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

[Whitehall 1212]

There’s no evidence to support the theory that JC had enough knowledge to allow him to steal cars.
Generally salesman (which JC was) looked down on workshop staff, as a result unless a special relationship developed workshop staff kept themselves to themselves.
Ford Sierra locks were a new development at the time, it didn’t take long for thieves to work out they could be unlocked with a matchstick and a tennis ball. Other makes could be unlocked with just a 12” steel ruler.
The BMW referenced all those years later was thought to be left hand drive, what about the Belgium diamond dealers BMW?
The whole story around this looks very dodgy.

I don't have any evidence that JC was accomplished in stealing motor vehicles in 1986. What I would say though if one works within the motor trade (a petrol head), commits transient crime and serves five years in prison, then the odds of not being versed in how to break into a 80's vehicle and hot wire it are in my book pretty slim. I would go so far as to say that JC was that manipulative and outwardly convincing as the 'businessman' type that he could have the owners keys away and a new plate made up in no time. Call it intuition based on experience.

The 'information' of a left hand driver BMW, was speculative, based purely on the fact that person in the right-hand front seat was struggling the occupant of the left-hand seat. The 'conclusion' drawn by the witness was that the individual in the right-hand seat could not be struggling and driving at the same time! Therefore it MUST be LHD.

We need to be careful about using unestablished facts to support an argument. Some information is more reliable than other information, particularly in this case, given the passage of time. All we do know for certain is:

1. SJL left Sturgis at approximately 12:30 hours on Monday 28th July 1986
2. SLJ's car was found on Stevenage Road, SW6 at approximately 22:00 on Monday 28th July 1986

Everything else has degrees of reliability and uncertainty, depending on the sources reliability, any independent corroboration or other supporting information.

We know very little of what the police have and the credibility they place on the various witnesses. The weight we place on information in the public domain is not the same as that of the investigative team.

 

[Cluesleuth]

We know very little of what the police have and the credibility they place on the various witnesses. The weight we place on information in the public domain is not the same as that of the investigative team.

dbm

 

[Terryb808]

Are you returning us to the PoW 'theory'?

Give the police a little credit, they may have missed info because of the wealth coming in, but when they speak to either witnesses or suspects they are weighing up what is said, how its said and the body language being displayed. The investigators were detectives, not rookie probationers just out of training school. They knew the score.

Not the PoW, there are others who may have had a vested interest in keeping the police focus on Mr Kipper.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Not the PoW, there are others who may have had a vested interest in keeping the police focus on Mr Kipper.

Are you alleging that there was a conspiracy either before or after the fact?

Who are you alleging is involved, what are the offences and what is the evidence for it?

PM me if you wish.

 

[Terryb808]

I don't have any evidence that JC was accomplished in stealing motor vehicles in 1986. What I would say though if one works within the motor trade (a petrol head), commits transient crime and serves five years in prison, then the odds of not being versed in how to break into a 80's vehicle and hot wire it are in my book pretty slim. I would go so far as to say that JC was that manipulative and outwardly convincing as the 'businessman' type that he could have the owners keys away and a new plate made up in no time. Call it intuition based on experience.

The 'information' of a left hand driver BMW, was speculative, based purely on the fact that person in the right-hand front seat was struggling the occupant of the left-hand seat. The 'conclusion' drawn by the witness was that the individual in the right-hand seat could not be struggling and driving at the same time! Therefore it MUST be LHD.

We need to be careful about using unestablished facts to support an argument. Some information is more reliable than other information, particularly in this case, given the passage of time. All we do know for certain is:

1. SJL left Sturgis at approximately 12:30 hours on Monday 28th July 1986
2. SLJ's car was found on Stevenage Road, SW6 at approximately 22:00 on Monday 28th July 1986

Everything else has degrees of reliability and uncertainty, depending on the sources reliability, any independent corroboration or other supporting information.

We know very little of what the police have and the credibility they place on the various witnesses. The weight we place on information in the public domain is not the same as that of the investigative team.

Yes, the two fact are the only solid evidence in the public domain and have been quoted many times in thread 0,1 & 2.
That’s why we speculate, looking for the links in all the information that’s available in the public domain.
As I think Cluesleuth said recently everything is there, we just need to find the links in the chain.

 

[Circulo]

Re: unemployment in 1986: A small point to weigh in on, but had to google to make sure I hadn't mis-remembered that era

20 years ago the dole queue hit 3 million - today it is the workforce that's a record

In July 1986 the number of people on the dole hit almost 3.1 million, 10.6% of the workforce. Today, on comparable figures, it is less than a million, with a rate of 3%.

www.theguardian.com

 

[Jenesaisquoi]

Now I haven’t read any of the books yet (got the cheaper ones on the way), so I am a little confused.

If JC did abduct Suzy, is it generally thought that had nothing to do with the diary entry? So, she went out for reasons not associated with her abductor and crossed paths with the abductor en route?

Or is it thought that JC did arrange a Mr Kipper appointment? I just wonder if he did use Kipper as a name because he had been semi-stalking her and knew that she knew a ‘Kipper’ - that maybe manipulated her into thinking that JC was a safer person than he was.

Is there anyone who thinks Kipper was a name given to Suzy by someone who wasn’t JC?

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Now I haven’t read any of the books yet (got the cheaper ones on the way), so I am a little confused.

If JC did abduct Suzy, is it generally thought that had nothing to do with the diary entry? So, she went out for reasons not associated with her abductor and crossed paths with the abductor en route?

Or is it thought that JC did arrange a Mr Kipper appointment? I just wonder if he did use Kipper as a name because he had been semi-stalking her and knew that she knew a ‘Kipper’ - that maybe manipulated her into thinking that JC was a safer person than he was.

Is there anyone who thinks Kipper was a name given to Suzy by someone who wasn’t JC?

There are a few theories, lots of confused/misinterpreted/incorrect information and ONLY two 'known, knowns':

1.. The Metropolitan Police position is that either SJL knew 'Mr Kipper', who was JC, possibly in an informal fling kind of way and/or that he was stalking her. What is not known, if it was JC, is if he gave the name 'Kipper' when he/she/they arranged the 'viewing/meeting' or that it was a 'name' that SJL assigned to him in the diary, because she 'knew' the person she was meeting.

It has been claimed that JC was called 'Kipper' whilst in prison for spurious reasons like he slept a lot, liked kippers for breakfast, wore kipper ties etc. I'd take the Kipper name in prison stories with a healthy dose of scepticism, as the sources are not confirmed, as far as I know.

2. Another theory is that the diary entry was a red herring (a kipper if you will) to enable SJL to get out of the office under the guise of doing the viewing in Shorrolds Road, but in fact going somewhere else entirely. Theories for who/where are:

a) Meeting persons unknown with whom she was having a relationship with and possibly with intent to break it off, other than JC
b) Meeting persons unknown in connection with a business deal or shady activity
c) Going to the Prince of Wales PH to collect her found personal diary, cheque book and other items. Some 'theorise' that SJL may have come to harm, died and is concealed there or nearby. I don't buy that....MOO
d) None of the three above!

3. Of course there is always the possibility that she was abducted by a complete stranger en route to where it was that she was intending to go (as you allude to)

In terms of the Kipper name, possible explanations are:

1. There was a real Mr Kipper or similar sounding name, e.g. Keiper, Kuiper etc. SLJ was dyslexic so she may have spelt a name as it sounded to her or mixed the letters up on account of her dyslexia

2. That it was a bogus name given by the person who made the house viewing appointment in Shorrolds Road

3. That SJL made up the name based on word association or her apparent fondness for assigning humourous names to some people she knew. SJL knew a guy called Mr Haddock. Apparently he had a nickname of Kip/Kipper. He had lived in Wardo Avenue and at the time of SJL's disappearance lived in Shorrolds Road. In her diary below the Shorrolds Road entry was an entry for Wardo Avenue. It is possible that she connected Wardo and Shorrolds with Mr Haddock, thought of his nickname and so entered 'Mr Kipper' for the person she intended to meet in connection with the Shorrolds Road entry. If she knew who she was meeting, because she had only recently met them in a pub, wine bar, club etc then she may only know their first name and not their surname. To make the booking look legitimate she would have to use a surname, that's my theory re 'Kipper' FWIW. P.S. Mr Haddock was eliminated from any involvement in SJL's disappearance

It's essential to remember that there are just two confirmed evidential facts......the 'known, knowns':

1. That SJL left Sturgis Estate Agents at 12:30 on Monday 28th July 1986

2. That SJL's white Ford Fiesta car was found in Stevenage Road at 22:01 on Monday 28th July 1986.

Everything else is from witness evidence, which is generally very unreliable unless corroborated by other independent witnesses or other sources.

There are no witnesses to what was believed to be an abduction and there is no identified crime scene.

I hope that helps to bring you up to speed. I have indicated my thoughts but tried to cover all the theories that I am aware of. I'm sure I have omitted anything, others will soon 'speak up'

 

[Cluesleuth]

The persson surname was 'Herring' not
3. That SJL made up the name based on word association or her apparent fondness for assigning humourous names to some people she knew. SJL knew a guy called Mr Haddock. Apparently he had a nickname of Kip/Kipper. He had lived in Wardo Avenue and at the time of SJL's disappearance lived in Shorrolds Road. In her diary below the Shorrolds Road entry was an entry for Wardo Avenue. It is possible that she connected Wardo and Shorrolds with Mr Haddock, thought of his nickname and so entered 'Mr Kipper' for the person she intended to meet in connection with the Shorrolds Road entry. If she knew who she was meeting, because she had only recently met them in a pub, wine bar, club etc then she may only know their first name and not their surname. To make the booking look legitimate she would have to use a surname, that's my theory re 'Kipper' FWIW. P.S. Mr Haddock was eliminated from any involvement in SJL's disappearance

The persons surname was 'Herring' not Hadddock

IN DV book interview with JH pg 149 JH says he only met SJL on a few occasions she was a friend of a friend, they had met at a drinks party 6-12 months before she disappeared.
At the time he lived 22 Wardo Av he moved out of the house in Wardo Av to a house in Shorrolds rd 6 months before SJL went missing.
JH said he didnt believe SJL knew he had moved to Shorrolds rd. When DV asks what number did you live at in Shorrolds JH said he couldnt remember it was about 50yards up from the main rd on the left.
37 was about 100 yards up.
DV's research showed that SJL had attended a party at 54 Shorrolds rd around the time JH had moved to Shorrolds rd.

JH's name was in one of SJL's diary.

both JH and PH were quickly eliminated from the investigation as being of no interest

MOO

 

[Pinkizzy]

There are a few theories, lots of confused/misinterpreted/incorrect information and ONLY two 'known, knowns':

1.. The Metropolitan Police position is that either SJL knew 'Mr Kipper', who was JC, possibly in an informal fling kind of way and/or that he was stalking her. What is not known, if it was JC, is if he gave the name 'Kipper' when he/she/they arranged the 'viewing/meeting' or that it was a 'name' that SJL assigned to him in the diary, because she 'knew' the person she was meeting.

It has been claimed that JC was called 'Kipper' whilst in prison for spurious reasons like he slept a lot, liked kippers for breakfast, wore kipper ties etc. I'd take the Kipper name in prison stories with a healthy dose of scepticism, as the sources are not confirmed, as far as I know.

2. Another theory is that the diary entry was a red herring (a kipper if you will) to enable SJL to get out of the office under the guise of doing the viewing in Shorrolds Road, but in fact going somewhere else entirely. Theories for who/where are:

a) Meeting persons unknown with whom she was having a relationship with and possibly with intent to break it off, other than JC
b) Meeting persons unknown in connection with a business deal or shady activity
c) Going to the Prince of Wales PH to collect her found personal diary, cheque book and other items. Some 'theorise' that SJL may have come to harm, died and is concealed there or nearby. I don't buy that....MOO
d) None of the three above!

3. Of course there is always the possibility that she was abducted by a complete stranger en route to where it was that she was intending to go (as you allude to)

In terms of the Kipper name, possible explanations are:

1. There was a real Mr Kipper or similar sounding name, e.g. Keiper, Kuiper etc. SLJ was dyslexic so she may have spelt a name as it sounded to her or mixed the letters up on account of her dyslexia

2. That it was a bogus name given by the person who made the house viewing appointment in Shorrolds Road

3. That SJL made up the name based on word association or her apparent fondness for assigning humourous names to some people she knew. SJL knew a guy called Mr Haddock. Apparently he had a nickname of Kip/Kipper. He had lived in Wardo Avenue and at the time of SJL's disappearance lived in Shorrolds Road. In her diary below the Shorrolds Road entry was an entry for Wardo Avenue. It is possible that she connected Wardo and Shorrolds with Mr Haddock, thought of his nickname and so entered 'Mr Kipper' for the person she intended to meet in connection with the Shorrolds Road entry. If she knew who she was meeting, because she had only recently met them in a pub, wine bar, club etc then she may only know their first name and not their surname. To make the booking look legitimate she would have to use a surname, that's my theory re 'Kipper' FWIW. P.S. Mr Haddock was eliminated from any involvement in SJL's disappearance

It's essential to remember that there are just two confirmed evidential facts......the 'known, knowns':

1. That SJL left Sturgis Estate Agents at 12:30 on Monday 28th July 1986

2. That SJL's white Ford Fiesta car was found in Stevenage Road at 22:01 on Monday 28th July 1986.

Everything else is from witness evidence, which is generally very unreliable unless corroborated by other independent witnesses or other sources.

There are no witnesses to what was believed to be an abduction and there is no identified crime scene.

I hope that helps to bring you up to speed. I have indicated my thoughts but tried to cover all the theories that I am aware of. I'm sure I have omitted anything, others will soon 'speak up'

I wonder why the original investigation didn't mention SJL's errand to the PoW and her flat, surely a mention would trigger someone's memory on that day.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

The persons surname was 'Herring' not Hadddock

IN DV book interview with JH pg 149 JH says he only met SJL on a few occasions she was a friend of a friend, they had met at a drinks party 6-12 months before she disappeared.
At the time he lived 22 Wardo Av he moved out of the house in Wardo Av to a house in Shorrolds rd 6 months before SJL went missing.
JH said he didnt believe SJL knew he had moved to Shorrolds rd. When DV asks what number did you live at in Shorrolds JH said he couldnt remember it was about 50yards up from the main rd on the left.
37 was about 100 yards up.
DV's research showed that SJL had attended a party at 54 Shorrolds rd around the time JH had moved to Shorrolds rd.

JH's name was in one of SJL's diary.

both JH and PH were quickly eliminated from the investigation as being of no interest

MOO

I knew it was something fishy

It was late and I had a veritable sea of names swimming around my head

 

[Whitehall 1212]

I wonder why the original investigation didn't mention SJL's errand to the PoW and her flat, surely a mention would trigger someone's memory on that day.

It was too vague and would have undermined what SJL had written in her diary and only tangible line of enquiry the police had at that time.

You can't put information out to the public on a whim, at it has to be collated and lines of enquiry established from it. The police were overwhelmed from the press coverage already.

It would have caused no end of confusion for the police to be seen to looking at different possibilities.

 

[Cluesleuth]

I knew it was something fishy

It was late and I had a veritable sea of names swimming around my head

No problem Whitehill 1212 Ive found myself making the same hiccups, I like to think we are all a friendly bunch here and someone will always politely correct it.

not sure where that eye roll emoji came from on my post it should have just been a smile

 

[Cluesleuth]

Ive got more questions than answers at the moment...anyone else feeling the same?

 

[RichardKimble]

Are you returning us to the PoW 'theory'?

If there was a cold case review starting from the very beginning would not the POW come into play , at the very least for elimination purposes, a complete new start solved the Ricky Neave case, a cold case review in the Sophie Toscan du Plantier case has possibly unearthed a new suspect.

 

[Cluesleuth]

It's essential to remember that there are just two confirmed evidential facts......the 'known, knowns':

1. That SJL left Sturgis Estate Agents at 12:30 on Monday 28th July 1986

2. That SJL's white Ford Fiesta car was found in Stevenage Road at 22:01 on Monday 28th July 1986.

3. SJL's Car and Flat keys were missing.
4. SJL's Purse containing money and cards in car.

Some doubt has been cast on wether she took the 37 Shorrolds rd key from the office so laying that aside for now

 

[Whitehall 1212]

3. SJL's Car and Flat keys were missing.
4. SJL's Purse containing money and cards in car.

Some doubt has been cast on wether she took the 37 Shorrolds rd key from the office so laying that aside for now

Absolutely

I was parroting what the police DS said...Suzy left the office at 12:30 and her car was found at 22:01. What happened in between is/was known only to SLP and her abductor/s.

I don't know about you but when it's put like that and we realise we know so little after thirty-six years, my heart always sinks a little, particularly for those she left behind.

I don't know if you saw about the conviction of David Venables at Worcester today. When his wife's body was found in the cesspit, Met Police were digging for Suzy about six miles away. There was speculation it could be Suzy! Mrs Venables family now have closure after forty years.....just what we all wish for Suzy.

GUILTY - UK - Kempsey, found in a septic tank, Jul'19, missing in 1982 - Brenda Venables *husband arrested*

Worcester Crown Court 3 T20217099 david venables Details: Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 13:00 - 10:36 Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 12:49 Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 14:00 - 12:54 Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 14:00 Trial (Part Heard) - Jury retire to...

www.websleuths.com

 

[Cluesleuth]

Absolutely

I was parroting what the police DS said...Suzy left the office at 12:30 and her car was found at 22:01. What happened in between is/was known only to SLP and her abductor/s.

I don't know about you but when it's put like that and we realise we know so little after thirty-six years, my heart always sinks a little, particularly for those she left behind.

I don't know if you saw about the conviction of David Venables at Worcester today. When his wife's body was found in the cesspit, Met Police were digging for Suzy about six miles away. There was speculation it could be Suzy! Mrs Venables family now have closure after forty years.....just what we all wish for Suzy.

GUILTY - UK - Kempsey, found in a septic tank, Jul'19, missing in 1982 - Brenda Venables *husband arrested*

Worcester Crown Court 3 T20217099 david venables Details: Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 13:00 - 10:36 Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 12:49 Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 14:00 - 12:54 Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 14:00 Trial (Part Heard) - Jury retire to...

www.websleuths.com

How the hell did he get away without emptying that for 40 years!

 

[Pinkizzy]

Absolutely

I was parroting what the police DS said...Suzy left the office at 12:30 and her car was found at 22:01. What happened in between is/was known only to SLP and her abductor/s.

I don't know about you but when it's put like that and we realise we know so little after thirty-six years, my heart always sinks a little, particularly for those she left behind.

I don't know if you saw about the conviction of David Venables at Worcester today. When his wife's body was found in the cesspit, Met Police were digging for Suzy about six miles away. There was speculation it could be Suzy! Mrs Venables family now have closure after forty years.....just what we all wish for Suzy.

GUILTY - UK - Kempsey, found in a septic tank, Jul'19, missing in 1982 - Brenda Venables *husband arrested*

Worcester Crown Court 3 T20217099 david venables Details: Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 13:00 - 10:36 Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 12:49 Trial (Part Heard) - Case adjourned until 14:00 - 12:54 Trial (Part Heard) - Resume - 14:00 Trial (Part Heard) - Jury retire to...

www.websleuths.com

Were her remains found in a plastic bag in the cesspit? Historic crimes will be solved eventually

 

[Pinkizzy]

How the hell did he get away without emptying that for 40 years!

I guess It wasn't being used