infrastructure, decent community, commutable to the city centre. One of the interesting things about it (and York as a whole) is that “good” and “bad” streets are intermingled rather than there being defined bad areas. You can just as easily be somewhere like East Parade (very middle class and desirable) to somewhere further along Tang Hall (less desirable, some drug issues).

It is most definitely strange to remain living on the street where your best friend disappeared from however...

 

[An_Owl]

The police must also surely have knowledge from The Limes CCTV of the time difference between the braking vehicle and the person who appears walking to the rear of Heworth Road, and of which came first.

There must also be CCTV coverage of where that vehicle ends up going - or at the very least, using the Limes cameras to rule out that it went back the way it came? What about the CCTV camera known to have been installed at a private residence on Heworth Road? If the vehicle continued along Heworth Road then it must have been captured on that.

I think there are several aspects of this case that are known to the police (who I think likely have a very good idea of what happened, when, by whom and why), but that are being withheld from wider public knowledge.

 

[An_Owl]

Another thing. There is no evidence that she had arranged to get a lift from a colleague that morning.

No text messages to that effect anyway.

I suppose it possible that she may have arranged a lift verbally the previous afternoon whilst at work, but then I would have thought the police would have interviewed every colleague of hers known to have driven her to work previously (this, I believe, was what led police to a previous arrest in this case).

So if she was expecting a lift at around 0540 then it must surely have been with someone else, not working for the university? Who, therefore, knew her movements and knew she would be on early shifts that week - and could arrange a lift by means other than text messaging?

That last question seems pertinent given that she would appear to have avoided the Nags Head for several days prior and therefore could not have made any such arrangement face to face in the pub with anyone there, unless it was made the previous week (which seems unlikely). Unless someone dropped by her address? In which case, who?

 

[Popejohn3]

If they're the same person then the hard braking suggests they've been in a rush to get there. At 5.40am.

Who is rushing anywhere at 5.40am?

He promised her a lift ?
Wanted to retrieve the cloths she bought or kept for him ?

Another thing. There is no evidence that she had arranged to get a lift from a colleague that morning.

No text messages to that effect anyway.

I suppose it possible that she may have arranged a lift verbally the previous afternoon whilst at work, but then I would have thought the police would have interviewed every colleague of hers known to have driven her to work previously (this, I believe, was what led police to a previous arrest in this case).

So if she was expecting a lift at around 0540 then it must surely have been with someone else, not working for the university? Who, therefore, knew her movements and knew she would be on early shifts that week - and could arrange a lift by means other than text messaging?

That last question seems pertinent given that she would appear to have avoided the Nags Head for several days prior and therefore could not have made any such arrangement face to face in the pub with anyone there, unless it was made the previous week (which seems unlikely). Unless someone dropped by her address? In which case, who?

agree with most .
But after 10 soon to be 11 years I think our job here should be to encourage people in the know to contact police again if they’ve tried once before.
Courage to do the right thing. And SOMEHOW to tell police /family where Claudia is even if the perpetrator gets away with it .

 

[Popejohn3]

Another thing. There is no evidence that she had arranged to get a lift from a colleague that morning.

No text messages to that effect anyway.

I suppose it possible that she may have arranged a lift verbally the previous afternoon whilst at work, but then I would have thought the police would have interviewed every colleague of hers known to have driven her to work previously (this, I believe, was what led police to a previous arrest in this case).

So if she was expecting a lift at around 0540 then it must surely have been with someone else, not working for the university? Who, therefore, knew her movements and knew she would be on early shifts that week - and could arrange a lift by means other than text messaging?

That last question seems pertinent given that she would appear to have avoided the Nags Head for several days prior and therefore could not have made any such arrangement face to face in the pub with anyone there, unless it was made the previous week (which seems unlikely). Unless someone dropped by her address? In which case, who?

Another thing. There is no evidence that she had arranged to get a lift from a colleague that morning.

No text messages to that effect anyway.

I suppose it possible that she may have arranged a lift verbally the previous afternoon whilst at work, but then I would have thought the police would have interviewed every colleague of hers known to have driven her to work previously (this, I believe, was what led police to a previous arrest in this case).

So if she was expecting a lift at around 0540 then it must surely have been with someone else, not working for the university? Who, therefore, knew her movements and knew she would be on early shifts that week - and could arrange a lift by means other than text messaging?

That last question seems pertinent given that she would appear to have avoided the Nags Head for several days prior and therefore could not have made any such arrangement face to face in the pub with anyone there, unless it was made the previous week (which seems unlikely). Unless someone dropped by her address? In which case, who?

Another thing. There is no evidence that she had arranged to get a lift from a colleague that morning.

No text messages to that effect anyway.

I suppose it possible that she may have arranged a lift verbally the previous afternoon whilst at work, but then I would have thought the police would have interviewed every colleague of hers known to have driven her to work previously (this, I believe, was what led police to a previous arrest in this case).

So if she was expecting a lift at around 0540 then it must surely have been with someone else, not working for the university? Who, therefore, knew her movements and knew she would be on early shifts that week - and could arrange a lift by means other than text messaging?

That last question seems pertinent given that she would appear to have avoided the Nags Head for several days prior and therefore could not have made any such arrangement face to face in the pub with anyone there, unless it was made the previous week (which seems unlikely). Unless someone dropped by her address? In which case, who?

Imo it would be the mystery boyfriend .
And since the police don’t seem to have a clue as to his identity, he /she could simply let the police know where Claudia is.He can do this anonymously.
Even if his dna is found he / she would still be anonymous.
The case would most probably fizzle out .
And it shows some kind of remorse and ‘kindness’ towards her distraught family and close friends including the innocent accused . After all ,all nine can’t be guilty.
Do it now before her anniversary because as you know the heat will be back on !

 

[An_Owl]

As with a lot of other aspects of this case I suspect the police know very well who the "mystery boyfriend" is.

 

[Andyboy]

As with a lot of other aspects of this case I suspect the police know very well who the "mystery boyfriend" is.

Her best friends said there was no boyfriend, the only person that mentioned one was her chef colleague who said she told him the day before,the one who said he almost picked claudia up that morning, and was upset he didn't for as long as a few weeks, some friend

 

[Andyboy]

I think if she was seeing someone it's more likely to be a secret boyfriend rather than an unknown one, by secret I mean one she wanted to keep secret as it was rather close to home and may have caused severe ructions with her social group