Found Deceased UK - Nicola Bulley Last Seen Walking Dog Near River - St Michaels on Wyre (Lancashire) #9

[sriraaacha]

I thought it was a bit warmer that week. That's why I was confused when I saw a few people being interviewed wearing wooly hats Right down, as if it was minus temperatures. <modsnip>

It's been SO cold for weeks now and probably even a few degrees colder up north! Honestly I'd say anything under about 7 degrees could warrant wearing hats, scarves, gloves... especially if you're just stood around instead of going anywhere inside or walking around. This isn't weird at all imo.

 

[Davieson]

I find it difficult to erase from my mind what the 'finder of Willow running loose' said originally...

She said she spotted Willow as she came through a gate onto the towpath but became suspicious when she saw the harness and lead on the floor. A man then came through behind her with his dog and spotted the phone.

"The gent has looked on the floor and two feet from the bench there’s a phone," she said. "I think she’s either been faffing about at the edge of the river because the dog’s been smelling fishing bait and she’s slipped or she’s had a medical episode."

The 'gent' with the dog being who exactly? The 70 year old with the fluffy white dog?

The story then morphed into...
A business owner - who did not wish to be named - says she raised the alarm after finding Willow. She said the phone was found under a tree which has a sign warning of deep water nailed to it.
The woman said: "I saw the dog and I recognised it, but I suddenly couldn't think whose dog it was. There was a mobile phone on the bench and there was also something between the bench and the river so I went and looked, and it was a dog harness." She said the dog looked "worried" and after speaking to her daughter-in-law was told it belonged to Nicola.

Then there was this...Nicola, who has been missing for six days looked "completely normal" just minutes before vanishing, the last person known to have seen her has said. The mortgage advisor was seen at about 9.20am on a footpath by the River Wyre in the village of St Michael's in Lancashire by a man walking his labrador, it has been reported. His wife said how he told her that there was "nothing unusual" about Nicola when he saw her. The software engineer, who didn't want to be named said: "In the field, there were about three people, including my husband. He said there was nothing unusual about her and she seemed completely normal. “I’d often see her and say hello. I always thought she looked very nicely dressed, in her bobble hat and smart Wellington boots. It’s just horrible to know she’s missing.”

All so very confusing

Difficulty is how much of what we read is true and how much is media hype ?
I would be inclined to believe only what the police tell us.

 

[shadwell]

Is there anyone local to the area on this thread?

The way this is going - would you admit it if you were?

 

[EyeSpyU]

I'm not sure float would be the correct word. A d**d body sinks, it would have to be a strong current to move an object that weighed around 9 stone (just guessing at weight) for miles

After several days or a couple of weeks gases develop which make the body float up to the surface.

 

[EyeSpyU]

I'm not sure float would be the correct word. A d**d body sinks, it would have to be a strong current to move an object that weighed around 9 stone (just guessing at weight) for miles

After several days or a couple of weeks gases develop which make the body float up to the surface.

 

[WAWAW]

Any idea what the fitbit would register if it was physically removed and thrown in the river? Presumably if it is not on the wearer's wrist it would cease to indicate movement, and if then put in water might indicate that it is immersed?

It would certainly stop measuring heart beat and probably steps as well. I think this comes down to what is making the police so confident in their hypothesis, and what you've described would probably result in steps and heart stopping at the same time and that throws up various scenarios and I don't see them being so confident. However, let's say the data showed she took her last step at 9.20 and her (please let this not be the case) last breath at 9.30 then this points to her being in the water sadly. How she got there is anybodys guess though, I'm not buying the falling in for various reasons, I think she was assaulted by someone who may then have removed her somehow.

 

[cottonweaver]

There’s a huge difference between identifying a likely cause and warning against a low risk but potentially fatal hazard.

To decide upon a probable cause and more importantly to rule out other possibilities means you need to be fairly confident in that the explanation offered is vastly more likely than any of the others.

You can drown in a paddling pool, and there probably at least once reported account of someone drowning in a puddle. The odds of it happening are down to the circumstances.you need to look at the mechanism to understand the risk factors.

To drown you need to aspirate water. Unconsciousness, Restricted mobility, neurological impairment or developmental factors increase the risk.
A head injury is perhaps the most obvious cause.
How credible the drowning hypothesis is depends evaluation of the risk as opposed to other possibilities.

If the water was very deep at that point then the likelihood of an accidental head injury is lowered, the small risk of cold shock is raised because of the chance of sudden deeper immersion into colder water.
This is the reason police warn kids against swimming in deep chalk pit lakes in the summer.

However a huge number of youngsters and adults ignore the warnings every year and drownings are tragic but very rare.



The bank is grassy and if there was a rock or similar hard object you would expect it to be of forensic value. But if it’s something fitting the criteria has been found and removed for analysis by police I would be even more surprised and the outright rejection of third party involvement.

Shallow water blackout is an example of a hard to detect cause in recreational swimmers. It’s not really applicable in this case

What the investigators need to decide if the likelihood of all or any of these factors is substantial.


In young infants drowning a bath or paddling pool is tragic and incidents are well reported . Thankfully they are rare , but awareness of the danger likely prevents deaths even . In that case any overstatement of risk is something I approve of.

Ruling out third party involvement that early bid what drew my attention to the case.

You can for example drown as a result of a head injury directly or indirectly inflicted by a third party. There doesn’t need to necessarily be a blood at the scene.

There are other examples where death from a fall is more certain, figuring out wether third party involvement was a factor can be even more challenging. In the absence of evidence those cases are generally closed quickly.


Maybe I’m missing something but what I’m seeing, is no reports of any signs of entry at the bank, a strong swimmer fully clothed and no indication of severe intoxication cognitive impairment or other factors.

Now the river search has come up empty the explanation becomes less plausible. But even if she did drown , the circumstances suggest that third party involvement can’t really be ruled out. The otherwise low risk means it becomes a possibility that’s worth investigating.

Cases are regularly closed even when obvious criminality is involved. Behind the scenes the ratiionale is sometimes to bring closure for families when answers and or justice are likely to remain elusive.

It seems a but early for that approach, but in this case I’m not privy to any inside information.

it's very long so my reply has to be long. Sorry!
yes, I mentioned aspiration in my earlier post you're replying to ( 'sudden aspiration of water, hyperventilation, blood pressure rise and the risk of cardio vascular difficulties etc)

Are we - the public - great, do you think at calculating risks?
eg with accidental risks. If you had to guess between the number of accidental drownings* per year vs accidental cycling deaths on the road or deaths due to house fires which would be higher IYO?

myths mainly from the news media etc:
-LE have said that they never ruled-out 3rd party involvement & are still open to evidence of this ( nor did they ' rule it out early')
- LE have said that they're working with national, acknowledged authorities/ experts specific to this river & estuary. These advisers have said that this is a particularly complex river to search. (I can only go off that, cuz they sure know more than the likes of me)
- The 'river search' has not really 'come out empty', this is why the river search continues today, further down.It's 28 miles long. Takes time. (Supt was at pains to explain that the water search only concludes as complete when the specialist partners & authorities deem that no further search is of value. )
- LE have said they conducted evidence -gathering at the bench on the day she went missing.( afaik they have found nothing of forensic value, such as you mention eg. a rock above or rock underwater(?)
- LE have repeated that they still don't rule out any scenario which led to NB entering the water, whether distraction, trip, medical event etc. They said this was speculative ( Naturally - we'd need to wait for coroner's finding after body recovery to get more evidence)

- The case investigation so far, as NB as a misper, has been peer-reviewed by the police national search advisor and the national crime agency. (Weird, I know, but am assuming that the NCA know better than me, so I personally don't feel qualified to criticise LancsPolice's approach atm when it's already been peer-reviewed. In cases where LE obviously 'drop a ball' I tend to be quite vocal but there's nothing jumping out for me atm.)

Also, you said: 'Cases are regularly closed even when obvious criminality is involved. Behind the scenes the ratiionale is sometimes to bring closure for families when answers and or justice are likely to remain elusive.'
Would be interested to know more about this, if you have a link. Do you mean missing persons cases like this one, summary offences or some kind of minor offence?

 

[wackyw]

Is there anyone local to the area on this thread?

I grew up in Garstang 5 miles away ...

 

[ginnyw]

I find it difficult to erase from my mind what the 'finder of Willow running loose' said originally...

She said she spotted Willow as she came through a gate onto the towpath but became suspicious when she saw the harness and lead on the floor. A man then came through behind her with his dog and spotted the phone.

"The gent has looked on the floor and two feet from the bench there’s a phone," she said. "I think she’s either been faffing about at the edge of the river because the dog’s been smelling fishing bait and she’s slipped or she’s had a medical episode."

The 'gent' with the dog being who exactly? The 70 year old with the fluffy white dog?

The story then morphed into...
A business owner - who did not wish to be named - says she raised the alarm after finding Willow. She said the phone was found under a tree which has a sign warning of deep water nailed to it.
The woman said: "I saw the dog and I recognised it, but I suddenly couldn't think whose dog it was. There was a mobile phone on the bench and there was also something between the bench and the river so I went and looked, and it was a dog harness." She said the dog looked "worried" and after speaking to her daughter-in-law was told it belonged to Nicola.

Then there was this...Nicola, who has been missing for six days looked "completely normal" just minutes before vanishing, the last person known to have seen her has said. The mortgage advisor was seen at about 9.20am on a footpath by the River Wyre in the village of St Michael's in Lancashire by a man walking his labrador, it has been reported. His wife said how he told her that there was "nothing unusual" about Nicola when he saw her. The software engineer, who didn't want to be named said: "In the field, there were about three people, including my husband. He said there was nothing unusual about her and she seemed completely normal. “I’d often see her and say hello. I always thought she looked very nicely dressed, in her bobble hat and smart Wellington boots. It’s just horrible to know she’s missing.”

All so very confusing

Yes, very confusing indeed. And if I've got this right, NB was actually not wearing that 'bobble hat' on that day, was she? Even though it was extremely cold, about 1 degree.

 

[ayrshireguy]

I think it’s been based on the level of resources that we’re deployed early on in the investigation. More info here about how misper investigations and risk assessments are carried out. Missing persons | College of Policing

Edited to add

High risk:

The risk of serious harm to the subject or the public is assessed as very likely.

This category almost always requires the immediate deployment of police resources – action may be delayed in exceptional circumstances, such as searching water or forested areas during hours of darkness. A member of the senior management team must be involved in the examination of initial lines of enquiry and approval of appropriate staffing levels. Such cases should lead to the appointment of an investigating officer (IO) and possibly an SIO, and a police search adviser (PolSA). There should be a press/media strategy and/or close contact with outside agencies. Family support should be put in place where appropriate. The MPB should be notified of the case without undue delay. Children’s services must also be notified immediately if the person is under 18.

You can see how some people would believe that it was treated as high risk

 

[Firstsnow4]

You can see how some people would believe that it was treated as high risk

Yes definitely. Especially when you compare to how they treat medium risk mispers. IMO.

 

[Mr X]

IMO the underwater search technique is interesting. Was -anything- found in the "deep hole" part of the River? I know they are professional and am not saying they don't know what they are doing but were any objects actually removed or was absolutely nothing found in there? Surely there must be some pieces of water logged wood around.

It seems to me that the idea would be to physically try and get everything out. Presumably when using a sonar there must be a point at which you have to ignore things which are probably just the riverbed. It is all very well having a screen in front of you but interpreting the signals is going to be quite complex. The bloke doing the survey IMO was in it for publicity.

It seems to me you could miss something positioned in a 'hole" or under a ledge or something.

Have there been any physical investigations other than the divers?

Grappling irons seem wise.

I suppose with the time line if there was a body it would have floated but what if there was an unusual underwater shape in the 'deep hole' area ?
I don't think the fishing club people would call it that if it was just a bit of the river which was slightly deeper than usual. There is something unusual about this area IMO.


The term "deep hole" originally came from a map of the area drawn up by a local fishing club.

 

[EyeSpyU]

This is exactly why I don’t think it was an opportunist attack by a stranger.
None of this appears to make sense therefore it probably didn’t happen in this way. There will be a scenario in which this makes sense.

We just don’t know it yet. I believe for this to have happened she must have known her assailant and perhaps been willing to deviate slightly from normal routine. Had she agreed to meet someone on or after walk… gone to sit in a car to apparently sign some papers….

I think it will be work related as she’d in a role that brings her into contact with new people. She seems a lovely and very attractive woman

She wouldn’t leave her dog and phone there to go and sign papers in a car. A car parked a long way from there too.

 

[rhino]

Why would it matter if the camera filmed them if they broke it? I'm staggered your doubting somebody took 1 cctv camera out on a busy road??

RSBM

IMO they’re not doubting the possibility of that one thing occurring. Not doubting the feasibility of ANY of those things - in isolation. But for ALL of those things to have happened, at the exact time…

 

[Carbonad0]

Be gentle, long time lurker and keen follower, first time poster.

Has anyone else noticed in the most recent official press conference with Sally Riley on Tuesday just gone, she mentions and uses words below in bold (I have bolded) which are past tense? as if she isn't in the water anymore but they know she was at some point?

"We can say with confidence, therefore, that we believe Nicola remained in the riverside area. I understand that this is frustrating for those observing the investigation when the river has been searched and Nicola has not been found. That does not mean, however, that Nicola was not in the river at some point due to the tidal flow of the river. For this reason, our search of the river and the river banks extends out to the sea, particularly the area from Knott End, out towards Morecambe.

 

[PeggyHenry]

I'm currently studying for my BSc in Psychology and there is just so much to it, even down to how we visually process our environment. It is really complex.

I did bsc psychology .. recall and facial recognition big complex areas with many influential factors. So if someone thought they saw Nicola with her dog.. then it could be that Willow is the only springer spaniel that they see regularly.. and therefore when they see a female shaped figure with springer spaniel they immediately believe it to be Nicola.
In this case someone saw Nicola in the upper field and it may be that it’s not a certainty.. but it’s the only thing to go on.

If foul play is involved and Nicola was removed from the scene.. she is either concealed or has been taken away by a vehicle. If it was someone known to her I can see a scenario occurring such as’ Hi Nicola thought I’d catch you here. I’ve brought the paperwork … Can you just come to my car and check it.’ She takes Willow and goes to the car. Car owner returns with items and discards them and Willow at the bench.

Ok … sounds unlikely unless there was a signature she or they required for a mortgage.

I’m just trying to think of a scenario which fits the known facts.

 

[SpursGyal]

IMO the underwater search technique is interesting. Was -anything- found in the "deep hole" part of the River? I know they are professional and am not saying they don't know what they are doing but were any objects actually removed or was absolutely nothing found in there? Surely there must be some pieces of water logged wood around.

It seems to me that the idea would be to physically try and get everything out. Presumably when using a sonar there must be a point at which you have to ignore things which are probably just the riverbed. It is all very well having a screen in front of you but interpreting the signals is going to be quite complex. The bloke doing the survey IMO was in it for publicity.

It seems to me you could miss something positioned in a 'hole" or under a ledge or something.

Have there been any physical investigations other than the divers?

Grappling irons seem wise.

I suppose with the time line if there was a body it would have floated but what if there was an unusual underwater shape in the 'deep hole' area ?
I don't think the fishing club people would call it that if it was just a bit of the river which was slightly deeper than usual. There is something unusual about this area IMO.


The term "deep hole" originally came from a map of the area drawn up by a local fishing club.

They have one of if not the best sonar machines available. They can see sticks on a river bed, they have a team of divers on standby to check any area they see something that needs checking or to check areas they don’t see the sonar can see clear enough.

It is safe to say Nicola is not in the river, in the areas that SGI searched.

 

[Cluella DeVille]

Difficulty is how much of what we read is true and how much is media hype ?
I would be inclined to believe only what the police tell us.

Yes I agree, distinguishing truth and sensationalism is a problem. But that's a very specific statement "The gent has looked on the floor and two feet from the bench there’s a phone," she said. "I think she’s either been faffing about at the edge of the river because the dog’s been smelling fishing bait and she’s slipped or she’s had a medical episode."
Use of the words 'gent' and 'faffing about' indicates to me the person has been quoted 'verbatim' rather than a sentence hyped by a journalist. There is also no indication this person tied the dog to a bench.

It also raises a question in my mind...was this lady dog walker and a 'gent' who came through the gate with his dog the first to come across the scene, put the phone on the bench and both went on their way. Then along comes 'the business owner' who sees the phone on the bench and calls her daughter in law? <modsnip - off limits>

 

[rhino]

Be gentle, long time lurker and keen follower, first time poster.

Has anyone else noticed in the most recent official press conference with Sally Riley on Tuesday just gone, she mentions and uses words below in bold (I have bolded) which are past tense? as if she isn't in the water anymore but they know she was at some point?

Welcome!

That was discussed a little earlier, it could be possible (theoretically at least, I’m not poking that hornet’s nest as none of the experts seem to agree) that if NB had entered the river then her body could be out at sea or very nearly by now, and therefore not still in the river.

 

[PeggyHenry]

Be gentle, long time lurker and keen follower, first time poster.

Has anyone else noticed in the most recent official press conference with Sally Riley on Tuesday just gone, she mentions and uses words below in bold (I have bolded) which are past tense? as if she isn't in the water anymore but they know she was at some point?

I think she means that Nicola may have been in the river at some point but is no longer in the river as she has reached the sea. I don’t think she means Nicola was once in water and now may be on dry land.. she is differentiating between river water and sea. Imo.