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

[Agatha3]

Yes, I understand that. And I understand helping out with the 2 children as much as she can.

But to move in?

She needs to live there?

I find it bizarre. My own opinion only, of course. Others may differ.

She may live a distance away and having auntie there all the time maintains some normality and bit of cheer for the children.

 

[JennieM]

tbh I previously thought his main theories were due to being ' in denial' and wanting every stone unturned ( Like being in denial as a stage of the grieving process) but since I re-watched the C5 interviews with PA, I don't know.

As you say, anything is possible.

In this scenario, would he not have appealed to her directly in that first interview? From memory, I don't think he did. He said something like the girls need her, but don't remember him addressing her directly to come home for them.

 

[JennieM]

Disgusting, cornered that man.

Just vultures

 

[BDL1960]

The personal information about Miss Bulley regarding her vulnerabilities should never have been released. It is private and personal. Only the police needed to know any of this and I cannot understand why they have made this public.

I'm sure the ACC and SIO now regret their choice of words. Like many watching the press conference, as soon as 'vulnerabilities' were mentioned, it obvious what the next question was going to be and where the attention would go.
I am sure too that their intentions were for the best ie.
1. To demonstrate they took it seriously from the start and weren't complacent.
2. To dissuade those who thought her partner was responsible from vocalising their theories.
3. To emphasise the unprecedented level of resourcing they had put into this case.
4. To demonstrate openness and transparency.

With hindsight this could have been finessed a little better without raising the controversy it has and in fact tainting the reputation of LE which was the exact opposite of what they intended.

Now as well as being a major incident requiring vast resources, it has become a 'critical incident' where the force now has to take remedial action to manage the tarnishing of its brand and the erosion of trust and confidence....as well as writing reports to the Home Office!

 

[JennieM]

Nicola Bulley: Home secretary asks police to explain health disclosures​

The home secretary has raised concerns with police after they revealed personal information about missing mother Nicola Bulley.

A source close to Suella Braverman said she had "asked for an explanation".

They said the home secretary had received a response on Thursday evening but was not wholly satisfied with the force's justification for releasing the personal details.

Nicola Bulley: Home secretary asks police to explain health disclosures

A source says the home secretary wants to know why police released Nicola Bulley's health details.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[onthecounter]

Disgusting, cornered that man.

Yep he’s a big bloke but stood right in the middle of that path, blocking it. Totally unethical.

 

[geelongcate]

Imagine if all LE put personal info of a victim out in the public simply because the media was going to do so first! It is wrong, an invasion of privacy. Never have I seen that done here in Canada for that reason!

Also, what information was supposedly going to come out? Surely nothing about her hormone levels, which is private medical information and is very unlikely to have been known by anyone outside her immediate family. Perhaps something about past episodes of drinking, given that police said her issues had "re-emerged" recently.

So in order to avert a story which may or may not have come out (and people have had three weeks to sell stories if they wanted to) they released arguably much more personal information which lead all the news headlines, was front page in all the papers and has been the subject of fierce public debate for two days now. A gossipy story appearing in a tabloid would've received nothing like as much attention and I'm sure would've been roundly condemned. If anything, the police statement has given credibility to any story which might emerge now.

I think a further serious implication is the way this affects trust in the police more generally. The police releasing private information certainly makes me think twice about what I would tell police were I to be in a similar situation. From a wider perspective it may have been better to wait until any story was published before commenting (a story which, again, may well not have been published at all) rather than the police releasing extremely personal information themselves.

 

[Cluella DeVille]

I suppose the police could have simply stated that Nicola was suffering from mental health issues or depression?

Being as that umbrella term would have covered a multitude of possibilities, that would seem a far more appropriate announcement IMO. The intimate details are an appalling breach of confidentiality.
Plus the fact they obviously knew this from outset and yet made no appeal to NB to return and offer her support, but when straight down the tack that she had thrown herself in the river. Whilst clearly the potential of her being in the river couldn't possibly be discounted, hence a search of it began very quickly, was there no consideration in the initial hours that they could have walked away?

 

[JennieM]

I'm sure the ACC and SIO now regret their choice of words. Like many watching the press conference, as soon as 'vulnerabilities' were mentioned, it obvious what the next question was going to be and where the attention would go.
I am sure too that their intentions were for the best ie.
1. To demonstrate they took it seriously from the start and weren't complacent.
2. To dissuade those who thought her partner was responsible from vocalising their theories.
3. To emphasise the unprecedented level of resourcing they had put into this case.
4. To demonstrate openness and transparency.

With hindsight this could have been finessed a little better without raising the controversy it has and in fact tainting the reputation of LE which was the exact opposite of what they intended.

Now as well as being a major incident requiring vast resources, it has become a 'critical incident' where the force now has to take remedial action to manage the tarnishing of its brand and the erosion of trust and confidence....as well as writing reports to the Home Office!

Since she was on HRT, which she then withdrew from, the police could just had easily said they had concerns and she was high risk because of medication she was using. End of.

 

[Firstsnow4]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1626528394404933633

Too right!!!

 

[vchk]

I'm sure the ACC and SIO now regret their choice of words. Like many watching the press conference, as soon as 'vulnerabilities' were mentioned, it obvious what the next question was going to be and where the attention would go.
I am sure too that their intentions were for the best ie.
1. To demonstrate they took it seriously from the start and weren't complacent.
2. To dissuade those who thought her partner was responsible from vocalising their theories.
3. To emphasise the unprecedented level of resourcing they had put into this case.
4. To demonstrate openness and transparency.

With hindsight this could have been finessed a little better without raising the controversy it has and in fact tainting the reputation of LE which was the exact opposite of what they intended.

Now as well as being a major incident requiring vast resources, it has become a 'critical incident' where the force now has to take remedial action to manage the tarnishing of its brand and the erosion of trust and confidence....as well as writing reports to the Home Office!

I believe (or nobody) expected this case to gain so much publicity, guess their main focus was on finding NB.
They could have done better in the initial press conferences/press releases

 

[Mycroft42]

Live on sky news now they have come across a witness that found the phone! They have stopped him and are speaking to him now.

Edited after watching fully.

** Context** - Two reporters are walking the route that Nicola would have taken, whilst doing so they have come across a witness.

A lady called Penny found the phone, harness, lead & willow initially and then called this older gentleman over.
He recognised the dog and saw the wallpaper on her phone.
He is sure on the exact time it was because he got a call from his wife so they went on that time.

Also worth noting he was an elderly gentleman but he didn't have a white fluffy dog with him as reported previously. It looked like either a springer / cocker type dog.

BBM

This gentleman isn't the white fluffy dog man at 9:10 he is the man mentioned by the 9:33 witness as coming through the gate after her.

What is now very confusing is he states he recognised Willow and NB's phone - this is at 9:33 so why did nothing get reported until 10:50? [EDIT ignore this the quoted transcript is incorrect.]

 

[cottonweaver]

In this scenario, would he not have appealed to her directly in that first interview? From memory, I don't think he did. He said something like the girls need her, but don't remember him addressing her directly to come home for them.

Agree
but that first PA interview was so short , wasn't it?

The first interview by the parents did ask for her to come home iirc

( I'll try and have a look at what Emma White was saying in he early days as I think those clips are on the WS ' media thread"

 

[vchk]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1626528394404933633

Too right!!!

but remember its the family that release a further detailed update - for NB family finding her is more important than all this media circus!!

 

[Firstsnow4]

but remember its the family that release a further detailed update - for NB family finding her is more important than all this media circus!!

Yes I know but they should still be investigated under the Data Protection Act. IMO.

 

[vchk]

Nicola Bulley: Home secretary asks police to explain health disclosures​

The home secretary has raised concerns with police after they revealed personal information about missing mother Nicola Bulley.

A source close to Suella Braverman said she had "asked for an explanation".

They said the home secretary had received a response on Thursday evening but was not wholly satisfied with the force's justification for releasing the personal details.

Nicola Bulley: Home secretary asks police to explain health disclosures

A source says the home secretary wants to know why police released Nicola Bulley's health details.

www.bbc.co.uk

OMG got this is all going against what NB's family want- focus is shifting towards police actions rather than finding NB!!

 

[vchk]

Yes I know but they should still be investigated under the Data Protection Act. IMO.

yes of course and I welcome LE for referring themselves to the watchdog.

 

[cottonweaver]

Since she was on HRT, which she then withdrew from, the police could just had easily said they had concerns and she was high risk because of medication she was using. End of.

true - if that is the case

with all these cases though I always have to remind myself as a WS member that I only know a sliver of the case info which police have. ( visible bit, above surface)


link for photo for WS ToS purposes : File:Iceberg.jpg - Wikimedia Commons

 

[JennieM]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1626528394404933633

Too right!!!

As I said before, unfortunately with this disclosure they have overexposed her massively. If the events of 10 Jan did cause her walking away from her family, I have no idea how she will find the strength to return to her family with her most private and inner information made public. If you are troubled and you walk away, how will any of this help? I would want the earth to open up and swallow me. How do they really expect her to return and lead a normal life? It's been made impossible for her. If she is alive, I wish her strength, and the most important thing is to find the power to come back for her two girls. One step at a time.

 

[steelo]

BBM

This gentleman isn't the white fluffy dog man at 9:10 he is the man mentioned by the 9:33 witness as coming through the gate after her.

What is now very confusing is he states he recognised Willow and NB's phone - this is at 9:33 so why did nothing get reported until 10:50?

You'd hope it was because the witenss that secured Willow also stated she would let someone know. The chap could then have probably continued on his walk assuming there was nothing for him to deal with.