Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #10

[AgathapisdT]

But a loose dog and an unattended mobile phone, next to a river??

I could understand if it was just the dog. (Barely, but only because I’m a dog lover).

But a dog and a mobile phone in a quiet area where it wouldn’t take long to realise there is a person missing where a person should be…..I could never walk away from that.

Agree, however, she may have been in a rush and although I may be wrong she did not spot the mobile, it was someone else.

 

[lazysloth]

I'm not really understanding why there's this argument between the 10 minute window and now it's suddenly changed to 1-2 hours? Nicola was sighted at 9:10am then her phone was apparently at the bench at 9:20am (police must be sure of this). 10 mins later and the call has ended that she was on and she hasn't disconnected. So at most surely it's a 20 minute window? Sure the witness got there at 9:33am ish, but at that point Nicola was gone anyway... so the fact Paul wasn't notified until 10:50am (ish again) doesn't really make any difference?

The timings are extremely important but not because it necessarily changes the window of opportunity, but because it paints a new picture of the scene in question. Before the new timings were revealed we had a pretty hazy idea of what was going on between 9:33 and when the alarm was raised at 10:50 am; how many people found the dog/phone? who recognised the dog? did the dog finder do any preliminary search (however short) for nicola or shout for her? When did they figure it out and finally tell Paul/the police?

Speaking for myself and having read the press conferences I had this idea in my head that after 9:33 there was at least some activity in terms of trying to figure out who's phone and dog were on the bench. In reality what happened between 9:33 and 10:50 was precisely... nothing.

Not a single witness saw the dog and the phone near the bench for 80 minutes. Bear in mind that both were directly beside the main walkway into the area at somewhat of a bottleneck. They would be hard to miss even for the most unobservant country stroller. On top of that the witness is in a rush and deems it only urgent enough to tell her daughter in law about the abandoned dog and lost phone in the park (she thought she recognised the dog but couldn't remember whose it was). She ties the dog up with a piece of string (String?!) before leaving.

What this says to me is that the area is more remote than perhaps it's made out to be. Yes there is a short window for her disappearance, but there is an extremely long and unobserved window for whatever happened after her disappearance.

 

[russeverton]

Paul Ansell: '
Find out what it is. My plea now is personally I want every house, every garage every outbuilding, the land scrutinised.
'I want it all searched, I want it all scrutinised, and I'm just pleading with them to just please anything, anything, no matter how tiny just vcome foreward with it because that could be the key to finding her.'

What are people thoughts on this statement made by PA
It's feels like to me they have their suspicions of the likely third party to me IMO

Shame it may be 2 weeks too late for all that now

 

[cottonweaver]

'.......as police soften stance to say she 'may have' gone into the river'​

scratching my head over this title
they've said every day that it's a hypothesis

Nicola Bulley's partner says his family are going through 'hell'

Nicola Bulley's partner Paul Ansell today declared 'something happened that day' as the search for the missing mother-of-two hits the two-week mark.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Awaywego]

If somebody else was involved, its curious how they decided to do something while she was logged onto the Teams call with people talking on loudspeaker and probably the phone visible such as near her ear during the time she disappeared, and the call was not interrupted at any point while she became detached from the phone. Suggests to me she put the phone down herself and then went somewhere without it, expecting to be back soon and just trusted nobody would take it. But she didn't make it back. She must have walked somewhere with no cctv. Then why? Looking for a bin carrying dog poo?

Yeah I agree, she could have gone back to pick up some dog poo, put it in a bin, or dropped something on the floor, throw a stick for Willow. She might have gone to the bench so she could put her phone down and not have to keep carrying it whilst listening on loudspeaker and then moved away from there again briefly to do something else whether that was near the water or back into the field.

 

[cottonweaver]

Shame it may be 2 weeks too late for all that now

how do you achieve those searches without the warrants?

and, do you think the water searches should now stop so that resources can be diverted elsewhere?

 

[Andreee]

Diver says missing mother’s partner was ‘shocked’ by river search detail

Police believe the 45-year-old fell in the River Wyre while walking her dog on January 27

www.standard.co.uk

 

[pineapple23]

A very good question!

For full disclosure, I do not think she fell into the river, I lean towards a third party intervention. Given that stance, I'm interested in what would have caused her to abandon phone and dog, and leave, e.g. through the kissing gate. I'm not sure where it was reported, but my impression was that the dog was found running between the bench and the kissing gate. Looking at the report on GMB yesterday (Thursday), the metal kissing gate is very close to the back of the bench, and leads to a tree/shrub lined footpath. Perhaps, at the crucial time, Willow was a little way away from the bench/gate and saw NB leave via the gate, so was naturally drawn to that area.

So why did she leave? Well, I can imagine if a third party came down the path to the gate and told her, for instance, they had come from the school and that one of her children had been taken ill/ had an accident, she would think of nothing other than to get to the child, forgetting everything else. I cannot imagine any other reason why she would just leave. Given the timings published by LE (last sighting 09:10, phone found 09:33), 20 minutes seems ample to lure her away. What happened therafter is not for me to speculate.

MOO

For me, as a dog owner, it would be second nature to grab my dog. It would only take seconds. I wouldn't be leaving him in the middle of nowhere whatever the reason.

 

[Dan Cooper]

IMO the absence of evidence is evidence in itself that a third party is involved - someone has gone to great lengths to bamboozle the police. IMO.

This is one of the funniest posts I've ever read on WS. An astounding example of circular logic.

"We can't find any evidence that someone is guilty, therefore by process of elimination someone must be guilty!"

 

[Cluella DeVille]

Paul Ansell: '
Find out what it is. My plea now is personally I want every house, every garage every outbuilding, the land scrutinised.
'I want it all searched, I want it all scrutinised, and I'm just pleading with them to just please anything, anything, no matter how tiny just vcome foreward with it because that could be the key to finding her.'

What are people thoughts on this statement made by PA
It's feels like to me they have their suspicions of the likely third party to me IMO

If the falling in the river scenario is to be discounted, I have my doubts NB ever returned to that bench area, that whatever happened it likely took place in that top field. Two scenarios support this....IF it is her own choice to disappear she would have required an accomplice to place things at the bench. IF she was abducted the perpetrator would have required an accomplice for the same purpose

 

[JimmyBets]

*We continue to look at all the potential scenarios to eliminate them. We are reviewing our decisions regularly. Based on all the work we have done up to now, our belief remains that Nicola may have fallen into the river for some reason*

C&P from that LE Twitter. There seems to be a change in tone here. That's not a criticism, and it's inevitable at this stage, I guess.

This was my first thought when I read todays press release from LE. The words “may” and “for some reason” appear to me as a softening on their previous tone.

 

[russeverton]

how do you achieve those searches without the warrants?

and, do you think the water searches should now stop so that resources can be diverted elsewhere?

A warrant to search fields bushes and a large lake near where she was last seen? No I think they should of treated it as a crime scene from day 1 and taped off all entry and exit instead of letting it become a tourist attraction and concentrating on a bench and river which at no point was she seen to of been near.

how do you achieve those searches without the warrants?

and, do you think the water searches should now stop so that resources can be diverted elsewhere?

 

[kittythehare]

Hi all, some Strava sleuthing from me. I'm a Strava subscriber which gives me access to 'segment' data and leaderboards. Basically a segment is a route, usually a short section, whereby if you pass through that segment it logs your data on the leaderboard.

Looking at NB's strava and her usual route, as per on Jan 27th, there are a few segments. On closer look at the data for these segments it shows someone, on the 27th, doing a very similar route, from the village.

Their walk starts at 10.24 and finishes at 11.31 Their route appears to differ from NB in that they head down stream along the river first then back, then to the area of bench/fields - if a body did travel downstream from bench area around that time, there could be a possibility of them noticing something floating down stream as they'd be walking in the same direction as the river flow for 20-30 ish minutes? Looking at the data this person does this route every day, except the few days following Jan 27th. They have 0 followers and follow 0 people.

Anyway my point is that they potentially could have either known NB or seen her previously or that day (potential witness) or a good chance that if a body travelled downstream at the time they were walking downstream for 15-20 mins, there could have been a good chance they'd have noticed, and if not, does that support the 'not in the river' line of thinking.

I hope I've explained what I'm saying ok but i'm happy to discuss, provide more info as I found it interesting. Thinking of NBs family, what an awful and sad case.

That is something I would most definitely notify to Lancashire Police
Link is here

https://twitter.com/x/status/1624124058563477504

 

[karakuchi]

Hi all, some Strava sleuthing from me. I'm a Strava subscriber which gives me access to 'segment' data and leaderboards. Basically a segment is a route, usually a short section, whereby if you pass through that segment it logs your data on the leaderboard.

Looking at NB's strava and her usual route, as per on Jan 27th, there are a few segments. On closer look at the data for these segments it shows someone, on the 27th, doing a very similar route, from the village.

Their walk starts at 10.24 and finishes at 11.31 Their route appears to differ from NB in that they head down stream along the river first then back, then to the area of bench/fields - if a body did travel downstream from bench area around that time, there could be a possibility of them noticing something floating down stream as they'd be walking in the same direction as the river flow for 20-30 ish minutes? Looking at the data this person does this route every day, except the few days following Jan 27th. They have 0 followers and follow 0 people.

Anyway my point is that they potentially could have either known NB or seen her previously or that day (potential witness) or a good chance that if a body travelled downstream at the time they were walking downstream for 15-20 mins, there could have been a good chance they'd have noticed, and if not, does that support the 'not in the river' line of thinking.

I hope I've explained what I'm saying ok but i'm happy to discuss, provide more info as I found it interesting. Thinking of NBs family, what an awful and sad case.

Can a Strava user see another user's location?
On re-reading this, I agree you should report this to Lanc Police.

 

[cottonweaver]

A warrant to search fields bushes and a large lake near where she was last seen? No I think they should of treated it as a crime scene from day 1 and taped off all entry and exit instead of letting it become a tourist attraction and concentrating on a bench and river which at no point was she seen to of been near.

no, I meant the point you replied to he

easier to paste the screenshot

the ' every house, garage, every outbuilding, the land scrutinised'

 

[ginnyw]

But a loose dog and an unattended mobile phone, next to a river??

I could understand if it was just the dog. (Barely, but only because I’m a dog lover).

But a dog and a mobile phone in a quiet area where it wouldn’t take long to realise there is a person missing where a person should be…..I could never walk away from that.

I am not a dog-lover, far from it, but I think that if I had found a distressed dog, a mobile phone and a harness with no owner around, I would have rung the police. Or if I had started to walk away, I think that something wouid have made me go back, or else I know it would have bugged me for the rest of the morning. Not trying to claim any moral high ground either. It's just what I would do. I realise that others wouldn't necessarily do the same. MOO.

 

[Mr applebee]

Agree, however, she may have been in a rush and although I may be wrong she did not spot the mobile, it was someone else.

My understanding is that she put the mobile phone on the bench and tied the dog up with a piece of “string”. ‍

It’s the fact that she saw the phone that has baffled me as to why she didn’t act with more urgency.

 

[Lincoln34]

I'm not really understanding why there's this argument between the 10 minute window and now it's suddenly changed to 1-2 hours? Nicola was sighted at 9:10am then her phone was apparently at the bench at 9:20am (police must be sure of this). 10 mins later and the call has ended that she was on and she hasn't disconnected. So at most surely it's a 20 minute window? Sure the witness got there at 9:33am ish, but at that point Nicola was gone anyway... so the fact Paul wasn't notified until 10:50am (ish again) doesn't really make any difference?

The dog Willow is key for me. I have ADHD - I’m in my late 40’s and was only diagnosed recently. In the last 2 weeks I’ve lost an iPad Air - hadn’t uploaded find on iPad - and 2 hats and 1 cardigan and 2 pairs of sunglasses. I have a locator on my keys and phone otherwise I would be hopeless. I could - and have in the past - easily leave my phone and walk away by putting it down and getting distracted and not realise for a while - even hours - I’ve found it through Find my iPhone and the tracker. But I would never leave my dog. Or leave lead and harness as I need them to get Pippa to the road near park . So yes . A tight window.

 

[sriraaacha]

The timings are extremely important but not because it necessarily changes the window of opportunity, but because it paints a new picture of the scene in question. Before the new timings were revealed we had a pretty hazy idea of what was going on between 9:33 and when the alarm was raised at 10:50 am; how many people found the dog/phone? who recognised the dog? did the dog finder do any preliminary search (however short) for nicola or shout for her? When did they figure it out and finally tell Paul/the police?

Speaking for myself and having read the press conferences I had this idea in my head that after 9:33 there was at least some activity in terms of trying to figure out who's phone and dog were on the bench. In reality what happened between 9:33 and 10:50 was precisely... nothing.

Not a single witness saw the dog and the phone near the bench for 80 minutes. Bear in mind that both were directly beside the main walkway into the area at somewhat of a bottleneck. They would be hard to miss even for the most unobservant country stroller. On top of that the witness is in a rush and deems it only urgent enough to tell her daughter in law about the abandoned dog and lost phone in the park (she thought she recognised the dog but couldn't remember whose it was). She ties the dog up with a piece of string (String?!) before leaving.

What this says to me is that the area is more remote than perhaps it's made out to be. Yes there is a short window for her disappearance, but there is an extremely long and unobserved window for whatever happened after her disappearance.

You're absolutely right and I guess it depends. It depends on what info the police have released (maybe there were more sightings of that situation and that's why a bunch of the info got mixed up for example). It also depends on what other (if any) witnesses have come forward or even noticed it if they were there. It's also a pretty isolated area judging by the pics/videos I've seen. I used to go walking in a fairly busy park any time from 5am-9am and I'd see lots of people walking dogs, after that not so much. So after that 9:33am witness, there may not have been anyone? Like I said from the experience I've had most people are gone by then, whether it's for work or whatever but dog walkers are usually early imo.

 

[Firstsnow4]

Hi all, some Strava sleuthing from me. I'm a Strava subscriber which gives me access to 'segment' data and leaderboards. Basically a segment is a route, usually a short section, whereby if you pass through that segment it logs your data on the leaderboard.

Looking at NB's strava and her usual route, as per on Jan 27th, there are a few segments. On closer look at the data for these segments it shows someone, on the 27th, doing a very similar route, from the village.

Their walk starts at 10.24 and finishes at 11.31 Their route appears to differ from NB in that they head down stream along the river first then back, then to the area of bench/fields - if a body did travel downstream from bench area around that time, there could be a possibility of them noticing something floating down stream as they'd be walking in the same direction as the river flow for 20-30 ish minutes? Looking at the data this person does this route every day, except the few days following Jan 27th. They have 0 followers and follow 0 people.

Anyway my point is that they potentially could have either known NB or seen her previously or that day (potential witness) or a good chance that if a body travelled downstream at the time they were walking downstream for 15-20 mins, there could have been a good chance they'd have noticed, and if not, does that support the 'not in the river' line of thinking.

I hope I've explained what I'm saying ok but i'm happy to discuss, provide more info as I found it interesting. Thinking of NBs family, what an awful and sad case.

Excellent work - I have also found the account you are referring to - looking at the start time they may have been in the vicinity of the bench around the time the police were alerted. I wonder if the police are aware of this strava feature?! JMO.