Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #13

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I suspect, though it’s just my opinion, that the police are holding a news conference today simply because they feel obliged to with all the speculation in the news. I doubt they’ll have any significant updates.

I’ve also detected this frenzy is getting slightly less so, maybe because people are realising how hard it is to locate a missing person and are becoming tired of repeating the same speculations.

It’s truly heartbreaking that NB has gone missing, and whilst I understand how desperate her partner, family and friends are to find her, it’s a sad fact that hundreds of people go missing every year - and some are never found again. As much as the police are desperate to find NB, they’ve done everything they can possibly do so far and whilst they’ll continue their searching, even into the sea, there will come a time they will have to scale their search down. Sadly, they can’t search daily forever. Obviously, they’ll investigate any new leads that may come in, and are still carrying out land searches, I believe. But I think they’re now hoping that NB resurfaces somewhere.

In today’s Daily Mail (linked in a previous post above) a fisherman with extensive local knowledge of the river said he feared if she fell in that river she would not be found 'for months'. He said no-one would have spotted her had she fell under, and that the undercurrents are such that she’d be dragged away into the sea.

Local fishermen know that river like the back of their hand, so for one with decades of experience, I believe his judgment.

I know there’s been lots of talk about her phone being left on the bench; some saying it was left as a decoy by an abductor; but why would an abductor not throw her phone into the river - they’d want to dispose of it promptly. And if they wanted to make it appear she had fallen in the river and not been abducted, the most obvious thing would have been to throw her phone in with her. They wouldn’t leave it on the bench to add intrigue. Almost everyone with a phone has it in their hand or pocket, so the obvious thing for an abductor would be to throw it in with her - or they’d throw it in the river knowing it would be located by signal ( or found in an underwater search) making people convinced she too fell in. I dare say they’d have even thrown Willow in the river too - they wouldn’t leave her to follow them for 10 minutes while they were struggling with Nicola to the exit, knowing dog walkers could appear any second.

IMO NB fell into that river by a tragic accident and I just hope they find her as soon as possible.
 
Also, it’s plainly obvious any such test would have meaningless results as a river is much too complex and variable. So many different environment factors.
I totally agree.
You'd have to be very careful, I watched a cold-immersion movie. In one breath (2-3 litres) you can swallow more than the 1.5 litres of water for the lethal dose for drowning, there is also a risk of a cardiac response and then even hypothermia. Although the former is the highest risk of death.

Don't think depth - think cold.
Fair enough and yes, another reason of many why it wouldn't work. It's frustrating but true that it simply can't be reconstructed because as well as nobody knowing what actually happened, it's also much too dangerous.
 
There were already several public searches as well as official searches from B Mountain Rescue and Fire Brigade professional searches.

Police also supervised community searches.
Yes, but it seems there are a lot of people in the community that believe she might be alive or her body might not be in the river. There had already been plenty of searches in the other case too but that’s the only example I could think of a line search that size.

But since many people believe she might be in the village, wouldn't they be allowed to organize a small search for a certain area, as long as it's not private property? Do they even need permission from police?
 
You'd have to be very careful, I watched a cold-immersion movie. In one breath (2-3 litres) you can swallow more than the 1.5 litres of water for the lethal dose for drowning, there is also a risk of a cardiac response and then even hypothermia. Although the former is the highest risk of death.

Don't think depth - think cold.
Also, the last thing emergency services need right now is a bunch of impressionable SM wannabes leaping in on video for the clicks and needing to be rescued themselves.
 
Nice to meet you. Based upon the many cases of drowning that have been posted on here (some of the same river) - it's conceivable a body could be found several months later despite how ever much searching has been done previously...
JMO but I doubt previous drownings in this particular river have ever been the subject of such repeated high intensity searches as has been for NB. And mega sophisticated equipment has been used. They've had the weather on their side, no rain, river level has continued to drop, drones, helicopters and goodness knows how many eyes watching that water for miles. If they haven't found a single piece of evidence of her presence or personal items in the water or on the riverbed in more than two weeks, then she must be seriously wedged or hidden somewhere
 
When we are talking about serious organised crime, could this be financially related? I.E loan sharks (kidnap due to non payment) etc. Not saying it is in this case but just thinking of another angle. JMO.
That’s put an idea in my head.. she had a meeting with her boss the day before, after which she has an important zoom meeting, straight after, relating to a new mortgage. Prior to meeting with boss ( who drove a good distance just for the meeting to see her face to face), she was not aware of the zoom meeting. What if this zoom meeting regarding ‘new mortgage’ is significant… ie trying to get a large loan for a dubious person through? Obviously Nicola wasn’t aware it was dubious … something goes horribly wrong. Or she finds out something she shouldn’t and had to be removed. Sounds far fetched ?
 
I hope this isn't considered too morbid or irrelevant, but as an example of how difficult it can be to find bodies in water (even very small amounts of water), how many people here have had to find a dead fish in an aquarium? Sometimes it can be an absolute nightmare. You know the fish is in there, it couldn't have gone very far, but finding it? Good luck.
 
When we are talking about serious organised crime, could this be financially related? I.E loan sharks (kidnap due to non payment) etc. Not saying it is in this case but just thinking of another angle. JMO.
Very possible.

A missing person case led by a organised crime Det Sup and 40 detectives.

Seem a lot of resources for someone that 'fell into the river '.
 
<modsnip - quoted post was removed>

(BTW They already asked ' no experts' to stop commenting last week and a few former detectives ( those who still work in LE consultancy rather than, say Simon Cowell True crime TV productions) have already said that commentary from non-experts makes the task so much harder. However I doubt that whatever they say, in general terms, will make any difference - hasn't done so before. )
 
Last edited by a moderator:
<modsnip>

Side note: having read PF's book due to curiosity of how he came to do what he does I can safely say I have full trust in what he says and what he does. I agree with him coming out with his honest opinions, it forces LE's hand to look elsewhere. They're pushing hard on the theory that Nicola fell into the water from the get go, but yet havent provided a single piece of evidence as to why that is which is unusual for a case like this, if she did indeed end up in the water by accident.
It'll be interesting to see if they actually give any firm reasons today at the presser. Anyone know what time it'll be at?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That’s put an idea in my head.. she had a meeting with her boss the day before, after which she has an important zoom meeting, straight after, relating to a new mortgage. Prior to meeting with boss ( who drove a good distance just for the meeting to see her face to face), she was not aware of the zoom meeting. What if this zoom meeting regarding ‘new mortgage’ is significant… ie trying to get a large loan for a dubious person through? Obviously Nicola wasn’t aware it was dubious … something goes horribly wrong. Or she finds out something she shouldn’t and had to be removed. Sounds far fetched ?
Slightly.
Coming from the same line of work as Nicola there are, on nearly a weekly basis, zoom meetings with BDM's of banks, you are asked to keep your sound off and you can show your face if you wish but 99% of people attending the zoom keep the sound and camera off. These generally last 20-30 mins if its just an update on new criteria, policy changes etc.
 
I can't help being slightly skeptical about this find given that it was found after hordes of people had descended upon the area and no-one spotted it. It'll be interesting to see if it is mentioned tomorrow in the press conference. JMO
Bearing in mind the glove was found on 7th February so would have been forensically tested by now if they were remotely interested in it
 
This. They're quite proactive at that, and arresting people from twitter.

Side note: having read PF's book due to curiosity of how he came to do what he does I can safely say I have full trust in what he says and what he does. I agree with him coming out with his honest opinions, it forces LE's hand to look elsewhere. They're pushing hard on the theory that Nicola fell into the water from the get go, but yet havent provided a single piece of evidence as to why that is which is unusual for a case like this, if she did indeed end up in the water by accident.
It'll be interesting to see if they actually give any firm reasons today at the presser. Anyone know what time it'll be at?
I saw 11.30 announced for the presser
 
It's concerning if they continue to persist with the narrative that she fell in the river this case will lose all momentum, interest and help from the public will wane and their credibility will slide off the scale
I'm kind of thinking that it will be exactly that, because we've seen nothing to suggest that there has been any evidence of third-party involvement all along. I expect they'll talk a lot about online abuse and wild speculation and tell people to stop doing that. IMO.
 
Sounds far fetched ?
It does to me, sorry. That said I feel we have gone round in circles. There is no theory that is 100% though statistically some might be more likely than others. So who knows....
 
Very intrigued about this press conference. I also think it may be to tell people to back off, given the arrests that have happened. However, it may also be that they are changing tack- she hasn’t been found where they thought she would be. Maybe they are thinking abduction now. We will see
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
105
Guests online
1,223
Total visitors
1,328

Forum statistics

Threads
599,281
Messages
18,093,818
Members
230,841
Latest member
FastRayne
Back
Top