- Joined
- Aug 30, 2021
- Messages
- 599
- Reaction score
- 2,108
They may have told parents but not necessarily the public. Why would they.If that is so surly the police would tell the other person and or his her partner that the phones were close together ??
They may have told parents but not necessarily the public. Why would they.If that is so surly the police would tell the other person and or his her partner that the phones were close together ??
Can I just say I think you have the wrong word and it borders upon indifference by JK And SC - especially SC - I put the full weight of Claudias father going to his grave without closure on SC’s shoulders!IMO Local Involvement and POI's plus friends know. I suspect there was a disagreement re county lines drugs and Claudia got in the way.
It is totally unacceptable for Ruanes, Cooper and Robinson to stay silent and say no comment (Already Named POIs in Media already so no breach of rules)
However, I do think that lack of comment from JK and SC, her "Best Friends" borders on Ambivolence.
NYP have not ruled Campbell out - ss has a solid alibi. Campbell admitted to passing York. Why did he pass York - wasn’t there a faster alternative route?.If that is so surly the police would tell the other person and or his her partner that the phones were close together ??
If that is so surly the police would tell the other person and or his her partner that the phones were close together ?
How could they do that? They would be in breach of data protection. The police have to be very careful when it comes to disclosure, apart from anything else it could impede a trialIf that is so surly the police would tell the other person and or his her partner that the phones were close together ??
Yes-Indiference works for me.Can I just say I think you have the wrong word and it borders upon indifference by JK And SC - especially SC - I put the full weight of Claudias father going to his grave without closure on SC’s shoulders!
What I mean is like we know your husbands phone was feet away from Claudia’s!They may have told parents but not necessarily the public. Why would they.
What I mean is like we know your husbands phone was feet away from Claudia’s!They may have told parents but not necessarily the public. Why would they.
What I mean is like we know your husbands phone was feet away from Claudia’s!They may have told parents but not necessarily the public. Why would they.
What I mean is like we know your husbands phone was feet away from Claudia’s!They may have told parents but not necessarily the public. Why would they.
Some of MSM are inaccurate re the texting part. One newspaper says she was texting Steve Samons as one of her final texts about coming to Cyprus and being unaffordable.Found a bit about RC’s trip to collect 4 vans
He says he was crossing to Italy when she disappeared - wonder if this was when she was reported missing or when she failed to show at work
Missing Claudia Lawrence did not come to Cyprus 4 years ago, insist pals | UK | News | Express.co.uk
MISSING chef Claudia Lawrence was planning to start a new life in Cyprus before she vanished almost four years ago, we reveal today.www.express.co.uk
It could depend on the timings ferry etc - he went to Italy first and then across to Cyprus according to the link aboveSome of MSM are inaccurate re the texting part. One newspaper says she was texting Steve Samons as one of her final texts about coming to Cyprus and being unaffordable.
Express are saying that text was to Robbie Blake.
This is why I believe that we shouldn't put too much weight behind MSM.
We are told that Samons has a cast iron alibi but was he friends with Blake and did the Alibi mean anything.
Samons was also good friends with Landlord at Nags George Foreman.
If Blake was passing York, would he not stop by toes his old friend Claudia and pop in to see George at Nags?
Im not sure if I’d ask a question in that phrase. You could ask - can you tell me what time your husband came in from work on the 18th March 2009?, what did you have for tea?What I mean is like we know your husbands phone was feet away from Claudia’s!
Can you give us an explanation for this ?
yes, you've clarified the. most likely scenario for meI have always felt that she was shielding someone.
The person who was seen at her door a few afternoons before with the fringe when she looked shocked at his arrival and looked both ways before ushering him in.
Was this someone from Cyprus, SS?
Was RB who drove from Glasgow with fleet of vans that he was taking to Cypruse via Europe involved?
He said that on the way from Glasgow to the port, he passed York but didn't stop.
Did he stop, what happened and was Claudia taken
Was she staying away from nags because she was with him each evening
IMO
Hi Cortina, hope you’re having a nice weekend! What evidence do you have that it wasn’t planned? Thank youyes, you've clarified the. most likely scenario for me
ive always felt the sighting at. the. door to. be key...for her to be shocked etc would mean for me. someone. who was unwelcome in the. local community....ive never really bought the theory that a man was jealous enough of Claudia seeing someone else to attack either of them...you could say that. unfortunately I don't. think any man took Claudia seriously enough..and, if it. was someone. else boyfriend. or husband the only risk would be their wife or girlfriend knowing and. if they lived near enough to Claudia to see him arriving, then they'd have either seen him in that pinpoint of time or not...and I don't really believe in a planned attack. on that basis.
thanks
Exactly this. A competent investigating officer, interviewing a POI or someone close to the case, wouldn't disclose crucial information in a way that could let a suspect off the hook.Im not sure if I’d ask a question in that phrase. You could ask - can you tell me what time your husband came in from work on the 18th March 2009?, what did you have for tea?
Thought provoking for sure, it’s a confusing couple of images. I see (and this is my opinion) a man in both morning and night on his own. I have put the footage under the microscope of Adobe - there’s only 1 person and whilst there are times as stills it looks feminine - when you look at the moving image as whole it’s a man - the same man. A man in his fifties - is a fair description. It’s not JK. Though it wouldn’t surprise me to learn she was present when whatever happened, HappenedI have created composites of the 'movement' in the footage and pointed out what I see from studying figure movement and shadows. I see something more complex than simply a person walking to an alley and back. On the return-journey one frame/one suspect caught my eye. I'm only saying what I see and deduce.
Well by not disclosing some info looks like they let him off any way !Exactly this. A competent investigating officer, interviewing a POI or someone close to the case, wouldn't disclose crucial information in a way that could let a suspect off the hook.