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

[Cluesleuth]

Has there ever been a 'reward' offered on this case?

 

[asyousay]

Another random thought of mine and trying to untangle the mystery.

We have been told a office Clarke printed out property details for Suzy and her “viewing” which she took with her.


Well if she did go to the POW then surely that would of been found in the car ?

She wouldn’t of taken paperwork she didn’t need to pick up her diary would she!

 

[Terryb808]

Another random thought of mine and trying to untangle the mystery.

We have been told a office Clarke printed out property details for Suzy and her “viewing” which she took with her.


Well if she did go to the POW then surely that would of been found in the car ?

She wouldn’t of taken paperwork she didn’t need to pick up her diary would she!

Like just about everything in this case, if it was a genuine viewing the perpetrator may have taken the particulars and put the in his jacket or briefcase. Then asked about other similar properties.
Unlikely I know, but the Met would say it’s a possibility.

 

[asyousay]

Like just about everything in this case, if it was a genuine viewing the perpetrator may have taken the particulars and put the in his jacket or briefcase. Then asked about other similar properties.
Unlikely I know, but the Met would say it’s a possibility.

Yes with the property paperwork gone that points to a genuine viewing that she took when she left the car imo


Unless Suzy thought she could interest CV and his Wife into a expensive property when she picked up her belongings

 

[Terryb808]

Yes with the property paperwork gone that points to a genuine viewing that she took when she left the car imo


Unless Suzy thought she could interest CV and his Wife into a expensive property when she picked up her belongings

SJL’s offering obvious fell well short of Mr & Mrs CV’s expectations so they moved back up north.

 

[asyousay]

SJL’s offering obvious fell well short of Mr & Mrs CV’s expectations so they moved back up north.

You have clearly solved it

 

[Cluesleuth]

Yes with the property paperwork gone that points to a genuine viewing that she took when she left the car imo


Unless Suzy thought she could interest CV and his Wife into a expensive property when she picked up her belongings

Empty pub or wine bar premises in the Hammersmith area perhaps.

 

[WestLondoner]

The supposed accounts of what happened at Sturgis that morning are so mutually contradictory it's hard to place much reliance on any of them. MG was both in CT and at his desk when SJL left Only negotiators did viewings except when they didn't. I suspect a lot of these accounts are of what probably ought to have happened if SJL had been going to a viewing.

I'm of a generation that has observed the police constantly botching inquiries and framing people, typically the local weirdo, and has no faith in them as a result.

 

[Cluesleuth]

The supposed accounts of what happened at Sturgis that morning are so mutually contradictory it's hard to place much reliance on any of them. MG was both in CT and at his desk when SJL left Only negotiators did viewings except when they didn't. I suspect a lot of these accounts are of what probably ought to have happened if SJL had been going to a viewing.

I'm of a generation that has observed the police constantly botching inquiries and framing people, typically the local weirdo, and has no faith in them as a result.

Youre right WL.
Its just my opinion but I think theres a 'fear' of some kind in play.

 

[Pinkizzy]

Dbm

 

[TimFisher1965]

Another random thought of mine and trying to untangle the mystery.

We have been told a office Clarke printed out property details for Suzy and her “viewing” which she took with her.


Well if she did go to the POW then surely that would of been found in the car ?

She wouldn’t of taken paperwork she didn’t need to pick up her diary would she!

Multiple copies of the details were held and only copied when these became low. Paperwork for Shorrolds were not copied on request if SL did not take a copy because she wasn’t going there nobody would have noticed so the paperwork is a moot point

 

[Pinkizzy]

Multiple copies of the details were held and only copied when these became low. Paperwork for Shorrolds were not copied on request if SL did not take a copy because she wasn’t going there nobody would have noticed so the paperwork is a moot point

Did the location of SL's fiesta near Sturgis make any difference to your research?

 

[TimFisher1965]

Did the location of SL's fiesta near Sturgis make any difference to your research?

Not sure yet

 

[asyousay]

Multiple copies of the details were held and only copied when these became low. Paperwork for Shorrolds were not copied on request if SL did not take a copy because she wasn’t going there nobody would have noticed so the paperwork is a moot point

Did one of the books not say that Suzy asked them to print off the details to the property?


Basically all I am learning is that everybody lied to the police at the stage which makes no sense.

We have somebody who says Suzy took the keys to the property. We have a Clark say they printed off property details for her. We now hear that the car was parked in a completely different spot that’s been reported for years.


So was everybody in a conspiracy with the killer to confuse LE?!

IMO MOO

 

[TimFisher1965]

Did one of the books not say that Suzy asked them to print off the details to the property?


Basically all I am learning is that everybody lied to the police at the stage which makes no sense.

We have somebody who says Suzy took the keys to the property. We have a Clark say they printed off property details for her. We now hear that the car was parked in a completely different spot that’s been reported for years.


So was everybody in a conspiracy with the killer to confuse LE?!

IMO MOO

I asked the person who would have done this IF it happened and he did NOT print them off for SL

 

[Terryb808]

I asked the person who would have done this IF it happened and he did NOT print them off for SL

Don’t you think two things are at play here, the Sturgis staff are being looked at by their big boss. And the police can be autocratic and intimidating.
So I don’t think deliberate lies are at play, just people afraid to say that normal working protocols were not followed.
It’s already been pointed out that the Sturgis family are from a military background, this has to come over in the day to day work. I can’t see them employing senior staff that don’t fit into this way of management.
So if a mistake was made by the office junior regarding where he parked the car he’s going to be too afraid to correct this.

 

[TimFisher1965]

Don’t you think two things are at play here, the Sturgis staff are being looked at by their big boss. And the police can be autocratic and intimidating.
So I don’t think deliberate lies are at play, just people afraid to say that normal working protocols were not followed.
It’s already been pointed out that the Sturgis family are from a military background, this has to come over in the day to day work. I can’t see them employing senior staff that don’t fit into this way of management.
So if a mistake was made by the office junior regarding where he parked the car he’s going to be too afraid to correct this.

I have been analysing this aspect very closely and some things have become abundantly clear.

The staff generally reported back to police and to others like AS what they thought had happened and made in my view many assumptions. For example SL must have taken the keys because she had a viewing, look at MG and NH reaction when interviewed by DV the possibility that she did not have the keys did not even occur to them.

I now know that the office junior borrowed negotiators cars ad hoc and used the negotiators keys then returned them to the negotiator when they had finished their task there were NO duplicate keys. JC borrowed SL's car and when he got back he gave her keys back. The argument must have happened when he was out between 9.45am and 10.15am because he heard about it later but did not witness it.

Cars were parked in the streets nearby it was not in the same street it could have been one of several which is why SL asked JC "where did you park my car" because she did not know and there was not a designated spot or road. Misquoting where this street was to the police maybe 2-3 days later (or longer) was a genuine mistake nobody lied about this for sinister reasons (IMO).

Copies of details for ALL the properties were in the office and extra copies were made when these become low so they were not printed by the office junior on request (unless they had run out and not been noticed) all SL had to do was go get a copy and nobody knows if she did this or not all I know for sure is JC did not print a copy for SL on that morning because I asked him.

As i said before I think AS is an excellent writer BUT he got his info from police files and from staff who said (IMO) what they thought must have happened not what actually did happen. People I think need to stop asking questions based on what they "assumed" happened and check these facts. SL did NOT collect her car from Whittingstall Road as widely reported but from from Radipole Road. The person who left it there told me this and he is 100% certain, he even told me where the road was in relation to the office and he was 100% spot on. What does this mean? maybe nothing BUT she could have gone in any direction from there and not be seen by anyone.

Also to me it removes another piece of likelihood about convicted JC because if he carjacked her how would he know where her car was unless he was waiting outside and followed her to her car? Even if he did stalk her (I don't believe for the record he had ANYTHING to do with it) he would not know which road her car was in because it could of been in one of 3 or 4 roads around the office.

DV has said this already in an interview, we need to strip back everything we think we know and start again a lot of facts in this case are WRONG. I now know a much more accurate timeline of the office from 8.45am to 12.40pm by not assuming anything in the record is true.

One last thing

The diary page

Top entry 6D wyfold crossed out it was a top floor flat several streets away not sure this means anything

The 142 wardo ave entry according to someone who was there means as I suspected that this was a note to bike round a contract via courier

Mr Kipper 12.45 o/s was in my view 100% written in very close to her leaving because she had to get out of the office.
Nobody in the office saw this prior to her leaving as the reason given was "nobody had a reason to check her diary until she didn't come back"

Jonna Wright entry 6pm was a legit viewing

 

[Cluesleuth]

I asked the person who would have done this IF it happened and he did NOT print them off for SL

It would be most unusual for individual copies to be printed off usually batches of 20 or more would be printed off at a time and these held in the file/filing cabinet. 4 negotiators working one office mailing out details and doing viewings it just would be practical to print details as needed.
The only situation I can think of is that the file was empty of copies so an individual copy would have to be printed.

SF said she saw SJL take a copy of the details from the drawer.

Its different to day everything is computerised as offices have gone paperless. But a professional agent would always take a set of details to the viewing.

MOO

 

[TimFisher1965]

It would be most unusual for individual copies to be printed off usually batches of 20 or more would be printed off at a time and these held in the file/filing cabinet. 4 negotiators working one office mailing out details and doing viewings it just would be practical to print details as needed.
The only situation I can think of is that the file was empty of copies so an individual copy would have to be printed.

SF said she saw SJL take a copy of the details from the drawer.

Its different to day everything is computerised as offices have gone paperless. But a professional agent would always take a set of details to the viewing.

MOO

and this is the problem with this case, I have a direct quote from someone who was there and told me what happened Which source is more reliable? a quote from someone who was there or a quote taken from a book written down at best second hand? JC did NOT print off a copy for SL on the 28th of July he is not sure if she took one copy from the drawer its possible so SF may be correct that she took one but if we believe she did not take the keys why bother? JC says they had multiple copies in the office for each property so they were at hand they were not printed out to order.

 

[Pinkizzy]

We're back to the original idea that SL turning right out of Sturgis suggests heading towards Putney