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

[Alpha Zero]

Im actually staring to question if this case will ever be solved in my lifetime, the amount of time that has elapsed suggests not.
Also, didn’t claudias house get broken into recently and items were taken? I’ve not heard anything else since that update as I saw it in the Daily Mail, so I guess it can’t be that significant or there would have been more updates ?

 

[Professor Moriarty]

Im actually staring to question if this case will ever be solved in my lifetime, the amount of time that has elapsed suggests not.
Also, didn’t claudias house get broken into recently and items were taken? I’ve not heard anything else since that update as I saw it in the Daily Mail, so I guess it can’t be that significant or there would have been more updates ?

I don't think it will be solved. To be solved, it would have to be in the lifetime(s) of the murder(s). Without fingerprints or DNA, it's hard to see how it could be solved after the death(s) of the murderer(s): they cannot be tried and there would be no conclusive evidence.

The murderer(s) have kept their nerve. Can anyone else give testimony against the murderer(s) that would be strong enough for a conviction? If anyone else knows who did it, how old is this person now?

 

[JimmyDurham]

At this juncture, it looks very much like the family need a miracle to enable Claudia's killer to serve justice.

How many people are convicted in the absence of a body? Not many. I've just looked at the statistics and it's pretty rare.

How many murderers are protected by somebody who knew he'd done it? Statistically unlikely. At a push, maybe a wife had suspicions based upon how he acted in the following days.

I can only see two scenarios whereby the killer serves justice:

1) The remains of Claudia's body are stumbled upon. Highly unlikely given it hasn't happened in 15 years.

2) This one is the best bet: the polis go back to the beginning. They focus on what is known/reasonable, e.g. probably left for work in the morning given the contents of Claudia's home. Who knew Claudia who is also known to have been in the area at the time when Claudia left for work that morning? What alibi was given? Where was that person going? Was it work? How did he act when he went into work? What statement did such people give at the time? Revisit those statements, anything sound off? Question them again. Maybe something will turn up on a revisit.

The only possibility I can see is that the answer and information was staring the polis in the face all along, the killer has been interviewed by the polis, the polis were satisfied with the answers to the questions but they shouldn't have been; they should have kept digging.

'Not saying that's what it is, but that's the only realistic prospect I can envisage.

 

[Nikynoo]

At this juncture, it looks very much like the family need a miracle to enable Claudia's killer to serve justice.

How many people are convicted in the absence of a body? Not many. I've just looked at the statistics and it's pretty rare.

How many murderers are protected by somebody who knew he'd done it? Statistically unlikely. At a push, maybe a wife had suspicions based upon how he acted in the following days.

I can only see two scenarios whereby the killer serves justice:

1) The remains of Claudia's body are stumbled upon. Highly unlikely given it hasn't happened in 15 years.

2) This one is the best bet: the polis go back to the beginning. They focus on what is known/reasonable, e.g. probably left for work in the morning given the contents of Claudia's home. Who knew Claudia who is also known to have been in the area at the time when Claudia left for work that morning? What alibi was given? Where was that person going? Was it work? How did he act when he went into work? What statement did such people give at the time? Revisit those statements, anything sound off? Question them again. Maybe something will turn up on a revisit.

The only possibility I can see is that the answer and information was staring the polis in the face all along, the killer has been interviewed by the polis, the polis were satisfied with the answers to the questions but they shouldn't have been; they should have kept digging.

'Not saying that's what it is, but that's the only realistic prospect I can envisage.

I agree. I would add, did that person arrive later than usual that morning?

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

As with most cases, I feel it's safe to assume the police know more than they've said publicly.

It was harder to pinpoint the location of mobile phones 16 years ago than it is today, but I think it's probable that LE know where Claudia's phone was located when she spoke to her mother, when she received the final texts, when the phone was shut off--and maybe even where it was in the missing time between the final texts and being switched off. Maybe not to the exact house, but to within a street or two.

They have always said her phone was turned off in the general area of Tang Hall/Melrosegate/Heworth. I've always suspected they have it narrowed down much more than that, but have never found any other convincing evidence to back up whatever suspicions they have.

 

[JimmyDurham]

I agree. I would add, did that person arrive later than usual that morning?

'Certainly a question I'd have asked as well as ensuring verification with no room for doubt.

Mind you, a lot can happen in three quarters of an hour. A 'lift to work' murderer wouldn't necessarily have been late for a 6 shift.

 

[JimmyDurham]

As with most cases, I feel it's safe to assume the police know more than they've said publicly.

It was harder to pinpoint the location of mobile phones 16 years ago than it is today, but I think it's probable that LE know where Claudia's phone was located when she spoke to her mother, when she received the final texts, when the phone was shut off--and maybe even where it was in the missing time between the final texts and being switched off. Maybe not to the exact house, but to within a street or two.

They have always said her phone was turned off in the general area of Tang Hall/Melrosegate/Heworth. I've always suspected they have it narrowed down much more than that, but have never found any other convincing evidence to back up whatever suspicions they have.

'Been a while since I read through the specifics of the mobile phone tracking, but I'm pretty sure that what you're suggesting wasn't possible due to the density of cell towers in the area and the mobile phone technology.

When Claudia's boss (by the way, has it ever been established whom Claudia's boss was?) rang her, Claudia's phone pinged off the nearest cell tower, which was near York University. That cell tower had a sector of 9 miles, i.e. anybody's mobile ringing in that 9 miles area, would ping off the cell tower near York University.

Likewise, other cell towers in the area would have had similar sectors.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

'Been a while since I read through the specifics of the mobile phone tracking, but I'm pretty sure that what you're suggesting wasn't possible due to the density of cell towers in the area and the mobile phone technology.

When Claudia's boss (by the way, has it ever been established whom Claudia's boss was?) rang her, Claudia's phone pinged off the nearest cell tower, which was near York University. That cell tower had a sector of 9 miles, i.e. anybody's mobile ringing in that 9 miles area, would ping off the cell tower near York University.

Likewise, other cell towers in the area would have had similar sectors.

You're probably right, but that would mean articles I've read have been at best misleading.

I've read numerous newspaper articles suggesting the phone was pinging from close to Claudia's home/the university. Her home is, after all, only about 1.5 miles from the university. The 9-mile arc of the cell tower does include her home, but also a huge area besides, including the whole of York city centre and massive areas of countryside and water.

If the police really haven't narrowed it down beyond the 9-mile cell tower sector, Claudia (and her phone) could have already been pretty far away on the morning of her disappearance.

I always had the impression they knew the phone was still close to home, but maybe not.

 

[sl77]

When you say they obviously had 'some evidence on the four', well, it clearly wasn't any evidence of any significance given that the CPS ruled: no realistic prospect of a conviction.

That's the reality. The CPS basically replied with: a defence lawyer would wipe the floor with what you have here, don't waste your time with this

No, it could be "significant" evidence but not enough for a successful prosecution.

If we were to see the evidence it'd probably be enough for a reasonable person to assume they are guilty.

However, it may not be enough to initiate court proceedings.

 

[Sam10098]

I think police know or suspect who did this and it’s someone she knew well, but don’t have enough evidence to prosecute (or don’t want to). Its disgusting how Claudia has been portrayed in the media as some kind of nymphomaniac man stealer so deserved it, and suggesting she would have gone home with any random man.

 

[JimmyDurham]

If we were to see the evidence it'd probably be enough for a reasonable person to assume they are guilty.

However, it may not be enough to initiate court proceedings.

You need to read about the CPS and their code of conduct.

What you've typed there is ridiculous.

 

[sl77]

You need to read about the CPS and their code of conduct.

What you've typed there is ridiculous.

Please elaborate. What exactly was "rediculous"?

 

[JimmyDurham]

If the police really haven't narrowed it down beyond the 9-mile cell tower sector, Claudia (and her phone) could have already been pretty far away on the morning of her disappearance.

Well, within 9 miles at 10 o'clock in the morning.

At this point, it'll be worth your while reading about cell towers and mobile technology in 2009.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

Well, within 9 miles at 10 o'clock in the morning.

At this point, it'll be worth your while reading about cell towers and mobile technology in 2009.

Why do you presume I haven't read about these things? I already said it was more difficult to track mobile phones 16 years ago than it is today, but things such as triangulation of cell towers were still possible in the absence of GPS.

There are only two likely possibilities IMO:

1. The police know nothing more than that Claudia's phone was within the 9-mile sector of the tower, which doesn't seem to be particularly helpful.
2. They have narrowed it down to a much smaller area (or even have connections to other towers) but don't want to talk about it for investigative reasons.

 

[JimmyDurham]

Please elaborate. What exactly was "rediculous"?

Because it's a contradiction in terms.

CPS are reasonable people. They threw out 'the evidence' due to having no realistic prospect of a conviction.

It follows that in the event this unseen 'evidence' was put before 'reasonable people', those people would not conclude that there is evidence of guilt.

What you're suggesting is a logical fallacy, and, quite frankly: ridiculous.

In the event you want to believe that there is some magic evidence somewhere that none of us have seen, then crack on, but what I can tell you is that the polis have not been able to get anybody into a court of law let alone secure a conviction. Now, that really should tell anyone the story, but some people simply are not reasonable and instead place their faith in magic, even when it's point blank staring them in the face that there is no magic evidence that the public haven't seen.

 

[JimmyDurham]

There are only two likely possibilities IMO:


2. They have narrowed it down to a much smaller area (or even have connections to other towers) but don't want to talk about it for investigative reasons.

It's not a 'likely possibility'. It is your opinion of course, and you're entitled to that, but some opinions are built upon much stronger foundations than others.

Everything we know about the cell towers in that area, the state of mobile phone technology in 2009, as well as polis disclosure; tells us that Claudia's mobile could not be "narrowed down to a much smaller area".

There's probably nothing more to say on this unless you can demonstrate otherwise.

 

[JimmyDurham]

I think police know

Not possible. They could only know in the event they had the evidence to prove it beyond reasonable doubt. They haven't been able to get a case into a court of law never mind secure a 'beyond reasonable doubt' conviction. That should tell anyone that they absolutely and unequivocally do not know.

or suspect

Probable. Without the evidence to prove it, it remains a theory however. The polis have been wrong many, many times before, and they do have form for continuing to bark up the wrong tree in the interests of self-promotion.

who did this and it’s someone she knew well

Possible. On the other hand, this could quite conceivably be a stranger. Abductions on the street are usually at the hands of strangers and the evidence of the contents of Claudia's home suggests she left for work that morning.

Its disgusting how Claudia has been portrayed in the media as some kind of nymphomaniac man stealer so deserved it, and suggesting she would have gone home with any random man.

Agree with this. Not only the media by the way, but also every waif and stray who has regurgitated this all over social media without bothering to check the facts. Absolutely shocking. That's somebody's daughter and sister. The internet is a cesspit of misinformation, confirmation bias, statements with no foundations and crowd pleasing.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

It's not a 'likely possibility'. It is your opinion of course, and you're entitled to that, but some opinions are built upon much stronger foundations than others.

Everything we know about the cell towers in that area, the state of mobile phone technology in 2009, as well as polis disclosure; tells us that Claudia's mobile could not be "narrowed down to a much smaller area".

There's probably nothing more to say on this unless you can demonstrate otherwise.

Respectfully, there's plenty more to say. Not least of which is the fact that I used to work as an IT administrator maintaining computer servers and all related connectivity. I have no interest in becoming "verified" so I will nonetheless say this is just my opinion.

In 2009 LE in the UK was more than capable of using cell tower triangulation to narrow down the location of a cell phone. A cell phone in 2009 may have only made a full connection to one tower at a time (in this case the University tower) but it would be pinging other nearby towers to check for a better/stronger/lower latency signal. Those pings would be recorded and could be used to narrow down the likely location. This was perfectly possible with 2G mobile technology in 2009.

A cell tower may cover an approximately 9-mile radius, but even in 2009 a city such as York would have had many more than just one cell tower to cover the entire 9 miles. Cell towers overlap their signals to provide stronger, more even coverage with minimal dead spots. This was as true in 2009 as it is today--though there were certainly fewer towers in 2009 than there are today.

York city centre is only a short distance away from Heworth--it's virtual insanity to think the whole of a major tourist city would rely on a single cell tower in the suburbs. It's probable that even in 2009, there were at least half a dozen towers close enough that Claudia's phone potentially could have connected to them.

Had Claudia's phone been closer to a cell tower in the city centre than it was to the tower at the University, it likely would have connected to the tower in the city centre rather than the one at the University. That alone would give the police a strong hint that the phone was still in the exact Heworth/Melrosegate area where Claudia lived, worked and was expected to be.

The police have almost certainly announced that Claudia's phone connected to the University's cell tower because they believe it is important and suggestive information--that her phone was still within the vicinity of her home and workplace. They gain nothing by saying her phone DIDN'T connect to other cell towers close by. Nor do they gain anything--other than spooking a potential suspect--by announcing that they have or possibly could narrow the location down further.

The mere fact that Claudia's phone connected to the University tower, and not any of numerous others in the York area, is highly suggestive that her phone was much closer to that specific tower. Together with triangulation of pings from other towers, the location could potentially have been narrowed down to within a few blocks. Even in 2009.

This is all just my opinion built on crumbly foundations.

 

[JimmyDurham]

Together with triangulation of pings from other towers, the location could potentially have been narrowed down to within a few blocks. Even in 2009.

From my perspective, this is a rehash of "the polis know" without any supporting basis. The polis themselves have declared that they narrowed Claudia's phone to a 9 miles radius. You believe they are lying. That's fine but you need to demonstrate how and why in order for your claims to be taken seriously. Where are those other cell towers?

A point aside, it's noticeable that the police are lying when it suits (e.g. mobile phone location) and telling the truth when it suits (e.g. they know Claudia's murderer).

Strange old world.

 

[JimmyDurham]

Should have added by the way, that Claudia's phone only pinged off one cell tower (near York University). That tells you that there was only one cell tower in range of Claudia's mobile, which in turn tells you why the polis could only give a range for that tower.