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

[Eastend Eagle]

Yes I noted this from AS, the property developer angle is interesting, 37 SR may have been one that could have been turned into flats?
It had just come onto the market and getting in quickly with a developer might explain the use of Mr Kipper.
It’s also possible that it’s an uncomplimentary reference to someone as a Kipper is a smelly fish.
If her lunchtime appointment was with someone she wanted to get rid of the reference equally make sense.

Respect to you Terry, but you have come up here with a number of potential explanations for use of the name Kipper without being able to pin things down for sure, or you would provide no more than a single explanation.
I just feel that this needs to be more forensically examined and not treated as if it's not that important.
I'm no handwriting expert but with practice how difficult would it be to imitate someone else's handwriting?
Until we can pin down for sure why Suzy would choose such a name if she was trying to deceive her bosses, I feel that we should not dismiss other potential explanations regarding the diary entry.
Unless of course you are suggesting that Suzy's bosses would know the significance of the name Kipper in terms of one of the potential explanations you have given but if that was so wouldn't they have told the police this?

 

[shadwell]

Yes .. DH was called Kip and Kipper at school

SJL knew DH so she may well have called him as Kip or Kipper so that wouldnt make the diary entry so strange

DH = carpenter, sailing instructor and on/off boyfriend
JH (aka Kip or Kipper) = accountant, lived in Shorrolds Road, owned a BMW
PH = brother of JH, sometime client of Sturgis and on their mailing list.

Far too many Hs in this case!

 

[WestLondoner]

I wonder if 'showing a house to Mr Kipper' was some sort of Private Eye-esque office euphemism, like 'discussing Uganda', whereby if you put an obviously fictitious name into your diary as an appointment, it meant there was no such appointment. With that said, it seems impossible for that not to have surfaced immediately. By going to 37SR in search of SJL MG and colleagues clearly thought there was an actual viewing if not an actual Mr Kipper.

Was KP known as Kipper?

 

[Eastend Eagle]

I wonder if 'showing a house to Mr Kipper' was some sort of Private Eye-esque office euphemism, like 'discussing Uganda', whereby if you put an obviously fictitious name into your diary as an appointment, it meant there was no such appointment. With that said, it seems impossible for that not to have surfaced immediately. By going to 37SR in search of SJL MG and colleagues clearly thought there was an actual viewing if not an actual Mr Kipper.

Was KP known as Kipper?

As I understand it, SL had not worked at Sturgis for all that long but is there any evidence that she or indeed any of her colleagues had entered any other ' suspect ' names into work diaries during her time working there?

 

[shadwell]

I wonder if 'showing a house to Mr Kipper' was some sort of Private Eye-esque office euphemism, like 'discussing Uganda', whereby if you put an obviously fictitious name into your diary as an appointment, it meant there was no such appointment. With that said, it seems impossible for that not to have surfaced immediately. By going to 37SR in search of SJL MG and colleagues clearly thought there was an actual viewing if not an actual Mr Kipper.

Was KP known as Kipper?

Which (sort of) brings us around again to the possibility that the (unusually) vacant but furnished 37SR could have been used as an improptu ‘love nest’ by those in the know (ie Sturgis office staff). And, in turn makes me ponder why NH didn’t disclose his relationship with SF - was he already in a relationship with someone else at the time?

 

[Pinkizzy]

Didn't SJL have an affair with someone who lived on Shorrolds Rd or is that one of the Herring brothers?

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Which (sort of) brings us around again to the possibility that the (unusually) vacant but furnished 37SR could have been used as an improptu ‘love nest’ by those in the know (ie Sturgis office staff). And, in turn makes me ponder why NH didn’t disclose his relationship with SF - was he already in a relationship with someone else at the time?

A consideration of mine also.

If this was the case then could it account for more than set of keys being available for 37SR. Maybe someone at Sturgis had a second set cut!

 

[Whitehall 1212]

DH = carpenter, sailing instructor and on/off boyfriend
JH (aka Kip or Kipper) = accountant, lived in Shorrolds Road, owned a BMW
PH = brother of JH, sometime client of Sturgis and on their mailing list.

Far too many Hs in this case!

Or was Kipper a red herring? Which is literally what is it

I'd like to know if other such 'interesting' names with other meanings featured in the diaries of other Sturgis staff.

 

[shadwell]

A consideration of mine also.

If this was the case then could it account for more than set of keys being available for 37SR. Maybe someone at Sturgis had a second set cut!

Thinking on along these lines, I did wonder whether it might have been NH and SF that were seen by HR et al outside 37SR around 1pm, possibly unable to enter the property as a result of SJL (in the wake of the earlier argument and being aware of their plans) having swapped the key on the board. As a result, they then decamp to Bishop’s Park to drink the champagne instead.

In this light, the diary entry might be seen as a joke by SJL - Kipper being NH (as in ‘stitched up like a…’) with the address to show she knew where they were going and O/S taunting them for the fact they couldn’t get inside.

In short, ‘all fun and games until somebody goes missing.’

 

[Konstantin]

DS carter said suzy took the keys, but DV says she did not take the keys. i believe carter.

Yes I agree, I don't think that the police and Sturgis colleagues of whom all in that office would have been interviewed by the police would have all missed this rather obvious fact and just gone along with the narrative that she took the keys knowing she didn't.

DV's assertion/hypothesis is based on the fact that he saw a photo of 37SR taken a day or two after SJL went missing and that it does not appear damaged, ergo the police did not forcibly break in, ergo they used the keys. He asked Sturgis staff if there was typically more than one set and they said there was not.

I think MG who went to 37SR TWICE before he went to report Suzy missing to the police (as per AS book) would have noticed had the keys for the house remained on the key board as this would obviously indicate right of the bat that she did not go there. If she put the appointment in as a cover story, MG would have sussed that immediately had she not taken the keys and would not have gone twice to see if she was stuck inside.

The police also sent uniformed officers to search 37SR and posted a constable outside it to guard it that same evening Suzy was reported missing, so again, I think this story would have unraveled pretty fast. "Did she really go there" was a question that was being asked from the start, and had the keys been sitting there for all to see on the Sturgis key board then the police and her colleagues would have known she had not in fact gone there. Everyone was worried about Suzy and everyone in Sturgis has solid alibis so there is zero point in covering for her when doing so could result in her not being found.

DV has to set up this key narrative though because he needs it to show that Suzy didn't go to Shorrolds Road and therefore the Mr Kipper story is false, therefore his theory that she went to the Prince of Wales pub holds more water, or holds any water.

 

[Konstantin]

Or was Kipper a red herring? Which is literally what is it

I'd like to know if other such 'interesting' names with other meanings featured in the diaries of other Sturgis staff.

Well it could have been.

Suzy actually knew and dated a man called John Herring who lived, wait for it, on Shorrolds Road. HIs nickname, not surprisingly, was Kipper or Kip. This is noted in AS's book, as the police discovered this early on and Herring did have a solid alibi so he was ruled out as a suspect.

DV uses this fact to suggest that Suzy was free associating when thinking of a fake name for her made up appointment, which he argues was done so she could leave the office that lunchtime to pick up her stuff from the Prince of Wales. His theory is that she saw the Shorrolds Road ad in the window and John Herring came to mind and she thus came up with Mr Kipper Shorrolds Road.

In fact, this is something I think does sound plausible as Kipper is such an odd name it sounds made up. If a client rang up with a funny name maybe Suzy would have joked about it with her colleagues before going out (or maybe not, who knows).

However, Suzy was also dyslexic and made spelling errors all the time so "Kipper" could be a misspelling of who knows what, hence why the police thought it might be Skipper, a more common name. If there was a real client and he really planned to abduct her then he would not use his real name, however one would expect him to use Smith or Jones or something common. But people don't always do what we expect.

Also, even if Suzy put a false name in the diary it does not mean she wasn't going out to meet someone, which is the most likely scenario (the other one is carjacking in broad daylight by a stranger). The pub idea doesn't hold water for me simply because it implicates at least three people in a random killing and cover up that has lasted decades.

 

[Konstantin]

I wonder if 'showing a house to Mr Kipper' was some sort of Private Eye-esque office euphemism, like 'discussing Uganda', whereby if you put an obviously fictitious name into your diary as an appointment, it meant there was no such appointment. With that said, it seems impossible for that not to have surfaced immediately. By going to 37SR in search of SJL MG and colleagues clearly thought there was an actual viewing if not an actual Mr Kipper.

Was KP known as Kipper?

Yes, i think that if Mark and the other colleagues thought it was a common in-joke for a fake client he would not have gone there once but in fact he went there twice and took Harry Riglin's testimony, which seems to have developed over the two visits into something rather sinister, very seriously. MG was a savvy, successful salesman so I don't see him being flaky, gullible, or ditzy in order for him to be so easily misled if this was a common insider practice.

I think he assumed it was a real viewing.

 

[Cluesleuth]

DH = carpenter, sailing instructor and on/off boyfriend
JH (aka Kip or Kipper) = accountant, lived in Shorrolds Road, owned a BMW
PH = brother of JH, sometime client of Sturgis and on their mailing list.

Far too many Hs in this case!

Youre absolutely correct its JH and PH .. thanks for the polite correction. Im getting far too much sun these past days. Unfortunately I cant edit past posts but I will pay more attention in the future.

 

[Cluesleuth]

Yes, i think that if Mark and the other colleagues thought it was a common in-joke for a fake client he would not have gone there once but in fact he went there twice and took Harry Riglin's testimony, which seems to have developed over the two visits into something rather sinister, very seriously. MG was a savvy, successful salesman so I don't see him being flaky, gullible, or ditzy in order for him to be so easily misled if this was a common insider practice.

I think he assumed it was a real viewing.

Did HR withdraw his statement that he had seen SJL being bundled into a van because he was threatened??
MOO

 

[Cluesleuth]

Didn't SJL have an affair with someone who lived on Shorrolds Rd or is that one of the Herring brothers?

I thought I had read this somewhere too. But she definately knew him

 

[WestLondoner]

DV's assertion/hypothesis is based on the fact that he saw a photo of 37SR taken a day or two after SJL went missing and that it does not appear damaged, ergo the police did not forcibly break in, ergo they used the keys.

It's not, actually - it's based on the police telling him they used keys to get in, but that they don't know where they got the keys they used. Two Sturgis sources, MG and KP, told him SOP was to have one bunch of keys, so without claiming to recall the 37SR key bunch that's what they think was done. Ergo, if they used keys and they got them from Sturgis, they used the only keys.

This has the ring of truth. I couldn't tell you what I claimed on any given work expenses claim 36 years ago, but I can tell you what the form looked like, my sales rep and payroll numbers (0626 and 647909) because I filled in so many of them.

DV has to set up this key narrative though because he needs it to show that Suzy didn't go to Shorrolds Road and therefore the Mr Kipper story is false, therefore his theory that she went to the Prince of Wales pub holds more water, or holds any water.

I'm not sure that's true; my reading of DV's thinking is that whether SJL went to 37SR or not is almost incidental. It was forensicated and no trace of her found inside. DV's point is that it was just one of several places she had it in mind to go, as was the PoW. If the PoW was a walk-in chemist, newsagent or launderette it would be of no interest, but the PoW has a cellar with a hiding place two strides from where her lost property had been put. Everywhere else she was thought to be going has been searched, so why not search there? If no dice, we're back with the abduction scenario.

Thinking on along these lines, I did wonder whether it might have been NH and SF that were seen by HR et al outside 37SR around 1pm, possibly unable to enter the property as a result of SJL (in the wake of the earlier argument and being aware of their plans) having swapped the key on the board. As a result, they then decamp to Bishop’s Park to drink the champagne instead.

Wasn't the point though that this would have left the office empty? MG is at lunch, another negotiator was holiday leaving NH and SJL. SJL puts a pretext in her diary because policy, but NH and SF just ignore this and go off to lunch anyway?

 

[WestLondoner]

However, Suzy was also dyslexic and made spelling errors all the time so "Kipper" could be a misspelling of who knows what, hence why the police thought it might be Skipper, a more common name. If there was a real client and he really planned to abduct her then he would not use his real name, however one would expect him to use Smith or Jones or something common. But people don't always do what we expect.

Agree - it also seems beyond argument to me that, if you were a recently released sex offender, you would not use your prison nickname. It wouldn't be a particularly cunning ruse to throw the search off the scent, would it? If you were known as Jack the Hat McVitie and you've decided to abduct an estate agent, you're not going to imagine calling yourself Mr The Hat is somehow going to cover your tracks.

And that's even if it is true that JC was ever known as 'Kipper' before 1989. The variety of rationales given for this make no sense. He liked kippers? He kipped a lot? He wore kipper ties (in prison)? I reckon he was no more known as Kipper in 1986 than he drove a BMW in 1986.

 

[Terryb808]

Thinking on along these lines, I did wonder whether it might have been NH and SF that were seen by HR et al outside 37SR around 1pm, possibly unable to enter the property as a result of SJL (in the wake of the earlier argument and being aware of their plans) having swapped the key on the board. As a result, they then decamp to Bishop’s Park to drink the champagne instead.

In this light, the diary entry might be seen as a joke by SJL - Kipper being NH (as in ‘stitched up like a…’) with the address to show she knew where they were going and O/S taunting them for the fact they couldn’t get inside.

In short, ‘all fun and games until somebody goes missing.’

Excellent explanation for the Mr Kipper appointment, all that’s needed is for them to own up and put the record straight.
No evidence that this is actually correct, and you have to ask yourself “why did DV not ask this question”.
If it’s correct it just means SJL went out and had no intention of going to SR.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Agree - it also seems beyond argument to me that, if you were a recently released sex offender, you would not use your prison nickname. It wouldn't be a particularly cunning ruse to throw the search off the scent, would it? If you were known as Jack the Hat McVitie and you've decided to abduct an estate agent, you're not going to imagine calling yourself Mr The Hat is somehow going to cover your tracks.

And that's even if it is true that JC was ever known as 'Kipper' before 1989. The variety of rationales given for this make no sense. He liked kippers? He kipped a lot? He wore kipper ties (in prison)? I reckon he was no more known as Kipper in 1986 than he drove a BMW in 1986.

The Jack the Hat analogy tickled me

I agree with the Kipper variations though.....I get the feeling most were made up by the Daily Mail....or other quality news media Your Honour.

 

[Terryb808]

Excellent explanation for the Mr Kipper appointment, all that’s needed is for them to own up and put the record straight.
No evidence that this is actually correct, and you have to ask yourself “why did DV not ask this question”.
If it’s correct it just means SJL went out and had no intention of going to SR.

It would certainly explain both DV’s assertion that SJL didn’t take the keys to 37 SR, she just reposition them. The couple seen outside by HR looking for a lunchtime quickie realised they had the wrong keys and went elsewhere.
MG would have know this was going on, which may be why he went round twice.
He might have thought she had gone there for the same reason.
None of this can be proven and at the time none of the Sturgis staff are going to own up, not good for business.