UK UK - Claudia Lawrence, 35, Chef, York University, 18 March 2009 #19

[Nikynoo]

Actually it seems somehow odd to me, that we since 2009 only are connecting old married men to Claudia, when she had daily contact with so many male (female) students. She was at the time from head to toe a very attractive young woman, chic, well-groomed and fashionable, who was seen by many people. Claudia herself may have had a soft spot for older, married men for unknown reasons, but that doesn't mean, that young men didn't have a soft spot for her. I would have no explanation at all, if it didn't happen. Why do you and I focus on these older men all the time? Just rhetorical.

Because we have been directed that way. I do not believe it was any of these 'old' men.

 

[jackal67]

Actually it seems somehow odd to me, that we since 2009 only are connecting old married men to Claudia, when she had daily contact with so many male (female) students. She was at the time from head to toe a very attractive young woman, chic, well-groomed and fashionable, who was seen by many people. Claudia herself may have had a soft spot for older, married men for unknown reasons, but that doesn't mean, that young men didn't have a soft spot for her. I would have no explanation at all, if it didn't happen. Why do you and I focus on these older men all the time? Just rhetorical.

I guess its because these men were arrested ,The police had evidence on them but not enough to take them to trial.

 

[Popejohn3]

saint Patrick day today …did she plan to go celebrate ? Is there a green dress missing from her wardrobe

 

[imstilla.grandma]

“As we have stated many times, the barrier to unlocking the answers for Claudia’s loved ones are the people who know or may suspect what happened to Claudia.

“There may be many reasons as to why they have been unable to come forward, and I repeat our plea to them after 16 years of living with this knowledge and seeing the pain Claudia’s loved ones have gone through, to please do the right thing and make a report.

“It is never too late to come forward.”

Claudia Lawrence: Police still 'committed' to justice 16 years on

Police investigating the disappearance of Claudia Lawrence have said they are atill committed to getting answers for her family on the 16th anniversary of her last being seen.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk

 

[FromGermany1]

I guess its because these men were arrested ,The police had evidence on them but not enough to take them to trial.

The one with a wife and 5 children; Claudia allegedly hanging out in his area the last weeks of her presence on earth ........ always a bit suspect to me until today. MOO

 

[davidt]

“As we have stated many times, the barrier to unlocking the answers for Claudia’s loved ones are the people who know or may suspect what happened to Claudia.

“There may be many reasons as to why they have been unable to come forward, and I repeat our plea to them after 16 years of living with this knowledge and seeing the pain Claudia’s loved ones have gone through, to please do the right thing and make a report.

“It is never too late to come forward.”

Claudia Lawrence: Police still 'committed' to justice 16 years on

Police investigating the disappearance of Claudia Lawrence have said they are atill committed to getting answers for her family on the 16th anniversary of her last being seen.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk

I suspect that's probably true.

There's many reasons why probably people haven't come forward. I know its hard to know the truth from the vast amount that's been written about CLs personal life. From what the police have said I think its true to say she had a complex private life which did involve relationships with married/attached men.

I can well see such men not coming forward as it might cause huge family problems and also if they are well known locally or have jobs of importance or reputations etc and so on.

Also some of CLs relationships may have been with those of a less than honest disposition. Those people definitely are not coming forward. Its also an area that CL could put herself in danger with if she was having relationships with such individuals.

There may also be others not involved who have some information but won't come forward out of fear. Would they be confident they wouldn't come to harm if local "gangsters" were involved.

 

[Alpha Zero]

I don’t understand this wall of silence thing, there must be hundreds of people who now genuinely know what happened to her, if not thousands. That includes police officers investigating the case, detectives, the perpetrators who did it, their friends and locals.

<modsnip - not an approved source>

 

[Nikynoo]

What makes you think it wasn’t these men? These men have also had past history of crime as well…..quite a lot of it. They aren’t squeaky clean like people pretend they are

What makes you think it was? Tunnel visioned investigations rarely produce results.

 

[Mrs Marple]

They took it to the CPS regarding 4 individuals, I have friends in the Police who have told me that things don’t go to the CPS unless they are almost certain

It needs to meet the threshold in order for the CPS to review it and decide if there is enough evidence. If the police were always certain, the CPS would not have a regulating role and the authority to decline taking it to prosecution. The police could have taken this action as scare tactics to make someone talk before someone else did.

On PL and JL not speaking. I take it many of you have not had acrimonious divorces. We have no idea how they treated each other but vindictive behaviour can arise if one party feels wronged, and repeated vindictive behaviour would prevent someone from ever speaking to someone else. Or some other boundary being crossed, potentially repeatedly, for one party to decide they weren't going to speak to them again. Would it have made much difference if they had sat in the same press conference? I doubt it. I think too much emphasis is put on this element.

 

[FromGermany1]

It needs to meet the threshold in order for the CPS to review it and decide if there is enough evidence. If the police were always certain, the CPS would not have a regulating role and the authority to decline taking it to prosecution. The police could have taken this action as scare tactics to make someone talk before someone else did.

On PL and JL not speaking. I take it many of you have not had acrimonious divorces. We have no idea how they treated each other but vindictive behaviour can arise if one party feels wronged, and repeated vindictive behaviour would prevent someone from ever speaking to someone else. Or some other boundary being crossed, potentially repeatedly, for one party to decide they weren't going to speak to them again. Would it have made much difference if they had sat in the same press conference? I doubt it. I think too much emphasis is put on this element.

The remarkable thing is, IMO, that Claudia's parents weren't on good terms with each other and didn't even speak, when their daughter became missing for years, BUT that Claudia had a close relationship with both, Joan and Peter. That's rare, I believe.
I would like to know, if Claudia's sister had the same close relationshipt to both parents.

 

[Nikynoo]

They took it to the CPS regarding 4 individuals, I have friends in the Police who have told me that things don’t go to the CPS unless they are almost certain

For a charge of murder (or any serious charge) CPS always review the case. My take on the actions taken by the police was to check that they hadn't missed anything in their evidence - my thinking at the time was, it was more to exclude those arrested, than charge them.

Any evidence gathered would be reviewed by the CPS. In this case, IMO, all the evidence was circumstantial evidence and there was not enough of that circumstantial evidence to get a conviction. Also, IMO, that means that there was no direct evidence linking any of the suspects to Claudia's disappearance.

 

[dalsglen]

For a charge of murder (or any serious charge) CPS always review the case. My take on the actions taken by the police was to check that they hadn't missed anything in their evidence - my thinking at the time was, it was more to exclude those arrested, than charge them.

No doubt we've all watched the police programmes whereby they are in constant touch with CPS/procurator fiscal on whether they have enough to move forward or not.

I'd be really keen to hear your opinions on the guilty party(ies) and the why, not a comment for this the thread though!

Not related to your posts but I genuinely think I grew a few more frown lines with the chucking Peter under the bus posts. If it wasn't for him, most people wouldn't give a single thought to Claudia.

 

[Nikynoo]

Interesting isn’t it , and almost laughably coincidental that a POIs company had planning permission accepted, granted, and construction was under way around the exact same time claudia went missing

https://edemocracy.northyorks.gov.uk/Data/Ryedale%20-%20Planning%20Committee/200910271800/Agenda/5-design%20and%20access%20statement.pdf

She went missing in March 2009, this application is five months later.

 

[RCYWW]

Because we have been directed that way. I do not believe it was any of these 'old' men.

They weren’t really old men though and the liked to go out and had money to spend she probably (not suggesting in a disrespectful way) enjoyed the attention … they are now old … women and men in the 35-50 age ranges wouldn’t have a problem sleeping with each other or dating or one off’s after a drink just look around work places pubs nights out in town Christmas party’s it happens all the time .. old bosses chasing younger workers or receptionists … even if married and vice verser it’s not abnormal

 

[Nikynoo]

Remind me, have we ever done a timeline on this case?

ETA - initial one here

 

[Nikynoo]

Just listening to this on YT

I never realised that Joan had never been to Claudias house. According to this, they always met in public places. I wonder why? (from 13 minutes onwards)

There was also mention that the geolocation of her phone from the night before Claudia went missing has been withheld by the police? Does anyone think this is the case? To my mind, withholding this information has misled the messaging given to the public.

 

[RCYWW]

Just listening to this on YT

I never realised that Joan had never been to Claudias house. According to this, they always met in public places. I wonder why? (from 13 minutes onwards)

There was also mention that the geolocation of her phone from the night before Claudia went missing has been withheld by the police? Does anyone think this is the case? To my mind, withholding this information has misled the messaging given to the public.

She did used to go to her house and I’m sure Joan went there for 2008 Christmas Day

 

[Alpha Zero]

It’s amazing how everyone in York knows what went on yet the people who have done this roam free.

 

[ABC987]

She went missing in March 2009, this application is five months later.

My initial conclusion was the same as yours but then I read the application and in Section 3. Introduction, third last paragraph, it states :-

The potential of this site was emphasised by the planning approval given on the adjoining site,
dated 25 February 2009, App. No. 08/01065/MFUL at Plot 4 Hertford Way, York Road Industrial Estate. Building work has now started on this site as pictured in the photograph on the front cover.

So there was an open site, approved for construction from late February 2009, adjacent to the property that was owned by the POI. That's three weeks before the disappearance/death of CL. Did the NY police ever look there ???

 

[Konstantin]

She did used to go to her house and I’m sure Joan went there for 2008 Christmas Day

Yes of course she went to the house! Joan was the one who thought that the house was too tidy.