Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #15

[Davieson]

I am still struggling to understand why a Detective Superintendant would be attached to the case if they are confident she went into the river...

I think its because NB was classified as high risk from the start and LP wanted a thorough investigation.
Had it not been a high risk case, it would have been assigned to a sergeant or inspector and the national press would have barely heard of Nicola

 

[Rusty Braincells]

Sorry if I wasn't clear - I'm still half trying to get it straight it my head.

Normally when someone disappears / is a victim of crime, you hear that their Next of Kin has been informed / kept up to date. As Nicola and PA weren't married, presumably Nicola's legal NoK are her parents, rather than him.

1) I'm curious about how police communication and interaction may differ with Next of Kin, vs., in this case, a long-term partner who is a close loved one but presumably not Next of Kin. It seems police have a duty to inform NoK, but what is their duty towards informing other loved ones, or PoAs etc.?

2) Is there a legal process to confirm your preferred Next of Kin in the UK? E.g. a way Nicola could have had PA legally listed as Next of Kin, instead of, or alongside her parents? As far as I'm aware, I've only been asked about Next of Kin in a medical setting, it's not official / registered with the government etc.

3) Conversely, Power of Attorney, for health or finance, is something official that is registered with the government. For example, it could well be that PA could be Nicola's registered Power of Attorney even if he wasn't her next of kin, or someone else could be, like her sister, or a friend etc. In a missing persons case like this, would a being Power of Attorney (someone who has a legally established right to make medical or financial decisions when a person is "unable") supersede Next of Kin in terms of being informed / in contact with police, would there be an expectation that both NoK and PoA would be kept informed, or would being a PoA not hold any weight at all here, in terms of police communication, because it's less about legality and more about "loved ones"?

Hope that isn't as clear as mud

EDIT: multi-quote



Thanks guys! Really the overarching idea was wondering how being kept in the loop by police during a case is affected by legal requirements vs. social bonds. And how that may influence whether Nicola's parents or PA may be the primary point of contact for the police / what they may be told.

“Next of kin” doesn’t really mean anything in a strict sense is what I would say. People love using the expression, and there are established rules for people who die intestate as to who inherits, but for grown adults, the law does not automatically deem anyone else as entitled to be given information about them or make decisions for them or about them.

You can, however, effectively make someone your “next of kin”, if you want to.

Either way, I am sure the police have updated Nicola’s partner on everything going on even though they are not married.

“Next of kin” is explained some more here: https://www.thegazette.co.uk/all-notices/content/104016

 

[JeremyBentham]

What does dbm mean?

I think it means "deleted by me"

 

[Pinkizzy]

Police helicopter having a good look at the River WyreView attachment 403470

Is this flightradar?

 

[calmdownjudy]

The family thinks she ran away, and the police believe she's in the river?

 

[ayrshireguy]

Is this flightscanner?

ADSB

 

[Marie Bell]

I always thought they used the menopause as some kind of excuse or justification for the alcohol issue, as if they felt it necessary for there to be a 'respectable' reason for her 'bad' drinking.
Trouble is, some people don't believe addiction is an illness anymore than they believe in the struggles the menopause can bring with it.

Great post.
Welcome!

Thanks. I feel as though they (family, and perhaps police too) thought that framing it like this would serve to minimise any relevance to it somewhat. A kind of 'oh just a bit of menopause difficulty; you know how it is; nothing to see here' type of thing. Putting it out there officially in a sympathetic manner like that would foil any press headlines that had been drafted as 'Police swooped on NB's house because she was DrUnK'. Sadly it hasn't had the desired effect, and has become the main topic of discussion, even on here, unfortunately.

 

[Allabouttrial]

Local (to me) news. So they are still searching Cumbrian volunteer groups called in for Nicola Bulley search - cumbriacrack.com

Thanks! From your link.

---

Cumbrian volunteer groups have been called in to help with the search for missing Nicola Bulley.

A spokesman said: “We are volunteers and we just want to help people and the families of missing people. We are one of several agencies involved in the search for Nicola Bulley.”

---

 

[Deleted member 165489]

I think it means "deleted by me"

Thank you.

 

[Nancy Drew 21]

Thanks for responding to my comment.

So in your view, there is no valid justification for the release of this information by the police as a decision taken to avoid it being released (possibly even more insensitively) instead/ahead of the press? I mean in terms of safety (eg. Nicola's psychological safety)? Bearing in mind we do not have all the information that they will have.

I have to believe there is validity in the actions of the police, but am also not ignoring the fact they could have made an error in judgement (aside from the legal issue, and my own personal views).

As you say we don't have all the information they have - but in terms of releasing the information prior/ahead of the press releasing it - they still need to have a lawful basis to release the information. Police can release personal data in order to investigate a crime and protect the public - personally I can't see how releasing information to pre-empt a story released by the press falls under either purpose? I would imagine that the Police have a legal support team and access to expertise that could have advised them.

Lancs Police will have to justify and explain their decision making process to the Information Commissioner's Office and imo it's good that the ICO have published a statement today stating they've asked for this explanation.

And again menopause systems, HRT treatment and "significant" alcholol problems are very explicit and detailed - any health and medical data including mental health data is special category (sensitive) personal data. They could have simply said there were ongoing health and medical issues without providing the level of detail that they did.

 

[cottonweaver]

---

17TH FEB.

Nicola Bulley's dad says the family are waiting for a "breakthrough" as today marks three weeks since she went missing.

---

E Bulley, 73, says "every day is a struggle" as the family are desperate for answers.

---

It comes one day after, Nicola's family released a heartbreaking directly appealed to the mum, saying to "not be scared" as her girls "want a cuddle".

It comes after Nicola's sister shared a sunny snap of herself with Nicola and their mum D, 72 on her Facebook wall today.

She wrote: "Three weeks today without you home. We all miss you so much, time to come home now."

---

Nicola Bulley dad says 'every day is a struggle' as he hopes for 'breakthrough'

Lancashire Police launched a massive search for Nicola Bulley, using drones, dogs, and specialist divers and expanding more than 13 miles to Morecambe Bay in the last three weeks

www.mirror.co.uk

"not be scared"
"time to come home now."


The phrasing makes it sound as if these family members believe that NB has left voluntarily ( Mum/Dad/Sister)

 

[JeremyBentham]

The family thinks she ran away, and the police believe she's in the river?

I think the family in these cases will always have hope, so won't want to resign to the theory that she is in the river. They would know her state of mind better than most so would know if disappearing is a likely occurrence. Plus there is no evidence to suggest she is in the river. There is also no evidence to suggest anything else happened. But in the light of no evidence of foul play or anything else, the most likely scenario is that she is in the river, which is the police's working theory (but not ruling anything out completely).

It's just bizzare all round.

I believe she is either in the river and just not yet found, or has disappeared of her own free will. I don't see an abduction being likely, although in this case still possible.

Lot's of going around in circles in this case and will be until something new turns up.

 

[Maclane]

I still find a loose dry dog near the bench/gate a bit perplexing. This has probably been mentioned and thrown out (lets face it every theory has countless times and nothing fully makes sense), but is it possible NB did actually tie Willow to the bench (looped through it) and after a while the dog struggled free because of a weak spring clip, but didn't know where to go. More likely the lead would have been found right at the bench, but it could have got moved around.

 

[Enigmacode]

Claudias Law deal with this.
Introduced after lobbying by Claudia Lawrence when she disappeared and she has been missing not found for over a decade.

Interesting, this only came into effect a few years ago. So her family can act as guardians of her affairs after a certain amount of time. Makes sense, providing it's just management of her finances rather than wholesale 'disposal'. Otherwise, it would be more than a bit suspicious.

 

[Marie Bell]

I am still struggling to understand why a Detective Superintendant would be attached to the case if they are confident she went into the river...

That's because they couldn't be confident of that. Searches, and a vast quantity of CCTV and digital investigations were all required, using a lot of resources. Not only operational support resources such as divers, drones, dogs, and helicopter; but detectives, financial and digital investigators. The D/Super would need to lead Superintendents and Chief Inspectors downwards, as well as being accountable and reporting to the Command Team re budgets, media, and everything else. Massive job.
Whether she had any particular 'vulnerabilities' or not, this was a lone female, and all the stops had to be pulled out to investigate whether she had been attacked or abducted. They continue to investigate as much as possible into whether this could have happened.

 

[Allabouttrial]

I still find a loose dry dog near the bench/gate a bit perplexing. This has probably been mentioned and thrown out (lets face it every theory has countless times and nothing fully makes sense), but is it possible NB did actually tie Willow to the bench (looped through it) and after a while the dog struggled free because of a weak spring clip, but didn't know where to go. More likely the lead would have been found right at the bench, but it could have got moved around.

That has definitely crossed my mind a few times. I still wonder why his harness was between the bench and river though.

 

[cottonweaver]

The family thinks she ran away, and the police believe she's in the river?

Not all family.
NB's partner seems to think somebody local is responsible and knows something ( And he wanted every house in the village searched) Channel 5 interview

 

[Grouse]

Is this flightradar?

adsbexchange - link here

 

[pineapple23]

I've just joined, after reading most of the threads on an ongoing basis, and as a lurker I'd like to compliment a few members on their good sense. There's some in particular, but I won't name them, as that might be in breach of the rules, for all I know.

What I mostly wanted to add, though, was my thoughts about the January 10th incident, because I'm fairly familiar with these types of situations where police respond in the way they did. i.e. with health professionals, and the various situations that come under the 'concern for welfare' heading. Basically a 'concern for welfare' can stretch from a person not being seen/failing to respond to knocks and calls, to someone sitting on the roof and threatening to set themselves on fire. But if the response comprises health professionals embedded with the police response team, this is generally because someone has called the police for assistance because there is some sort of a crisis going on, and where one of the involved people is 'not themselves/irrational' for any number of reasons.

I won't speculate as to why they responded in this case; and the exact circumstances don't matter. What does seem to matter is that someone from the press had got wind of the incident, and (I'm surmising here, based upon the few things I've heard about how the press operates) asked the police if they wished to comment regarding a story they intended to publish within a short time-frame. I'd surmise that the story was going to merely say WTTE 'police called to house on January 10th because NB was doing xxxxyyyzzz whilst drunk'.

I get the impression that the whole 'brought on by the menopause suffering' was intended (by the family, I'd say) to try to remove any suggestion that NB was a full-blown-never-sober-out-of-control-drunk.

I'm also of the opinion that in this case her state of mind, and any problems she'd had, including any problem drinking that had occurred, soon turned out to be not relevant to her disappearance. Though obviously it would have taken a couple of days and a lot of searching, etc, to get a clearer idea on that. It's my opinion that the most probable event - as said in the very first LP press conference, is that she plonked the phone on the bench (my words) to start getting the harness back on the dog, and that one way or another she ended up stumbling/tripping over and falling in the river. If so, she wouldn't have landed on the stones at the shallower edge in a neat standing-up landing pose (like PF kept talking about). She'd have ended up more on her backside/side, potentially even with a twisted ankle. With a good deal of her anatomy in water that was nearly 0c, and maybe having some splashed in her face and mouth, she wouldn't, sadly, have been capable of doing anything much to help herself.

All of the above is my opinion only, and sorry it's such a long ramble. With the exception of the Jan 10th matter, which we learned only yesterday, I've kind of held onto these thoughts for nearly three weeks in silence!

Hi we have similar theories. I have a mental health background and re Jan 10th was reminded of an incident which I attended along with police and health professionals due to concerns about one of my clients. As for the initial statement that NB was vulnerable, we already know that this came after a former detective Mark Williams Thomas found out about the incident and contacted Police saying he had details (discussed earlier with a link).
Of course none of this might have any bearing on what happened or it simply might be she wasn't as focussed as usual. I can see a scenario where she put her phone down and got up off the bench to grab Willow and put her harness on. She may have stumbled and gone down head first. The harness was found on the slope. Maybe she kocked her head or got cold water shock.
But just one of several possibilities imo
I hope for the family's sake we learn something soon.

 

[Davieson]

Not all family.
NB's partner seems to think somebody local is responsible and knows something ( And he wanted every house in the village searched) Channel 5 interview

The local may be considered an accomplice in her disappearance rather than some predator - eg a friend who is helping her escape from her situation.