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

[jackal67]

I agree with Alpha Zero. The fact that the CPS don't agree to charging someone doesn't mean that evidence would be laughed out of court: it just means that the CPS don't think it strong enough. As I previously said, you only get one chance to prosecute someone (unless, exceptionally, very powerful new evidence becomes available later).

I also think that Claudia was abducted the evening before she failed to turn up to work. Again, I think that Nag's Head customers are, at least, involved. Of course, Nag's Head people, questioned by police will be critical of the police.

Whoever is responsible seems to have had the means to make Claudia's body disappear and stay disappeared, which I think makes a random nutcase less likely. Random nutcases are also unlikely to be roaming about early in the morning and, in Claudia's case, the random nutcase would have needed a vehicle.

Police have commented that it is very unusual for a women to be abducted from the street.

I think it more likely that Claudia left her home, willingly or unwillingly, the evening before she failed to turn up at work, giving the murderer(s) plenty of time to do what he (or they) did before the alarm was raised.

I agree absolutely. If she was abducted/murdered on the way to work how did the killer get her to enter their car. Even if she did enter how did the killer keep her quiet and restrained in the car. ? If she was murdered on the street what did the killer do with her body?

 

[JimmyDurham]

I agree absolutely. If she was abducted/murdered on the way to work how did the killer get her to enter their car. Even if she did enter how did the killer keep her quiet and restrained in the car. ? If she was murdered on the street what did the killer do with her body?

It is well documented, based upon known murderers/murders, that such men use a ruse and some of the time it works. They don't simply rush and grab a woman.

There are countless examples of men getting women into a car. It happens, no matter how much we find it hard to fathom.

 

[jackal67]

It is well documented, based upon known murderers/murders, that such men use a ruse and some of the time it works. They don't simply rush and grab a woman.

There are countless examples of men getting women into a car. It happens, no matter how much we find it hard to fathom.

Well I dont think it is common unless like Sarah Everard the person pretended to be police. I think any woman would shout and scream try to draw attention to herself and try to get out of the car. Not just sit there meekly accepting her fate.
It would be daylight quite quickly and plenty of people about too.
Also there is no evidence that Claudia left her house that morning and walked to work
It is far more likely that she was taken the night before in my opinion

 

[jackal67]

It is well documented, based upon known murderers/murders, that such men use a ruse and some of the time it works. They don't simply rush and grab a woman.

There are countless examples of men getting women into a car. It happens, no matter how much we find it hard to fathom.

Can you give me some of those example ?

 

[JimmyDurham]

Well I dont think it is common

Agreed, it's not common, but it certainly does happen. A quick google will inform you of plenty of cases of men who managed to get a woman in a car before rape and/or murder.

As said, it is known that they use a ruse to minimise noise and resistance, and some of the time it works.

Also there is no evidence that Claudia left her house that morning and walked to work

This isn't a fair summation of the situation.

There is no direct evidence that Claudia did or didn't leave for work that morning, but we do know that Claudia left behind the things she didn't need for work, crucially her jewelry, and took the things she did need for work. That is the best piece of information we have to build a morning/night case upon.

 

[JimmyDurham]

Can you give me some of those example ?

Of what: ruse or getting into a car?

 

[jackal67]

Of what: ruse or getting into a car?

Well either

Agreed, it's not common, but it certainly does happen. A quick google will inform you of plenty of cases of men who managed to get a woman in a car before rape and/or murder.

As said, it is known that they use a ruse to minimise noise and resistance, and some of the time it works.



This isn't a fair summation of the situation.

There is no direct evidence that Claudia did or didn't leave for work that morning, but we do know that Claudia left behind the things she didn't need for work, crucially her jewelry, and took the things she did need for work. That is the best piece of information we have to build a morning/night case upon.

We know her work rucksack was missing ,she probably had it prepacked ready for the morning. The rucksack being missing doesnt prove she left for work though. She may have gone out to meet someone and intended to stay the night and therefore took it with her. Or the person/s who took here may have taken the rucksack to make it look like she had gone to work in the morning
I dont see the significance of jewelery being left behind either?

 

[jackal67]

Of what: ruse or getting into a car?

Either. I find it unlikely unless Claudia knew the person. She was not a young naive teenager and feel sure she wouldnt get into a strangers car

 

[JimmyDurham]

Well either

Google it. It's all over the internet, from Ted Bundy to that Gary Ridgeway.

Look at someone such as Peter Sutcliffe. One of his victims is on record as stating she was approached by him, walked alongside him for a good few yards and didn't imagine she was in danger at all. Sutcliffe disarmed her by adopting a certain tone and utilising certain diction.

I wouldn't assume that women (or men for that matter) automatically know the danger they're in. We know the danger in relation to murdered women because we have the benefit of hindsight, but victims don't always know at the time until it's too late.

She may have gone out to meet someone and intended to stay the night and therefore took it with her.

Without wearing her jewelry? For women, it's a form of self-expression. Highly unlikely that a woman meets a suitor without her jewelry.

Or the person/s who took here may have taken the rucksack to make it look like she had gone to work in the morning

Sounds like Poirot as opposed to the real world, and why was there no sign nor evidence of a struggle in Claudia's home?

 

[jackal67]

As a woman I can assure you that women dont feel the need to wear jewellry everytime they go out. Especially if you are staying over and have work the next day. In the 1950s maybe not in this day and age!!
Or if she was taken from her own house again the jewellry is not relevant
Like Poirot ? Not at all if you have abducted/ murdered someone you would go to great lengths to clean up stage a scene to evade detection. ?
Most random stranger murders the body is almost always found .
In my opinion the person/persons who murdered Claudia were very careful and thorough hence the lack of evidence
In my theory she was taken from the house and along the back alleyway behind her house and connected to the NH car park. Put into a car and then disposed of. Simple and easy no witnesses .
Probably car crushed at a scrap yard with Claudia inside it. I believe one of the NH regulars owned a scrap yard
All my own opinion of course.

 

[Professor Moriarty]

As a woman I can assure you that women dont feel the need to wear jewellry everytime they go out. Especially if you are staying over and have work the next day. In the 1950s maybe not in this day and age!!
Or if she was taken from her own house again the jewellry is not relevant
Like Poirot ? Not at all if you have abducted/ murdered someone you would go to great lengths to clean up stage a scene to evade detection. ?
Most random stranger murders the body is almost always found .
In my opinion the person/persons who murdered Claudia were very careful and thorough hence the lack of evidence
In my theory she was taken from the house and along the back alleyway behind her house and connected to the NH car park. Put into a car and then disposed of. Simple and easy no witnesses .
Probably car crushed at a scrap yard with Claudia inside it. I believe one of the NH regulars owned a scrap yard
All my own opinion of course.

I also think that something like this happened. But there was possibly no need to crush a car. If you have a van, or pick up, it is much easier. The back of a van can be hosed out. A body could be wrapped in a carpet or something similar, put in the back of a van, or pick up, and the body is buried on the Yorkshire Moors. A quick hose down of the van, or pick up, afterwards and there is no forensic evidence left.

 

[JimmyDurham]

As a woman I can assure you that women dont feel the need to wear jewellry everytime they go out.

We're not talking about "every time they go out", rather when they go to meet a suitor.

By the way, I'm not suggesting this is exclusively a female thing. I've only ever worn a watch (in terms of jewelry). Decent watches of decent quality. Would I wear it to bake cakes? 'Course not. Would I wear it to meet a woman. Of course. It's an expression of who I am. Born and bred in a mining village in County Durham which to me means nothing extravagant such as jewelry all over the show but if you're going to wear something then do it properly with decent quality. I come from a modest but proud and smart family.

You can be as sure as that in the event Claudia went to meet a man that night then she would have been wearing her jewelry to tell him the person she was.

 

[FromGermany1]

As a woman I can assure you that women dont feel the need to wear jewellry everytime they go out. Especially if you are staying over and have work the next day. In the 1950s maybe not in this day and age!!
Or if she was taken from her own house again the jewellry is not relevant
Like Poirot ? Not at all if you have abducted/ murdered someone you would go to great lengths to clean up stage a scene to evade detection. ?
Most random stranger murders the body is almost always found .
In my opinion the person/persons who murdered Claudia were very careful and thorough hence the lack of evidence
In my theory she was taken from the house and along the back alleyway behind her house and connected to the NH car park. Put into a car and then disposed of. Simple and easy no witnesses .
Probably car crushed at a scrap yard with Claudia inside it. I believe one of the NH regulars owned a scrap yard
All my own opinion of course.

bbm
Something like this makes sense, especially when between leaving her home and being put into a car there was possibly "a little event" in one of the NH hotel rooms. Not for nothing LE searched a room and took a matress from there, as far as I remember. IMO

 

[jackal67]

bbm
Something like this makes sense, especially when between leaving her home and being put into a car there was possibly "a little event" in one of the NH hotel rooms. Not for nothing LE searched a room and took a matress from there, as far as I remember. IMO

Yes thats right and the rooms could be accessed from the NH car park by an external staircase.
No CCTV in the car park either. If I recall the police didnt search the alleyway at all until much later on in the Investigation?

 

[jackal67]

We're not talking about "every time they go out", rather when they go to meet a suitor.

By the way, I'm not suggesting this is exclusively a female thing. I've only ever worn a watch (in terms of jewelry). Decent watches of decent quality. Would I wear it to bake cakes? 'Course not. Would I wear it to meet a woman. Of course. It's an expression of who I am. Born and bred in a mining village in County Durham which to me means nothing extravagant such as jewelry all over the show but if you're going to wear something then do it properly with decent quality. I come from a modest but proud and smart family.

You can be as sure as that in the event Claudia went to meet a man that night then she would have been wearing her jewelry to tell him the person she was.

Sorry but I completely disagree. Unless you know Claudia and the type of person she was how can you be sure she would put jewelry on to meet a man. That seems extremely old fashioned IMO
She was a young woman who by all accounts had many nights out and met up with many men. There is no evidence that she had a special suitor to impress . More likely she was taken from her home or she had a secret meet up with someone that went badly.
The jewelry is proof of nothing JMO

 

[JimmyDurham]

Unless you know Claudia and the type of person she was how can you be sure she would put jewelry on to meet a man. That seems extremely old fashioned IMO

You could apply that reasoning to any aspect of this case, i.e. we didn't know Claudia therefore everything we say is meaningless and pointless.

On the other hand, a general picture of the known actions of human beings gives an indication of how Claudia may have acted. Cannot be proven, but it gives an idea.

There is nothing old fashioned about a woman wearing her jewelry on a date while not wearing it at work. It's not exclusive to women either. Jewelry/watch is a form of self-expression, for both women and men, as is the clothes we wear. Both say a lot about the individual, whether consciously or otherwise.

Although this won't apply to everyone, given that a general rule never does, you will find there are very few women who buy jewelry and do not wear it when they go to see a suitor, and that being the case it is probable that Claudia left her jewelry behind because she had no intention of meeting a man when she left her front door.

She was a young woman who by all accounts had many nights out and met up with many men.

Not by all accounts at all; not by a long chalk. I hope you don't mind me borrowing your argument style: "we don't know Claudia therefore we cannot say". Actually, the people who reported these so-called "many men" didn't know Claudia at all, whereas the people who did know Claudia well, i.e. her family and her close mates, did not recognise the "many men" version of Claudia that was plastered all over the newspapers.

More likely she was taken from her home

All sorts of mental acrobatics has to take place to make this work. Look outs, cover ups, clean up operations, braking cars, people wearing a mac knocking on the door in the morning, bodies being ferried around in the middle of the night: all sorts of things going on there.

Statistically, it's very unlikely. Feel free to post similar incidents. We do know that women are abducted on the street while walking alone in the dark, however. We know this because Crimewatch was full of such incidents.

The jewelry is proof of nothing JMO

It's not proof, no, but it does suggest that Claudia left for work that morning (for the reasons mentioned above).

 

[Alpha Zero]

Apologies for the long post, It’s always interesting to see what other peoples opinions are of this case. What I will say is that there seems to be ( at least to me ) far too many coincidences for me to say this is just a random attack or someone unknown to Claudia that’s done this. All my own opinions below:

A lot of people don’t believe the Nags 4 theory which is fair enough, but what speaks volumes to me is her avoidance of the Nags prior to her dissapearance. She has a pub , what, not even a 2 minute walk away? Yet she went to pubs in Acomb way out of her usual reach. Obviously she drank in these areas before, but an event that happened at the Nags clearly scared her enough to stay away and venture further out.

I read there was a potential altercation or argument between Claudia and one of the 4 suspects in the pub itself, possibly on the 13th? Which if I remember correctly would be the Cheltenham cup. Now if this was the case, the pub would be busy, lots of witnesses and lots of eyes and ears. So why has nobody come forward, I imagine her friends SC and JK were there ? Then she disappears on the 18th.

I personally believe something was said that either grassed someone up, or something damaging enough to cause serious concern for parties involved. It was mentioned that she could have said something and that 2 main people were involved with accessories who helped, who decided enough was enough and took care of things , the main suspects both related to one another.

A lot also ask why her friend SC never knocked on her door when she never turned up, does anyone think she could have been threatened to stay away? Or intimidated ?

I also ask why so many people in the area of York seem to know what happened , or speak about it so often, yet are terrified of saying anything, all gossip of course but a lot will genuinely know what happened to her, this is not an act of a random stranger who kidnapped Claudia…for me this is a calculated and well planned operation by an outfit who have the equipment ( lots of equipment the general public wouldn’t have access to ) and connections to remove her without leaving many clues behind, and possibly the money to keep people silent or to look the other way. Money does come into play in this surely.

I think this is a planned operation, but a lot also say it’s a cover up, a cover up for what I don’t know, but it’s also worth thinking that so many things have seemingly worked out so well for the people who did this that it’s almost “ too perfect” in terms of the crime.
No body, no real DNA evidence and the only DNA that’s been taken is not related to any of the main suspects.

I think this case gets solved but only when the people involved aren’t here anymore and people can talk freely because they are no longer fearful

 

[jackal67]

You could apply that reasoning to any aspect of this case, i.e. we didn't know Claudia therefore everything we say is meaningless and pointless.

On the other hand, a general picture of the known actions of human beings gives an indication of how Claudia may have acted. Cannot be proven, but it gives an idea.

There is nothing old fashioned about a woman wearing her jewelry on a date while not wearing it at work. It's not exclusive to women either. Jewelry/watch is a form of self-expression, for both women and men, as is the clothes we wear. Both say a lot about the individual, whether consciously or otherwise.

Although this won't apply to everyone, given that a general rule never does, you will find there are very few women who buy jewelry and do not wear it when they go to see a suitor, and that being the case it is probable that Claudia left her jewelry behind because she had no intention of meeting a man when she left her front door.



Not by all accounts at all; not by a long chalk. I hope you don't mind me borrowing your argument style: "we don't know Claudia therefore we cannot say". Actually, the people who reported these so-called "many men" didn't know Claudia at all, whereas the people who did know Claudia well, i.e. her family and her close mates, did not recognise the "many men" version of Claudia that was plastered all over the newspapers.



All sorts of mental acrobatics has to take place to make this work. Look outs, cover ups, clean up operations, braking cars, people wearing a mac knocking on the door in the morning, bodies being ferried around in the middle of the night: all sorts of things going on there.

Statistically, it's very unlikely. Feel free to post similar incidents. We do know that women are abducted on the street while walking alone in the dark, however. We know this because Crimewatch was full of such incidents.



It's not proof, no, but it does suggest that Claudia left for work that morning (for the reasons mentioned above).

So in a nutshell your opinion Claudia left her jewelry at home so that equals she left to go to work in the morning?
We all have our own theories here of course.
In my opinion she didnt go to work in the morning whatever happened took place the night before that doesnt mean that involved multiple people though it could be just one person or several
it could have been an accident and was covered up too.
In the absence of any real evidence anything could have happened

 

[Professor Moriarty]

You could apply that reasoning to any aspect of this case, i.e. we didn't know Claudia therefore everything we say is meaningless and pointless.

On the other hand, a general picture of the known actions of human beings gives an indication of how Claudia may have acted. Cannot be proven, but it gives an idea.

There is nothing old fashioned about a woman wearing her jewelry on a date while not wearing it at work. It's not exclusive to women either. Jewelry/watch is a form of self-expression, for both women and men, as is the clothes we wear. Both say a lot about the individual, whether consciously or otherwise.

Although this won't apply to everyone, given that a general rule never does, you will find there are very few women who buy jewelry and do not wear it when they go to see a suitor, and that being the case it is probable that Claudia left her jewelry behind because she had no intention of meeting a man when she left her front door.



Not by all accounts at all; not by a long chalk. I hope you don't mind me borrowing your argument style: "we don't know Claudia therefore we cannot say". Actually, the people who reported these so-called "many men" didn't know Claudia at all, whereas the people who did know Claudia well, i.e. her family and her close mates, did not recognise the "many men" version of Claudia that was plastered all over the newspapers.



All sorts of mental acrobatics has to take place to make this work. Look outs, cover ups, clean up operations, braking cars, people wearing a mac knocking on the door in the morning, bodies being ferried around in the middle of the night: all sorts of things going on there.

Statistically, it's very unlikely. Feel free to post similar incidents. We do know that women are abducted on the street while walking alone in the dark, however. We know this because Crimewatch was full of such incidents.



It's not proof, no, but it does suggest that Claudia left for work that morning (for the reasons mentioned above).

I don't know what these statistics are to which you often refer. However, there are many cases where women are killed at home and their bodies then disposed of. Several have occurred in Milton Keynes alone: just off the top of my head Natalie Hemming and Jo Benerley spring to mind. Outside of Milton Keynes, there was the famous case of Joanna Simpson, murdered by her BA captain husband, who buried her in a grave he had previously dug for her in a wood in Berkshire. In Lancashire Katie Kenton was also murdered by her partner at home and he also buried her in a pre prepared grave. There was the daughter of Bangladeshi parents somewhere in the North West who was killed by those parents for being too westernised and her body disposed of some distance away.

As I say, I am not aware of the statistics to which you refer, but there are many cases of women being murdered at home and their bodies being disposed of elsewhere.

It is hardly surprising that Claudia's relatives played down her relationships. It would be unlikely that Claudia would update her church going parents on affairs with married men. However, the police and the press were clear on this issue.

 

[JimmyDurham]

So in a nutshell your opinion Claudia left her jewelry at home so that equals she left to go to work in the morning?

Clearly not, there are a few factors that point towards Claudia leaving for work in the morning:

1) Claudia spoke to her Mam on the phone and told her she was going to bed at 9 to get up for work in the morning at 5. That was Claudia's intention. Anybody disputing this can only really argue that either her Mam was lying or Claudia was lying. I'm going to go with them telling the truth rather than one of these statistically highly improbable theories that require all sorts of mental acrobatics to make them work.

2) There was no sign of a struggle in Claudia's home.

3) There were no text messages on Claudia's phone to suggest she was meeting somebody that night.

4) Items missing from Claudia's home were those that she needed for work.

That's a simple but effective case for Claudia leaving for work that morning, and it is more likely than the alternative.