Things seem to get sillier and sillier. IMO
Things seem to get sillier and sillier. IMO
I actually disagree with this - I think it’s clever to leave it because it points to an accident as opposed to foul play, which then leads the police astray. If you were an intelligent perp, you would want the scene to look as normal as possible. IMO.Why would you not throw it in the River in this scenario? Once underwater it will no longer transmit a signal and although they are saveable you would have to get it out quite quickly and even if it was recovered it would still point to the missing person being in the River.
Leaving it seems an odd choice IMO.
River isn't tidal at this point.Paths and tracks lead down to a point midway between bench and weir that isn’t visible from riverpath. At this point on google maps there is a sandbank in the river – is it fordable here? By foot or quad bike maybe?
Yes, there’s a shallow point in the river between the bench and the weir which can be seen in Google maps - you can wade through that - ankle to knee deep that day at low tide according to locals, then there’s a small field to the gate and road at Hall Lane.
If this is the case and NB was taken by someone who has planned this through then she will probably never be found.I actually disagree with this - I think it’s clever to leave it because it points to an accident as opposed to foul play, which then leads the police astray. If you were an intelligent perp, you would want the scene to look as normal as possible. IMO.
The phone being in the river would also point to an accident.I actually disagree with this - I think it’s clever to leave it because it points to an accident as opposed to foul play, which then leads the police astray. If you were an intelligent perp, you would want the scene to look as normal as possible. IMO.
The silence from LE is absolutely deafening.
Yes I agree but by leaving it where it was indicates more to me that someone was clever to distract from the truth. If you were to throw it away, that points more to foul play by trying to hide evidence. But I do see your point because if NB had it in her hand it would have gone in the river with her (by accident) anyway. JMO.The phone being in the river would also point to an accident.
Indeed, to date, nothing is pointing towards it being anything else.
Can I ask how do you know this?Yes, there’s a shallow point in the river between the bench and the weir which can be seen in Google maps - you can wade through that - ankle to knee deep that day at low tide according to locals, then there’s a small field to the gate and road at Hall Lane.
It's interesting though there is an assumption that NB would still in the area and what sort of radius 'local' might extend to and whether there are clues/evidence that maybe based upon, or purely hunch/suspicion?
It allows you to walk up to the car and open the door, some like mine, even prime the fuel pump as the door opens so there is no delay when the starter button is pressed.OK and why is that needed ?
To Q1. I would say that knowing what I would do is of no help in trying to figure out what really happened, because the finder was not me.I'd like to ask a couple of questions of people to try and improve my understanding of human behaviour and to increase my knowledge of rivers and specifically of bodies in them and what happens to them in shortish timescales.
It in no way infers guilt on anyone, it is intended to question the hypothesis that this is an accident.
Question 1
If you found Willow and the phone that day with no owner in sight would you check the river
Question 2 is more difficult for me due to lack of knowledge
If you checked the river would you expect to see a body if it had entered the water in the last 13 minutes
If the answer to the second one is yes then I can't see the police hypothesis is right
Am sure they had a good old chortle at itIf you're a NCA-accredited expert and a Home Office adviser I'd grit my teeth and say thanks.
Unless it was supposed to be found.Leaving it seems an odd choice IMO.
If you want to immediately draw people's attention to the river then you leave the phone near the bench, the harness on the bank, and the dog running around - which was not interesting in the river's edge but was interesting in the bench and the gate. Then you have someone come along with the caravan site owner and talk about NB 'faffing' about near the river's edge and that the dog might have been sniffing fishing bait.Yes I agree but by leaving it where it was indicates more to me that someone was clever to distract from the truth. If you were to throw it away, that points more to foul play by trying to hide evidence. But I do see your point because if NB had it in her hand it would have gone in the river with her (by accident). JMO.
Paths and tracks lead down to a point midway between bench and weir that isn’t visible from riverpath. At this point on google maps there is a sandbank in the river – is it fordable here? By foot or quad bike maybe?
There is a great drone video (Daily Mail) here Nicola Bulley: Desperate search continues for mother in Lancashire
The stile (which is one of the locations Willow was found at) next to the bench is visible at the 0:38 mark. Then the drone flies partly over this area. The path and quad bike(?) tracks are visible. Just before the video leaves this area at 1:28 there is an area visible on the opposite bank which could lead up to a path or track.
I love to see some detail of this area. Is it possible to then head up to the church and Hall Lane, or even the other direction towards the 'Abandoned House' and then back up to Hall Lane and where the rad van was supposedly parked?
One thing that went through my mind at the start of all this...if NB was approached/threatened and taken...she may have dropped her phone there. Left as a clue so to speak that she had actually been there, because in her mind she didn't know where Willow might run off to without her around. It's a minor point and not helpful in finding her, but I've never noticed this expressed elsewhereIt has been generally assumed that the phone was left, backing the theory that NB fell into the water. However, in the absence of any body being found in the river, my alternative theory is that if NB was abducted, the phone was left BECAUSE the abductor was foresencially aware I.e. knew movements could be tracked via the phone...no point in throwing it in the bushes as would give clues to exit path taken. Just my thoughts...
I would ask them what they said to you.If I said to you that I’d gone to LancsPolice at the weekend and given them a map of the local area pointing out to them ditches, hedgerows and wooded areas which could be potential body deposition spots - what would you say to me?
Be honest!