UK UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #2

[Henry B]

With the police having zero interest in the new evidence he has dug up and he implied he won’t dig and he has a specific reason for that it doesn’t seem like there will be a break anytime soon.

So if it was in AS's book then he would have got this information from the original police investigation, so therefore it's logical to assume that AL made this statement.

The thing is, how do we know he was telling the truth? We don't have Suzy's side of the story obviously.

Suzy went to a party on Saturday night without AL, and she made her way to and from Worthing on the Sunday without him as well.

Also in DV's book AL says the reason they didn't meet up on Sunday night was because Suzy went to visit her parents, nothing about him being delayed?

AL is also sketchy about the phone call on the Sunday night, saying he can't remember who phoned who. As DV suggests maybe Suzy met up with someone else that evening - maybe that's why he chooses not to remember?

Suzy did not appear to want to spend any time with AL that weekend, which is strange considering he'd been away on holiday and had only just returned. IMO things were not fine and dandy with them at all.

The AS book states that DL and SJL had arranged to meet at her flat if he was back in London on time, but he was 'delayed' returning from Worthing. SJL's visit to her parents did not last the whole evening, so they talked on the phone instead. I don't know about the DV book.

 

[Terryb808]

There were some interesting clarifying things in the chat.

How does he explain all the spurious sightings at 37SR? Essentially, the police prompted them all. There was one sighting of "Mr Kipper" by HR, and this was the basis of the narrative presented the very next day. Already it was inaccurate, because HR did not identify SJL, but the police said he had. He spoke to MG first before the police and HR told MG what he expected to hear, then when it turned out there'd been an abduction and police wanted to hear about that, suddenly HR had now seen her abducted, too. This account set the entire tone and was disastrously influential. All the later sightings were of what the police wanted people to have seen, and this applies to those a week, or 12 and 14 years later. If you tell people what you want them to have witnessed, witnesses to it will come forward.

What about the couple SJL was friends with? He cut the question off to say he wouldn't talk about that. Interesting.

What about the BW sighting? She was probably mistaken as to the day.

What other hypotheses did the police examine? None, just Mr Kipper, and the focus was on naming and finding him. Later, the focus was on proving JC was him.

When was the car ditched? Not when WJ said, as she has proved unreliable.

What about JC's fake plate, S396 SLP? Seriously? Is that what the case against him relies on? There's no evidence but it looks a bit like SJL's name?

What about JC's "confessions" to cellmates or police interviewers? The former never happened and the latter was not thought a confession by the other officer present.

What about JC's nickname of Mr Kipper? If even true, it postdates the case; prisoners may have started calling him that because the press said he was Mr Kipper.

Has he thought about searching the site? It would cost a couple of hundred thousand - he could barge in and be proven right, but as nobody knows how she died, he could destroy forensic evidence doing so.

What about dogs or LIDAR? Dogs are inconclusive, as you don't know why they're alerting, and LIDAR wouldn't work on the location.

As I've said before, DV's book feels to me like he's given us parts 1, 2 and 4, but there's a missing part 3 without which part 4 makes no sense. Inferentially part 3 entails some connection between the couple he wouldn't discuss and either the PoW, or CV.

To understand why DV cuts off the question about the business venture and interviewing this couple you need to look at them in detail.

They don’t appear in any documentary and as far as I know only briefly in AS’s book.

There’s a very good reason for this, which is why DV can’t say anything, he an ex Scotland Yard detective who knows the law inside out. And wisely he’s steering well clear, additionally, he doesn’t waste time on things that he feels are not directly connected.

 

[WestLondoner]

Was DV implying that within this lost salacious diary (which he hasn't personally read), there are details of sexual affairs, that CV was attempting to blackmail SL with?

It's not lost - the police have it.

Have cops from the original team broadly told DV what the diary contains?

It doesn't seem so. They reject his conclusions on three grounds. One, they told him he'd have to prove the diary's contents were "salacious" (by implication so that its loss would be damaging to SJL and she would be desperate to have it back; they know if it's "salacious" but they aren't helping). Second, he needed to find a motive for someone to kill her at the pub (if DV thinks eg CV did it and he's thought of his motive, that's not in the book, and neither did it persuade the police). Third, he needs witnesses to say she was seen going into that pub (of course unavailable, because no such witnesses were sought at the time).

All in the background of his first proper day in charge of the pub, a full bar stock take handover / inspection in full swing with the proper landlord and brewery guy plus CV's wife floating around the place too! .....

Exactly so!

Did he say anything more on the plate? Bristol area common prefix?

Yes, basically. He said he had checked and there were quite a few such numbers around locally. I bought a new car in Birmingham in 1985, C920HOX, and you could tell what dealer from where had sold what cars because they tended to be allocated a number / letter range. C900 HOT would be another Midlands-registered car.

 

[asyousay]

I just get the feeling his interview was to push more book sales before Christmas.


If he genuinely believes she is buried in the pub then he needs to stop wasting time as wittiness’s are getting older and just do a “Go Fund Me” and then push forward with what he knows. But he doesn’t seem to me in any rush to do anything at all and the question is why?!


He is so vague on stuff which doesn’t help anybody. I know he is afraid of being sued but if he generally wants justice then he should push forward and get the ball rolling as he claims the police have told him the case was botched so turn to the media and get them to put pressure on the met.


MOO

 

[Crusader21]

It's not lost - the police have it.

I mean't that the SL had lost her diary. Incidentially, I read that the diary has been returned to the family ....

I agree with Asyousay in that DV is so vague it's hard to know what he's actually getting at. For instance is he actually saying for sure that he believes CV is responsible?!

 

[Terryb808]

I just get the feeling his interview was to push more book sales before Christmas.


If he genuinely believes she is buried in the pub then he needs to stop wasting time as wittiness’s are getting older and just do a “Go Fund Me” and then push forward with what he knows. But he doesn’t seem to me in any rush to do anything at all and the question is why?!


He is so vague on stuff which doesn’t help anybody. I know he is afraid of being sued but if he generally wants justice then he should push forward and get the ball rolling as he claims the police have told him the case was botched so turn to the media and get them to put pressure on the met.


MOO

From a forensic point of view it’s vital that the burial site is not disturbed, when asked the question “will the media coverage result in the site being disturbed” he said no.
On this basis I don’t believe SJL is in the cellar of the PoW, and where she is can not be easily accessed by the public.
I agree crowd funding is an option and DV did say he would consider this if the police took no action.
Regarding the obstacles the police placed in front of DV regards to what he needed to provide to get them to action his case file.
They are all designed to be things that can’t be overcome, look at the Mets history when it comes to admitting their mistakes, they just don’t.
If the then Home Secretary and an 8 year inquiry (Watch Murder in the Car Park) can’t achieve this, DV has no chance.
I honestly believe DV is doing his level best to get the police on side in a diplomatic way, to those of us who want to see a quick result, it’s frustrating.

 

[WestLondoner]

So based on recent discussions, how's this for a hypothesis. Pure conjecture, but it uses a lot of known facts, plausible sightings, and DV hypotheses. I've put these in bold. Italics are my own speculations.

CV is in cahoots with someone who has a beef with SJL. Let's call him A N Other (but it could be a they - the couple DV won't discuss are the obvious possibility here). Perhaps she's pulling out of the business venture they were planning. Maybe this is going to bring to a head his money troubles. Maybe he tried it on with her, and he's afraid his wife will find out and realise why she's gone cold on the business idea.

He wants to confront her, but she is avoiding and won't meet him. He needs to trick her into a meeting in a discreet place. So he lifts her stuff or someone or perhaps his mate CV does, while she's making a phone call to AL from the pub payphone, and he has CV "find" it.

Next day, after she speaks to CV's partner 'Karen', this is enough to lure SJL to the pub to retrieve her diary. CV goes along with this, favour to a mate perhaps. But to his horror, when SJL unsuspectingly turns up at the PoW, A N Other kills her.

CV is appalled - but A N Other warns him that 'like it or not pal, you're an accessory now, because you got her here. You get your @rse in gear and you help me fix this. Get rid of her car and then get back to the PoW ASAP to help dispose of her body under that floor'.

CV drives her Fiesta over the river and dumps it at random. He gets a cab and Tube back. He knows this is a big deal and the car will be looked for and found. The cabbie may remember him, so he plants some misinformation. He tells the cabbie he saw a couple 'having a right ruck'. This 'ruck' mislocates the place SJL came to harm from the PoW to somewhere near where he left her car.

Back at the pub, he and A N Other are hiding SJL under the pub floor when 'Karen', CV's partner, somehow gets wind of something afoot and is suspicious. A N Other leaves. A N Other's wife wants to know how the conversation with SJL went. Both men give their women some spiel.

SJL is reported missing. CV and A N Other breathe a huge sigh of relief as the police charge off in completely the wrong direction after Mr Kipper, her cover story that's a lucky, lucky break for them.

A N Other's wife had been planning to meet SJL for lunch that Monday but cancelled it. She's distraught and thinks had she not done so SJL would be alive. She helps DL establish the SLT.

'Karen' contacts the police about SJL's intended visit to the PoW, but it's CV that they meet and interview. He asks A N Other what to tell them. A N Other says give them her diary, it's a blizzard of suspects - all the men she's slept with; it'll keep them busy for months. CV obediently tells the police she was never there.

'Karen' becomes (correctly) convinced that CV knows something about SJL's disappearance, because he behaved so weirdly the day she vanished and since. She knows SJL was expected that day at the PoW. She may even have seen her there. It dawns on her what she actually saw, and appalled, some months later 'Karen' ends it with him.

A N Other's troubles materialise and his wife, putting 2 and 2 together like 'Karen', divorces him. Neither speaks about SJL ever again and not a single one of the many documentaries or articles ever, ever mentions them. She reinvents herself as a TV talking head, but despite publicity-seeking, she never milks her connection to SJL.

The PoW suffers a blowfly infestation because there is a body under the floor. There's a Crimewatch reconstruction on TV, but nobody comes forward to identify themselves as the 'James Galway' lookalike taxi fare who mentioned 'a couple having a right ruck'. This was CV, who obviously wasn't coming forward.

A year later CV's re-interviewed, and embellishes his story with made-up phone calls to suggest that someone else intended but failed to meet her there.

Four people know or suspect what happened to SJL: CV, 'Karen', A N Other, A N Other's ex-wife. Mesmerised by the Mr Kipper fiction, then by the JC story, no journalist or cold-case investigator bothers any of them for 35 years.

Until DV comes along.

 

[Henry B]

So based on recent discussions, how's this for a hypothesis. Pure conjecture, but it uses a lot of known facts, plausible sightings, and DV hypotheses. I've put these in bold. Italics are my own speculations.

CV is in cahoots with someone who has a beef with SJL. Let's call him A N Other (but it could be a they - the couple DV won't discuss are the obvious possibility here). Perhaps she's pulling out of the business venture they were planning. Maybe this is going to bring to a head his money troubles. Maybe he tried it on with her, and he's afraid his wife will find out and realise why she's gone cold on the business idea.

He wants to confront her, but she is avoiding and won't meet him. He needs to trick her into a meeting in a discreet place. So he lifts her stuff or someone or perhaps his mate CV does, while she's making a phone call to AL from the pub payphone, and he has CV "find" it. After she speaks to CV's partner 'Karen', this is enough to lure SJL to the pub to retrieve it. CV goes along with this, favour to a mate perhaps. But to his horror, when SJL unsuspectingly turns up at the PoW, A N Other kills her.

CV is appalled - but A N Other warns him that 'like it or not pal, you're an accessory now, because you got her here. You get your @rse in gear and you help me fix this. Get rid of her car and then get back to the PoW ASAP to help dispose of her body under that floor'.

CV drives her Fiesta over the river and dumps it at random. He gets a cab and Tube back. He knows this is a big deal and the car will be looked for and found. The cabbie may remember him, so he plants some misinformation. He tells the cabbie he saw a couple 'having a right ruck'. This 'ruck' mislocates the place SJL came to harm from the PoW to somewhere near where he left her car.

Back at the pub, he and A N Other are hiding SJL under the pub floor when 'Karen', CV's partner, somehow gets wind of something afoot and is suspicious. A N Other leaves. A N Other's wife wants to know how the conversation with SJL went. Both men give their women some spiel.

SJL is reported missing. CV and A N Other breathe a huge sigh of relief as the police charge off in completely the wrong direction after Mr Kipper, her cover story that's a lucky, lucky break for them.

A N Other's wife had been planning to meet SJL for lunch that Monday but cancelled it. She's distraught and thinks had she not done so SJL would be alive. She helps DL establish the SLT.

'Karen' contacts the police about SJL's intended visit to the PoW, but it's CV that they meet and interview. He asks A N Other what to tell them. A N Other says give them her diary, it's a blizzard of suspects - all the men she's slept with; it'll keep them busy for months. CV obediently tells the police she was never there.

'Karen' becomes (correctly) convinced that CV knows something about SJL's disappearance, because he behaved so weirdly the day she vanished and since. She knows SJL was expected that day at the PoW. She may even have seen her there. It dawns on her what she actually saw, and appalled, some months later 'Karen' ends it with him.

A N Other's troubles materialise and his wife, putting 2 and 2 together like 'Karen', divorces him. Neither speaks about SJL ever again and not a single one of the many documentaries or articles ever, ever mentions them. She reinvents herself as a TV talking head, but despite publicity-seeking, she never milks her connection to SJL.

The PoW suffers a blowfly infestation because there is a body under the floor.

A year later CV's reinterviewed and embellishes his story with made-up phone calls to suggest that someone else intended but failed to meet her there.

Four people know or suspect what happened to SJL: CV, 'Karen', A N Other, A N Other's ex-wife. Mesmerised by the Mr Kipper fiction, then by the JC story, no journalist or cold-case investigator bothers any of them for 35 years.

Until DV comes along.

Hmm... yes, that's really interesting... so the parking of SJL's company car opposite another Sturgis property for sale in Stevenage Road was a coincidence?

 

[WestLondoner]

Hmm... yes, that's really interesting... so the parking of SJL's company car opposite another Sturgis property for sale in Stevenage Road was a coincidence?

I think so. Would CV even know, when dumping her car, that she worked at Sturgis?

As a speculation, it would require the establishment of a prior connection between CV and A N Other. We don't know if DV has established such a connection, because he won't talk about the couple. The police invitation to him to find some witnesses to SJL going there is impossible, because there are only three or perhaps four, and they are either not talking (K), or making no sense (CV), or DV doesn't want to talk about them at all (the couple).

 

[Crusader21]

So based on recent discussions, how's this for a hypothesis. Pure conjecture, but it uses a lot of known facts, plausible sightings, and DV hypotheses. I've put these in bold. Italics are my own speculations.

CV is in cahoots with someone who has a beef with SJL. Let's call him A N Other (but it could be a they - the couple DV won't discuss are the obvious possibility here). Perhaps she's pulling out of the business venture they were planning. Maybe this is going to bring to a head his money troubles. Maybe he tried it on with her, and he's afraid his wife will find out and realise why she's gone cold on the business idea.

He wants to confront her, but she is avoiding and won't meet him. He needs to trick her into a meeting in a discreet place. So he lifts her stuff or someone or perhaps his mate CV does, while she's making a phone call to AL from the pub payphone, and he has CV "find" it.

Next day, after she speaks to CV's partner 'Karen', this is enough to lure SJL to the pub to retrieve her diary. CV goes along with this, favour to a mate perhaps. But to his horror, when SJL unsuspectingly turns up at the PoW, A N Other kills her.

CV is appalled - but A N Other warns him that 'like it or not pal, you're an accessory now, because you got her here. You get your @rse in gear and you help me fix this. Get rid of her car and then get back to the PoW ASAP to help dispose of her body under that floor'.

CV drives her Fiesta over the river and dumps it at random. He gets a cab and Tube back. He knows this is a big deal and the car will be looked for and found. The cabbie may remember him, so he plants some misinformation. He tells the cabbie he saw a couple 'having a right ruck'. This 'ruck' mislocates the place SJL came to harm from the PoW to somewhere near where he left her car.

Back at the pub, he and A N Other are hiding SJL under the pub floor when 'Karen', CV's partner, somehow gets wind of something afoot and is suspicious. A N Other leaves. A N Other's wife wants to know how the conversation with SJL went. Both men give their women some spiel.

SJL is reported missing. CV and A N Other breathe a huge sigh of relief as the police charge off in completely the wrong direction after Mr Kipper, her cover story that's a lucky, lucky break for them.

A N Other's wife had been planning to meet SJL for lunch that Monday but cancelled it. She's distraught and thinks had she not done so SJL would be alive. She helps DL establish the SLT.

'Karen' contacts the police about SJL's intended visit to the PoW, but it's CV that they meet and interview. He asks A N Other what to tell them. A N Other says give them her diary, it's a blizzard of suspects - all the men she's slept with; it'll keep them busy for months. CV obediently tells the police she was never there.

'Karen' becomes (correctly) convinced that CV knows something about SJL's disappearance, because he behaved so weirdly the day she vanished and since. She knows SJL was expected that day at the PoW. She may even have seen her there. It dawns on her what she actually saw, and appalled, some months later 'Karen' ends it with him.

A N Other's troubles materialise and his wife, putting 2 and 2 together like 'Karen', divorces him. Neither speaks about SJL ever again and not a single one of the many documentaries or articles ever, ever mentions them. She reinvents herself as a TV talking head, but despite publicity-seeking, she never milks her connection to SJL.

The PoW suffers a blowfly infestation because there is a body under the floor.

A year later CV's re-interviewed, and embellishes his story with made-up phone calls to suggest that someone else intended but failed to meet her there.

Four people know or suspect what happened to SJL: CV, 'Karen', A N Other, A N Other's ex-wife. Mesmerised by the Mr Kipper fiction, then by the JC story, no journalist or cold-case investigator bothers any of them for 35 years.

Until DV comes along.

Not bad at all WL ...

Had you have been a retired met man you may have just landed youself a deal with Amazon!

 

[Henry B]

I think so. Would CV even know, when dumping her car, that she worked at Sturgis?

Yep, good point. I had wondered if it might have been linked to SJL buying a property with somebody else. Is it a possibility that, on 28 July, 1986, she met the chap at her car, having invented 'Mr Kipper' as an excuse to leave the office, he made out like: 'Yes, Madame! I will chauffeur you to see the property I have in mind!' He drove the car to Stevenage Road and the Sturgis property there - and SJL was severely disappointed, realising that the £3,000 commission was all hogwash. If there was anything to the 'right ruck' in the neighbourhood reported by the James Galway lookalike, this might account for it. It's just crossed my mind a few times, but I have no idea how it would fit into the wider picture. I just put it out there as a curiosity.

 

[Crusader21]

As a speculation, it would require the establishment of a prior connection between CV and A N Other.

CV moved down into London (with his wife), arriving around Easter '86. After training by working on site with the landlord at the PoW, CV was deemed suitably experienced / competent enough to be given the pub reigns that very Monday.

Assuming A N Other was a local, perhaps he would have been involved in either the pub, building or entertainment trade(s) himself, for CV to come into contact with him through business.

CV and A N Other may have known each other then, a few months ....

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

I think so. Would CV even know, when dumping her car, that she worked at Sturgis?

As a speculation, it would require the establishment of a prior connection between CV and A N Other. We don't know if DV has established such a connection, because he won't talk about the couple. The police invitation to him to find some witnesses to SJL going there is impossible, because there are only three or perhaps four, and they are either not talking (K), or making no sense (CV), or DV doesn't want to talk about them at all (the couple).

SL keys, AS says her house keys, car keys and office keys were all on one ring, had a bright yellow Sturgis tag on them. Anyone who had her keys could guess she worked at Sturgis. The boards were all over London at the time too.

 

[asyousay]

My theory’s


I believe Suzy met a boyfriend or a ex that afternoon. Things escalated into a argument and she was killed IMO.



2) she had obtained a stalker from the estate agents who had been following her for awhile and she went to a viewing that afternoon and was murdered.



The POW pub makes no sense unless it was spur of the moment as CV had called the bank hadn’t he? He drew attention to the diary and missing items so if he was involved that doesn’t add up.

 

[Terryb808]

So based on recent discussions, how's this for a hypothesis. Pure conjecture, but it uses a lot of known facts, plausible sightings, and DV hypotheses. I've put these in bold. Italics are my own speculations.

CV is in cahoots with someone who has a beef with SJL. Let's call him A N Other (but it could be a they - the couple DV won't discuss are the obvious possibility here). Perhaps she's pulling out of the business venture they were planning. Maybe this is going to bring to a head his money troubles. Maybe he tried it on with her, and he's afraid his wife will find out and realise why she's gone cold on the business idea.

He wants to confront her, but she is avoiding and won't meet him. He needs to trick her into a meeting in a discreet place. So he lifts her stuff or someone or perhaps his mate CV does, while she's making a phone call to AL from the pub payphone, and he has CV "find" it.

Next day, after she speaks to CV's partner 'Karen', this is enough to lure SJL to the pub to retrieve her diary. CV goes along with this, favour to a mate perhaps. But to his horror, when SJL unsuspectingly turns up at the PoW, A N Other kills her.

CV is appalled - but A N Other warns him that 'like it or not pal, you're an accessory now, because you got her here. You get your @rse in gear and you help me fix this. Get rid of her car and then get back to the PoW ASAP to help dispose of her body under that floor'.

CV drives her Fiesta over the river and dumps it at random. He gets a cab and Tube back. He knows this is a big deal and the car will be looked for and found. The cabbie may remember him, so he plants some misinformation. He tells the cabbie he saw a couple 'having a right ruck'. This 'ruck' mislocates the place SJL came to harm from the PoW to somewhere near where he left her car.

Back at the pub, he and A N Other are hiding SJL under the pub floor when 'Karen', CV's partner, somehow gets wind of something afoot and is suspicious. A N Other leaves. A N Other's wife wants to know how the conversation with SJL went. Both men give their women some spiel.

SJL is reported missing. CV and A N Other breathe a huge sigh of relief as the police charge off in completely the wrong direction after Mr Kipper, her cover story that's a lucky, lucky break for them.

A N Other's wife had been planning to meet SJL for lunch that Monday but cancelled it. She's distraught and thinks had she not done so SJL would be alive. She helps DL establish the SLT.

'Karen' contacts the police about SJL's intended visit to the PoW, but it's CV that they meet and interview. He asks A N Other what to tell them. A N Other says give them her diary, it's a blizzard of suspects - all the men she's slept with; it'll keep them busy for months. CV obediently tells the police she was never there.

'Karen' becomes (correctly) convinced that CV knows something about SJL's disappearance, because he behaved so weirdly the day she vanished and since. She knows SJL was expected that day at the PoW. She may even have seen her there. It dawns on her what she actually saw, and appalled, some months later 'Karen' ends it with him.

A N Other's troubles materialise and his wife, putting 2 and 2 together like 'Karen', divorces him. Neither speaks about SJL ever again and not a single one of the many documentaries or articles ever, ever mentions them. She reinvents herself as a TV talking head, but despite publicity-seeking, she never milks her connection to SJL.

The PoW suffers a blowfly infestation because there is a body under the floor. There's a Crimewatch reconstruction on TV, but nobody comes forward to identify themselves as the 'James Galway' lookalike taxi fare who mentioned 'a couple having a right ruck'. This was CV, who obviously wasn't coming forward.

A year later CV's re-interviewed, and embellishes his story with made-up phone calls to suggest that someone else intended but failed to meet her there.

Four people know or suspect what happened to SJL: CV, 'Karen', A N Other, A N Other's ex-wife. Mesmerised by the Mr Kipper fiction, then by the JC story, no journalist or cold-case investigator bothers any of them for 35 years.

Until DV comes along.

Spot on as a narrative, what is missing is any evidence linking the four with SJL on that Monday, and this is what has kept this case open for 35 years. The people involved in this narrative are above suspicion as far as the police are concerned, I say this for two reasons:

1. JC did it and they’ve openly said this.
2. They have a record of never admitting their mistakes, and having made point 1 to the media, that’s not going to change in the near future.

A N Other (male) had links to pubs & restaurants back then, so it’s a remote possibility that as you outline they knew each other. If DV won’t talk about them, he either can’t or needs to keep what he knows back for legal reasons.

 

[WestLondoner]

So we have a Mexican standoff.

The police want witnesses and a motive before they'll abandon their JC theory and search the pub, but that's not going to happen exactly because they ignored it 35 years ago in favour of pursuing the fictitious Mr Kipper.

DV needs the pub searched because he needs to find and forensicate her, because A N Other's DNA will confirm the motive.

Total impasse unless he can crowdfund this.

 

[Henry B]

My theory’s


I believe Suzy met a boyfriend or a ex that afternoon. Things escalated into a argument and she was killed IMO.



2) she had obtained a stalker from the estate agents who had been following her for awhile and she went to a viewing that afternoon and was murdered.



The POW pub makes no sense unless it was spur of the moment as CV had called the bank hadn’t he? He drew attention to the diary and missing items so if he was involved that doesn’t add up.

Excellent point. Yes, CV contacted the bank about the cheque book. I don't see why CV would have done that if he knew SJL. Another point: did the bank verify that they contacted SJL? Or was it part of some plan - somebody phoned, but it may not have been the bank and SJL was hoping to use it as an excuse to pop out to get her cheque book - but then discovered that wouldn't be possible due to the staff shortage? She had alluded to the missing items that morning, but anybody could fake a phone call to a bank to cancel a cheque book. Not likely, I know - but it could have happened. In the end, she simply scrawled 'Mr Kipper' in the diary to cover her absence. The 6pm appointment escaped her when she said she would be picking up her belongings from the PoW then. Maybe she left her things there on p

So we have a Mexican standoff.

The police want witnesses and a motive before they'll abandon their JC theory and search the pub, but that's not going to happen exactly because they ignored it 35 years ago in favour of pursuing the fictitious Mr Kipper.

DV needs the pub searched because he needs to find and forensicate her, because A N Other's DNA will confirm the motive.

Total impasse unless he can crowdfund this.

Was there really blowfly infestation at the pub? That sounds really ominous.

 

[asyousay]

Just reading this and this jumped out at me Suzy Lamplugh — Time For The Truth

She left her handbag and other personal possessions in the office as if she planned to return relatively quickly

has this been confirmed elsewhere as if that’s true she obviously was not going home as she would if surely of taken her purse and bag with her if popping home?

 

[WestLondoner]

Was there really blowfly infestation at the pub? That sounds really ominous.

According to the permanent manager, yes there was, during August. It's apparently quite common around pubs and restaurants, because the food waste attracts the flies. They're also attracted to dead bodies.

 

[Crusader21]

Just wondering now is the consensus of opinion from those who are familiar with this case, moving away from 'JC done it'?

Yes that's still the 'official' line but as we know there's no real evidence backing it. As we know despite police pressure, there wasn't enough for the Crown Prosecution boys to take to court.

Moving on to the PoW Pub in Putney, where SL appeared to drive to that Monday lunchtime. And there a series of events, with one or two individuals present, which resulted in SL being murdered and remaining within the vacinity of that pub?

I think DV does deserve enormus credit for moving this case forward. And if indeed SLs remains are reclaimed at some point, from within the footprint of the PoW, then a process can begin of questioning those known to be present that Monday. With a view to ascertain who else was there and once and for all, what exactly took place ....