UK UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #2

[Konstantin]

I agree that MG was taken as the kipper photo this makes perfect sense, I would have asked MG who went with him when he went to Shorrolds Road (twice apparently) because if he says SF or KR went with him this could explain completely the HR sighting. As for what CV looked like there must be a picture somewhere? might be hard to locate but possible.

For the record MG and NH JC (not cannan) are on Linkedin I have spoken to JC and got a reply to a question I asked maybe he would answer that question?

Well, when MG went there with a colleague he actually spoke to HR, and asked him if he had seen SJL and anyone else, so it is not the case that HR saw those two and mistook them for SJL and Mr Kipper. But it could be the case that when HR was asked to make an efit he recalled MG's face and described that because in reality he either didn't see a male outside the next door house to his, or he did briefly and didn't notice him that much.

 

[Crusader21]

But it could be the case that when HR was asked to make an efit he recalled MG's face and described that ....

Once HR recanted after sensationally telling the police that 'SL was bundled in to a car', imo his 'evidence' should be taken with a large dose of salt .....

 

[Terryb808]

It’s very frustrating that there’s so much circumstantial evidence that Mr Kipper never existed and the James Galway man is someone of interest and the police just ignore it all.
I’m sure they could (if they really wanted to) get old photos of CV to compare with the James Galway man.
There’s more mileage in this line of enquiry than JC did it, keep looking and we’ll pin it on him.

 

[Konstantin]

Once HR recanted after sensationally telling the police that 'SL was bundled in to a car', imo his 'evidence' should be taken with a large dose of salt .....

From my reading of the AS book, in fact what appears to have happened is that the reason the police actually got involved and treated SJL's disappearance as serious so early on, given that she was a grown adult and at the time the police didn't take adult mispers seriously until at least 48 hours had passed, was that HR was effectively reporting witnessing a potential abduction in broad daylight.

So I suppose it is because of this that they found her car so fast, on the same night she was reported missing.

However, HR sent them on a wild goose chase it seems. There were other parts of his testimony that the police found did not measure up, including his original assertion that he heard a door inside the house next to his, the one SJL was supposed to be showing, slam, when in fact that could have been the other neighbour on the other side to him. HR's testimony that someone had gone into the Shorrolds property is not really worth anything at all.

 

[Terryb808]

From my reading of the AS book, in fact what appears to have happened is that the reason the police actually got involved and treated SJL's disappearance as serious so early on, given that she was a grown adult and at the time the police didn't take adult mispers seriously until at least 48 hours had passed, was that HR was effectively reporting witnessing a potential abduction in broad daylight.

So I suppose it is because of this that they found her car so fast, on the same night she was reported missing.

However, HR sent them on a wild goose chase it seems. There were other parts of his testimony that the police found did not measure up, including his original assertion that he heard a door inside the house next to his, the one SJL was supposed to be showing, slam, when in fact that could have been the other neighbour on the other side to him. HR's testimony that someone had gone into the Shorrolds property is not really worth anything at all.

Makes you wonder if DL had anything to do with HR upping the stakes by claiming he saw SJL abducted.

 

[Crusader21]

Just watching 'The Man Who Killed Suzy Lamplugh' on Channel 5 now.

It feels like two completely different cases, the one portrayed on TV and that what's been discussed here!

SL has been let down very badly indeed ....

 

[Konstantin]

Makes you wonder if DL had anything to do with HR upping the stakes by claiming he saw SJL abducted.

I'd be really interested in your thoughts on how the unfolding story with HR is portrayed in the AS book. AS is a bit flimsy on details of how things actually went down with HR but there's an interesting thing he reveals when he talks about how MG calls the police to report SJL missing and AS casually adds that HR was "now saying" that the woman he saw had been bundled into a car.

AS doesn't spell it out, but from this you can see that the first conversation MG had with HR was not the last that day.

There must have been at least two conversations with HR. The first when MG and probably SF went to Shorrolds to see if SJL was at the address. AS does not give info on how this interaction happened but either MG knocked on his door or he came to the door or window alerted by MG maybe shouting SJL's name through the letterbox (if the latter was the case, and he was alerted that way, it suggests MG didn't bring keys with him and didn't check inside the house. The police checked inside the house later that evening, so either they had a key or it had a flimsy Yale lock that gives without causing much damage to the door--you don't always need a big red key.) I doubt that HR related his tale of seeing a man unprompted, it is more likely that MG said, we're looking for our colleague who was supposed to be showing a male client around here at this time. Blonde, yay high, did you see her? And he said he recalled a man. Did he give a description of the man to MG or did that come later, and he effectively just described MG?

By the time MG called the police on the phone that evening to report her missing, HR was "now saying" his expanded story meaning there was a second chat, but with who and how did that go down? Did someone else go to Shorrolds looking for SJL and ask HR to tell them what they saw? Did MG call HR? Meaning he got his number when he spoke to him the first time? Asking maybe did she come back? Did HR call MG having been given a card, call me if you remember anything else?

I think these details are important if we want to understand how information got out there, who told what to whom? No?

 

[Terryb808]

Just watching 'The Man Who Killed Suzy Lamplugh' on Channel 5 now.

It feels like two completely different cases, the one portrayed on TV and that what's been discussed here!

SL has been let down very badly indeed ....

Exactly, even criminologist DW followed this line and wasn’t prepared to step out of line.
In my experience this is unusual, DW usually looks at things far more objectively.
I expected him to at least consider other possibilities, IMO this was very disappointing, not at all like him.

 

[WestLondoner]

The simplest explanation of HR's contribution is that he's a fantasist and / or he seeks approval by telling people what they want to hear.

- MG asked him if he'd seen anyone at 37SR, so he had.
- He was asked if he had seen a blonde woman with a man, so he had.
- When it transpired that MG was worried about this woman, HR had obligingly seen her being carried off.
- When the police questioned this, he agreed that he hadn't seen this.
- He was asked to describe the man he saw outside 37SR, he described the man he saw outside 37SR, i.e. MG.
- When later the owner of an abandoned BMW was traced, he was able to prove he was in Belgium the day SJL disappeared, but HR looked at his photo and confirmed that he was definitely "Mr Kipper".
- He heard a couple leaving 37SR and saw Mr Kipper, but he failed to notice MG pounding noisily on the door later.

And so on.

The thing is, there must have been two MG visits to 37SR. The first time, he went there and banged on the door because he didn't have the keys. This would be the visit HR noticed, when he and SF were seen standing back from the house looking up at it, as you would if you were trying to see if there was any sign of activity inside. The second visit was the one where he took the keys and searched inside. This mad less noise so HR did not notice it. HR has simply confused the two and not realised that the man he saw outside had come back and was, in fact, MG.

The AS account and the reconstruction alike are unhelpfully unclear on who went there when looking for SJL. The reconstruction can't be trusted because it shows SJL reaching past MG at his desk to get the keys. We know he had been gone for half an hour at that time so this simply cannot have happened.

 

[Crusader21]

This is completely my own view and it is definately not intended to offend anyone, it is an attempt to further understand what was going on that day.

It's my undersatnding HR was gay. How does this have any bearing on the case?

HR was sitting in his front living room in 35 SR. The house next door was up for sale. HR heard noises from outside. He saw a male and female. With either of these individuals / or indeed both, potentially becoming his new next door neighbour(s) he looked at them.

He admitted he didn't look closely at the 'striking' blonde but could describe in great detail the male. I believe his orientation led him to view the male in close detail whilst glancing at the female.

I too believe HR was describing MG in detail, with the female being one of the other Sturgis employees ....

 

[WestLondoner]

If you look at the pencil sketch's face below the nose, it's MG, basically, along with the hair, eye colour and eyebrow shape.

 

[Cluesleuth]

In the Footsteps of a killer tv doc bought the Suzy Lamplugh case to my attention. After reading The Suzy Lamplugh Story by AS I was intrigued. Im probably on catch up with all the case details but Im hoping I can contribute something to the discussion here. I like a challenging case.

 

[WestLondoner]

The issue around HR being gay is that it led the police to make another one of their disastrous handwavey errors. In his account, HR did not identify SJL. The police should have proceeded on the basis that maybe she was never there. Instead they assumed that she was there but HR didn't notice her because he was letching at the bloke.

So the police identified her as SJL, based on exactly nothing. They then put this assumption out there as fact.

For my money, MG and SF went to Shorrolds looking for SJL but couldn't get in because they didn't have the keys. They didn't have the keys because they assumed SJL had taken them. When he got back to the office, MG found they did in fact have the keys, and later went back, accompanied this time by someone else, to look for her inside.

This was when he spoke to HR. Because MG had previously turned up with a woman and this time was with someone else, HR did not connect that it was the same person. So when asked to describe the man he had seen with the woman earlier, he described MG much as he might look seen through a net curtain.

 

[WestLondoner]

Hi Cluesleuth (and welcome)

I recommend reading the David Videcette book if you haven't. Together with the AS book, it gives a quite different slant on what probably happened. It almost certainly does not involve John Cannan ('JC').

 

[Cluesleuth]

The issue around HR being gay is that it led the police to make another one of their disastrous handwavey errors. In his account, HR did not identify SJL. The police should have proceeded on the basis that maybe she was never there. Instead they assumed that she was there but HR didn't notice her because he was letching at the bloke.

So the police identified her as SJL, based on exactly nothing. They then put this assumption out there as fact.

For my money, MG and SF went to Shorrolds looking for SJL but couldn't get in because they didn't have the keys. They didn't have the keys because they assumed SJL had taken them. When he got back to the office, MG found they did in fact have the keys, and later went back, accompanied this time by someone else, to look for her inside.

This was when he spoke to HR. Because MG had previously turned up with a woman and this time was with someone else, HR did not connect that it was the same person. So when asked to describe the man he had seen with the woman earlier, he described MG much as he might look seen through a net curtain.

Do we have direct confirmation from the police
1. how may times MG or anyone else from the office accompanying him to the property entered the the house before police did.
2. That MG had in his possession 'the office key' to Sharrolds rd.
3. In his own words in the Channel 5 programme the Vanishing of Suzzy Lamplugh JC said in his own words 'Suzy asked him to get the keys for Sharrolds rd she was going to do a quick showing and then go for lunch.
So if he gave her the keys she had the key
or he handed her the wrong keys? for that we would need to know how the keys were arranged on the key board. Were they arranged alphabetically all S addresses on one S hook. Did they hold keys for any properties in Stevenage road and was that hook next to or on the same hook as the Sharrolds road hook?

To be honest the dynamics in the office that day need to be scrutinized in much more detail.
Can I ask is there a cold case team still avail to correspond with?

 

[Cluesleuth]

Hi Cluesleuth (and welcome)

I recommend reading the David Videcette book if you haven't. Together with the AS book, it gives a quite different slant on what probably happened. It almost certainly does not involve John Cannan ('JC').

Thank you WestLondoner
Yes I have read DV book I thought it was light on detail, I was disappointed he upset AL that was a missed opportunity

 

[WestLondoner]

Do we have direct confirmation from the police
1. how may times MG or anyone else from the office accompanying him to the property entered the the house before police did.
2. That MG had in his possession 'the office key' to Sharrolds rd.
3. In his own words in the Channel 5 programme the Vanishing of Suzzy Lamplugh JC said in his own words 'Suzy asked him to get the keys for Sharrolds rd she was going to do a quick showing and then go for lunch.
So if he gave her the keys she had the key
or he handed her the wrong keys? for that we would need to know how the keys were arranged on the key board. Were they arranged alphabetically all S addresses on one S hook. Did they hold keys for any properties in Stevenage road and was that hook next to or on the same hook as the Sharrolds road hook?

To be honest the dynamics in the office that day need to be scrutinized in much more detail.
Can I ask is there a cold case team still avail to correspond with?

1/ we don't know. Police apparently searched the next day.
2/ The police have admitted that they must have had the keys, as entry was not forced.
3/ MG can't have given SJL the keys, as he left the office before she did. The reconstruction showing her leaning past him to collect them is simply inaccurate.

There is a supposed team still on the case, but they are not investigating it - they are focused on making it fit John Cannan.

 

[Terryb808]

In the Footsteps of a killer tv doc bought the Suzy Lamplugh case to my attention. After reading The Suzy Lamplugh Story by AS I was intrigued. Im probably on catch up with all the case details but Im hoping I can contribute something to the discussion here. I like a challenging case.

Welcome to the thread, I’m sure I can speak fo most of us when I say feel free to ask any questions and we’ll do our best to answer them.

 

[Cluesleuth]

1/ we don't know. Police apparently searched the next day.
2/ The police have admitted that they must have had the keys, as entry was not forced.
3/ MG can't have given SJL the keys, as he left the office before she did. The reconstruction showing her leaning past him to collect them is simply inaccurate.

There is a supposed team still on the case, but they are not investigating it - they are focused on making it fit John Cann

Yes I did read in the DV book that that he had derived from some paperwork that the door was not forced for entry.
Im not entirely sure they used the keys from Sturgis office to enter the property tho Im leaving that one open for now.
In DV's book I felt he was trying to convince MG that police used the office key when clearly in the conversation MG had no knowledge of where the key they used came from. When pushed he said the car?
I dont think he would still be holding that line all these later if the police had found the keys in still to be in the office.
DV felt MG was holding something back I get that feeling too.
I agree WestLondoner MG couldnt have given SJL the keys he was out at lunch. JC on the other hand says Suzy asked him to get the keys for her we heard him personally say that in the tv doc The Vanshing of Suzy Lamplugh.
I havent heard much about the owner of Sharrolds road except he was a pilot so I dont have much re any relationship or friends/neighbours who may hold a key?
I find it strange that they would break into Suzys flat the same afternoon as she went missing but leave entering the sharrolds road property where she was suspected to have taken a viewer until the next day.

just my opinion

 

[Cluesleuth]

Welcome to the thread, I’m sure I can speak fo most of us when I say feel free to ask any questions and we’ll do our best to answer them.

Thank you Terryb808 I hope the recent tv exposure will bring more people to the forum.

Questions I have loads
firstly what do you know about the 'bike contract' written against the 142 Wardo entry at the top of the page?