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

[WestLondoner]

A more common name like SKIPPER perhaps? I think we would all like to have an explaination why that name appears along side Kipper on the Incident Room whiteboard

Another way of reading this is that the police didn't believe Kipper was a real name and thought she meant some other name. So the police decided she may have meant Skipper, like they decided she had been IDed at the property when she had not.

Was the caller a friend who knew of the lost diary and where it was lost/found and rang to enquire if she had been to collect them as she needed to speak with SJL urgently, on learning she hadnt they left their name and a tel number for SJL to call her when SJL arrived. Such was their concern to speak to SJL that they instructed the Landlord to keep her talking and not let her leave by telling her he couldnt find the diary and chq book.

Dl may have heard about the trip to the PoW from SL or MG. DL called or visited other witnesses, didnt she?

The problem with all these accounts is that there's no time for any of this to have occurred, nor has anybody ever come forward in support of the idea that it did.

All we know is that at some point after the banks opened that morning, someone at the PoW rang SJL's bank to report finding her cheque book. The bank looks up SJL's work number and after some interval rings her to tell her. After some further interval she rings the pub to arrange a visit after work. Some time after this someone then rings her to organise a viewing at 6pm so this means she needs to change her arrangement to visit the pub. She then makes that call. All this has to transpire in a maximum of about 3 hours fitted into a work morning in an office which is one person down, i.e. she doesn't get to do all this instantly. Moreover we know there was other stuff happening - for example the dispute about whose bid on whichever property was to go forward. Where in that timeline does she have an opportunity to do all that, plus phone up other people about her ever-changing plans to go to the PoW - people who have never come forward to say they are Sarah or whoever? Nobody at work can even remember knowing about the lost property, so we don't know how the police knew where it was. This makes much of what else they reckon they remember a bit suspect.

In my opinion what pulled JC's name into the SJL case was because of who he said he bought the mini from.

JC claimed to have bought the car off some bloke and that bloke had killed Shirley Banks and SJL. The context was he was trying to make some imaginary person was the one they should be looking for. He's not very smart and he's a psychopath, so i am not sure what weight to attach to this.

 

[WestLondoner]

Yes exactly, I have also read it quoted that it was a name he used himself.
I don’t believe in coincidences when crime is involved and this is a big one.
The problem with proving JC remained in London until the Thursday and the Gallows Bridge sighting is that all those that might have been involved have passed away.
The police failed to confirm his alibi at the time and it’s too late now.
JC is the only person who knows for sure and he’s not saying.

According to CBD he claimed to have bought it off someone called "Hodgeson". Is there some significance to this made-up name?

 

[WestLondoner]

I still think the only way to move forward is to search the PoW and the adjacent railway embankment.
This would confirm or debunk DV’s narrative and close off one possibility.

Yep. If that comes up empty then we have finally - after 36 years - searched all the four places she had reason to be going: her flat for tennis kit, 37SR, 123SR (for whatever non-abduction reason took her there) and the PoW. The first three were searched on the day, the latter never has been, essentially because the only person the police spoke to said she never went there. He was either 1/ her killer or 2/ telling the truth. The police just assumed the latter.

 

[Cluesleuth]

Worth noting KIPPER/SKIPPER

Its been pointed out to me that in the AS book pg 126 that a young BBC journalist that SJL knew had the surname Skipper. He was questioned and elimated from the enquiry.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Wouldn’t the police need some kind of actual evidence then and now to search the pub?
Is it possible they have requested to search but been turned down for legal reasons?

What if the landlords voluntarily agreed - do they still need 'evidence' to enforce

 

[shadwell]

In my opinion what pulled JC's name into the SJL case was because of who he said he bought the mini from.

As it goes, that’s a name that’s currently edging its way forward in my attempts to make sense of the events of 28/7/86.

 

[asyousay]

I still think the only way to move forward is to search the PoW and the adjacent railway embankment.
This would confirm or debunk DV’s narrative and close off one possibility.

Well that’s on DV to do that and he won’t at the moment so that speaks volumes about how much he wants this solved.

 

[WestLondoner]

Well that’s on DV to do that and he won’t at the moment so that speaks volumes about how much he wants this solved.

How is it on DV? He's a private citizen with no powers of entry and if he barges in he risks contaminating a crime scene. It's not his job to detect crimes. The police have said they'll leave no stone unturned and he's pointed them towards an obvious stone to turn over. Nobody who's seen their "evidence" against Cannan, e.g. the CPS, believes it, so they need to come up with a better answer.

 

[asyousay]

How is it on DV? He's a private citizen with no powers of entry and if he barges in he risks contaminating a crime scene. It's not his job to detect crimes. The police have said they'll leave no stone unturned and he's pointed them towards an obvious stone to turn over. Nobody who's seen their "evidence" against Cannan, e.g. the CPS, believes it, so they need to come up with a better answer.

He has been told he has to bring evidence to the table. He has literally zero evidence and he won’t start a crowd funder and won’t do anything to prove he isn’t somebody trying to make a name and money off the back of this case.

So yes it’s entirety down to him to prove he just hasn’t made up a ton of crap to sell a book. The Police and the family won’t listen to him and that speaks volumes. He has nothing but a theory and he hasn’t done anything since his chat in December to move his theory forward - the question is why?

 

[asyousay]

Any of us could walk into a police station and claim something random - are LE meant to follow up on every randoms theory with zero evidence?

 

[Terryb808]

How is it on DV? He's a private citizen with no powers of entry and if he barges in he risks contaminating a crime scene. It's not his job to detect crimes. The police have said they'll leave no stone unturned and he's pointed them towards an obvious stone to turn over. Nobody who's seen their "evidence" against Cannan, e.g. the CPS, believes it, so they need to come up with a better answer.

Couldn’t be a more true statement, DV has zero powers to instigate a search without the full cooperation of the owners of the PoW and it’s not in their interests to do this.
Also a full forensic search would be very expensive and who’s going to fund this. The police certainly don’t appear interested in funding anything.

 

[asyousay]

Couldn’t be a more true statement, DV has zero powers to instigate a search without the full cooperation of the owners of the PoW and it’s not in their interests to do this.
Also a full forensic search would be very expensive and who’s going to fund this. The police certainly don’t appear interested in funding anything.

Yes because he has zero proof of anything. He can start a gofundme to move this forward but in December he said he was reluctant to go down that route.


He doesn’t need to do a search he can get these people he talked to go to the police with their new whiteness statements and he has loads of avenues to prove he is isn’t simply blowing Hot Air. But he won’t because he has nothing of anything of substance to prove his theory right.


MOO

 

[asyousay]

So a question for people who think LE should bend over backwards for a man with not a single bit of evidence.

1) Should LE chase up every theory that people have that decided to walk into a police station and claim they know something?

2) if you think they should who exactly would fund the extra man power this would need to make work?

3) At what Line do the police say “ hold on we need evidence before we can proceed with this”

2) What if LE find nothing how is the cost and the general public going to feel at more resources wasted when it could be used elsewhere?

 

[Terryb808]

Yes because he has zero proof of anything. He can start a to move this forward but in December he said he was reluctant to go down that route.


He doesn’t need to do a search he can get these people he talked to go to the police with their new whiteness statements and he has loads of avenues to prove he is isn’t simply blowing Hot Air. But he won’t because he has nothing of anything of substance to prove his theory right.


MOO

I can't believe that an ex Scotland Yard detective would have submitted a file without including witness statement. It seems the Met have taken the same approach as the CPS when their file on JC was submitted. They rejected it as having insufficient evidence.
DV could have tried crowd funding, but without getting permission from the owners it would be a waste of time.
As has been said in the past, the only actual facts in this case are:
1. SJL left the office at approx. 12.40pm.
2. Her car was found in Stevenage Road at 10.03pm.
3. No solid witness identification relating to her whereabouts has been confirmed, she disappeared without trace.
The Met can't prove JC had anything to do with SJL's disappearance, they have no evidence he knew SJL or was in Fulham the day she disappeared. There's no link to him at all, however, there is a link to CV & the PoW. SJL did intend to go there at some point, so at the very least it should have been searched in 1986 and certainly should now.
It's about checking all possibilities, leaving no stone unturned (as the Met said in public to the press), as WestLondoner has already pointed out, this seems to apply to stones that might just link to JC.

 

[Jenesaisquoi]

Maybe LE are waiting for JC to croak before they go down the PoW search route. If he makes some kind of deathbed confession then they can investigate that first. This assumes his death will be in the next few weeks.

 

[Cluesleuth]

Does anyone know the original number plate of the mini found in JC's garage?

 

[lee sumner]

Worth noting KIPPER/SKIPPER

Its been pointed out to me that in the AS book pg 126 that a young BBC journalist that SJL knew had the surname Skipper. He was questioned and elimated from the enquiry.

yes, leslie skipper. he was a friend of suzy, and worked for the BBC.

 

[lee sumner]

Does anyone know the original number plate of the mini found in JC's garage?

HWL 507N.

 

[sian morris]

Does anyone know the original number plate of the mini found in JC's garage?

HWL 507N (p124 'Ladykiller' by Berry-Dee and Odell)

Also 'The driver's door did not function properly and Shirley used the door on the passenger side to get in and out of the car.'

 

[Jenesaisquoi]

I wonder if JC fixed the driver’s door or got it fixed?