Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #11

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
A friend of mine was held at knifepoint, led into bushes and raped. (In a public park). She didn’t make a sound and stayed in the bushes for 30mins after the attack (as per her attackers instructions) before emerging from the bushes. All whilst not making a single sound. The idea that she couldn’t have been kidnapped without making a sound is preposterous.

If someone tells you that they’ll kill you if you make a sound, you’ll stay quiet.
Agree. Oh, and the responses are not just 'fight or flight' as people assume - it's fight, flight or freeze.
 
Its not an exact science, but using Floodmap it suggests you'd need 4m plus storm surge to get over the weir. That would equal the 1953 North Sea Flood.

link from 4th Feb with comments from LE ( It is more likely that officer is getting her info on probabilities from the nationally renowned river experts & other specialists which the team have said they are consulting)

'The spot is 300m away from a weir, which divides the river between tidal and non-tidal.

Nothing of note had been found, the officer said, but she added that a 'large mass' could go over that weir downstream, which would present 'more complexities and challenges' as it flows out to the coast nine miles away at Fleetwood.which divides the river between tidal and non-tidal.'


Nicola Bulley's friends and family question police's drowning theory

obviously nobody has any proof of where NB might have entered the river, whether at the bench spot or further down or upstream from it. and nobody knows whether NB was still conscious or, say, swimming downstream to find a better spot to get out, soon after she fell in.
 
Last edited:
Would anyone react to the sound of a dog barking coming from an area used by dog walkers?
I think a man dragging /abducting a woman with a barking dog trailing after them might be noticed.

Think this is what the OP was getting at - pre-planning or required prior knowledge of a perp when abducting a woman with an unleashed dog ( Hence if perp knew the dog & NB or used a ruse)
 
Denis Rowlandson said to the Sun: “I rent the barn to store woodcuts to dry out and I sell them as fire logs. I don’t know anybody with a red van who should be parked outside that barn or near the entrance. I don’t know of anybody at all with a red van.
 
Denis Rowlandson said to the Sun: “I rent the barn to store woodcuts to dry out and I sell them as fire logs. I don’t know anybody with a red van who should be parked outside that barn or near the entrance. I don’t know of anybody at all with a red van.
Is this the barn with a red van behind it on satellite?
 
I stand by the work of the police and believe that everything they do, and the information they do and don't release is for a reason. I also believe in their expertise, or that they call in expertise where needed. I don't think any feasible line of enquiry will be overlooked or ignored.

In the absence of evidence I still don't know which way I think. Previously it was river accident, now for me seeming less likely in the absence of any evidence coming forward. Leaning now more towards abduction, that could change again. @Woodburnbay #931 mentioned options for exiting a person via the caravan site. It seems to me there are other secluded/non CCTV options if not taking a footpath route in such a rural location.

Some random thoughts - all just MOO - are:
  • The river search wasn't ever just a search for a body but a search for any other evidence to back up another line of enquiry. The high profile of the river search could have been to take focus away from other lines of enquiry.
  • Stalker or threat history - not something that has been disclosed or would be disclosed. Close family could be aware of but told not to disclose. Speed of police response, and PA's concern, could be linked to history not made public.
  • Willow - could have been deliberately distracted or temporarily restrained (even drugged?) in a planned abduction.
  • Use of threat/weapon to get a person out of an area quickly and quietly seems all too feasible to me.
Your second thought here really stands out to me. Ties in with PA's very assertive stance on it being something/somebody local involved. To me this makes a lot of sense. JMO.
 
"Mr Ansell explained that he and his wife had done the same walk for years. “And you see the same faces every single day, and on the very odd occasion when you see somebody that you know, you, you don’t know, they, they stand out like a sore thumb.” Link

It is interesting how NB’s morning routine is very predictable and if you lived nearby or your kids went to the same school, you would know where she can be found walking most mornings. She also posts photos of her walk on SM. But with such a narrow window of opportunity and with her dog with her, it's very hard to imagine how the event could unfold and that someone could get away with something like this without being noticed. My guess would have to be someone both she and her dog is familiar with. It also suggests someone who is very familiar with the area and who doesn't work typical hours as it occurred after 9am.

Personally I still lean towards something accidental and relating to water though, I wish we knew more about the river flow that

Your second thought here really stands out to me. Ties in with PA's very assertive stance on it being something/somebody local involved. To me this makes a lot of sense. JMO.
PA seems quite adament there is some local involvement in NB's disappearance. "Whatever has happened in my eyes has to be somebody who knows the local area. And the fact that nothing has been seen or heard. I just truly believe that it's something in the village". PA's words in the channel 5 programme last night and widely quoted in today's newspapers.
 
Would anyone react to the sound of a dog barking coming from an area used by dog walkers?
It depends upon the type of barking. I am used to this in the place I walk. If you hear persistent barking it is either a dog enjoying himself in the river/ a dog being aggressive with another dog / interacting playfully

Certainly you take note snd quite often I would try and observe what is going on by walking nearer or into view.
So yes I would say you would react … whether you would act on it is a different matter. I probably would try and see what is going on.
But there is also the question of whether the fog would bark, even if worried and concerned. One of mine would bark and the other would stay silent.Springer spaniels aren’t particularly vocal.
 
Your second thought here really stands out to me. Ties in with PA's very assertive stance on it being something/somebody local involved. To me this makes a lot of sense. JMO.
Makes no sense at all in the absence of any evidence in support of that.
I am amazed by the number of people who support the idea of some sort of predator at large without the slightest piece of evidence to support it.
Until police identify something to the contrary, I will go along with drowning as I consider that the only logical thing to do.
 
I am not ruling out accidental drowning, absolutely not. I just find it incredulous that a normally sedate section of river, at the height of less than metre suddenly and for only about 2 hours turned into a white water rapid log flume to dispose of all the evidence.
 
Of course, but you then bring a dog into the equation and it becomes less likely. The dog would go crazy!
Yes very true. Unless it was someone she knew. (Bear in mind, I am still leaning towards her having fell into the river in my own thoughts)

However, the thing that’s bugging me is the events surrounding how willow and the phone were found. From my understanding, somebody found willow, and the phone on the floor. Put the phone on the bench, tied up willow and left for an appointment. Then somebody else came along and found willow and the phone afterwards. Is there any clarification on this?

In an area like that, it wouldn’t take long to ascertain that this is a weird situation. No human in sight, phone on floor, and a presumably stressed out unattended dog…..all of this next to a river. I cannot get my head around why somebody would walk away from that. Had this discussion on here last night and some people got quite offended by it. But it is the one thing that makes things seem unusual and if I was of the train of thought that she hasn’t fallen into the river, It’s the one thing that I’d be asking about.

Just to add, for the person to have tied willow up, they must have realised that the owner was not around. Add to this the mobile phone…..I just don’t get the persons way of thinking for them to just leave things like that. I’m saying this on the basis that the series of events around willow being found are the way that I’ve heard they were. (Person found willow and phone and then tied willow up)
 
Last edited:
Makes no sense at all in the absence of any evidence in support of that.
I am amazed by the number of people who support the idea of some sort of predator at large without the slightest piece of evidence to support it.
Until police identify something to the contrary, I will go along with drowning as I consider that the only logical thing to do.
Imagine if, somebody was assumed to have fallen overboard, from a boat on a lake ( or a cruiser in an ocean) ... would we use the expression ' he just vanished into thin air' to describe it? I don't think so. Yet it's the phrase most used in this case.

Maybe it's hard to conceptualise millions of cubic metres of murky, opaque and ever-moving water.
If we can't see an object under the surface, it mustn't exist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
128
Guests online
224
Total visitors
352

Forum statistics

Threads
609,019
Messages
18,248,560
Members
234,523
Latest member
MN-Girl
Back
Top