Thank you Nimrod, you are very patient.
Does anybody else find this statement below slightly odd ?
The 17 year old sees a 'darkish' car reversing and then SOME HOURS LATER Mrs Humphrey hears a car start up again, is this suggesting somebody stayed with Linda or they returned to Linda ?
http://www.truecrimelibrary.com/crime_series_show.php?series_number=11&id=767
Linda, the daughter of a foundry worker, disappeared four days earlier while on her way to pay a newspaper bill. Her abductor drove 18 miles across the county border into Suffolk to dump her body. His car was seen by a 17-year-old schoolgirl who remembered a darkish car reversing down Potts Lane. Some hours later Mrs. Edna Humphrey, lying awake, heard the car start up again and drive past her home to the edge of the field.
I'll try to explain this one a little clearer than "truecrimelibrary.com".
Firstly, Potts Lane is about one hundred yards from where Linda was found. The girl was out with her boyfriend on his motorbike late on Thursday 19th. He lived at the top of Potts Lane on the farm. I traced this couple whilst researching and they said that on reflection shortly after that it may have been a man and woman known locally seeking privacy. I think we can make assumptions in that respect.
Mrs Humphrey lived about half a mile from the spot. She said she heard a car start up at the end of the road at about 5am on Friday 20th. It went down the road towards the spot but did not return. She did not say that she heard it start up "again". This suggests that the couple on Thursday night and Mrs Humphrey on Friday morning saw/heard the same vehicle which was never proven or for that matter strongly suspected, even.
The pathologist said that in his opinion Linda was left in the field on the evening she was taken or very shortly after which calls to account the validity of what the couple and Mrs Humphrey saw/heard.
Nimrod