Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I got the impression and I could well be wrong because it's an impression that she didn't specify as if more was to be procured..?
Anybody else remember exactly how the Fitbit question was answered?
I don't use them but I think there may be levels?
The super said they are currently looking at the data on her Fitbit.
 
I got the impression and I could well be wrong because it's an impression that she didn't specify as if more was to be procured..?
Anybody else remember exactly how the Fitbit question was answered?
I don't use them but I think there may be levels?
They said they have a team of digital experts looking at the Fitbit data and phone data etc. but unless she has her Fitbit set to sync automatically (which would do it every 10 mins or so) she would need to physically go in and sync it to the app on her phone (which is what I do to save battery). So unless she done that prior to being separated from the phone I’m not sure how they could get that data (unless Fitbit can advise the police). JMO.
 
Was anything said about location information from her Fitbit? I've never owned one of these so I've no idea whether it would be useful or not, in this respect. But assuming she did fall into the river, is there any likelihood it would have given sufficient information for them to assume she was still near the river?
I also know little about Fitbit....but it would be presumed the device was attached to her....remote access would be possible, but IMO it could not confirm with absolute certainty whether the device was attached to NB or another. Hope this makes sense.
 
I also know little about Fitbit....but it would be presumed the device was attached to her....remote access would be possible, but IMO it could not confirm with absolute certainty whether the device was attached to NB or another. Hope this makes sense.
Good point although that then makes them trackable,why would they want that
 
If she fell into the river surely her big long gilet would of come up to the surface. I have one and when they get wet they kind of puff up. Even if her body was under the surface of the water I'd imagine the gilet would float up to the top as they are really long and lots of material
I’ve just researched and sinking would happen first in a case of drowning
 
Personally I find it really hard to believe she fell in and still suspect foul play. The lack of marks / anything being recovered despite such a rapid search just feels wrong to me.

I think this is what a lot of us are thinking.

To fall in a river and leave no marks in the mud or bracken on the embankment, for no-one to hear her shout, for the police not to have recovered anything (even a small piece of clothing like a hat) seems odd and defies logic.

But the alternative of someone abducting or harming her in the 20 mins between when a witness saw her and her phone was found by someone else seems even more logic defying.

Both would involve a succession of rare events to occur to make them happen. But sometimes a series of unlikely happening does happen.
 
Hi everyone, first time I've posted but I've been (trying!) To keep up with all threads since the start -along with threads on other unrelated incidents! Sorry if this has already been covered!

With regard to the Fitbit, they must be able to tell when she became separated from her phone as the Fitbit would have stopped syncing to it. The app tells you when the Fitbit last synced.

Whilst I'm sure the police have access to far more Fitbit data than us Fitbit users, I lost mine recently and it seems the only way to find it is to retrace your steps until it links back to your phone (luckily I knew roughly where I may have lost mine); obviously there may be ways for LE to access data but I can't really see how as I think all connectivity is run through the linked phone (I believe).

I'm assuming Willow's harness etc has been examined for forensics? It leapt out at me early on that they could, potentially, have been a weapon then left discarded on the bank (in this hypothetical scenario) because the perp heard someone coming so tried to throw them in the river whilst running to hide. Would also explain why the harness wasn't on Willow.

Obviously this is all MOO and I really hope I haven't broken any rules!

*Edited due to typo*
 
I also know little about Fitbit....but it would be presumed the device was attached to her....remote access would be possible, but IMO it could not confirm with absolute certainty whether the device was attached to NB or another. Hope this makes sense.
My sister has one, her husband can see when she is at the gym etc, heart rate, nothing dodgy it's just how it is set up same both sides.
 
I think this is what a lot of us are thinking.

To fall in a river and leave no marks in the mud or bracken on the embankment, for no-one to hear her shout, for the police not to have recovered anything (even a small piece of clothing like a hat) seems odd and defies logic.

But the alternative of someone abducting or harming her in the 20 mins between when a witness saw her and her phone was found by someone else seems even more logic defying.

Both would involve a succession of rare events to occur to make them happen. But sometimes a series of unlikely happening does happen.
NB was not wearing a hat so what other clothing could be recovered?
 
I got the impression and I could well be wrong because it's an impression that she didn't specify as if more was to be procured..?
Anybody else remember exactly how the Fitbit question was answered?
I don't use them but I think there may be levels?
She had a light blue fitbit, obviously it would have collected data, heart rate etc
 
Was there mentioned in one of these threads about a missing ‘ball thrower’ handle? If so I assume they would have asked for it as if that turned up down river would support this theory as could have been leaning to reach the ball with it.


Did Nicola Bulley slip into river trying to retrieve dog's tennis ball? Missing mother may have been weighed down by her two heavy coats, police believe - as outdoor swimming expert says cold water shock may have stopped her reaching safety​



 
<modsnip - quoted post removed>
Why assume an abduction ? Or hiding anything ? Think how quickly someone could simply strike her over the head and just push her into the water (seconds), with them entering and leaving by the road which has no CCTV. It would take someone a total of a few minutes. The area could simply not be busy enough for there to be witnesses.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I’m sure it’s these 2 exits that they need to double down on. Any dash cam footage would identify anyone, or any vehicles that were exiting onto Garstang Rd in that 10/15 minute grey area.
So potentially where she was last seen in the upper field is close to the Rowanwater lodges (red circle on map). If she had been abducted in the top right hand corner of that field, could she have been put in a car (concealed) and then taken up that road to the exit at Garstang road? Can you even get through to Rowanwater from the upper field? JMO.

 

Attachments

  • 97595528-8F89-4F24-A87C-3C6585707949.jpeg
    97595528-8F89-4F24-A87C-3C6585707949.jpeg
    95.7 KB · Views: 17
Could the Fitbit have been thrown in the river and NB is somewhere else?
Doubtful in ten mins, abducted someone, without being seen, placed phone etc then got away unseen by witness, then even knowing she had a fit bit on
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
73
Guests online
2,214
Total visitors
2,287

Forum statistics

Threads
602,489
Messages
18,141,106
Members
231,409
Latest member
relaxininaz
Back
Top