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

[su5ie]

then there is SL sister TL who stayed on holiday for another 2 weeks despite the fact that SL was missing. not being critical, but if my sister was missing presumed abducted, i would have been on the first plane home. iam not having a go, i just thought it was strange she did not come home sooner. she also had letters written by suzy that detectives needed to read ASAP to see if any clues lay there.

Nobody knows the reaction they would have in this situation we can only use the analogy of when someone in the family dies some are visibly emotional others go in on themselves and others use black humour and seem to be joking with everyone. But I have to agree Lee ,very strange behaviour from each family member bar the dad PL whom broken down and was vocal publicly on his grief. I understand stoicism but it seemed to be on a whole other level . Unless suzy was known to "disappear " for days which was never reported I can't fathom the seemingly indifference and for DL to say well Tasim remained on holiday as it had already been paid for is beyond my comprehension

 

[su5ie]

Does anyone think AL could have done it
JMO He claims he went to lunch with a lady friend obviously she was questioned for verification of alibi but could she have been covering for him ? Was she part of the putney set ?

He was taller than suzy and his DNA would already be in the car .

He had motive suzy was at minimum 3 timing him. Apparently with a close friend or two

He was away on a week's holiday so most likely would have been tanned

Allegedly suzy had broken up with him and ignored him for weekend and his account of the Tuesday date and Sunday night phonecall is on his word

He was apparently good looking and had a good build could it be mistaken for the guy seen on Shorrolds that could have been a former rugby player

He allowed the media and police to state that he was suzys boyfriend would men normally do this if it has been exposed that their girlfriend was having affairs and he remained close to her family doing media interviews etc it is known some perpetrators remain close to the investigation eg Ian Huntley, Joe o reilly (irish ) among countless others.

He dressed very well and lots of witnesses describe the man seen with suzy as well dressed public schoolboy type

He could have had access to the diary and chequebook and placed it back at pub

Could the putney set be protecting him by remaining silent and some having alleged NDAs

It took 11 separate statements to eliminate him seems bit excessive imo

Did anyone notice if he had a deviated septum or crooked nose that could have been broken playing sport .

 

[lee sumner]

Does anyone think AL could have done it
JMO He claims he went to lunch with a lady friend obviously she was questioned for verification of alibi but could she have been covering for him ? Was she part of the putney set ?

He was taller than suzy and his DNA would already be in the car .

He had motive suzy was at minimum 3 timing him. Apparently with a close friend or two

He was away on a week's holiday so most likely would have been tanned

Allegedly suzy had broken up with him and ignored him for weekend and his account of the Tuesday date and Sunday night phonecall is on his word

He was apparently good looking and had a good build could it be mistaken for the guy seen on Shorrolds that could have been a former rugby player

He allowed the media and police to state that he was suzys boyfriend would men normally do this if it has been exposed that their girlfriend was having affairs and he remained close to her family doing media interviews etc it is known some perpetrators remain close to the investigation eg Ian Huntley, Joe o reilly (irish ) among countless others.

He dressed very well and lots of witnesses describe the man seen with suzy as well dressed public schoolboy type

He could have had access to the diary and chequebook and placed it back at pub

Could the putney set be protecting him by remaining silent and some having alleged NDAs

It took 11 separate statements to eliminate him seems bit excessive imo

Did anyone notice if he had a deviated septum or crooked nose that could have been broken playing sport .

AL fingerprints were all over SL car, but i think that was from using it on occasion. it took 11 statements to clear him from the enquiry, so i doubt it was AL, but it does show detectives did there homework when it came to his alibi. 11 statements is a lot when it comes to an alibi. i thought that when i read the info in AS book. it was not 1 or 2 statements, but 11. he certainly had motive as i believe SL ditched him that weekend, but this is something he would never verify.

 

[lee sumner]

Nobody knows the reaction they would have in this situation we can only use the analogy of when someone in the family dies some are visibly emotional others go in on themselves and others use black humour and seem to be joking with everyone. But I have to agree Lee ,very strange behaviour from each family member bar the dad PL whom broken down and was vocal publicly on his grief. I understand stoicism but it seemed to be on a whole other level . Unless suzy was known to "disappear " for days which was never reported I can't fathom the seemingly indifference and for DL to say well Tasim remained on holiday as it had already been paid for is beyond my comprehension

re, PL suzy appears to have been close to her father. as you probably know he coached her during her exams etc. sounds like they were very close as father and daughter.

 

[lee sumner]

That’s a good point and very probably the very reason she disappeared. Her lifestyle must have created a few suspects that fit this profile.
It’s been said previously that JC had no money to fund the purchase of top quality Suits etc and to splash out of wining & dining SJL in the way she expected.
However, that’s not true, in early 1985 his father died leaving him £2000 & and another distant relative (who I can’t name) left him £5000. Both with the idea that it would put him back on his feet.
He’s just one that perfectly fits the description you make above. He has a killer streak in him once he feels he’s been wronged.

I can't help thinking this could be entirely random.

Say for argument's sake you are meeting a woman - whom you intend to abduct - in the street, and you intend to take her to a place where you can attack her. If she and you arrive separately in said street by car, you've got a bit of a logistical problem. If you leave the initial meeting place in two cars, you don't control where she goes. If you leave together in one car, the other car obviously has to be retrieved later. And until you do, that car's still in the last place she was known to be going. You really don't want to be going back there even to pick up your own car, in case when you get there the street is full of plods.

Ideally you'd leave in her car, because hers will soon be compromised and searched for, whereas yours is unknown and you'll be needing it. So you need to manage where her car is found. What you maybe do is park your car somewhere well away from your hideout, but at a walkable distance from the meeting place. You then leave 37SR in her car and later you drive in her car back to where you left yours.

You possibly didn't notice any Sturgis sign at 123SR because you left your car around the corner in Kenyon Street or Langthorne Street. You arrived back from the south via SR, intending to ditch her car away from your own and then walk around the corner to fetch it.

In this sequence of events, the driver had never been in SR before and where he stopped was driven not by any Sturgis sign, but by which road off it he'd left his own car.

The imperative to get rid of the car applies in DV's PoW theory too. It's unclear that either CV or JC had much local knowledge but CV clearly had further to go to get back to the PoW afterwards. All JC would have had to do to get to either Shorrolds or Star Road was cut through the park and keep heading east.

no way was parking SL car across the road from the large yellow for sale sturgis sign random. this was pkanned in advance. he was always going to ditch her car there. what it means, i cant say, was mr kipper playing mind games, or did he want us to think SL went there.

 

[lee sumner]

This is just my own observation, but it helps to prove the point you're getting at.

I have walls in my house painted in a Dulux colour named "Polished Pebble". It's a really pale grey. I have all frames, skirting and architrave painted brilliant white.

When you see the grey *next to* the white, it's obvious that the grey is in fact grey. But when you just look at the grey walls, depending on how the light hits it, the grey is so pale that it can easily be mistaken for a slightly off-white despite not being white at all.

how many times did mr mahon come home from work, and there was a white car parked up right next to his garage. this would have been on a regular basis. after so long, he would not even notice if there was a car there or not, and SL fiesta was not blocking his entrance, it was overlapping the entrance by 13 inches, so close, yes, but not blocking him preventing him from getting in. so my point is did he even notice SL car that day, as it was the same as any other day.

 

[WiseOwl]

how many times did mr mahon come home from work, and there was a white car parked up right next to his garage. this would have been on a regular basis. after so long, he would not even notice if there was a car there or not, and SL fiesta was not blocking his entrance, it was overlapping the entrance by 13 inches, so close, yes, but not blocking him preventing him from getting in. so my point is did he even notice SL car that day, as it was the same as any other day.

Yes he did, check out the Crimewatch video for when LM returned home at 5.15pm that day.

 

[su5ie]

I was reading a few articles relating to Every contact leaves a trace

Trace Evidence: Principles

www.forensicsciencesimplified.org

Trace Evidence – The Forensics Library

And I thought of the tapings done on suzys car .
Cannan while at the hostel worked as a porter for a props for hire company
Would these leave traces of paint and the type of wood used in props on cannans person and could these have come in contact with suzys car or her belongings like her clothes or handbags she prehaps brought on the alleged dates they may have had ?

While looking up on Cannan's place of work Acton I seen this article in the sun newspaper it mentions suzy was dating a businessman from Bristol and they had gone to a motor racing event (I never seen this before)she became scared by him at this event and was planning to have lunch with him to break up .it also states the witness on Shorrolds Road observed a couple arguing beside a BMW and a woman seen a man holding a bottle of champagne and woman does this mean two separate witnesses seen the man holding the bottle of champagne?

What happened to Suzy Lamplugh, the girl with everything to live for

ONE Monday morning 33 years ago, Suzy Lamplugh walked out of the Fulham estate agency where she worked. She told her colleagues that she was going to show a house on nearby Shorrolds Road to a clie…

www.thesun.ie

Also this article about Cannans work place and that he used to go home to his family in Bristol and also allegedly had a married lover in Bristol

PressReader.com - Digital Newspaper & Magazine Subscriptions

Digital newsstand featuring 7000+ of the world’s most popular newspapers & magazines. Enjoy unlimited reading on up to 5 devices with 7-day free trial.

www.pressreader.com

This was a major motor racing event on the 17th of July in Kent London it may be the event suzy went to

1986 British Grand Prix - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[su5ie]

Edit to above post race was sunday 13th of july not the 17th suzy usually visited her parents on Sunday evening prehaps she mentioned being fearful then and the plan to break up with this man .....This was the price of tickets to the British grand prix in july 1986 would 2 tickets at 50 pounds for the pair be a lot of money in 1986
I'm spending my sunday casually scanning old photos of the crowd for Suzy . Lol i need to get a life

 

[lee sumner]

But I don't think there is any suggestion MG had a second set of keys, is there? AS's book doesn't suggest that, and DV's goes a step further, making it clear DV doesn't think MG went into the house at all.

A lack of forensic evidence doesn't absolutely guarantee Suzy never went into the house. If all she did was open the front door, walk around a bit, and then come back out, trace evidence could be minimal or non-existent; to quote an old saying, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. On tv and in movies every person leaves behind copious trace evidence everywhere they go. But in real life it's not always that simple.

MG supposedly got his initial information about the man and woman at Shorrolds, which he reported to the police at 6:45PM, *from* HR. How could HR have been talking about having seen MG and SF when he was actually telling the story to MG and SF? It is possible that other witnesses saw MG and SF, but HR can't have done.

HR reported seeing a man and a woman at 37SR at around 12:45-1:00PM. He told this to MG before anyone knew Suzy was missing and before the police had even been called. He appears to have had no reason--or any knowledge of the situation that would have allowed him--to make it up.

Having now read AS's book, I think HR has been treated somewhat unfairly. The first version of his story, the one he told MG, supposedly included the woman being bundled into a car, which was later found to be at best an exaggeration and at worst an outright lie. But it's not at all clear what HR actually said to MG, or even if it was HR or MG who exaggerated the story to begin with.

HR apparently told a similar but less embellished story to the police; again, who originally embellished the story, him or MG? If it was MG, had someone (DL, whom MG had already spoken to before calling the police?) encouraged him to embellish the story hoping the police would take the situation more seriously?

You also say HR positively identified the Belgian Mr. Kiper as the man he saw in Shorrolds. But according to AS's book, all he could ever say was that the man he saw *could* have been Kiper, not that it definitely was. HR had apparently been given an expenses-paid trip to Belgium by a newspaper to look at Kiper, so it's hard to know if his answer was even genuine, or just an attempt to appease his benefactors.

HR is the best witness in my opinion. he seen a couple outside 37 shorrolds rd at 1pm, and this lines up perfect with SL diary entry. he also gave MG this info only hours later on the same day. HR did add things on later, but iam convinced he seen SL and MR KIPPER that day outside 37 shorrolds rd.

 

[su5ie]

HR is the best witness in my opinion. he seen a couple outside 37 shorrolds rd at 1pm, and this lines up perfect with SL diary entry. he also gave MG this info only hours later on the same day. HR did add things on later, but iam convinced he seen SL and MR KIPPER that day outside 37 shorrolds rd.

Its states on page 8 in AS book will add screenshot I will just quote it here . MG rang Diane to ask her if she had seen suzy . DL asks him has he been to 37SR, he replies I have looked inside and outside 37SR. This very small detail in the book seems to get lost in the narrative and is glossed over or ignored by everyone but to me it clearly suggests he went into 37SR to see if suzy was in there...

Another thing I will note regarding HR'S witness statement . MG would have asked a loaded or leading question of Harry for example MG asks 'Did you happen to see a young woman a colleague of mine around lunchtime with a man viewing next door ? Already harry knows it was a woman and man ,He knows the woman was showing the man the house as a potential buyer and he knows a time frame so any questions from police later on is guided by this information. It is textbook leading the witness so whether he seen anything or not Harry now feels important and feels he can "help' which is prehaps why he embellished information later on .

 

[su5ie]

HR is the best witness in my opinion. he seen a couple outside 37 shorrolds rd at 1pm, and this lines up perfect with SL diary entry. he also gave MG this info only hours later on the same day. HR did add things on later, but iam convinced he seen SL and MR KIPPER that day outside 37 shorrolds rd.

A woman was observed at around 12.45 standing at the gate of 37 Shorrolds Road she seemed to be waiting on someone she was holding a piece of paper in her hand I have no doubt in my mind this is Suzy . This is an independent Witness. A woman was seen arguing with a man on Shorrolds Road beside a black or dark coloured BMW another independent witness .

HR in my mind was inserted into the case as a Witness because he spoke to MG before it was known to the wider public that suzy was missing . Whether or not what he says is true or not ,A good defence barrister would blow holes in his Witness testimony in court . The other Witness's on shorrolds Road came forward after the public appeal. A young spanish man named Jesus gives details to do up the second sketch and provided the information regarding a well dressed man , possible broken nose and possibly a former rugby type build he observed the man up close without the barrier of a net curtain. He also had to be somewhere at a certain time . The unemployed jeweller observed the man with a bottle of champagne so did a lady out on her own so we have four other witnesses on Shorrolds Road whom I would afford more credibility to than what has been afforded HR he has been proven unreliable and if it had come before the courts a judge would disregard the evidence because he lied

 

[WestLondoner]

The main problem I have with HR is his claim to have heard the door of 37SR slam and to have seen a couple leaving.

AFAIK there was no sign of SJL having been inside, however, and we'd certainly know if JC's prints had been found, so this detail feels like an embellishment. The lack of prints inside says they never went into the house and this is whether or not SJL had the keys.

When you factor in that ND disagreed strongly with the HR- sourced Kipper sketch and JI thought the face much thinner, and that ND wasn't sure whether he saw what he saw within 4 hours between noon and 4, and that MG looks a lot like Kipper and we know he was there by 4, then you start to wonder if all these witnesses saw the same person.

 

[lee sumner]

A woman was observed at around 12.45 standing at the gate of 37 Shorrolds Road she seemed to be waiting on someone she was holding a piece of paper in her hand I have no doubt in my mind this is Suzy . This is an independent Witness. A woman was seen arguing with a man on Shorrolds Road beside a black or dark coloured BMW another independent witness .

HR in my mind was inserted into the case as a Witness because he spoke to MG before it was known to the wider public that suzy was missing . Whether or not what he says is true or not ,A good defence barrister would blow holes in his Witness testimony in court . The other Witness's on shorrolds Road came forward after the public appeal. A young spanish man named Jesus gives details to do up the second sketch and provided the information regarding a well dressed man , possible broken nose and possibly a former rugby type build he observed the man up close without the barrier of a net curtain. He also had to be somewhere at a certain time . The unemployed jeweller observed the man with a bottle of champagne so did a lady out on her own so we have four other witnesses on Shorrolds Road whom I would afford more credibility to than what has been afforded HR he has been proven unreliable and if it had come before the courts a judge would disregard the evidence because he lied

i agree. SL would get there early to meet clients when she had a viewing, and this lines up perfect with ND statement.

 

[lee sumner]

i agree. SL would get there early to meet clients when she had a viewing, and this lines up perfect with ND statement.

HR told MG the same day before MG even reported suzy missing. the couple he observed had to have been SL and mr kipper. remember occams razor. dont complicate the events that day like DV does in his book.

 

[lee sumner]

Its states on page 8 in AS book will add screenshot I will just quote it here . MG rang Diane to ask her if she had seen suzy . DL asks him has he been to 37SR, he replies I have looked inside and outside 37SR. This very small detail in the book seems to get lost in the narrative and is glossed over or ignored by everyone but to me it clearly suggests he went into 37SR to see if suzy was in there...

Another thing I will note regarding HR'S witness statement . MG would have asked a loaded or leading question of Harry for example MG asks 'Did you happen to see a young woman a colleague of mine around lunchtime with a man viewing next door ? Already harry knows it was a woman and man ,He knows the woman was showing the man the house as a potential buyer and he knows a time frame so any questions from police later on is guided by this information. It is textbook leading the witness so whether he seen anything or not Harry now feels important and feels he can "help' which is prehaps why he embellished information later on .

View attachment 530017

or HR could have seen MG looking through the window at 37 shorrolds rd. HR comes out of his house next door and says to MG, are you looking for a couple, to which MG replies, yes, then HR gives him the info about the couple outside at 1pm. remember SL also wrote down O/S in her diary, which means she intents to meet mr kipper outside 37 shorrolds rd.

 

[su5ie]

HR told MG the same day before MG even reported suzy missing. the couple he observed had to have been SL and mr kipper. remember occams razor. dont complicate the events that day like DV does in his book.

While I agree to the extent of keeping things simple .This case was complicated way before any of us took a look . I believe the devil is in the smaller details. HR may be right and while i do believe he seen a couple outside 37 and may have approached MG without having being asked he also embellished his statement within hours , his claim of hearing the door slam I feel is also an embellishment . I merely stated I would rely on the other witness statements and the photofit from Jesus the Spanish student over HRs Those statements still place suzy and a dark haired man at Shorrolds so I'm not disputing that

I haven't read DVs book as I wanted to look at the narrative from 1986 to 1988 first and specifically articles before Cannan was a suspect.

In all the photos of Cannan available on MSM from his younger years up until his court appearance for Shirley Banks murder I have never seen a photo of him with his hair slicked back .

 

[Cherwell]

or HR could have seen MG looking through the window at 37 shorrolds rd. HR comes out of his house next door and says to MG, are you looking for a couple, to which MG replies, yes, then HR gives him the info about the couple outside at 1pm. remember SL also wrote down O/S in her diary, which means she intents to meet mr kipper outside 37 shorrolds rd.

Why ever would he approach MG and assume he was looking for "a couple"?
The house was for sale, so it would have been more likely that someone looking through the window was interested in it. There's nothing to suggest any connection with two people who (according to witnesses) behaved like people viewing the property.

 

[lee sumner]

While I agree to the extent of keeping things simple .This case was complicated way before any of us took a look . I believe the devil is in the smaller details. HR may be right and while i do believe he seen a couple outside 37 and may have approached MG without having being asked he also embellished his statement within hours , his claim of hearing the door slam I feel is also an embellishment . I merely stated I would rely on the other witness statements and the photofit from Jesus the Spanish student over HRs Those statements still place suzy and a dark haired man at Shorrolds so I'm not disputing that

I haven't read DVs book as I wanted to look at the narrative from 1986 to 1988 first and specifically articles before Cannan was a suspect.

In all the photos of Cannan available on MSM from his younger years up until his court appearance for Shirley Banks murder I have never seen a photo of him with his hair slicked back .

that is what i like about AS book. it does not even mention JC, and was written in the late 1980s, the time frame your interested in.

 

[lee sumner]

Why ever would he approach MG and assume he was looking for "a couple"?
The house was for sale, so it would have been more likely that someone looking through the window was interested in it. There's nothing to suggest any connection with two people who (according to witnesses) behaved like people viewing the property.

the only way we would know how events played out that between HR and MG would to see the original case files, then we would know what was said between HR and MG regarding the couple seen outside.