UK UK - Claudia Lawrence, 35, York University, 18 March 2009 - Chef - #1

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for that........... My initial thought - based on the 12.10AM report - was that something happened at that time ( based on the belief that CL usually had a fairly early night for work the next day, so if she was switching her phone off, she would have done so long before midnight. ) But 12.10PM moves it back to something happening on the Thursday morning

It was revealed in 2010 that Claudia had a very late night out with a male companion a couple of days before she went missing - which blew out of the water her father's (well meaning) insistence that Claudia would have had an early night on the Wednesday evening of her disappearance.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/mar/18/claudia-lawrence-mystery-boyfriend
 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...dia-Lawrence-released-bail.html#ixzz3VO3VRCz8

I feel I have to say that in view of the very clear requests from the police, the relentless attempts here to identify this man's possible address have made me uneasy.

I'm also shocked that the Daily Mail is allowing comments on that story.
No offense but there's a big difference between doing what the police have asked people not to do (identify him through sm) and identifying where the search house is. I think people have been very mindful of the police request and as such I personally have not seen anyone on this forum attempting to identify the chap

"Police have repeatedly urged people not to identify the arrested man. “To ensure the investigation and legal process are not compromised or potentially damaged in any way during this critical phase in seeking the truth about Claudia’s disappearance, North Yorkshire police strongly advises the media and members of the public against identifying the man who has been arrested,” said DS Dai Malyn.

“This includes naming or publishing images of the man on traditional media platforms or social networking sites. I urge everyone to show restraint and patience while we carry out these very important inquiries.”
 
It's only a short step from pinpointing an address to coming up with a name. I think we all know how to do that. I'm not going to go any further with this, but others may not be so conscientious. This site attracts many guests.
 
It's only a short step from pinpointing an address to coming up with a name. I think we all know how to do that.
Well as others have said we haven't named names and have stuck to the ToS so we haven't done anything we shouldn't. I'm sorry if you are not comfortable with that
 
It's only a short step from pinpointing an address to coming up with a name. I think we all know how to do that. I'm not going to go any further with this, but others may not be so conscientious. This site attracts many guests.

With respect the number of guests who read these pages is never very high, millions read the DM website every day and can easily look at google earth as people here have done. The police would be better to ask MSM not to publish photos if they don't want an identification. It's unrealistic nowadays to hope that a name won't come out. There was a tweet from a neighbour linked above which is more likely to lead to identification imo.

Posters here have been pretty restrained I think

JMO
 
Thank you for adding me to this group – I am a newbie so please be gentle with me.

In common with many people in Yorkshire, I suspect, I’ve been interested in this case from the outset. What particularly caught my attention, as a writer, is the way in which, despite the fact that we are one of the most “observed” societies, with cameras on every corner, and people hooked up to a mobile phone network that pinpoints their movements, and the prevalence of social media where people post details of the minutiae of their lives, someone can still just… vanish.

I’d like to put up a theory, and see what people think. I don’t know every detail of the case, and I could easily have based this on incorrect assumptions. I think also that for the moment, to stress that it’s a theoretical theory and not connected to anything that might land me in legal “soup”, let’s discuss a theoretical girl called Laura Florence.

Laura lives on her own and is a chef at a local College. She is also a regular at the pub three doors down from her house, The Winning Post. Laura is a girl with healthy appetites, which she indulges. Please note that I am not judging her, here. Having attained the decrepit age which I have, one thing I do know is that there is no such thing as a “normal” sex life. Plus there is a massive double standard whereby men who are promiscuous are “lads” whereas women who have multiple partners are labelled as “slags”.

Anyway, for whatever reason, Laura enjoys a lively sex life with multiple partners, some of whom are married and some of whom are concurrent rather than sequential.

Laura comes home on the evening of the day before she “disappears”. She posts a letter on the way home, and then she phones her parents from home in the evening. She has an early start the next day, but she has also planned an assignation with her current partner. A few days before, they had a mad fling that kept both of them awake late into the night, followed by an early start, and tonight she’s resigned to something similar.

She goes to The Winning Post. She’s carrying a rucksack containing her chef’s whites, clean underwear, her hair tongs, maybe other bits and bats, who knows. Plus she takes her phone. The Winning Post does B&B, and the B&B rooms are accessible via an external fire escape from the rear car park and the landlord, with whom she is friends, and who allows maybe a select group of his regulars to do this, allows her to use one of the B&B rooms for meeting her partner (why? Maybe it’s a regular thing at the pub?) She plans to leave for work directly from there in the morning.

Maybe there’s time for a drink downstairs, or maybe her lover can’t be seen in public for some reason, and for the same reason can’t go to her house. Either way, they end up together and *something* happens, which ends up with Laura dead. This is where it gets a bit odd, because for this theory to work, the landlord and possibly others of the regulars, who were around in the pub at closing time (or maybe having a lock in?) that night then need to co-operate and help cover up the crime. Maybe the landlord thought of his licence going up in smoke and his livelihood vanishing. Maybe he knew the perpetrator. Maybe the perpetrator was someone *important*. Maybe The Winning Post was the centre of a ring of swingers, who knows?

Whatever, between them, they get rid of Laura’s body somewhere (maybe temporary at first then more permanent) and ditch the rucksack, the clean clothes, the hair straighteners and the rucksack. Stick them all in the rucksack, stick a few bricks on it, and chuck it in the river Ouse. They think of doing the same with the phone, but they have a bright idea. If it’s allowed to ring out, unanswered, then the precise time of her demise will be obscured. So they keep it and let it ring when her work are trying to find her in the morning, to foster the illusion that she’s maybe ill in bed at home or she’s slept in. Eventually, in the afternoon, they turn it off and chuck it away (river again?)

So there you have it. The strange fate of Laura Florence. What do you think?
 
Thank you for adding me to this group – I am a newbie so please be gentle with me.

In common with many people in Yorkshire, I suspect, I’ve been interested in this case from the outset. What particularly caught my attention, as a writer, is the way in which, despite the fact that we are one of the most “observed” societies, with cameras on every corner, and people hooked up to a mobile phone network that pinpoints their movements, and the prevalence of social media where people post details of the minutiae of their lives, someone can still just… vanish.

I’d like to put up a theory, and see what people think. I don’t know every detail of the case, and I could easily have based this on incorrect assumptions. I think also that for the moment, to stress that it’s a theoretical theory and not connected to anything that might land me in legal “soup”, let’s discuss a theoretical girl called Laura Florence.

Laura lives on her own and is a chef at a local College. She is also a regular at the pub three doors down from her house, The Winning Post. Laura is a girl with healthy appetites, which she indulges. Please note that I am not judging her, here. Having attained the decrepit age which I have, one thing I do know is that there is no such thing as a “normal” sex life. Plus there is a massive double standard whereby men who are promiscuous are “lads” whereas women who have multiple partners are labelled as “slags”.

Anyway, for whatever reason, Laura enjoys a lively sex life with multiple partners, some of whom are married and some of whom are concurrent rather than sequential.

Laura comes home on the evening of the day before she “disappears”. She posts a letter on the way home, and then she phones her parents from home in the evening. She has an early start the next day, but she has also planned an assignation with her current partner. A few days before, they had a mad fling that kept both of them awake late into the night, followed by an early start, and tonight she’s resigned to something similar.

She goes to The Winning Post. She’s carrying a rucksack containing her chef’s whites, clean underwear, her hair tongs, maybe other bits and bats, who knows. Plus she takes her phone. The Winning Post does B&B, and the B&B rooms are accessible via an external fire escape from the rear car park and the landlord, with whom she is friends, and who allows maybe a select group of his regulars to do this, allows her to use one of the B&B rooms for meeting her partner (why? Maybe it’s a regular thing at the pub?) She plans to leave for work directly from there in the morning.

Maybe there’s time for a drink downstairs, or maybe her lover can’t be seen in public for some reason, and for the same reason can’t go to her house. Either way, they end up together and *something* happens, which ends up with Laura dead. This is where it gets a bit odd, because for this theory to work, the landlord and possibly others of the regulars, who were around in the pub at closing time (or maybe having a lock in?) that night then need to co-operate and help cover up the crime. Maybe the landlord thought of his licence going up in smoke and his livelihood vanishing. Maybe he knew the perpetrator. Maybe the perpetrator was someone *important*. Maybe The Winning Post was the centre of a ring of swingers, who knows?

Whatever, between them, they get rid of Laura’s body somewhere (maybe temporary at first then more permanent) and ditch the rucksack, the clean clothes, the hair straighteners and the rucksack. Stick them all in the rucksack, stick a few bricks on it, and chuck it in the river Ouse. They think of doing the same with the phone, but they have a bright idea. If it’s allowed to ring out, unanswered, then the precise time of her demise will be obscured. So they keep it and let it ring when her work are trying to find her in the morning, to foster the illusion that she’s maybe ill in bed at home or she’s slept in. Eventually, in the afternoon, they turn it off and chuck it away (river again?)

So there you have it. The strange fate of Laura Florence. What do you think?
Welcome!!! Great first post, I like your style of writing.

I'll keep my answer brief as I have two children who keep shouting me upstairs and I'll only go off on a tangent, end up writing half sentences or some such nonsense.

Anyway, you do raise some good points to mull over. As many of us know on this forum - anything is possible however, we need to tie in our theories with the evidence we have at hand. Iirc there has never been any prof that she was last seen in the local pub, or that the owners/regulars were directly responsible in her death so we need to tread carefully when suggesting otherwise.

However, I do think that the pub is central to this case.....

Question: would the police be able to determine exactly where Claudia phone was before it was turned off/ran out? The pub is only 3 doors away from her home address - would they be able to pinpoint the location that precisely?
 
Great post, Woollybear - welcome to the sleep depriving, chore neglecting, all consuming site that is Websleuths!

Anything is possible but I'd be surprised if she was in the pub that evening, too many people for it to be covered up I reckon. As for phone pings, I'd be surprised if they could differentiate between the pub and her house, it's only 50m away, if that.

Who bloomin' knows. Not us.
 
Great post, Woollybear - welcome to the sleep depriving, chore neglecting, all consuming site that is Websleuths!

Chore neglecting.... that is SO true in my case :lol:

And yes :welcome: to WS Woollybear, great name and great first post! I do struggle with a pub connection a little, even though I know there is usually no smoke without fire, just having spent a lot of Sundays in there, they used to do an amazing carvery btw. Just the thought makes me feel a bit ill. Had to chuckle how you used The Winning Post too, I used to live around the corner to the Nags Head, and where I live now? The Winning Post is down the street! LOL
 
Welcome Wollybear great first post.

I think alot of the focus is on the pub as Claudia was local and it was known she had previously "dated" a couple of the patrons. There was an article from a while ago that mentioned that she had recently started to drink regularly at another pub (which i think was searched at some point). The Nag's Head seems to have something to do with this case as every suspect/poi it has been mentioned they knew her from the pub. Reading between the lines it seems like someone killed her and then maybe one or more individuals possibly helped to dispose of her possibly and since then have helped with a cover up.

The police said this:

Det Supt Malyn added: "Further analysis of Claudia's mobile phone, particularly cell site activity, also shows she was in the Acomb area of York in the weeks leading up to her disappearance.
"We believe she may have been socialising with a person or persons. Again, we would like to know who this was and where it was taking place.

Wonder what date she was last seen in the Nag's Head and if she had stopped drinking in there for reasons unknown.
 
Was it ever established she was actually at home that night?

As I recall Claudia spoke with her mother sometime in the early evening and she indicated she was at home during that call. There is video linked below and they say "we can't be sure but we think she was at home when she took that call" about an 20.30 call from her mother.

20:04 - 20:14
Claudia and her mother, Joan Lawrence, speak on the phone

http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/13193
 
I like the theory that Claudia might not have been home that evening/night. It would certainly explain why her straighteners were missing - she would have wanted those for when she got ready for work in the morning.
 
Weird though, why take straighteners but not your bank cards, mobile charger or toothbrush etc? Not sure about the toothbrush but she prolly had an electric given her pride in her appearance.
 
Weird though, why take straighteners but not your bank cards, mobile charger or toothbrush etc? Not sure about the toothbrush but she prolly had an electric given her pride in her appearance.
If it was somewhere she stayed regularly then she may not have needed anything other than her straighteners.

When I used to sleep at my boyfriends I had a toothbrush there,some clothes and I would use his charger. Also I only take my bank card with me if I don't have cash on me or I know I need to withdraw more cash. It's very plausible that she wasn't at home that night but somewhere near enough that when he phone was traced it would be in the same kind of area
 
Two questions- what gave parents the idea that she was calling from home?

And was it ever determined what she had posted? I'm suprised more had never been made of that fact
 
Weird though, why take straighteners but not your bank cards, mobile charger or toothbrush etc? Not sure about the toothbrush but she prolly had an electric given her pride in her appearance.

It has been known for people to forget their bank cards when they are leaving home in a hurry, particularly if they have other things on their mind. She may have had a manual disposable toothbrush in her bag, and as for the charger, well, I don't charge my phone up every night, I can sometimes go a week without plugging it in. It would have been perfectly possible for someone to access the upper rooms of The Winning Post via the external staircase without being seen in the pub. Perhaps the person she was meeting was already booked in as a legitimate B&B guest and was already in the room, waiting.

As to what could have happened, it may not have involved the landlord at all: one could envisage a plot scenario in this novel where the landlord is entirely ignorant of what was going on under his nose, or he may have agreed under duress, not wishing to imperil his livelihood, simply to help move the body off his premises and maybe help get rid of some evidence. Or he didn't find out until the next day, and had nothing to do with the act itself, and may simply have concealed evidence. Or not. In real life, people are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

As I said in my first post, the easiest way of disposing of the evidence would be to put everything in the rucksack, plus some rocks, and chuck it off Bempton Cliffs or Flamborough Head - or into the Ouse.

Once two or more people have agreed to commit a criminal act it becomes conspiracy to ... whatever, and thus there is even more pressure on those involved not to rat each other out. As the highwaymen gangs used to say in the 18th century, "If we do not hang together, then we shall certainly hang separately"

The fact that Laura Florence had apparently been seeing someone new in recent weeks (the phone located in an unfamiliar place, the change of pubs etc) may indicate a heady, intense, new relationship, in the first throes of infatuation. Having an assignation that is going to leave you with very little sleep on a "school night" when you have to be up at 5.30AM is exactly the sort of thing you do when you first meet somebody like that and you can't get enough of them.

Maybe the relationship became too tempestuous. Maybe the perpetrator had discovered Laura's penchant for seeing more than one person at once, confronted her with it, and when she told him she would do what she damn well liked, he flipped. "If I can't have you, then nobody can have you" has been a familiar refrain in many murder cases. Or it could have been something like strangulation games that just went wrong. I've never tried it myself (*don't try this at home, kids) but there is a large and reliable body of literature that claims the pleasure of sex is enhanced by constricting the throat, and mistakes do occasionally happen (there are a number of well-documented cases of auto-erotic stimulation ending very badly - Michael Hutchence, Stephen Milligan, et al.) Maybe the assignation wasn't with the exciting new lover, but instead one last meeting for old times' sake with another lover, who took exception to being told it was all over...

Thank you for your encouraging responses to my first post. I should stress that I am talking about a fictional person, Laura Florence, and a fictional pub called The Winning Post, and no relation to any persons currently living, dead, or not feeling very well, is intended or implied. There is not a shred of evidence to support any of these theories and I am not looking to draw any parallels with real life. As a writer, I try and construct plausible plot scenarios and that is all I am doing here.

Plus, in any real life cases, I am sure that the police would already have thought of all these scenarios and more. Returning to Claudia Lawrence briefly, after this massive off-topic diversion, surely the police will have had a printout of her incoming and outgoing calls from the phone company, even if the phone itself was never found?
 
The police will have a printout of her mobile calls defintely. The police also feel Claudia left for work the morning of her disappearance so would have returned home the night before (if she went out at all).

This is a very intriguing case.
 
The police will have a printout of her mobile calls defintely. The police also feel Claudia left for work the morning of her disappearance so would have returned home the night before (if she went out at all).

This is a very intriguing case.
Hmm but what makes them so certain that she left for work from her home?? Just because she ay have told her mom via telephone call she was at home doesn't mean she actually was and there's been no confirmed sightings of her after the 3pm cctv...

Also aren't the police now saying they don't actually know if she left for work

We still don't know if Claudia left... information needs to be fully investigated."

http://www.northyorkshire.police.uk/15101
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
131
Guests online
1,583
Total visitors
1,714

Forum statistics

Threads
606,232
Messages
18,200,900
Members
233,786
Latest member
KazPsi
Back
Top