UK UK - Claudia Lawrence, 35, Chef, York University, 18 March 2009 #3

[MajorLang]

At the moment we have a missing person probably murdered, we have a murder on the loose might do it again.It is a cold case probably no one on the case .
Meanwhile a grieving family and friends keep suffering.

Yes
Probably easy for police to cold case as they don't like to reveal if other murders are connected unless they have to.

 

[Yozzer]

@Popejohn3
Yozzer said: Police aren't going to offer a plea bargain to a murderer. Are you suggesting someone not directly connected to the murderer who might know what happened should be offered immunity?
At the moment we have a missing person probably murdered, we have a murder on the loose might do it again.It is a cold case probably no one on the case . Meanwhile a grieving family and friends keep suffering.
Immunity / witness protection for the informant and their family should be quietly offered to a very select few involved with the case.
I'm sure that lots of 'deals' happen within the justice system.

 

[Popejohn3]

@Popejohn3
Yozzer said: Police aren't going to offer a plea bargain to a murderer. Are you suggesting someone not directly connected to the murderer who might know what happened should be offered immunity?
At the moment we have a missing person probably murdered, we have a murder on the loose might do it again.It is a cold case probably no one on the case . Meanwhile a grieving family and friends keep suffering.
Immunity / witness protection for the informant and their family should be quietly offered to a very select few involved with the case.
I'm sure that lots of 'deals' happen within the justice system.

Sorry @yosser I left it to others to answer your question

 

[Popejohn3]

More info about cctv cameras from NYP explaining the lack of info:
8 March 2016 Unsolved Claudia Lawrence investigation
“A man was filmed by a CCTV camera in Lime Court, Heworth Road, very close to Claudia’s house, on the morning after she vanished. Our review managed to unearth additional CCTV footage from that same camera shot the previous evening which appears to show the same man in the same place.

“We had this footage examined by a number of experts in the UK and abroad, but it is only as good as the camera and it cannot be enhanced using current techniques. Despite exhaustive efforts, we have not been able to identify the man.

“The lack of extended CCTV footage from that CCTV camera on the days and weeks either side of Claudia’s disappearance, has been one of our biggest frustrations and is typical of the type of challenge that faces a cold case review team. We have reviewed material seized by the original team and, wherever possible, looked to see if additional material could be secured.

“We don’t know if that man was in the area as a matter of daily routine, or whether his appearance is of critical significance. I believe he must be local to the area, and despite extensive appeals, he hasn’t come forward. I can only speculate why he hasn’t done so, and whether someone is protecting him.”

Some ‘contradiction’ from the experts Maylin thinks the dark person is probably local while the expert on tv program referring to him ..’ of an unusual gait ‘ as probably NOT local .

 

[MajorLang]

Some ‘contradiction’ from the experts Maylin thinks the dark person is probably local while the expert on tv program referring to him ..’ of an unusual gait ‘ as probably NOT local .

Why would the Persons gait make the difference from being local and not local?

 

[Yozzer]

Some ‘contradiction’ from the experts Maylin thinks the dark person is probably local while the expert on tv program referring to him ..’ of an unusual gait ‘ as probably NOT local .

Do you have a link for the tv programme please?

 

[Yozzer]

Re NYP gait analysis:
'Numerous national experts have helped to support the review, including....Forensic Podiatrist (interpreting the way people walk from CCTV footage)'

Re arrests:
Det Supt Malyn said: “For legal reasons I am limited about what I can say, but I respect the decision made by the Crown Prosecution Service. We have made several arrests in this enquiry and, as a result, we have had positive reactions from the public and very useful information.
“We do not arrest people without weighing up the proportionality and justification for the arrest. To eliminate people from an enquiry, we sometimes have to search for evidence that either supports their alibis or not. Seven years on this is more difficult to do just relying on memory, therefore if it is justified, proportionate and necessary, we will arrest or apply for search warrants.
“The investigation team will continue to thoroughly assess any new leads and information. We remind those who we suspect are withholding key information about Claudia that we will not give up our quest to find the truth.
Unsolved Claudia Lawrence investigation

 

[Popejohn3]

Why would the Persons gait make the difference from being local and not local?

Sorry I could not remember the retiredpoliceman who said ... nothing to do with his gait ... that he was probably not local that is why he was not identified .

 

[MajorLang]

For me this has to be the most telling Police statement:
“However, I still strongly favour the theory that the person – or persons – responsible for Claudia’s disappearance was someone – or several people – who were close to her. It was either very well-planned or there was a huge element of luck to have got away with it, so far at least. In my view they have probably been helped by the fact that those closely associated with Claudia have withheld key information.

Those close to her were responsible for her disappearance
Those closely associated with Claudia have withheld

Are those close to her also those same ones closely associated with her

This is important...

 

[Popejohn3]

Do you have a link for the tv programme please?

Donald Macintyre’s program on CL

 

[Popejohn3]

For me this has to be the most telling Police statement:
“However, I still strongly favour the theory that the person – or persons – responsible for Claudia’s disappearance was someone – or several people – who were close to her. It was either very well-planned or there was a huge element of luck to have got away with it, so far at least. In my view they have probably been helped by the fact that those closely associated with Claudia have withheld key information.

Those close to her were responsible for her disappearance
Those closely associated with Claudia have withheld

Are those close to her also those same ones closely associated with her

This is important...

They probably were not very specific because they were not sure of the information and so as not to be identified too.
They are sitting ducks if they go to the same pub probably same time same each week.
Some had to close the pub all by themselves .
Sometimes police are not very discreet

 

[Popejohn3]

For me this has to be the most telling Police statement:
“However, I still strongly favour the theory that the person – or persons – responsible for Claudia’s disappearance was someone – or several people – who were close to her. It was either very well-planned or there was a huge element of luck to have got away with it, so far at least. In my view they have probably been helped by the fact that those closely associated with Claudia have withheld key information.

Those close to her were responsible for her disappearance
Those closely associated with Claudia have withheld

Are those close to her also those same ones closely associated with her

This is important...

moonsafari would not be so quick coming forward with information if she was still working there ? Am I right @moonsafari ?

 

[MajorLang]

moonsafari would not be so quick coming forward with information if she was still working there ? Am I right @moonsafari ?

I read from @moonsafari article that she would have written it anyway and felt she wished she had been there in March and could have offered more information but only moonsafari can answer that. However your statement is moving away from my question and so I ask all again:

"Are those close to her also those same ones closely associated with her"?

 

[HongKongPhooey]

Considering moonsafari was pretty much an aquaintance, she was a heck of a lot braver than anyone else connected to that crowd

 

[Yozzer]

Sorry I could not remember the retiredpoliceman who said ... nothing to do with his gait ... that he was probably not local that is why he was not identified .

That's probably a reasoned assumption based on the lack of reported local information. Maybe he didn't reckon that local people who recognised cctv man would knowingly withhold that fact.
In fairness, if he was not someone living in the immediate location e.g. Heworth village area, then it is understandable that local people might not have recognised someone who only walked from the Nag's Head car park to the pub! But his friends would....and chose not to submit his name. Shame on them.
The point is, police did use gait analysis so arrived at a scientific conclusion by an independent expert, to support the information reported by a witness.

 

[Yozzer]

I've just been looking at Donal McIntyre's 'Unsolved' from 2015. A couple of very interesting points worth watching:
1) From 12m 30s - re the period between 8 and 8.30pm when Claudia spoke to her mum on the phone ........ listen to Gerard Tubb @ 13m 12s."she had made calls to her parents...which the police have never revealed where she was when they made those calls and of course they have a pretty good idea from the cell phone data. For operational reasons they've kept that to themselves...and having made those calls, she wasn't heard from again"

2) At 13m 50s the cctv from Lime Court on the evening of Wed 18/3 is shown but interestingly, it is one of the earlier versions which shows other activity on Heworth Road. It reveals a group of 3 people walking past Heworth Place, 2 passing cars (one being a dark coloured taxi) and then, the man in dark clothing comes round the corner. When he reappears, we see the person in white standing near the front door of the property opposite, the 'light jacket' man crossing and finally another car.
What this proves is that it was far busier on Heworth Road at that time of the evening than is evident in the more carefully edited version now doing the rounds. Possibly 'dark man' would have felt less conspicuous then although it appears that there were potentially 8 witnesses to his suspicious actions.

 

[Popejohn3]

I've just been looking at Donal McIntyre's 'Unsolved' from 2015. A couple of very interesting points worth watching:
1) From 12m 30s - re the period between 8 and 8.30pm when Claudia spoke to her mum on the phone ........ listen to Gerard Tubb @ 13m 12s."she had made calls to her parents...which the police have never revealed where she was when they made those calls and of course they have a pretty good idea from the cell phone data. For operational reasons they've kept that to themselves...and having made those calls, she wasn't heard from again"

2) At 13m 50s the cctv from Lime Court on the evening of Wed 18/3 is shown but interestingly, it is one of the earlier versions which shows other activity on Heworth Road. It reveals a group of 3 people walking past Heworth Place, 2 passing cars (one being a dark coloured taxi) and then, the man in dark clothing comes round the corner. When he reappears, we see the person in white standing near the front door of the property opposite, the 'light jacket' man crossing and finally another car.
What this proves is that it was far busier on Heworth Road at that time of the evening than is evident in the more carefully edited version now doing the rounds. Possibly 'dark man' would have felt less conspicuous then although it appears that there were potentially 8 witnesses to his suspicious actions.

Police did say they believed she was at home when she spoke with her mother.
Her phone also put her in the same general area where and when her phone was switched off.
It seems the police are not able to pinpoint her with 2009 technology.So yes she could have been in the pub , next door or anywhere in the vicinity.Of course others should have been able to confirm if she was not at home .
————————
By showing the clip of the dark person the police are admitting they do not have a name for him

 

[Yozzer]

@Popejohn3
Police did say they believed she was at home when she spoke with her mother.
The clue is in the word 'believed'.
By showing the clip of the dark person the police are admitting they do not have a name for him
Possibly. Or they do have a name but due to the poor quality of the clip and the denial of the named person plus an alibi, they are seeking as many witnesses as possible to corroborate their claim that it was person X. Note the absence in later cctv clips of those potential witnesses seen in the earlier clip, for their protection. If this ever goes to court, one or more of them may testify e.g. 'he was hanging around on doorstep of no. 46 before walking into HP' or 'he was knocking on the door of no. 46', or 'we followed him out of the Nag's Head where he had been sitting at the bar talking to staff' etc.

The Turnbull Guidelines Identification | The Crown Prosecution Service
5) Where, in the judgement of the trial judge, the quality of the identifying evidence is poor (such as a fleeting glance or difficult conditions), the judge should withdraw the case from the jury and direct an acquittal, unless there is evidence that supports the correctness of the identification. The trial judge should identify to the jury the evidence he considers capable of supporting the identification evidence. If there is any evidence or circumstances that the jury might think was supporting when it didn’t have this quality, the judge should say so.

 

[MajorLang]

I've just been looking at Donal McIntyre's 'Unsolved' from 2015. A couple of very interesting points worth watching:
1) From 12m 30s - re the period between 8 and 8.30pm when Claudia spoke to her mum on the phone ........ listen to Gerard Tubb @ 13m 12s."she had made calls to her parents...which the police have never revealed where she was when they made those calls and of course they have a pretty good idea from the cell phone data. For operational reasons they've kept that to themselves...and having made those calls, she wasn't heard from again"

2) At 13m 50s the cctv from Lime Court on the evening of Wed 18/3 is shown but interestingly, it is one of the earlier versions which shows other activity on Heworth Road. It reveals a group of 3 people walking past Heworth Place, 2 passing cars (one being a dark coloured taxi) and then, the man in dark clothing comes round the corner. When he reappears, we see the person in white standing near the front door of the property opposite, the 'light jacket' man crossing and finally another car.
What this proves is that it was far busier on Heworth Road at that time of the evening than is evident in the more carefully edited version now doing the rounds. Possibly 'dark man' would have felt less conspicuous then although it appears that there were potentially 8 witnesses to his suspicious actions.

@Yozzer There are several inaccuracies in this Video. Macyntyre says "Her phone was turned of around midnight" It has always been reported at 12:10 the next day. Was this new evidence? had it been turned off at midnight and not mentioned before or did they just wrongly report it this time_I believe they got it wrong here as if it was turned off at midnight, it would have to be turned back on again later for it to be turned off for a final time at 12:10. In addition we do know that in 2009 Police had stated that they could only track phones within a 9 mile radius of the mobile transponder that was situated close to the University This was before triangulation could be as accurate as it is today.

However, I do think that Police have tried to obliterate the figure in the doorway across the road. Firstly I will show you the attached daylight shot of the house across the road.
Secondly, a shot of the figure in doorway before obliteration
and Finally, the man in doorway obliterated by a white box. I have checked the CCTV footage and this is not purely a glare or headlights.

Strange how this has been obscured from one but not the other.
Were all 3 of these people lookouts? Thesewere all from evening of 18th

 

[Popejohn3]

@Popejohn3
Police did say they believed she was at home when she spoke with her mother.
The clue is in the word 'believed'.
By showing the clip of the dark person the police are admitting they do not have a name for him
Possibly. Or they do have a name but due to the poor quality of the clip and the denial of the named person plus an alibi, they are seeking as many witnesses as possible to corroborate their claim that it was person X. Note the absence in later cctv clips of those potential witnesses seen in the earlier clip, for their protection. If this ever goes to court, one or more of them may testify e.g. 'he was hanging around on doorstep of no. 46 before walking into HP' or 'he was knocking on the door of no. 46', or 'we followed him out of the Nag's Head where he had been sitting at the bar talking to staff' etc.

The Turnbull Guidelines Identification | The Crown Prosecution Service
5) Where, in the judgement of the trial judge, the quality of the identifying evidence is poor (such as a fleeting glance or difficult conditions), the judge should withdraw the case from the jury and direct an acquittal, unless there is evidence that supports the correctness of the identification. The trial judge should identify to the jury the evidence he considers capable of supporting the identification evidence. If there is any evidence or circumstances that the jury might think was supporting when it didn’t have this quality, the judge should say so.

The thing is if the Police have a name for him they are the best placed people to confirm .They possibly can enhance it, poss video him in secret even using the same equipment from the same distance .
No the police do not have a name therefore waiting for a name from the public or himself saying yes it’s me !