You are right, I just watched the video and can't find him saying that.Thanks. Yeah somebody said it was from there, but he didn't say anything about her phone being locked.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You are right, I just watched the video and can't find him saying that.Thanks. Yeah somebody said it was from there, but he didn't say anything about her phone being locked.
Right!? It's been driving me nuts.You are right, I just watched the video and can't find him saying that.
I’d say he simply couldn’t remember the exact time he saw the phone on the bench or when he called his wife (or she called him). He was out walking his dog and wouldn’t have known the exact time it happened - he was just giving the approximate time.Yes so the official timeline I would say is the 9:33 timing, based off his phone.
The other person has come across a dog off lead, tethered the dog, phoned this man’s wife about the dog, who has in turn phoned him, it all feels too tight.
I think I’m clutching at straws it’s just uneasy feeling…..that’s a lot of action that been done which it makes the 9:20 window onwards even smaller.
I think maybe it's because he mentions "the wallpaper on the phone"Right!? It's been driving me nuts.
Presuming when they first found it, the phone was "on" connected to the work meeting. Then he mentions the "wallpaper", indicating that the phone was then locked?I think maybe it's because he mentions "the wallpaper on the phone"
He is basically saying that because of the wallpaper on the phone, they could see who the couple was. So the wallpaper on the phone is a photo of Nicola and Paul. They would not be able to see that at first as the phone was still connected to the work meeting. This is what I understand.Presuming when they first found it, the phone was "on" connected to the work meeting. Then he mentions the "wallpaper", indicating that the phone was then locked?
Right!? It's been driving me nuts.
ETA: For all. This is the interview and what was actually said.
TRANSCRIPTION OF INTERVIEW WITH ONE MAN AND HIS DOG
Reporter - Good to see you. Sir, you actually... you saw the phone is that right?
Witness - Yeah.
Reporter - You saw the phone that Friday morning?
Witness - Yes.
Reporter - And that was around... was it after half 9?
Witness - I gave a full statement to the police with the exact time because my wife's telephone call had the time on it so, and I've given a full statement to the police.
Reporter - Was it just on the bench or..?
Witness - The phone?
Reporter - Yeah.
Witness - Yeah.
Reporter - How's the last three weeks been?
Witness - Each day something new comes out doesn't it?
Reporter - Yeah. And in terms of when you saw phone, lead and Willow, you knew who Nicola was?
Witness - No I didn't.
Reporter - You knew Willow. That was it, you knew Willow?
Witness - I knew I'd seen both the owners of Willow walking this dog in the past, but whilst I knew them by face, like I know your face, I didn't know the name.
Reporter - Yeah, but I remember you actually telling me when you saw the phone, the lead and Willow you were like 'OK I'm going to keep an eye on it because something doesn't feel right'?
Witness - I thought somebody had gone to the toilet in the... do you know that would have been my first... I got to about this red brick building here and I thought 'this is not right' and then there was a conversation... but my wife was trying to ring me and I was trying to ring her. P had rung my wife to say that she'd fastened the dog up that was ru..
Reporter - And P was the lady who actually spotted Willow initially...
Witness - That's right yes.
Reporter - and saw the phone but didn't know what was going on with the phone?
Witness - Yeah that's right, yeah, yeah.
Reporter - And then after that, you know, what happened? What was the next steps?
Witness - Well, then it was just a progression of things happening, you know. We found out, because of the wallpaper on the phone. We found out who the couple were, then the school was contacted and Paul arrived.
Reporter - Well look, we'll let you carry on with your walk. I know you do this every morning. Nicola did this almost every morning as well.
Witness - Yeah probably, yeah.
It’s very hard to trust a person who exaggerates and twists the truth.Nicola Bulley head diver shares 'blunt' conversation he had with partner
Peter Faulding was called in by Lancashire Police and Nicola's loved ones to help aid the search, after she vanished on January 27 while walking pet dog Willow.www.birminghammail.co.uk
Agree that he comes across as sincere. The scenarios we were imagining of 3rd party (witness) involvement, I just can't see him playing any part. And to think that these people are being harassedThe film crew had obviously briefed him as when the reporter began asking him questions he told him something like “so when you found the phone there what did you think?” The man clearly knew they were going to interview him.
However, he did come across extremely sincere and truthful IMO.
What I can’t seem to understand is why did the lady who first found Willow then call the other lady (Ron’s wife)? I find that odd. Do we know the connection between Ron / Ron’s wife and the First Lady? Or am I missing something? And then even more odd is why did Ron’s wife then call Ron to let him know the dog had been tied up? It doesn’t make sense. It’s as if they were all concerned for some time about an unattended dog and phone. IMOYes so the official timeline I would say is the 9:33 timing, based off his phone.
The other person has come across a dog off lead, tethered the dog, phoned this man’s wife about the dog, who has in turn phoned him, it all feels too tight.
I think I’m clutching at straws it’s just uneasy feeling…..that’s a lot of action that been done which it makes the 9:20 window onwards even smaller.
I'm guessing here, but the police said that the 1st witness made a number of calls after she tied Willow up. I think she knew Ron walked his dog around that time in the morning, so rang his wife (not having Ron's number) and his wife rang him to ask if he could go have a look and see if he recognised the dog.What I can’t seem to understand is why did the lady who first found Willow then call the other lady (Ron’s wife)? I find that odd. Do we know the connection between Ron / Ron’s wife and the First Lady? Or am I missing something? And then even more odd is why did Ron’s wife then call Ron to let him know the dog had been tied up? It doesn’t make sense. It’s as if they were all concerned for some time about an unattended dog and phone. IMO
To recap:
First Lady finds Willow and phone. Ties up Willow. Calls Ron’s wife.
Ron comes across phone. Ron’s wife calls to tell him that First Lady has tied up the dog.
I’m so confused!
I haven’t seen that, either.The thing is I've seen NO-ONE anywhere judging her. Not once. All I've seen is support for her.
It's like in one fail swoop you've just made up a whole new narrative that's not been mentioned anywhere. All of her friends who have spoken out have had nothing but kind things to say, so really not sure what you're basing all this on.
Presuming when they first found it, the phone was "on" connected to the work meeting. Then he mentions the "wallpaper", indicating that the phone was then locked?
Perhaps in their attempts to find out whose the phone was, they'd simply switched away from the Teams screen. I don't think it really matters whether the phone was locked or not, as NB was obviously gone by then.I’m not saying he necessarily knew the correct terminology himself and he might well have meant what was on the lock screen, but “wallpaper” also (and perhaps usually?) refers to the background image when the phone is unlocked, as in the picture behind the icons on your homescreen, as opposed to the lock-screen background.
I get the impression (from the Sky interview) that R had seen the phone (in company with P), carried on walking as far as the brick building, then doubled back to the bench because on reflection he was concerned about the situation. I don't think he's saying he was at the brick building when he saw it.<modsnip - quoted post was removed>
Ron it appears, spotted the phone on the bench whilst he was by the brick building...Good eyes IMO
Hadn't really thought about the direction, but yeah you're right. Now after watching the full retracing video he was going away from the bench not towards it.I get the impression (from the Sky interview) that R had seen the phone (in company with P), carried on walking as far as the brick building, then doubled back to the bench because on reflection he was concerned about the situation. I don't think he's saying he was at the brick building when he saw it.
---
Reporter - Yeah, but I remember you actually telling me when you saw the phone, the lead and Willow you were like 'OK I'm going to keep an eye on it because something doesn't feel right'?
Witness - I thought somebody had gone to the toilet in the... do you know that would have been my first... I got to about this red brick building here and I thought 'this is not right' and then there was a conversation... but my wife was trying to ring me and I was trying to ring her. P had rung my wife to say that she'd fastened the dog up that was ru..
---
@Allabouttrial's transcript:UK - UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #15
Agreed.Hadn't really thought about the direction, but yeah you're right. Now after watching the full retracing video he was going away from the bench not towards it.
This retracing video is the best I've seen. They walked Nicola's exact route and times. I'm now even more convinced that Nicola made it back to the bench.