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

[wtiger]

who exactly had a motive to make Claudia disappear?

probably a good starting point

 

[sl77]

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.

The threshold for reasonable people in the street to believe someone committed a murder is probably lower than the CPS threshold to take a case to court.

Where is the contradiction/logical fallacy?

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

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.

I don't think they are "lying". They absolutely have narrowed it down to the 9-mile radius of the University tower, exactly as they say they have. I just think there's a strong chance that they have narrowed it down even more than that. I don't think it's strictly a "lie" when the police withhold information for operational reasons.

The difference is that I'm only stating this as a possibility. You're stating things as fact without providing any supporting evidence. For example, the fact that the police have only said Claudia's phone connected to one tower *does not* prove there was only one cell tower in range of her phone.

See this article from 2002, 7 years before Claudia's disappearance:

"The Evening Press can today reveal at least 45 mobile phone masts are currently operating in the centre of York."

We reveal shock York mobile mast locations

THE Evening Press can today reveal at least 45 mobile phone masts are currently operating in the centre of York.

www.yorkpress.co.uk

 

[JimmyDurham]

The threshold for reasonable people in the street to believe someone committed a murder is probably lower than the CPS threshold to take a case to court.

As I said, ridiculous.

 

[JimmyDurham]

I don't think they are "lying". They absolutely have narrowed it down to the 9-mile radius of the University tower, exactly as they say they have. I just think there's a strong chance that they have narrowed it down even more than that. I don't think it's strictly a "lie" when the police withhold information for operational reasons.

The difference is that I'm only stating this as a possibility. You're stating things as fact without providing any supporting evidence. For example, the fact that the police have only said Claudia's phone connected to one tower *does not* prove there was only one cell tower in range of her phone.

See this article from 2002, 7 years before Claudia's disappearance:

"The Evening Press can today reveal at least 45 mobile phone masts are currently operating in the centre of York."

We reveal shock York mobile mast locations

THE Evening Press can today reveal at least 45 mobile phone masts are currently operating in the centre of York.

www.yorkpress.co.uk

1) There is no evidential basis for your 'strong chance'. You've simply made this up, as well as claiming the polis are lying by omission.

2) The mast that Claudia's phone connected to, had a 9 miles sector. Ergo, we're not talking about a 2025 densely populated area with various masts having a limited range; we're talking about an area with masts covering a large distance. We're informed that Claudia's phone pinged off one cell tower also, by the polis.

 

[JimmyDurham]

who exactly had a motive to make Claudia disappear?

probably a good starting point

1) Lone man with a screw loose kills wife/girlfriend/ex-partner/would be partner because he has a screw loose.

2) Lone man with a screw loose abducts and murders woman walking alone in the dark because he has a screw loose.

Statistically, one of those two is going to be your answer/motive.

Statistically, the York arm of the Chicago Mafia (known to sensible people as fellas without a criminal conviction between them having a booze in the pub) making people disappear is not going to be your answer.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

1) There is no evidential basis for your 'strong chance'. You've simply made this up, as well as claiming the polis are lying by omission.

2) The mast that Claudia's phone connected to, had a 9 miles sector. Ergo, we're not talking about a 2025 densely populated area with various masts having a limited range; we're talking about an area with masts covering a large distance. We're informed that Claudia's phone pinged off one cell tower also, by the polis.

Your information regarding how phone mast coverage works is just... not accurate. Which is bizarre given your prior insistence that I needed to research the technology. A phone mast having a 9-mile sector doesn't mean it's the *only* mast within that 9-mile sector. The mast coverage overlaps--often massively so. It always has to avoid dead zones with poor signal. Phones simply connect to the strongest signal, which usually comes from the mast closest to them--in this case the University mast.

You asked for proof of other masts within the range of Claudia's phone. I provided a link to a newspaper article from 2002 proving there were already at least 45 phone masts in the centre of York at that time, and at least 37 more in the wider York area--a number which would only have increased by the time Claudia went missing 7 years later.

If you're going to accuse others of "making things up" it would behoove you to stop ignoring the evidence that YOU requested because it disproves your argument.

This image I've drawn up shows the areas we're discussing. The 9-mile radius of the University mast in red, the central area of York in blue, the wider outer area of York in green, and I've also marked the location of Claudia's home and workplace in purple.

In 2002, the sector covered by the University mast already had *at least* 80 other masts in it. That number would have been significantly higher by 2009.

 

[JimmyDurham]

A phone mast having a 9-mile sector doesn't mean it's the *only* mast within that 9-mile sector. The mast coverage overlaps

Which is understood by small rodents and is self-evident.

But, a mast covering 9 miles means this isn't like a densely populated area in 2025 where masts cover a less than a mile area (your claim: "a few streets" or whatever.)

And of course, it would have been very easy to disprove the polis' claim had they being lying by omission, which in turn would have made them a laughing stock. Are they really gonna make such a bold claim when any man and his dog with an ounce of mobile phone technology nous could come along and say: "this is garbage"?

Either way, we're getting into a tit-for-tat cycle of verbal violence on the internet and that's not good manners in public. 'Best thing you can do is explain where exactly the other masts were to make this "narrowed down to a few streets" possible. That way, you'll convince me and I'd imagine a few more.

 

[Hustling01]

Everything has gone really quiet of late, has anyone else noticed that? Like there appeared to be a whole influx of new information or interest in the Claudia case and a lot of newspaper stories about it recently and then all of a sudden it’s just gone back to normal again.

thing is people build up a tolerance to hearing about the same thing so they switch off so you have to handle information carefully

 

[Alpha Zero]

I’ll leave this here -

This was a programme on Claudia which aired on August 13th 2010.
Here are some sinister parts which came from a source of mine who knows way more about the case than I do , after a while, there was a gagging order placed on this programme and it was seemingly erased from existence and couldn’t be found anywhere online, and I mean anywhere.

It was uploaded again 6 years ago as I imagine someone must have recorded it and placed on YouTube in the link provided, but parts are missing and certain let’s say individuals are missing too. None of claudias “male friends” make an appearance in this footage yet on the original they apparently did?, one of them potentially being a nags 4 member who was in a relationship with JK at the time.

Now ask yourselves this, if that’s the case and footage has been removed…..why?

My guess is, Individuals involved have been arrested ( the nags 4) , footage has been taken down, wiped , edited and re uploaded with the missing segments now all seemingly a blur. Or perhaps the people involved have the money to do such things to be able to request such footage to be removed, or….the theory of a cover up could come into play…..but a cover up to what?

 

[Alpha Zero]

thing is people build up a tolerance to hearing about the same thing so they switch off so you have to handle information carefully

I must admit I do this too, we all go in circles with this case

 

[JimmyDurham]

'Case here of a lass who was murdered in Hull, 2002. Rachel was walking from her Mam's home to her flat on New Year's Eve, early hours of the morning.

I haven't watched this for a while back, from memory though Rachel left her Mam's home (about a mile from her flat), her killer walked past (just ahead of Rachel) as Rachel was saying goodbye to her Mam. Her killer walked the mile as Rachel did and took a route that meant he got himself behind her. As Rachel passed his flat door, he attacked her and dragged her in. Rachel was very close to her flat at that point, less than a hundred yards. They didn't know one another.

Two interesting bits of information from the YT upload/link:

1) A keen eye spotted something on CCTV that he believed was Rachel and it turned out to be correct. Looking at the image, that's a remarkable spot and it's easy to see how Claudia could have been on CCTV but missed.

2) At 25:43, a detective states: "if a person is abducted on foot, 98% of the bodies are found within a half a mile radius of the last sighting." That's useful information in a police investigation. The polis found the killer because they questioned and searched the homes of everyone within a half a mile radius of where Rachel was last seen. Hats off to 'em, that's very good policing. Had they not done that, it would be another Claudia Lawrence situation.

The contents of Claudia's home suggest she left for work that morning. We know her car was out of action and she was going to work on foot. CCTV at Melrosegate didn't pick up Claudia. That's a good basis to suggest Claudia was attacked not far from her home. The investigation could have done with the Hull polis concentrating on what they knew.

Food for thought for anyone.

 

[Ruthbullock]

Many thanks on the welcome!

I tend to agree with most of this.

In terms of the fella who walked down the street, well, he simply walked down a street like everyone else. No more information than that on the camera. Maybe the tail wagging the dog. We know a lass who lived there was murdered and so we imagine that innocuous, every day activities are somehow important. Same with the 'braking car'. It's a car driving down a street and it's braking: happens in every street in the country.

When you say 'rebuffed by Claudia', do you mean rebuffed for the first time on that morning?

Neither indicate guilt I agree, but the man walking on the street came from somewhere and has never been identified and it’s not a busy pedestrian area, let alone appearing from behind the pub and houses (he must have come from somewhere)- so it’s a bit odd they never identified this person. The car braking is really odd when you see the street, but again could be attracted
to something else causing them to brake on a straight clear section of road.

 

[Ruthbullock]

Did we ever discover what prompted them to search the gravel pits at Sand Hutton? I’m not a believer in psychics, I promise, but the fact that a psychic said they search the fishing ponds literally over the road from Sand Hutton and they didn’t, but a couple of weeks later searched the gravel pits is too much of a coincidence without the police being told something else. Claudia Lawrence search: Sand Hutton lake drained by police - BBC News

 

[sl77]

As I said, ridiculous.

I'll ask a second time: where is the contradiction/logical fallacy for what I said to be "ridiculous"?

 

[JimmyDurham]

but the man walking on the street came from somewhere and has never been identified and it’s not a busy pedestrian area,

.
The CCTV shows one thing: a man walking down the street and there are various properties nearby. That's all you see. It happens all of the time and everywhere in this country. Look out of your window now, you'll see a man walking down the street near various properties.

 

[Alpha Zero]

Did we ever discover what prompted them to search the gravel pits at Sand Hutton? I’m not a believer in psychics, I promise, but the fact that a psychic said they search the fishing ponds literally over the road from Sand Hutton and they didn’t, but a couple of weeks later searched the gravel pits is too much of a coincidence without the police being told something else. Claudia Lawrence search: Sand Hutton lake drained by police - BBC News

Significant intelligence that was cross referenced with other intel the police had and led to the gravel pits specifically , it was really a case of “we can’t not look at this” rather than risking it.

However, ( and don’t quote me on this ) it was reported the police drained the wrong area and there are 2 areas with the same name. One being “Sand Hutton” which is 8 miles northeast of York , and “Sandhutton” which is in Thirsk, roughly 30 miles away and a completely different village.

The draining of the pits found items , but none of significance to the investigation, I believe the other area was never searched. Numerous people have come forward and said police have searched and drained wrong lakes altogether.

There was also rumours it could be related to Claudias phone location and being picked up by nearby masts before being disconnected from the network via powering down the phone

 

[Ruthbullock]

.
The CCTV shows one thing: a man walking down the street and there are various properties nearby. That's all you see. It happens all of the time and everywhere in this country. Look out of your window now, you'll see a man walking down the street near various properties.

He’s not walking down a street though, he’s walking from the back of a group of terraces and a pub car park to the street.

 

[Ruthbullock]

Significant intelligence that was cross referenced with other intel the police had and led to the gravel pits specifically , it was really a case of “we can’t not look at this” rather than risking it.

However, ( and don’t quote me on this ) it was reported the police drained the wrong area and there are 2 areas with the same name. One being “Sand Hutton” which is 8 miles northeast of York , and “Sandhutton” which is in Thirsk, roughly 30 miles away and a completely different village.

The draining of the pits found items , but none of significance to the investigation, I believe the other area was never searched. Numerous people have come forward and said police have searched and drained wrong lakes altogether.

There was also rumours it could be related to Claudias phone location and being picked up by nearby masts before being disconnected from the network via powering down the phone

Thanks for the further information. I can’t imagine for a second anyone would go all the way to Thirsk to hide a body from York.

 

[JimmyDurham]

He’s not walking down a street though, he’s walking from the back of a group of terraces and a pub car park to the street.

Same thing. He walked down a street, into an alley and then he goes off CCTV. So what?

Get yourself to a cafe tomorrow, sit outside with a cup of tea, and within half an hour you'll see boatloads of people walk down a street and then turn into an alley.

For this person to have any relevance, you have to see more than somebody walk down the street and turn into an alley. To force relevance upon this person, you're making things up that are not on CCTV.