UK UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #6

[WestLondoner]

There would not have been any phone records in 1986. Itemised billing was not standard. If you wanted it, you had to ask for it to be enabled at the (mechanical) exchange, which took a couple of weeks to set up, and was at extra cost. It did not capture where incoming calls were from, only outgoing ones, nor could you apply it retrospectively. That is, you couldn't enable it today and find out what numbers you rang yesterday - it only worked from the point you set it up.

 

[su5ie]

There would not have been any phone records in 1986. Itemised billing was not standard. If you wanted it, you had to ask for it to be enabled at the (mechanical) exchange, which took a couple of weeks to set up, and was at extra cost. It did not capture where incoming calls were from, only outgoing ones, nor could you apply it retrospectively. That is, you couldn't enable it today and find out what numbers you rang yesterday - it only worked from the point you set it up.

Thank you . There was actually a debate concerning legislation for this in the house of Parliament on the 7th of july 1986 . But would calls that required an operator to connect have been recorded in a log by the exchange ? I know the operator took the name of the person you wanted to speak to and then connected the call . So potentially if suzy recieved a call in the office from a car phone the operator would know if a call was made to Sturgis that morning from one ? I wondered was this angle investigated