Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #6

[PS8800]

This has been covered before but faking a river search with all the associated costs, diversion of police time and potential risk to divers seems unlikely.

and a bit Hollywood...

 

[cottonweaver]

James Maloney is a photographer for LancsLive news & CumbriaLive

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[DazN]

Where the witness made the enquiries has not been clarified by the police and there have been many conflicting reports in the press about the details between the intial sighting at 9.35, how many people were involved in looking at the phone and subsequently alerting the school/family

Yes I think the only definite times we have are:

9:33am dog is found

10:50am PA and police alerted

 

[LastSeenWearing]

Yup, just after the 9.10 sighting. Her phone and dog were taken to the bench IMO

Do you mean you think the phone and dog were taken to the bench by NB or a perp?

 

[Undecided]

Not too sure why there’s so much negativity around PF at all, the family have asked him, it can only help, he does this for the police all the time , he’s doing it for free. More resources can only be a good thing.

Who cares if he has the biggest ego ever , or has written a book, it’s about getting answers . If he hadn’t gone he’d have been criticised, he’s now gone and he’s being criticised. I don’t think it’s what’s important at all. Who cares if he likes media attention? It’s helping scour the river, which is important, finding what happened to Nicola. We don’t know what he now knows from the police , in terms of his opinions changing. I’m just surprised how much of thread is now analysing someone trying to help. For free.

 

[cottonweaver]

He raises some excellent points.

Does he really? He's putting words in LE's mouth. The wrong words

Superintendent Sally Riley from Lancashire Constabulary said police were “keeping a really open mind about what could have happened”

Link:
statement from LE yesterday Everything we know about the disappearance of Nicola Bulley

( Martyn Underhill is in an elected post)
contrary to what Underhill says LE have never said ' this IS a tragic accident'

 

[wackyw]

Yes I think the only definite times we have are:

9:33am dog is found

10:50am PA and police alerted

with a 9:20 choice of "phone is on the bench" ... or ..."phone becomes stationery" ...

 

[Dowls90]

It’s just disrespectful tbh. Maybe that’s just me.

I agree. " Dark Tourism" has always seemed very strange to me.

 

[justicepeace]

Yep and he says its time for an outside force to review the case as is normal procedure after 9 days.

Agree.

7 different hypothesis in his mind and LP only exploring 1. Hit the nail on the head imo.

He sounds dumbfounded with it all, as are the few of us on here that cannot just accept that this was an accident, incase it wasn’t. This is someone’s life here here. Imo

 

[JeremyBentham]

James Maloney is a photographer for LancsLive news & CumbriaLive

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Be interesting to know how far they managed to search today. Someone posted earlier it's about 13 miles to the sea, is that correct? PF said they could do about 10 miles a day, so you'd think by end the of tomorrow they'd have searched the entire possible area, pre-sea?

 

[justicepeace]

Does he really? He's putting words in LE's mouth. The wrong words

Superintendent Sally Riley from Lancashire Constabulary said police were “keeping a really open mind about what could have happened”

Link:
statement from LE yesterday Everything we know about the disappearance of Nicola Bulley

( Martyn Underhill is in an elected post)

Oh my.

 

[kev4pe]

James Maloney is a photographer for LancsLive news & CumbriaLive

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Be interested to know how much of the river they searched today

 

[annpats]

It happens in every case on Websleuths. People always decide that the police are inept and have concluded too soon and got it wrong

There are countless cases (particularly US ones) on here,. where the police have been too slow, too disinterested and too unfocused - causing many cases to stall or remain cold.

 

[EyeSpyU]

The kids were at school and hubby at home, so I'm not sure who would check on the dog. When I walked a dog, I didn't pay a lot of attention to other dogs. Others passing that way would quite likely have ignored a dog on its own. If you're out on a common or in the woods and you see a dog on its own, you just assume the owner was elsewhere.

What would have attracted attention, as in 'that's not right', is the smartphone abandoned on a bench. I suppose a devious abductor might leave it there so it didn't come along with and locate the victim, but if any abductor had got hold of NB's phone, they would surely have just lobbed it into the river or undergrowth? That way it won't even attract attention.

Agree 100%.

As a fellow dog Walker I often see random dogs running through wooded areas and naturally assume the owner is nearby somewhere. My own dog, a Labrador has a habit of running off to explore but it always within sight and always s comes back when called. So someone seeing Willow could’ve simply thought she’d gone off exploring.

As for the phone on the bench, if I saw one I’d assume someone had forgotten it and would come back for it. Depending on the circumstances I might pick it up and see if I could call someone on it to let them know I’d found the phone, that’s if it wasn’t locked, of course.

Thinking about it, as the phone was still logged into the work teams meeting, I wonder why the first person who found it didn’t ring them?

 

[WhoIsThatGuy]

I believe someone who knew who the dog belonged to made their way over relatively quickly after the first person made enquiries.

JMO

We on the outside do not know who these witnesses are. We do not know if NB fell in the river, we equally do not know if NB came to harm or foul play. IF, NB is not in the river, and it is ascertained that foul play is at play here, at what point will these 'witnesses' be more closely scrutinised and questioned?

Just because a witness, or anyone for that matter, says something, does not necessarily mean that it is true. Just because you live in the same area as someone, does not mean that you have to like them, or that you even like them at all.

This does not have to be overly complex at all. All it would take is the involvement of someone unhinged, maybe jealous of NB career, good looks or family, who was familiar with NB routine, (to be fair, look how much information us complete strangers have managed to find out with regards to her routine), for someone to be familiar with the local area, entry, exit points, any CCTV that does or does not work. If multiple people involved, then making NB 'disappear' becomes considerably easier. Especially if any perspective harm doers, just so happen to be any of the witnesses.

One thing is certain. What happened to NB, the answer or answers to that question remain firmly in the area. The answer to that question has never left the area. Either it being the river, or a 3rd party.

 

[ginnyw]

He raises some excellent points.

I agree, although I'm not the biggest fan of that particular news channel. He reminded us that there were seven different potential scenarios for what had happened etc. Plus his own experience heading up similar investigations and the reminder that ten minutes is plenty long enough for something criminal to happen. I thought he was a much-needed voice of sense, restoring context and balance to what has (IMO) become an all-eggs-in-one-basket investigation based on.....what? I still have a strong sense of foul play, have had all along (MOO) and the fact that NB's walk was so clearly photographed so many times on her own threads makes me fearful. JMO.

 

[annpats]

I’m sure the river police have some kind of filtering nets they can place in the river to trap debris etc, including of course a body.

No, this isn't a thing. There is also no such thing as "river police".

Putting a net up could cause damage to the ecology of the river, and also could cause a back-up of debris, leaves, branches etc.
Not to mention a boat propellers could get entangled in it.

There is a weir in this river apparently, further downstream, which may act as a natural dam or 'collecting area'.
I don't know if Lancashire Police dive team searched that far......if they did, they didn't find anything there. No clues or body.

 

[JeremyBentham]

Be interesting to know how far they managed to search today. Someone posted earlier it's about 13 miles to the sea, is that correct? PF said they could do about 10 miles a day, so you'd think by end the of tomorrow they'd have searched the entire possible area, pre-sea?

Yeah, so 13 miles from the bench area of the river. If I'm reading that correctly.

The River Wyre is approximately 28 miles long. It begins in the Forest of Bowland near the village of Abbeystead, running south through Dolphinholme. The Lancaster Canal crosses the Wyre as it flows through Garstang. It continues to St Michael's on Wyre, which was where Nicola was last seen. Here it is joined by its second major tributary, the River Brock. It becomes tidal below the weir at St Michael's.

It then carries alongside Great Eccleston, Larbreck, Little Singleton, up to Thornton Cleveleys and past Hambleton where it widens, before flowing out to sea at Fleetwood - around 13 miles from where Nicola was last seen.

- Source

 

[ayrshireguy]

JMO

We on the outside do not know who these witnesses are. We do not know if NB fell in the river, we equally do not know if NB came to harm or foul play. IF, NB is not in the river, and it is ascertained that foul play is at play here, at what point will these 'witnesses' be more closely scrutinised and questioned?

Just because a witness, or anyone for that matter, says something, does not necessarily mean that it is true. Just because you live in the same area as someone, does not mean that you have to like them, or that you even like them at all.

This does not have to be overly complex at all. All it would take is the involvement of someone unhinged, maybe jealous of NB career, good looks or family, who was familiar with NB routine, (to be fair, look how much information us complete strangers have managed to find out with regards to her routine), for someone to be familiar with the local area, entry, exit points, any CCTV that does or does not work. If multiple people involved, then making NB 'disappear' becomes considerably easier. Especially if any perspective harm doers, just so happen to be any of the witnesses.

One thing is certain. What happened to NB, the answer or answers to that question remain firmly in the area. The answer to that question has never left the area. Either it being the river, or a 3rd party.

Fully agree with everything you said.

The witnesses don't sit right with me. But we shall see.

 

[cottonweaver]

There are countless cases (particularly US ones) on here,. where the police have been too slow, too disinterested and too unfocused - causing many cases to stall or remain cold.

Agreed but we don't know if this is one of those cases do we?

genuinely, I have not noticed anything that's made me concerned about their handling of this one and I'm usually the first to say even when it's deemed taboo.