UK UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #4

[WestLondoner]

There have been eight searches so far for Suzy's body:

2000 & 2001: Norton Barracks
2001: Quantock Hills
2003, 2004 & 2018: Shipton Road, Sutton Coldfield
2010: Drakes Broughton
2019: Pershore

None of these searches found anything at all - absolutely nothing.

So how can the information given to the police be credible, in what way? The information they were given was both inaccurate and misleading, the only way it could be considered credible is if they found anything.

My fear is that it was considered credible exactly and only because it pointed to Cannan. That alone may have been enough to establish credibility. Conversely, as DV found, information that points away from Cannan is not credible, because it points away from Cannan.

 

[WestLondoner]

Coupled with JC and Sl can't be placed together, does not lack of evidence point away from JC.

It should, but there are people who believe there's a monster in Loch Ness despite a total lack of evidence. The personal confidence of monster investigators that there's a monster is not persuasive.

 

[WestLondoner]

I have to wonder what the motive is of people who want to ignore the fact that a man with a history of kidnapping and murdering women was in the same area as another woman who was probably kidnapped and murdered.

Equally, I have to wonder why you have to wonder. Nobody has been convicted of the killing of SJL, hence whoever did it may have remained at large. I have teenage daughters, so I find that pretty worrying both specifically - as in SJL's killer may still be out there - and in general; as in, killers have quite a good chance of getting away with it.

You're stumbling into the same pitfall as before, with respect. Persuading someone that JC is a bad man is easy, and nobody disagrees. It does not follow that because we agree on that, he might have been in the area, therefore probably did other crimes, and hence did this. He's been convicted of nothing in the area, the "sightings" are decades after the fact (can you remember who you saw looking in a shop window in 2008, and the day and date it happened? These witnesses can) hence IMO worthless, and much of the evidence consists of assertions that he did other bad things, therefore he did this. It is not at all surprising he has never been charged if that's what the case-making looks like.

Personally I'd be very happy to see JC charged. However, that's been tried and the CPS aren't buying it, and even if they were, he'd certainly be acquitted. So the discussion here is about who really did it.

 

[WiseOwl]

My fear is that it was considered credible exactly and only because it pointed to Cannan. That alone may have been enough to establish credibility. Conversely, as DV found, information that points away from Cannan is not credible, because it points away from Cannan.

That's an excellent point @WestLondoner.

It poses the question does any so-called credible information that is given to the police regarding Suzy is only considered if it involves JC in any way?

All the searches that have been carried out so far have been linked to JC, there is no doubt about that.

 

[PPowell]

The defence barrister has just one job, he’s not interested in his clients guilt, that’s not his job.
They’ll tell you that it’s the prosecutions job to prove guilt and do so better than they can undermine their case.

When I hear people being angry at defence barristers, such as saying, "How they defend such a person?"
I look at it another way. A person can't be convicted unless it has been shown they had a fair trial, and they can't have a fair trial unless they have a defence to give their side of the story.
An evil person can be released if a part of the procedures from the police to the trial hasn't been followed properly. Chris Halliwell couldn't be convicted of murder because he wasn't read his rights before confessing to a 2nd crime.

I think most of the loophole, dodgy lawyers are in civil law, where rich people are willing to pay thousands to get off a speeding ticket.

 

[PPowell]

I would urge you to read the views of Keith's brother, Alan Bennett, on what he thought of the 'credible' information given to the police by the author, amateur sleuth and conman Russell Edwards.

Why did the GMP accept his evidence - on what basis did they believe he was providing them with reliable information?

Just a couple of days into the GMP's dig for Keith's remains, Alan had already called Edwards' bluff. The GMP did not say anything until Friday, when they admitted nothing had been found.

Alan Bennett was way ahead of them.

Have you read the book by the academic Alan Keightley who Brady left his possessions to? When I heard the digging was a tip off from an author, I was hoping it was something Brady left him in the suitcase to say where Keith was. Maybe the ground has moved too much for them to find him now?
Didn't the newspaper say there was a skull or something?
I deleted the Keightley book from my kindle, as keep seeing Brady's face gave me the creeps.
I also don't know how the police officer kept Peter Sutcliffe's killing kit in his attic, as that would give me the creeps too and I wouldn't want anything like that near me.

 

[PPowell]

I saw somebody write earlier that they think the case has been solved and they agree with the DV book about who did it.
I'm only half way through the book now but haven't picked up yet about who it could be.
So if it wasn't Cannan then does anybody have any other theories or people involved?

 

[WestLondoner]

Don't want to spoil it for you

Something to remember about DV's book is he's putting forward a proposal around what may have happened to SJL, which turns largely on things that obviously ought to have been done, but weren't. In so doing he overlooks or omits, in print at least, quite a lot that undermines his own theory.

For example, SJL was friends with a seemingly wealthy couple. She had been intending to go into business with them but had cooled after money had been spent; she'd said someone was pressuring her about money; she had been due to have lunch with the wife the day she disappeared; the (now ex-)wife is now a minor celebrity who writes how-to articles in tabloids about sex, so appears to a bit of fame seeker, yet has never alluded to her friendship with the most famous missing person in the UK; eight days after she disappeared, the husband went bankrupt. A number of us here this is a very interesting sequence of events, but you'll hear nothing of it in documentaries.

The BW sighting of the car debunks his theory; it's not mentioned. It's far from clear that his point about the house keys is correct; and so on.

This is fair enough because he's not writing a rebuttal of other theories, he's setting out his own. Your reaction will probably be "...Eh? What?!" because that's what most people's is (and what brought me here).

 

[Cluesleuth]

I saw somebody write earlier that they think the case has been solved and they agree with the DV book about who did it.
I'm only half way through the book now but haven't picked up yet about who it could be.
So if it wasn't Cannan then does anybody have any other theories or people involved?

AS book Page 184
The man arrested elsewhere was questioned by detectives about Susannah, but was not charged in connection with the case. No evidence was found to link him with her and the police had no alternative but to eliminate him from the case.
.....
As book was published in 1988.
JC wasnt questioned about SJL disappearance until 1989 and 1990 so it wasnt him.

Weds 30th July 1986 The Sun Newspaper
Scotland Yard said last night they were 'gravely concerned' for the safety of the vivacious and popular young girl. And they alerted detectives hunting the Railway Ripper, who has murdered two other blondes and a teenage schoolgirl.

 

[WiseOwl]

Have you read the book by the academic Alan Keightley who Brady left his possessions to? When I heard the digging was a tip off from an author, I was hoping it was something Brady left him in the suitcase to say where Keith was. Maybe the ground has moved too much for them to find him now?
Didn't the newspaper say there was a skull or something?
I deleted the Keightley book from my kindle, as keep seeing Brady's face gave me the creeps.
I also don't know how the police officer kept Peter Sutcliffe's killing kit in his attic, as that would give me the creeps too and I wouldn't want anything like that near me.

Yes, I too thought it might have been Keightley who was the author that contacted the police about finding Keith's remains.

However, it was another author and amateur sleuth called Russell Edwards who said he had found Keith's remains a couple of weeks ago. He claimed to have found a jawbone, along with some other items including clothing. He tweeted that he had found Keith's remains, and sent a photograph of what he claimed to have found to the GMP.

Alan Bennett (Keith's brother) was sceptical about Edwards' claims and came out in public last week to say so.

The police continued their dig until last Friday, when they wound it up having found nothing significant.

They even believe that the jawbone seen in the photograph was probably just vegetation!

Edwards hasn't commented on the police's (lack of) findings as of yet, but he has had a public spat with Alan Bennett.

I think you make a good point about the ground having moved, it has been nearly 60 years after all and Keith's remains are probably nowhere near to where he was buried.

 

[WestLondoner]

And they alerted detectives hunting the Railway Ripper, who has murdered two other blondes and a teenage schoolgirl.

The Railway Ripper possibility, which in fact turned out to be two killers, is one I hadn't considered till it came up here. Two abductors would, as others have noted, been able to carjack and subdue her, with one planting the false trail by moving her car while the other took her to wherever they had organised.

 

[Terryb808]

The Railway Ripper possibility, which in fact turned out to be two killers, is one I hadn't considered till it came up here. Two abductors would, as others have noted, been able to carjack and subdue her, with one planting the false trail by moving her car while the other took her to wherever they had organised.

This is IMO a likely scenario, it would have been easier for both to follow her in one vehicle, make sure they are in front stop suddenly and wait for her to exit her car.
At this point one takes her while the other takes her car.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Please forgive me for going (slightly) off-topic, but any one know if there is a PR type department within British policing?

Where employees work to put a positive spin on unsolved cases in the press etc, possibly even using social media, chat forums etc towards this goal?

It certainly looks that way.

Here are some interesting sites with relevant points - the first is the LSE on the subject of UK police, the second is more in depth and regarding Israeli police protocols and considerations on social media.

The relationship between police and media: is the Met less accountable than ever before?

Drawing on interviews with journalists, senior police, and press officers, Marianne Colbran explores changes between the Met and the mainstream media over the last 40 years. She argues that in rece…

blogs.lse.ac.uk

View of Police in social media: To protect and share? | First Monday

firstmonday.org

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

That's an excellent point @WestLondoner.

It poses the question does any so-called credible information that is given to the police regarding Suzy is only considered if it involves JC in any way?

All the searches that have been carried out so far have been linked to JC, there is no doubt about that.

Yes and the more searches, the credibility is diminishing. So, the case was not credible enough for the CPS in the first place, yet some kind of undisclosed 'information' is considered credible enough to support the funding, manpower, and disruption for numerous digs.

Yet the detailed information supplied by DV that we are also not fully aware of has been ignored and dismissed as not credible and not requiring a search of the PoW or the railway banking when we do all know for sure that SJL was most certainly headed for the PoW on the last day she was ever seen?

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

This is IMO a likely scenario, it would have been easier for both to follow her in one vehicle, make sure they are in front stop suddenly and wait for her to exit her car.
At this point one takes her while the other takes her car.

would be a very notable event though and come to the attention of passing traffic, pedestrians, and I can't imagine she'd have come quietly

 

[Cluesleuth]

The Railway Ripper possibility, which in fact turned out to be two killers, is one I hadn't considered till it came up here. Two abductors would, as others have noted, been able to carjack and subdue her, with one planting the false trail by moving her car while the other took her to wherever they had organised.

JD was a martial arts exponent, manuals found in his home with instructions of how to kidknap and the importance of an escape route.

JD collected keys from his victims as souvenirs
JMO

 

[Cluesleuth]

would be a very notable event though and come to the attention of passing traffic, pedestrians, and I can't imagine she'd have come quietly

Couple having a 'Right Ruck' in the street?

Two seperate accounts by housewives of hearing a scream. One describing 'a high pitched yowl'
JMO

 

[Terryb808]

would be a very notable event though and come to the attention of passing traffic, pedestrians, and I can't imagine she'd have come quietly

The Road her car was parked in was very quiet where it bends round, and that’s even today when you’d expect more traffic.

If this was the scenario these two would have this off to a military operation and as such, quick, quiet and without attracting attention.

It’s possible, and explains why they moved SJL’s car, if they just grabbed her she would have had time to react. Additionally, grabbing her before she reached her car would negate the need to move it from Whittingstall Road.

 

[Cherwell]

Still quite tricky, though, as how would they keep her subdued while driving? Force her to drive at gunpoint? Or perhaps there was a third person to keep her under control?

 

[WestLondoner]

Still quite tricky, though, as how would they keep her subdued while driving? Force her to drive at gunpoint? Or perhaps there was a third person to keep her under control?

Do we know how they subdued their other victims?

One way might be to bundle her into the back of a van. One threatens her with a knife while the other drives her car away.