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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #421
AL doesn’t admit to be dumped that weekend?

why would he?
AS book says it was known among SL friends she was going to end it. He also has made conflicting statements or bluntly he has lied about what happened and when. But can’t remember if he rang SL or she rang him? Really? The last time you speak to you girlfriend and you can’t remember that? He also said SL stuff was stolen on Friday and they went to the POW after mossops, then told DV it never happened? Not exactly reliable but he seemingly had an alibi. It is possible he wasn’t dumped on Friday because he spoke to SL on Sunday and left a message at her workplace on Monday but we can only guess as to what really happened but SL did not see him on Sat and blanked on Sunday so not exactly a happy couple
 
  • #422
that is exactly what I was thinking

The reason I remember this is my mate saying how cut throat the business was among your own colleagues. If he and another agent in his office each had a buyer for the same property, the manager would decide whose bidder to recommend to the seller. On a £200k property, this meant he either made £600 (15% of 2% of £200,000) or he made nil. DV describes exactly such a tense discussion that morning at Sturgis so this was clearly standard.

If a series of sales completed in a bunch, they could easily add up to £1 million which gives SJL her £3000 at month end.
 
  • #423
The reason I remember this is my mate saying how cut throat the business was among your own colleagues. If he and another agent in his office each had a buyer for the same property, the manager would decide whose bidder to recommend to the seller. On a £200k property, this meant he either made £600 (15% of 2% of £200,000) or he made nil. DV describes exactly such a tense discussion that morning at Sturgis so this was clearly standard.

If a series of sales completed in a bunch, they could easily add up to £1 million which gives SJL her £3000 at month end.
This is another reason for SJL to think she’d been hard done by and then add the winner of that little confrontation going to lunch while she stayed in the office, and you can imagine where the mythical Mr Kipper came from.

To flourish as a female in this environment she would need to be tough and determined.

This is why I think she took the hump and decided to nip out anyway and retrieve her things, if she was that tough and determined I can’t see her taking any nonsense from CV if he tried it on.

This may have been what sealed her fate at the PoW. It’s likely DV concluded this and that is why he made a point of the fact it could have been an accident.
 
  • #424
To flourish as a female in this environment she would need to be tough and determined.

This is why I think she took the hump and decided to nip out anyway and retrieve her things, if she was that tough and determined I can’t see her taking any nonsense from CV if he tried it on.

This may have been what sealed her fate at the PoW. It’s likely DV concluded this and that is why he made a point of the fact it could have been an accident

Yes, I can see two possibilities here. One is the confrontation with the angry imminently bankrupt business partner, and the other is what you've outlined.

So possibly CV reads the diary, thinks Well she's a dirty cow, and when she turns up, he says she can have her stuff back if she obliges him there and then. Or something.

She spiritedly tells him where to get off and there's a scuffle in which she dies. He can't report this accident, because her injuries prove she was being sexually assaulted when she sustained them. So he has to cover it up.

If CV is 'James Galway' and he was sighted at 2.45, then allowing for the time involved in attacking, then hiding her, and dumping her car, SJL must have died almost as soon as she arrived at the pub.
 
  • #425
The AS book is pretty clear that AL was not SJL's serious boyfriend, that he was one of a number of men she had been seeing, and that SJL was planning to end things with him. If AS had found that out, it presumably was info given to him via the material he had access to from the police investigation.

It seems that DL was just fixated a bit on AL because he fitted the type of boyfriend she wanted SJL to have. So the impression was given that he was closer and more serious with SJL than was the reality. Probably AL picked that up on the Friday night when they went out.

There could be any number of reasons why AL was odd in his interview with DV. It might have been that DV gave him the impression that he was close to finding out what happened to SJL and when he turned up AL realized this wasn't the case from the questions he was asked. So he felt like his time was wasted. Yes his apparent contradiction of whether he and SJL went to the pub seems odd, but he has an alibi and wasn't involved in her disappearance. If they really didn't go to the pub, it must be weird for him that her stuff was found there. But after all this time, his reaction seemed very raw. But SJL's disappearance must have been traumatic for him, especially if their last conversations were less than amicable or fraught in some way because she meant more to him than he did to her.

I would take his remarks to DV as meaning, well you won't find her because you have nothing new and no one else has found her so why should you, now, after all this time.

If he knew SJL was involved with other men and that something very sinister happened to her as a result of that, he might feel uneasy or his decades old feelings of unease were just stirred up again, even if he has nothing to feel personally threatened about now.
 
  • #426
I still don’t believe DV has solved this . It just doesn’t add up to me and until there is some proof she was planning to visit the POW I’m not buying it.


CV wouldn’t of admitted to her picking up her belongings if he has murdered her that afternoon.


The first book writer also had zero suspicions about him as well.


MOO
 
  • #427
AL doesn’t admit to be dumped that weekend?

why would he?
AS book says it was known among SL friends she was going to end it. He also has made conflicting statements or bluntly he has lied about what happened and when. But can’t remember if he rang SL or she rang him? Really? The last time you speak to you girlfriend and you can’t remember that? He also said SL stuff was stolen on Friday and they went to the POW after mossops, then told DV it never happened? Not exactly reliable but he seemingly had an alibi. It is possible he wasn’t dumped on Friday because he spoke to SL on Sunday and left a message at her workplace on Monday but we can only guess as to what really happened but SL did not see him on Sat and blanked on Sunday so not exactly a happy couple
I still don’t believe DV has solved this . It just doesn’t add up to me and until there is some proof she was planning to visit the POW I’m not buying it.


CV wouldn’t of admitted to her picking up her belongings if he has murdered her that afternoon.


The first book writer also had zero suspicions about him as well.


MOO

Several other people saw the possessions so it was known they were there so CV had witnesses to them being there.

assuming CV did call the bank then at that point he was simply doing the right thing, if something happened to SL it was spur of the moment and only required him to take drastic action to cover his tracks ie he was thinking on the fly it wasn’t some elaborate plan he carried out. It’s likely she turned up and surprised him

AS book is very good BUT he was working from police files so we need to bear that in mind his info was largely second or third hand. He did mention feeling uneasy about CV he thought the events did not add up

DV has not claimed to have solved it he is certain she went to the POW (many more do as well) after that we can without a body only speculate
 
  • #428
Well there is zero evidence she went to the POW and even less that she was murdered there.


She arranged to meet somebody who she knew and trusted and was murdered imo


There is a reason nobody in media or the police are taking his book seriously. Even her own family want nothing to do with his theory’s as memory’s fade with time and he hasn’t got one bit of evidence that says she went to the POW.


I originally thought he had something but the fact he is just sitting on his hands so his book continues to sell points to where his priorities lay. If he genuinely had something then he would be doing a lot more than he has.

MOO
 
  • #429
Well there is zero evidence she went to the POW and even less that she was murdered there.


She arranged to meet somebody who she knew and trusted and was murdered imo


There is a reason nobody in media or the police are taking his book seriously. Even her own family want nothing to do with his theory’s as memory’s fade with time and he hasn’t got one bit of evidence that says she went to the POW.


I originally thought he had something but the fact he is just sitting on his hands so his book continues to sell points to where his priorities lay. If he genuinely had something then he would be doing a lot more than he has.

MOO


This post raises something that I have repeatedly said to other members, what exactly is a fact in this case, not a theory but a fact?

I think DV has found more actual facts than AS but who exactly can we believe in this case? AL who contradicts himself in interviews? JD who came out with the classic "I believe JC had access to a BMW in 1986" really? ok try standing up in court and saying that. A decent barrister would demand he produced evidence not his personal opinion its not a fact but a JD theory and it does not stand up to scrutiny on any level.

Lets be clear about the known facts.

SL went to Sturgis office and arrived shortly before 9am probably about 8.45-8.50am.
She left her office at 12.30-12.40pm
Her car was found in Stevenage Road at 10.01pm

Nothing else in this case is a fact, we are left with lots of holes and nuggets of info and we are left to piece it together.

There is as much evidence that SL went to the POW as she went to Shorrolds ie there is no actual evidence she did either, we simply can only suggest a theory basic on deduction and likely events.

DV has evidence that a stock check occurred at the POW on that morning something nobody else knew, that alone is a gamechanger.
KP the guy who actually employed SL and was MG boss not only popped into the office on Monday 28th but had lunch nearby placing SL in a very difficult situation as she could not risk leaving the office and have him come back to find her running a personal errand, only DV found this vital info. he also found out Hindle and SL had a row over a client that morning and that Hindle and SF were in a relationship factors which all had a bearing on what happened that morning, none of these facts were discovered by AS or seemingly the police. According to James C the junior SL took the keys but the vendor says he only gave the office one set so as they entered the property without breaking the door and had not had new keys cut so how could she have taken the keys? it doesn't add up and as we cannot prove either as a fact we are left sifting through the "likely" scenario which is what sleuthing is all about. I know its a stretch to say that a random person killed SL in a remote location on the spur of the moment but kidnapping a person in broad daylight in London in Summer is just as unlikely and placing her car in a street and not being seen is equally unlikely IMO.

There are in existence some notes written by a writer AB who wrote an article in defence of AS book and as she has now passed away an institution in USA holds her notes some of which were her thoughts about the SL case as she had access to a lot of his notes and evidence. her handwriting is VERY difficult to read but she makes some interesting points one of which heavily suggests the possessions were lost on the Sunday night not the Friday as has been "assumed" but perhaps the most interesting point was her opening statement in which she says "Could it have been planned? If so the planner was meticulous, not only covering their tracks but placing clues in such a way as to confound logical deduction." and my goodness how true that is.

We obviously do not agree but as Sherlock Holmes says "when you have removed the impossible whatever is left however unlikely must be the truth" I think DV wants the truth he is not interested in merely selling books he spend about £50k and i think was astonished that the Met did not search the POW, he wants the truth and so do I with no agenda. If someone could prove 100% it was JC I would accept that. I think CV is number one suspect and I think his ex knows SOMETHING.

I want the truth and to find it we are going to have work very hard and find stuff like AS did and as DV has done.

This case can still be solved but we have 35 years false narrative to unpick

 
  • #430
I don’t believe JC did it but I also don’t believe CV did it either.

Maybe she did meet somebody at a showing that day or she had made plans to meet somebody she knew that lunchtime.


I still believe she was seen that afternoon in a car heading towards Hammersmith so that points towards a single male who had gained her trust.

MOO
 
  • #431
This post raises something that I have repeatedly said to other members, what exactly is a fact in this case, not a theory but a fact?

I think DV has found more actual facts than AS but who exactly can we believe in this case? AL who contradicts himself in interviews? JD who came out with the classic "I believe JC had access to a BMW in 1986" really? ok try standing up in court and saying that. A decent barrister would demand he produced evidence not his personal opinion its not a fact but a JD theory and it does not stand up to scrutiny on any level.

Lets be clear about the known facts.

SL went to Sturgis office and arrived shortly before 9am probably about 8.45-8.50am.
She left her office at 12.30-12.40pm
Her car was found in Stevenage Road at 10.01pm

Nothing else in this case is a fact, we are left with lots of holes and nuggets of info and we are left to piece it together.

There is as much evidence that SL went to the POW as she went to Shorrolds ie there is no actual evidence she did either, we simply can only suggest a theory basic on deduction and likely events.

DV has evidence that a stock check occurred at the POW on that morning something nobody else knew, that alone is a gamechanger.
KP the guy who actually employed SL and was MG boss not only popped into the office on Monday 28th but had lunch nearby placing SL in a very difficult situation as she could not risk leaving the office and have him come back to find her running a personal errand, only DV found this vital info. he also found out Hindle and SL had a row over a client that morning and that Hindle and SF were in a relationship factors which all had a bearing on what happened that morning, none of these facts were discovered by AS or seemingly the police. According to James C the junior SL took the keys but the vendor says he only gave the office one set so as they entered the property without breaking the door and had not had new keys cut so how could she have taken the keys? it doesn't add up and as we cannot prove either as a fact we are left sifting through the "likely" scenario which is what sleuthing is all about. I know its a stretch to say that a random person killed SL in a remote location on the spur of the moment but kidnapping a person in broad daylight in London in Summer is just as unlikely and placing her car in a street and not being seen is equally unlikely IMO.

There are in existence some notes written by a writer AB who wrote an article in defence of AS book and as she has now passed away an institution in USA holds her notes some of which were her thoughts about the SL case as she had access to a lot of his notes and evidence. her handwriting is VERY difficult to read but she makes some interesting points one of which heavily suggests the possessions were lost on the Sunday night not the Friday as has been "assumed" but perhaps the most interesting point was her opening statement in which she says "Could it have been planned? If so the planner was meticulous, not only covering their tracks but placing clues in such a way as to confound logical deduction." and my goodness how true that is.

We obviously do not agree but as Sherlock Holmes says "when you have removed the impossible whatever is left however unlikely must be the truth" I think DV wants the truth he is not interested in merely selling books he spend about £50k and i think was astonished that the Met did not search the POW, he wants the truth and so do I with no agenda. If someone could prove 100% it was JC I would accept that. I think CV is number one suspect and I think his ex knows SOMETHING.

I want the truth and to find it we are going to have work very hard and find stuff like AS did and as DV has done.

This case can still be solved but we have 35 years false narrative to unpick
If I could double like your post I would, my only interest (in the last 2 years plus) has been to help in some way to bring closure to SJL’s family.
Your summary perfectly outlined what few facts we have and the two possibilities left as a result.
The one that will (if true) mean that this will not be solved is the one being the carefully planned abduction.
For someone to plan and remain undetected for 36 years means they did a very good job of covering their tracks.
In this scenario the Met have helped tremendously by following the false trail and adding JC to the mix could not have been better.
So I hope DV is right and that we can close this case for the Lamplugh family.
 
  • #432
Yep. there've really only ever been three plausible possibilities:

1. She was abducted from 37SR
2. She was ambushed at the PoW, by CV or someone else
3. She was abducted from elsewhere.

DV has debunked (IMHO) #1, and has settled on #2. At the very least it is worth searching the PoW and embankment simply to eliminate this possibility, because there's evidence she needed and intended to go there. If this were to happen and nothing found, then we're left with the last - the mystery abductor, of whom she has left absolutely no trace.

It's worth pointing out - and consistent with @TimFisher1965 's comment - that whichever you think happened (or is later proved to have happened), you have to dismiss the majority of the evidence and "witness" sightings.

37SR
If she really did go to 37SR you then have to overlook that she had no keys to get in, and that HR apparently totally failed to notice or mention MG and SF banging much more noisily on the door later. Between this, that the various supposed sketches and efits of "Mr Kipper" are not of the same man, and the fact that nobody's ever been put onto an identity parade, the well-known likeness of the supposed Mr Kipper is almost certainly spurious. All we can really say about it is that MG clearly made a big impression on HR.

Her car was
  • at Stevenage Road by 12.30 (from WJ, which is before she even left Sturgis), then
  • in Stevenage Road by 2pm (cabbie sighting), then
  • in the FPR by BW at 2.30pm,
  • back in Stevenage Road by 3pm (James Galway man sighting), or
  • after 4pm (departure of the BT engineers), or
  • by 5.15PM (owner of the garage returns).
No more than two of those six can be right at the same time.

The calls made by her to the PoW arranging a visit that evening cannot have happened because she wasn't free that evening. She can't have been going there sooner because she was at SR. The calls from a man and woman to the pub asking when she was expected cannot have happened because she wasn't going there.

The PoW story
If you buy the PoW story, then four of the six car sightings are wrong and so is all the evidence and sightings that suggest a visit to 37SR took place.

Mystery abductor
If you buy the mystery abductor hypothesis, then all the sightings and evidence relating to the other two possibilities are wrong except the BW sighting, which suggests she was being abducted while driving her own car.

The police focus on 37SR means there's more "evidence" of that than anything else, but that's because they instantly believed it and did not seek evidence for anything else, not because it's the most likely. If they had said on TV that she had been abducted by a bloke dressed as a clown in a red Noddy car, there would undoubtedly have been confirmatory sightings of him, too.

The torpedo under the waterline here for me is that when, a year on, CV changed his story, the police just assumed that the two otherwise reliable officers who'd talked to him a year before had messed up, and that he had not in fact changed his story, they had just got it wrong before. It doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone that CV's story change would suggest that other people knew where she was going (so someone else could have intercepted her), and that it gave him an alibi for not being 'James Galway', since he'd supposedly been at the pub all day.

If I had to assign percentage likelihoods to the three possibilities above, mine would be something like:

1. 2%
2. 90%
3. 8%

but the middle one would plummet if a search of the PoW and embankment were undertaken and found nothing.

Are there any other possibilities? What are others' rankings compared to mine?
 
Last edited:
  • #433
I don’t believe JC did it but I also don’t believe CV did it either.

Maybe she had made plans to meet somebody she knew that lunchtime.

The female half of the couple by her own admission, stated that she and SL were meeting that Monday lunchtime.

Then on the Wednesday (at DLs house) after SL disappeared, the (upset) female revealed that that meeting had been cancelled and rearranged.

But, could that Monday meeting have actually went ahead as originally planned?


We don't know the location where they had planned to meet. SL didn't go to SR as that was a cover story, and maybe she was indeed intent on going to PoW later to retrieve her items.

So could she have met the female half of the couple as originally planned, with or without her husband? Friend(s) she would have trusted and individual(s) whom SL would have felt no threat from ...
 
Last edited:
  • #434
If that is what did happen it's not surprising that DV doesn't want to talk about this female.

Not because she could sue him, but because he was incorrect with his book re PoW, CV etc, etc ....
 
  • #435
If that is what did happen it's not surprising that DV doesn't want to talk about this female.

Not because she could sue him, but because he was incorrect with his book re PoW, CV etc, etc ....

Except that in this case, CV's account of a man and a woman calling the PoW during the afternoon, wanting SJL to be kept there when she arrived, is presumably true? In which case you wonder why they would meet there. Wouldn't the woman just have come to Fulham, so SJL didn't have to waste her limited free time at lunch getting to the PoW, which is in the opposite direction to that in which the woman lived?
 
  • #436
Except that in this case, CV's account of a man and a woman calling the PoW during the afternoon, wanting SJL to be kept there when she arrived, is presumably true?

Not sure how that would be factored in.

Say SL met (as originally planned), the female / couple. Could the meeting location have been around Stevenage Rd? Meaning SL would have driven directly to there? Satisfying WJ sighting.

As the male has been reported to be in the building trade, perhaps a property in that area was being renovated by him? Could SL have spent the lunchtime at a meeting around Stevenage Rd before having an arguement ('right ruck') upon leaving? Then driving away with the male, heading up the Fulham Palace Rd being spotted by BW? With her car returning to Stevenage later ....

Admittingly bit of a stretch but who knows .....
 
  • #437
Except that in this case, CV's account of a man and a woman calling the PoW during the afternoon, wanting SJL to be kept there when she arrived, is presumably true? In which case you wonder why they would meet there. Wouldn't the woman just have come to Fulham, so SJL didn't have to waste her limited free time at lunch getting to the PoW, which is in the opposite direction to that in which the woman lived?



CL more than likely got the days wrong or the phone didn’t even happen.


As unless she had been kidnapped by this stage who knew she was going to the pub that afternoon?

so unless Suzy told her kidnapper that she was heading there and that’s why this person called the pub to check out if she was gonna be missed.
 
  • #438
Not sure how that would be factored in.

Say SL met (as originally planned), the female / couple. Could the meeting location have been around Stevenage Rd? Meaning SL would have driven directly to there? Satisfying WJ sighting.

As the male has been reported to be in the building trade, perhaps a property in that area was being renovated by him? Could SL have spent the lunchtime at a meeting around Stevenage Rd before having an arguement ('right ruck') upon leaving? Then driving away with the male, heading up the Fulham Palace Rd being spotted by BW? With her car returning to Stevenage later ....

Admittingly bit of a stretch but who knows .....
I don’t think it’s a bit of a stretch at all, it’s as valid as the other two, and sadly the one I don’t want to be correct.
If it is correct as AL said “you’ll never find her, no body will”.
 
  • #439
...unless she had been kidnapped by this stage who knew she was going to the pub that afternoon?

so unless Suzy told her kidnapper that she was heading there and that’s why this person called the pub to check out if she was gonna be missed.

Yep, that's the only reason I can think of for these calls, if genuine - someone wanting to work out by when she might be missed. If not genuine, they support a narrative wherein she never went to the PoW - but mysterious people knew she intended to and must have intercepted her.

I don’t think it’s a bit of a stretch at all, it’s as valid as the other two, and sadly the one I don’t want to be correct.

Strictly speaking it's less valid. While a business issue with this couple looks plausible given that SJL had apparently welshed on a project with them and he then went bankrupt, we still need to show that either of them was near SJL that day. The problem with that is that we don't know where she actually went. There is evidence she intended to go or went to 37SR or to the pub, but none that indicates she had to go to Stevenage Road, or was meeting anyone there, or indeed meeting anyone at all.

Her car being found there isn't evidence of this, given that it seems likely someone else drove it there. The seat position suggests this, and so does her possessions being left behind. The driver might have delayed the finding of her car by taking these out of it, but a male would attract attention if he walked off carrying a woman's hat and purse.

She apparently had a cancelled appointment with PSS that day, but there's no evidence that it was in fact kept, nor is there any that places the builder husband anywhere near her that day either. If SJL could have been meeting the couple, she could have been meeting anyone at all, on the same evidence, i.e. none, unfortunately.

The trouble with this case is that the absence of officially-endorsed evidence for anything except a visit to 37SR means that any solution you like can be projected onto it. As a result, people have speculated that "Mr Kipper" was Jewish (because a kippah is a Jewish prayer hat), was Fred West because John West because kippers, was the Suffolk Strangler because he'd possibly met SJL, was JC because he might have met SJL, and even that he was Jimmy Savile, because Jimmy Savile was evil.

Part of the reason I favour DV's theory is that SJL was an outstandingly good-looking woman beset by admirers. I have trouble with her simply vanishing unnoticed by anyone; people noticed her everywhere she went. Unless she went from her car into the cellar of a pub, I'd have expected someone to notice her out and about in the streets.
 
  • #440
The trouble with this case is that the absence of officially-endorsed evidence for anything ...

I remember (detective) Mike Barley saying on one of the tv docs, that all the police knew for certain was that
- SL left Sturgis approx 12.40pm
- the fiesta was located on Stevenage Rd later that evening at 10.o1pm.

And that everything else was speculative .... :confused:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
1,919
Total visitors
2,023

Forum statistics

Threads
632,917
Messages
18,633,474
Members
243,334
Latest member
Caring Kiwi
Back
Top