Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #8

[Beckxsy]

Too much information going on. We are jumping from one thing to another. A timeline of sorts is needed as when I went back to the start it seemed alot more witnesses than first imagined. I couldn't figure timeline who was who. That why I wanted to verify who actually seen nicola and also who came across the dog.

 

[Sleepyface]

I agree, who carries string around with them? Unless he found it on the gate/fence

People who have an issue with off lead di

I hate to disappoint all you dog lovers out there, but some people (like myself) are just not interested. If my fella came home and said he'd seen a dog loose on his way through the park, I wouldn't think anything of it. I'd probably be mildly curious if there was a mobile phone there too. I might think I would go check on it later when I had finished whatever I was doing, but I certainly wouldn't rush out the door.

This would only be different if we knew the dog and it belonged to someone close to me or someone I thought was vulnerable.

I'm not a dog owner, I love them but I don't have much experience with them, so if saw a dog running loose especially if agitated, I'd give a wide berth - lots of dog attack stories in uk news recently / issues with covid-era unsocialised puppers being anxious etc.

 

[ginnyw]

The whole bench thing troubles me, with the poster of Nicola now alongside a 'dogs must be kept on a lead' and a 'danger deep water' sign. Strong messages.

 

[wallaby]

That was certainly NOT from Supt Riley's presser yesterday or her presser last Friday or any police statement whatsoever.

She did say something about not cordoning off the bench due to it being a beauty spot, because she misunderstood a reporter asking about why they didn’t cordon it off as a crime scene as asking if it should be cordoned off for SAFETY. I saw that live. I’ll have to look back where it was but I definitely saw it.

 

[kittythehare]

Expert diver dramatically ends river search for Nicola Bulley

Superintendent Sally Riley, of Lancashire Police, said it remained a 'possibility' that Nicola Bulley, 45, left the area by one path not covered by CCTV cameras

www.dailymail.co.uk

I know it’s the daily Mail and all but on the 3rd picture down where 2 men are carrying a inflatable rolled up boat the caption says

Police last night admitted that Nicola could have left the area with a third party when she vanished during a dog walk near the village of St. Michael's on Wyre, Lancashire, some 12 days ago (Pictured: Lancashire Police carrying inflatable Rib boats during the search for Nicola on Wednesday)

Did the police actually says this ?

BS

 

[Justice_4_Holly]

One reason would be to ensure that they weren't interrupted and prevented from doing what they were doing.

Another reason I can think of committing suicide in this manner (with the secretiveness and deflection) is to spare family. A suicide might think that the appearance of it not being suicide (I.e. deliberate) would be less painful.

Obv this still hurts family, but folks who are suicidal have different ways of reasoning (I’ve been suicidal in the past, and when I am I tend to try to think of ways that would be least painful to my family).

I believe that it is possible for this to still be a third party case, but I agree with the cops that there are limited ways she might have been transported out of there by a third party just given the geography (and camera placement). It’s possible but pretty hard to pull off.

The only thing that gives me pause are the various sex-related reported near to where she was taken from in the last year. You can search this information here. This is a town of about 700 and that amount of criminal activity is kind of rare. By contrast, I’m working on a case in a town with 1,600 people and during a period of about ten years there was one violent sexual assault.

 

[Mycroft42]

Thank you, just to add the dog had a collar on, presumably with a dog tag etc.

There are pictures of Willow with a dog tag on he collar - wonder why 9:33 witness didn't use the contact details that are presumably on it?

 

[kittythehare]

She did say something about not cordoning off the bench due to it being a beauty spot, because she misunderstood a reporter asking about why they didn’t cordon it off as a crime scene as asking if it should be cordoned off for SAFETY. I saw that live. I’ll have to look back where it was but I definitely saw it.

The bench area was processed early Friday when the police got there.
It's in the replies on their Twitter page.

 

[LibertySleuth]

Not this rural person! I can never find string in the house, let alone on my person when out walking.

Same here! I'm rural and wouldn't have a clue where to find string indoors....and definitely don't make a habit of carrying it around outside - even when walking our own dogs here in the countryside.

 

[daisydew124]

Supt Riley said officers have searched derelict riverside properties with the permission of owners.

She added: ‘Because there is no criminal element yet identified, and we don’t expect there to be in this inquiry, then we’re not starting to go into houses because that’s not where the inquiry is leading us.’

To me that’s directly contradictory. “We have searched riverside properties.” “Because we believe it’s not criminal, we’re not going into houses”. Huh???

If there are any nearby properties not searched, derelict/empty or otherwise, that’s not good enough IMO.

There’s at least a 10 minute window NB could have been drugged and taken to a building. Possibly a 70-minute window if NB was nearby but out of sight of the 9.33 witness (eg undergrowth/other end of field).

I don’t really get the polices actions with this.

Also what about Paul searching a derelict house on day 3? I wonder what made him do that? With that specific property? Could NB have been working with the owner to do with her mortgage advisor career? JMO.

If she’s not in the river - she is somewhere!

I can’t call to mind any other missing persons case where the police have been so adamant to the point of defensiveness about there being ‘no third party involvement/no foul play/no suspicious circumstances’

I struggle to see what’s gained by being so dismissive?

 

[jackal67]

I’m glad you mentioned about the ‘man that came through the gate after her’ - I was sure I had read that somewhere but now can’t think where. I also thought that was at 9.33am so glad you have cleared that up for me too!

do we know for a fact that this man

The police may have witnesses from that time period, I expect even without a direct appeal for that 0933 to 1050 timeframe people have come forward- if it's not deemed as relevant ie they also just saw the dog or didn't notice anything that suggests NB wasn't there which is the crucial bit I suppose perhaps they wouldnt see it helpful to release.

The family member scenario could be as simple as ah I'm popping out later I'll check on my way back to see if it's still there. At this point personally I wouldn't expect urgency necessarily as it wouldn't have been clear whether someone had run to a bush for a wee or whatever; in a small village with little crime I doubt many would jump to something nefarious, they'd have surely phoned the police off the bat if they thought so. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing and I appreciate many would perhaps be more startled by this discovery.

Although it sounds cruel the police don't share everything with family and friends if there's good reason not to. Not suggesting in this case they haven't or suggesting any reasons, but it can be the case that the police are being truthful as are those making comments that don't align.

The police may have witnesses from that time period, I expect even without a direct appeal for that 0933 to 1050 timeframe people have come forward- if it's not deemed as relevant ie they also just saw the dog or didn't notice anything that suggests NB wasn't there which is the crucial bit I suppose perhaps they wouldnt see it helpful to release.

The family member scenario could be as simple as ah I'm popping out later I'll check on my way back to see if it's still there. At this point personally I wouldn't expect urgency necessarily as it wouldn't have been clear whether someone had run to a bush for a wee or whatever; in a small village with little crime I doubt many would jump to something nefarious, they'd have surely phoned the police off the bat if they thought so. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing and I appreciate many would perhaps be more startled by this discovery.

Although it sounds cruel the police don't share everything with family and friends if there's good reason not to. Not suggesting in this case they haven't or suggesting any reasons, but it can be the case that the police are being truthful as are those making comments that don't align.

great post, my exact thoughts too

 

[AtaraMalka]

It's a shame you can't pin information to the top of each page on these threads. I think it would save a lot of repetitive questions and it could be updated as we get more information. Like a "Sleuth Board" with all the facts so far. Not helpful to the case, but thought I'd mention in case there was such a thing.

I would second that, Jeremy. Many sites have this sort of thing and it really helps. Some of the other forums I am on (one of which I used to moderate) also have different topic threads for each case. So you would have things like a thread on timelines, a thread on forensics, a thread on the dog, a thread on what different detectives are saying, etc., etc. - as relevant to each case. We all have aspects of each case we are interested in more than others, according to our own perspectives and area of expertise, and this way makes it easy for posters to catch up with what interests them, and to contribute relevant postings (it also makes it easier to moderate and you don’t need these massive ‘cleanups’). I don’t visit Websleuths so often, as I just don’t have time to wade through all these long threads ( who does?), and as a regular poster elsewhere, I know how annoying it is when ‘newcomers’ ask questions or post info that the others have already gone through many times - which is a shame, as otherwise this is a really great forum and a fantastic resource.

 

[wallaby]

The bench area was processed early Friday when the police got there.
It's in the replies on their Twitter page.

I was just saying that the Supt DID say that it was not cordoned off due to being a “beauty spot” live on TV, which is why some people keep bringing it up. But she clearly didn’t understand the question from the reporter, she corrected herself after they asked again. She said she thought they were asking why it wasn’t cordoned off as a SAFETY measure to stop people falling at first. Then she said it was processed on the first day.

 

[steelo]

The last known location of NB was in the upper field. There was no sighting of her at the bench. The only known facts are that the phone was at the bench with the lead and harness close-by, along with the dog.

 

[Coach]

Here is what I think it really, really important about the timeline update:

1. Why did the dog walker choose to tie Willow up with string, and not the lead and/or harness that was on the floor? It seems far more obvious to me to use the lead, unless the person was prescient enough to realise that it was a serious enough situation that it was important not to touch the lead or harness but to leave it in situ. BUT: I think it is incongruous to both think "I shouldn't touch the lead/harness", at the same time as "I had better get off to my appointment". It seems really inconsistent to me.

2. It has to be assumed that the dog walker had string on them, because it wouldn't be normal to go home to collect string, and hope/expect the dog to be where you left it, untied, some time later. Why did they have string on them? Maybe it's totally normal, but I still think important.

3. The dog walker returns home to inform family member, and the way it is described is that the family member arrived on the scene at 10.50, and called the school immediately. Why on earth does it take 1hr20mins for this family member to arrive on scene? Sure, it could be that neither was worried at all ('OK yeah, maybe I'll check that out, no rush') - in which case, why the string (just use the lead and harness!?)

4. In the time between 9.20 and 10.50 (1hr20 mins), are we really saying that nobody else passed the bench and didn't think it peculiar to see a dog tied to the bench with string, a phone on the bench, and a harness on the floor? If so, it's an absolutely vast time gap, and literally, anything could have happened.

Brilliant points SS.
1. I agree, if the lead and harness were there surely it would have made more sense to use these. Did they not see them? String seems odd and string can be very think would a dog not be able to break free from string or chew through it? I wonder if it was rope and not string.
2. Was the person who first found Willow walking their own dog? Could they have had some form of rope on them (perhaps and extension for a lead for their own dog)? Was it when the first person found Willow that Willow was distressed or was it when the second person went to the bench (a considerable period of time after) that the dog was distressed? Hardly surprising after being tied up. Did any of them contact the dog warden or the Police given that the phone was also there and still connected to a conference call which had ended?
3. I agree, the period of time that passed and well over an hour is significant. I wonder if the first person who contacted the other one possibly left a message on voicemail which might not have been retrieved right away. Could this explain the amount of time that passed by?

 

[Fishwick]

Too much information going on. We are jumping from one thing to another. A timeline of sorts is needed as when I went back to the start it seemed alot more witnesses than first imagined. I couldn't figure timeline who was who. That why I wanted to verify who actually seen nicola and also who came across the dog.

The police website is still the best official summary IMO.

Lancashire Constabulary - Missing Nicola Bulley - latest update

The latest news and information for Lancashire Constabulary

lancashire.police.uk

 

[Mrb]

The whole thing is a mess now, if there is third party involvement the crime scene has been disturbed by hundreds of footprints.

We now have people coming from all parts of the country like it's a tourist attraction, the whole area should have been cornered off. What's also worse is that the police speculated from Day one that Nikki drowned in the river with no firm evidence that we are aware of. They should not have ruled out third party involvement as we know there is one path that has no CCTV.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

The cordons here are getting confused. I think at first Riley thinks the interviewer is asking about why the bench area does t have a cordon for safety with respect to the river , as in a permanent fixture on the path for general public. Obviously the interviewer is asking about the police cordon following this incident. Which Riley then responds to. That’s why she references the beauty of area and also misunderstanding continues with interviewers reference to it being isolated area.

Yes, quite right, the police cordon and the physical cordon, but context is given for both as to why this should NOT be treated as crime scene so it makes no odds really in context, I'd argue?

 

[Blamhappy]

I can’t call to mind any other missing persons case where the police have been so adamant to the point of defensiveness about there being ‘no third party involvement/no foul play/no suspicious circumstances’

I struggle to see what’s gained by being so dismissive?

Reassurance to the public.

It was the same with Adrian Lynch. If there's no evidence of foul play, reassure people. Otherwise, there's a murderer on the loose.

 

[Sandyuk]

There are pictures of Willow with a dog tag on he collar - wonder why 9:33 witness didn't use the contact details that are presumably on it?

Maybe it’s only NB details?