Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #16

[cottonweaver]

Wonder how long until NB surfaces. Could be weeks, could be months. Potentially she might never. JMO of course.

Does anyone have any idea how long decomp takes underwater?

if you try the ws word search, we've put tons of links from Royal College of Pathology onto previous threads.
Some of the links explain the complexity and are really informative

 

[Marie Bell]

Wonder how long until NB surfaces. Could be weeks, could be months. Potentially she might never. JMO of course.

Does anyone have any idea how long decomp takes underwater?

According to this >Missing Persons Understanding Planning Respondi.pdf which is the base from which police generally base their initial strategies on, it might be around 28 days or so. They say that if the body isn't spotted during this time when the gases have caused it to 'float' the gases will eventually disperse and the body will sink again. I suppose this accounts for the large number of bodies that do seem to be found after people have been missing for a few weeks.

 

[Eaglette]

It's hard to keep up with this case from Australia: BTW Australia had a missing female:

Melissa Caddick - Wikipedia

She scammed over $20mil in a Ponzi scheme (just saying).....

Only her foot was found 3 months after her disappearance. It makes for interesting reading.

 

[29 Acacia Road]

<modsnip - quoted post and response removed>


As soon as the national media became interested in this case, it was blown up to police incompetence, made worse by people like PF and MWT. Even a friend of Nicola's, had a facebook post with 'facts' which she kept updating, but got it wrong that the 'abandoned mansion' had not been searched, it had already been searched at that point. But because she forgot to update that bullet point in her post, the media were still running 'abandoned mansion' articles daily, instead of checking with proper sources, like the police. The friend of Nicola ended up deleting her facebook I believe because of people then criticizing her for not updating the post, it was just a genuine mistake of hers. The media really need to do much more thorough checking of things, even if it comes from friends and family, because it causes the public to believe things incorrectly for days on end.

 

[Marie Bell]

I certainly find it strange. To me the obvious question to all of them is "when you came across the dog and phone with no obvious person near a sign indicating danger deep water, did any of you think to look in the river". Nobody has told us whether or not they did, if they did then it seems more likely she wasn't in there at that time.

I'm completely sure that they would have been asked 'where did you look'? 'did you see anything, anywhere?' etc. But if people didn't look, or say they saw nothing, what can you do. Of Course everyone can look at it and bemoan the fact these people were so incurious and unseeeing, but you deal with what you've got.

 

[Normanly]

I certainly find it strange. To me the obvious question to all of them is "when you came across the dog and phone with no obvious person near a sign indicating danger deep water, did any of you think to look in the river". Nobody has told us whether or not they did, if they did then it seems more likely she wasn't in there at that time.

I have always found the timeframe between 9.33 to when PA received the call at 10.50 from the school strange. If I had been first on scene I would have been calling and checking the area/river to find the owner. I would have checked Willows collar for a tag.

I think there were a number of elderly witnesses involved around that time and it appears to have taken over an hour to raise the alert

Taking information from the police timeline and media reports:-

A lady (P) was first on the scene. Willow was loose in field. Phone was on bench. Harness (? and lead) were on the ground

A man (R) then was next at the scene. Phone still on bench and not on floor as previously reported

Both recognised Willow and had seen PA and NB walking her before but did not know them

P at some point rang R's wife which I presume was to see if she knew who the owners were

Someone also then rang the vets but they could not help

P tied up Willow as had to rush home to an appointment I don't know if R continued his walk or stayed at bench.

At some point P spoke to her DIL (who was friends with NB on Facebook). She knew who NB was and called the school who then rang PA

Another man with a white dog has been mentioned as being a witness and coming through the gate and seeing the phone on the ground 2ft from the bench. No idea where this fits into the timeframe

Like I said very confusing

 

[Lindengracht]

I read a different, non-suspicious meaning in Ron's "That would have been my first [thought?]". Not expressing condition (would have been, IF...), but high probability. As in:
A: "Do you remember the guy we saw at The White Horse?"
B: "Yes, that would have been Peter's brother."
Ron is just saying something like "probably" or ''if I remember correctly", IMO. A Google search taught me that grammarians call it 'epistemic would'.

 

[Purplepixii]

Looks like the police chopper is having another look.

 

[cottonweaver]

<modsnip - quoted post and response to it removed>

As soon as the national media became interested in this case, it was blown up to police incompetence, made worse by people like PF and MWT. Even a friend of Nicola's, had a facebook post with 'facts' which she kept updating, but got it wrong that the 'abandoned mansion' had not been searched, it had already been searched at that point. But because she forgot to update that bullet point in her post, the media were still running 'abandoned mansion' articles daily, instead of checking with proper sources, like the police. The friend of Nicola ended up deleting her facebook I believe because of people then criticizing her for not updating the post, it was just a genuine mistake of hers. The media really need to do much more thorough checking of things, even if it comes from friends and family, because it causes the public to believe things incorrectly for days on end.

Agree to all
but just to add, that at least here on this platform we're trying to correct each other - if there's an inaccuracy, if we've got a timing wrong or misheard something.
I appreciate that sometimes people don't like it, but we have to operate within known facts. ( It doesn't bother me if WS-ers speculate that, eg, she was removed by canoe even if I personally find it implausible - if they can fit it within the known facts. It does bother me if people with huge platforms deliberately or sloppily mislead the public on the facts)

 

[abovethestorm]

I have always found the timeframe between 9.33 to when PA received the call at 10.50 from the school strange. If I had been first on scene I would have been calling and checking the area/river to find the owner. I would have checked Willows collar for a tag.

I think there were a number of elderly witnesses involved around that time and it appears to have taken over an hour to raise the alert

Taking information from the police timeline and media reports:-

A lady (P) was first on the scene. Willow was loose in field. Phone was on bench. Harness (? and lead) were on the ground

A man (R) then was next at the scene. Phone still on bench and not on floor as previously reported

Both recognised Willow and had seen PA and NB walking her before but did not know them

P at some point rang R's wife which I presume was to see if she knew who the owners were

Someone also then rang the vets but they could not help

P tied up Willow as had to rush home to an appointment I don't know if R continued his walk or stayed at bench.

At some point P spoke to her DIL (who was friends with NB on Facebook). She knew who Nicky was and called the school who then rang PA

Another man with a white dog has been mentioned as being a witness and coming through the gate and seeing the phone on the ground 2ft from the bench. No idea where this fits into the timeframe

Like I said very confusing

It IS very confusing! Admittedly, I'm a bit of a continuity freak, but I just cannot get past the nagging weirdness which is the first witness's initial statement that 'the gent' 'comes through the gate after me and sees a phone lying on the floor', and later statements that it was found on the bench, which Ron re-stated in his Sky News live with KB.

I can't fully articulate why this bothers me so much, but it's troubled me right from the get-go.

Which IS it? It can't be both!

 

[29 Acacia Road]

Agree to all
but just to add, that at least here on this platform we're trying to correct each other - if there's an inaccuracy, if we've got a timing wrong or misheard something.
I appreciate that sometimes people don't like it, but we have to operate within known facts. ( It doesn't bother me if people speculate that she was removed by canoe even if I personally find it implausible - if they can fit it within the known facts. It does bother me if people with huge platforms deliberately or sloppily mislead the public on the facts)

Absolutely, on here people DO try and stick to the facts and at least correct themselves and others if things are inaccurate, or become to be known as inaccurate. Sadly places like facebook and twitter have a much bigger audience and once something gets said it is shared and repeated so quickly it is often wrongly assumed to be a 'fact', if the press/media are also repeating these things it only makes it worse.

The true crime community can really be an amazing force for good, but I feel like this case the balance has tipped too much over into several of them being a hinderance. I hope that doesn't continue in the future, but I also hope it doesn't mean genuine places like this are lumped in with the not so genuine.

 

[Moirasrosegarden]

It IS very confusing! Admittedly, I'm a bit of a continuity freak, but I just cannot get past the nagging weirdness which is the first witness's initial statement that 'the gent' 'comes through the gate after me and sees a phone lying on the floor', and later statements that it was found on the bench, which Ron re-stated in his Sky News live with KB.

I can't fully articulate why this bothers me so much, but it's troubled me right from the get-go.

Which IS it? It can't be both!

Also “gent”… sounds odd as it sounds like they knew each other so surely you would say “Ron” or “my friend” <modsnip>

 

[Steno]

I read a different, non-suspicious meaning in Ron's "That would have been my first [thought?]". Not expressing condition (would have been, IF...), but high probability. As in:
A: "Do you remember the guy we saw at The White Horse?"
B: "Yes, that would have been Peter's brother."
Ron is just saying something like "probably" or ''if I remember correctly", IMO. A Google search taught me that grammarians call it 'epistemic would'.

The other thing is we know that it was Nicola who'd gone missing. At the time he didn't, he may have assumed it was her partner who'd dashed away to relieve himself. It would be unlikely a woman, on her own, in broad daylight, would nip behind a bush for a wee. He said he knew Willow's owners by sight, so it could have been either from his point of view. That might also account for the lack of urgency, if they thought it was PA's phone. JMO

 

[Deleted member 165489]

I cannot help wondering if, following on from the Health Check on 10th January, LE had been in touch with Nicola, possibly with unwelcome news which had upset her. They did say no one had been arrested in connection with this incident but they were investigating, which means it was still live. It possibly could explain why all the resources were thrown at this case and another reason she was deemed high risk.

 

[tree1]

The poor man is elderly and his memory may not be as sharp .MOO

Isn’t he 70? I don’t think of that as elderly these days! A lot of 70 year olds are still working!

 

[Mr X]

The other thing is we know that it was Nicola who'd gone missing. At the time he didn't, he may have assumed it was her partner who'd dashed away to relieve himself. It would be unlikely a woman, on her own, in broad daylight, would nip behind a bush for a wee. He said he knew Willow's owners by sight, so it could have been either from his point of view. That might also account for the lack of urgency, if they thought it was PA's phone. JMO

IMO someone who walks there every day (not saying that 'Ron' does this) would know who was walking the dog. I suppose if it was random they might not know but if it was generally the same person.

<modsnip>

 

[JennieM]

The ghoulish online sleuths are shameful, but that’s no excuse for how the police have treated Nicola Bulley​

Every British police force must learn from Lancashire’s mistake: disclosing personal details is no way to respond to conspiracists

Gaby Hinsliff

The ghoulish online sleuths are shameful, but that’s no excuse for how the police have treated Nicola Bulley | Gaby Hinsliff

Every British police force must learn from Lancashire’s mistake: disclosing personal details is no way to respond to conspiracists, says Guardian columnist Gaby Hinsliff

www.theguardian.com

 

[JennieM]

Why TikTok sleuths descended on Nicola Bulley’s village​

Frustrated locals have resorted to hiring local security to try to keep people away from their property.

This isn't just about social media. An absence of information, news that leaves us frightened or shocked and distrust are essential ingredients for rumour and conspiracy to thrive. Police have been criticised in recent days for their handling of the case.

There's also a huge amount of media interest, too. Rumours circulating online find their way into newspapers and new sites.

Then there's the legacy left by the boom of pandemic disinformation.

Research for the BBC by King's College London suggests that the pandemic has created a "gateway" for conspiracy theories denying that tragic events have happened, and calling people "crisis actors".

A significant number of people hyper-engaged on social media - with its powerful algorithms - and well-versed in this conspiracy lexicon are being presented with a disappearance at a time when trust in institutions, and the police, is low - providing a perfect storm.

Why TikTok sleuths descended on Nicola Bulley’s village

Marianna Spring goes to visits St Michael's on Wyre to try to understand the scale of the social media frenzy.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Davieson]

It IS very confusing! Admittedly, I'm a bit of a continuity freak, but I just cannot get past the nagging weirdness which is the first witness's initial statement that 'the gent' 'comes through the gate after me and sees a phone lying on the floor', and later statements that it was found on the bench, which Ron re-stated in his Sky News live with KB.

I can't fully articulate why this bothers me so much, but it's troubled me right from the get-go.

Which IS it? It can't be both!

I don't see that it matters.

Police have got witness statements along with the phone and will know the exact timeline. They have asked for witnesses, who are the only ones who add to their knowledge.
It is of no value to them for the general public to know this in minute detail.

IMO

 

[JennieM]

Frustrated locals have resorted to hiring local security to try to keep people away from their property.

So shameful that it's come to this.

Why TikTok sleuths descended on Nicola Bulley’s village

Marianna Spring goes to visits St Michael's on Wyre to try to understand the scale of the social media frenzy.

www.bbc.co.uk