Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #9

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
NB did this same walk almost daily- I do think they have a good idea where she went and stopped- we are all creatures of habit to a degree. They will know looking at her previous recorded walk data her routine, doubling back and sitting etc. I lived in hope for the new search- but dismissing it by throwing a stick in and stating it didn’t move- shows his lack of knowledge sadly- undercurrents are a real thing.
 
These photos are all taken in summer. The river is higher at the moment. I would guess several feet more than in the pics. My parents still live there and prior to the last couple of weeks there has been a lot of rain so the outflow from the hills in Bowland has been fairly significant and water levels are relatively high as a result. It is unusual to see stones just upstream from the weir as in these pictures.
thank you.
 
Mine 100% wouldnt follow me in. Hates water, as did the last dog I had.
My cockapoo is frightened of water and won't go in but when she was younger we did manage to get her to go in once. She mothers my son and he went in a lake we live near, paddling to see if he could get her to follow. She started crying to get our attention but then went after him anyway and he then came out. I think even though she is frightened, if he had been drowning she would have followed him out of desperation. So that's why it seems odd that Willow wouldn't have followed when she isn't frightened.
 
Actually the 9:10 doesn't necessarily throw off the timing of her path. She could have doubled back. I'm just not convinced she necessarily made it to the bench. In fact, what people have said about dog behaviour is interesting. What if someone removed the dog's harness and set it free, then realised it needed to be tied to the bench to stop it from going towards her exit-point? If that gate was that? I'm not trying to imply anything here. It could have been tied up and got free, and that's how the harness came off - then someone tied it up again - just maybe in a different place to where it was waiting before, and they didn't know?
It would be good to ask the person who tied up the dog on finding it EXACTLY where the dog was, which direction it was facing and if it was perturbed in a way what suggested something specific, like violence, or just anxious from Nicola's sudden disappearance? It's enough to make you want to put dashcams on dogs, to be quite frank. It's just awful, and I can't stop thinking about how desperate her family must be.
 
To my mind the priority was to eliminate outbuildings and private property where the owner might not have been home in the working day, or perhaps which are not occupied out of season.

Searching inside locked buildings seems near pointless IMO

IIRC this house is on the other side of the river?

In any event, it irrationally annoys my ex-lawyer nature to read complaints about police not searching properties for which they might not have any permission, or any real reason to search, just because the media gets fixated on an old house.
…a building found locked, might not have been locked earlier in the day.
 
I don't understand not searching everything nearby, including buildings, abandoned or otherwise.

It's not even a matter of needing to know whether she had an accident or met with foul play or what.

Maybe she had a stroke or fainted or hit her head or something which caused her to not be thinking clearly -- why not check all nearby locations? Including "looking up" if there are trees etc around.

Strange and unlikely, yes, but we've all seen strange be true before. MOO
 
Looking at the timings, the route Nicola took from Garstang Road - the only place she could have been approached from without seeing the person which also has residences and road access is Garstang Road, where the trees are. The upper field seems an impossible place to have been abducted, so I think it's a red herring. The timing's wrong and the person who saw her has got it wrong in earnest, or something else.

If an attack happened, it was likely nearer to the woods and by placing her in the upper field later it throws all that. Which suggests to me it's either someone who doesn't know what they're talking about, or someone who has an interest in throwing off the investigation. The phone being on the bench is completely irrelevant to me now. I reckon it was put there by someone trying to imply Nicola drowning, when in fact I think something else happened.
If someone else did put the phone on the bench, you would expect some DNA (I'm presuming DNA testing has been done),. Otherwise had gloves on ? But then how many people have touched the phone since, as it was thought it all seemed innocent, and not any other kind of involvement of any sort
 
What if NB did fall in the river, then managed to scramble out, but at the other side to where she fell in?

She could have shouted Willow to stay and set off to find a safe place to cross.

This could explain the talk of an ‘entry site’ and explain Willow running back and forth I.e. NB was there but no longer in sight.
And?? She fell in again? Got dragged off by someone?
 
Totally agree. It's so easy after the event in the context of someone now being a missing person to question things but we all make judgements every day in the context of busy lives, full of other priorities not overthinking our decisions and so they will always seem like imperfect decisions to other people.
Disagree honestly, I think tying someone else’s dog to a bench and leaving it for an hour is inexplicable.
 
"TalkTV" eh? It's been a while since I've watched TV, especially news channels, due to the poor standards displayed, can't say I'm sad I've missed this one - it looks like a live version of the Sun & Daily Fail all wrapped into one (bitter) pill.

That said, this "contacting 700 vehicle owners in the hope they have dashcams" is intriguing. Police aren't ruling anything out and nor should they.
 
View attachment 401314

yes it's on the other side of the river from the bench

They're also demanding the river gauging station be searched but afaik that would've been locked and either EA or river authority is key holder. ( Might also have been checked already )

link for this photo Nicola Bulley's friend urges police to search abandoned house


'Abandoned and derelict buildings along the river have been broken into by members of the public carrying out their own investigations.
Super Riley, yesterday's presser:
She added: 'There are some properties along the riverside which are empty or derelict and whilst it may be well-intentioned that people think that that could be a line of inquiry, I would ask them to desist from doing that.

'In some cases it may be criminal if they are breaking in, causing damage or committing a burglary.

'We have gone into derelict property - including ones on the riverside, (and) any under renovation that were empty - with the permission of those owners and their knowledge.'
Looking at this how would she of wales from last sighting to the bench in ten minutes and also fall and injur herself falling in the river? Why would she place her phone on the bench its clear that even if she had of made it to that bench there wouldn't of been enough time to relax and think lets sit down. It seems more logical thay she headed off towards the broken cctv that is closer to her. So maybe the phone and dog at bench is decoy surely
 
The thing is you have police saying stop speculating because it’s hurtful to family and friends yet friends are forcing the issue with some things which leads to the speculation. It’s like a vicious circle! IMO.
Yeah ITA.
 
If someone else did put the phone on the bench, you would expect some DNA (I'm presuming DNA testing has been done),. Otherwise had gloves on ? But then how many people have touched the phone since, as it was thought it all seemed innocent, and not any other kind of involvement of any sort
Yeah I was staggered the entire area wasn't cordoned off, but as the fall and possible drowning was the initial conclusion, they didn't do that. It's a very challenging case, and these people turning up and breaking into properties are completely mad. Must be driving locals mad.

I did think just now though - if she was somehow lured down the path shown on TalkTV (is that Garstang Road somewhere?), by either dishonest or violent means - leaving her dog and her phone would be a good way to indicate she was taken somewhere against her will and suddenly. Perhaps whoever it was had no idea she had a dog or was on a call - this would also help indicate where they approached her - especially if she'd been on speakerphone and not holding the phone at the time.
 
The Superintendent has already stated, numerous times, that there is only 1 exit that wasn't covered by CCTV because it was broken.
I am aware the police said that all other exits were covered by cctv however now that the daily Mail are reporting police say it’s possible she could have left by foot across the river path which wasn’t covered by cctv.


The exit I am referring to in my line of thinking is situated directly next to the river path but on the other side of the river. My enquiry (assuming it’s possible to cross the river on foot?) was to try and understand if you can get across the river in order to reach this particular exit via the kissing gate (not the turn style). This May account for the first witness (presuming they didn’t see anything) not seeing anybody on the way out again presuming the the exit directly on the other side of the river path was also used as an entry point also? I also wondered if it was even considered as an exit or entry point or whether it was ascertained by the police if you can cross the river. I am sure and would hope they have considered this. I’ve attached an image to show you the one I mean. Looks like you could park a car in there too.
 

Attachments

  • 2EFECCC6-1339-4207-88BD-BDC972C7AE3D.jpeg
    2EFECCC6-1339-4207-88BD-BDC972C7AE3D.jpeg
    129 KB · Views: 48
Exactly the questions I would like to know too… This seems like critical information IMO and not sure why the mans wife was giving the account of what (she heard) happened (as in sighting by her husband) and not her husband? I was under the impression that his wife wasn’t there and is just stating what he told her? Not 100% sure about that though..
Timeline of what happened on each day since Nicola Bulley disappeared so her husband is the white fluffy dog man they appealed for …
 

Attachments

  • C06473E7-EDF1-42A1-B6A4-8A3F10945905.jpeg
    C06473E7-EDF1-42A1-B6A4-8A3F10945905.jpeg
    348.9 KB · Views: 70
It would be good to ask the person who tied up the dog on finding it EXACTLY where the dog was, which direction it was facing and if it was perturbed in a way what suggested something specific, like violence, or just anxious from Nicola's sudden disappearance? It's enough to make you want to put dashcams on dogs, to be quite frank. It's just awful, and I can't stop thinking about how desperate her family must be.
as this witness has already been spoken to by the police I am sure they will have asked all the relevant details already. We are not privy to all the details and LE are not obliged to share every little detail with the public.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
69
Guests online
1,938
Total visitors
2,007

Forum statistics

Threads
600,389
Messages
18,107,964
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top