A friend from Perthshire visited Susan's site today to plant forget-me-nots and periwinkle. Susan would have loved all the dogs that visited today. And she's smiling down on us WebSleuthers with thanks and love. The people of Aberfeldy left a nice message and flowers at the gate where Loch Hoil Trail begins. Hippy Hippy, thank you, again. I am amazed how unperturbed things are. My last visit was over 8 months ago, but things are basically the same. I left her the Chapstick because she wouldn't leave home without it.
The final pic shows again how close she was to the north edge of the forest. It was the same to the south edge, just not pictured.
Long and windy update of my police complaint. If you're busy, just skip to the last paragraph: I submitted a many page letter to Police Scotland. Interestingly, I received the reply ten days ago from Chief Superintendent Carole Auld. The responder essentially dropped every point of my complaint, beginning with HH's bloody dog. He swears that they handled the that piece properly, since they didn't know about the blood...
Then the Neutrogena lip balm from which the Police Scotland labs could not find ANY DNA, Chief Sup sidetracks, saying that Susan's family was sure it was not hers. Chief Sup avoids the issue of the lab not finding any DNA on the lip balm. In retrospect, based on the mold on the side of the tube, I'm sure it was not Susan's. However, that doesn't excuse a lab that couldn't find DNA! However DS Wilkie has now changed his story, saying now that he didn't tell me that there was no DNA. Rather, he is now saying that he said they didn't find Susan's DNA. I really don't like people who change their story when somebody holds their feet to the fire. And now Chief Sup goes on to say that they found a blood stain with traces of DNA, but not Susan's. It sure sounds like he is mixing up the blood stain on HH's blanket with the lip balm. It would be exceptional to find blood on the lip balm.
Incidentally, Chief Sup has twice referred to DS Smith. I think HH met with Smith, but my only meetings were with DS Wilkie. So when Chief Sup does "not uphold this aspect of ... complaint", I wanna shout that he doesn't even have his people's names straight. So I do not uphold his response to my allegations.
Then Chief Sup goes into my asking DS Wilkie for the search grids so that I could really see where the search and rescue teams and police had actually walked. Wilkie had told me that they covered the whole area from Gatehouse Nursery along Loch Hoil Trail to the Birks to Moness Resort. And when I pushed for thorough details, he said they covered the entire area both immediately with search and rescue dogs and a couple weeks later with cadaver dogs. But he could not give me the search grids, and I should just believe that they had covered the entire area. He pointed out the area of interest on a map on the back of his door, where the area was about two inches by two inches. A lot of help he was! Then after we found Susan, Sup Murdoch told Kirsty McIntosh, The Courier's journalist, that the police "could not have search every square inch" yet they searched the trails. Well, why wasn't the story consistent between DS Wilkie and Sup Murdoch? Wilkie claims that he was told by his Det Sup and Det Insp not to provide details of the police's search grids. He also claims that he showed me the map of the search area, the 2"X2" map on the back of his door, yet he never said the area was fully searched. How convenient to change the story after 9 months.
Then Chief Sup says that they couldn't have given me any more information because I was not next of kin, even though I arrived with a notarized letter from the next of kin authorizing me to search on his behalf. And in the end, it was NOT Susan's next of kin who went to Scotland to arrange cremation. How could they allow not-next-of-kin to cremate and repatriate Susan, yet not allow me information to search for her? Makes no sense.
Then, in relation to the bottle of vodka, DS Wilkie now says he that he didn't tell me about the bottle because he didn't know it was a bottle of vodka. The first witness, the one who saw Susan walking uphill about 5 or 10 minutes from Moness Resort also claims he didn't see her with a bottle of vodka. However when I pressed him for details, he admitted that he saw her with some kind of a bottle, but he could not verify it was vodka. Like we really care if it was vodka or rum. I think that's what Wilkie would also claim if I pressed him on it.
And when I claimed that Police Scotland was negligent by not checking inside the forest sections (yet implying that they had), he assures me that they searched in accordance with training provided by the Police National Search Centre. Nothing like passing the buck.
I could go on for the remaining two pages of the Chief Sup's response to my complaints. Suffice it to say that each allegation was not upheld because of changed stories by police, or by passing the buck to another agency, or by referring only to press/media releases instead of the Q&A info provided to the press.
I've said too much already.
Thank you all so much for your support ever since I learned of WS. I love you all!
Lumberjill Lorna
