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

[Whitehall 1212]

This is something i'm sure many of us on this thread have wondered about - are the diary and chequebook going missing (and subsequently turning up again) linked to Suzy's disappearance in any way? Or was it just a coincidence?

It's too much of a coincidence in my opinion.

 

[Cherwell]

... whoever sent them or called knew her number and her address.
This is one reason I think her having the diary and chequebook go missing could be important, as it could mean someone was trying to find out about her.

Might be just me, but I never wrote my own address and phone number in my diary or address book .... because I never needed to look them up

 

[Pinkizzy]

It's too much of a coincidence in my opinion.

Did the person who took the items before dumping them in front of the PoW kill her or was she lured out of the office and killed by another?

 

[Terryb808]

Yes, it would.



It's possible. We don't know how anyone would react in that scenario. Her family and friends thought she would not have been forced or taken so easily as she was sporty and fit, but we don't know what threats or pressure was applied to her.

For the police to be correct in that SJL’s car being abandoned between 3.00 & 5.00pm it really only fits when you have a single perpetrator.
If she was abducted by a criminal gang or two perpetrators her car could have been left in Stevenage Road as per WJ’s statement.
With the suspects we have this fits either DV’s narrative or JC the prime suspect.
The criminal gang element opens up an entirely new avenue altogether.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Might be just me, but I never wrote my own address and phone number in my diary or address book .... because I never needed to look them up

Have you never woken up one morning and thought, if only briefly 'where am I'? That's where it starts

 

[Whitehall 1212]

The criminal gang element opens up an entirely new avenue altogether.

It does indeed, but what would be the possible motive, apart from rape and murder.

Are you implying organised crime?

Certainly OCG's have such capability but they are sophisticated enough not to try on a Monday lunchtime in a London street on a summers day. It's far too risky.

It doesn't fit with the MO of Duffy and Mulcahy.

There were no other similar abductions that came to the fore, which would be expected.

For someone to gain control over SJL without being noticed it had to be someone that she went with willingly, someone who either she knew or was suitably taken in by.

 

[Konstantin]

Have you never woken up one morning and thought, if only briefly 'where am I'? That's where is starts

I can't remember my phone number because I never call myself.

But things were different with landlines. But most diaries do have a bit at the front where you write your name and address don't they? I assume SJL didn't put her contact details in her diary since the pub had to call her bank rather than her directly.

 

[Konstantin]

It does indeed, but what would be the possible motive, apart from rape and murder.

Are you implying organised crime?

Certainly OCG's have such capability but they are sophisticated enough not to try on a Monday lunchtime in a London street on a summers day. It's far too risky.

It doesn't fit with the MO of Duffy and Mulcahy.

There were no other similar abductions that came to the fore, which would be expected.

For someone to gain control over SJL without being noticed it had to be someone that she went with willingly, someone who either she knew or was suitably taken in by.

If this happened in the hours of darkness you could believe it was a carjacking like JC's rape of DT, where he got DT's attention by making some small talk questions (asking her if she knew where a certain place was) then using a weapon to force her out of the driver's seat. In that case, he was the one who did the driving and made DT direct him to a quiet spot for him to commit his crimes before he drove her back to Reading.

He had control the whole time over the car and his victim. However he did take his balaclava off so DT saw his face.

You can imagine this is how he also abducted SB as she was in her car, although we don't know for sure the details.

In this case, if JC is the perpetrator, a random carjacking is surely less likely in the daytime where there are people about and even if someone has a knife or gun you can scream to attract attention. So one would assume that he was plausible (as he was with many other women) until he suddenly wasn't. When JC was arrested for the SB murder several keys were found in his car so he did seem to collect keys to places he frequented, perhaps he had a place he could have taken SJL to, if he is the perpetrator of course.

 

[WestLondoner]

For the police to be correct in that SJL’s car being abandoned between 3.00 & 5.00pm it really only fits when you have a single perpetrator.
If she was abducted by a criminal gang or two perpetrators her car could have been left in Stevenage Road as per WJ’s statement.
With the suspects we have this fits either DV’s narrative or JC the prime suspect.
The criminal gang element opens up an entirely new avenue altogether.

I'm not sure it points to JC. Such an abductor could have been anyone, not limited to JC. It could for example have been one of the other sex offenders recently released from the Scrubs, or it could have been someone not then known but later found to be a local offender. Nothing in the timeline points to any individual as being an abductor.

JMO

 

[Cherwell]

Have you never woken up one morning and thought, if only briefly 'where am I'? That's where it starts

Many many times! I have woken and mentally gone over my plans for the day ahead, only to pull back the curtains and find that I was in a different city.
But I have never forgotten where I live.

 

[Cluesleuth]

I'm not sure it points to JC. Such an abductor could have been anyone, not limited to JC. It could for example have been one of the other sex offenders recently released from the Scrubs, or it could have been someone not then known but later found to be a local offender. Nothing in the timeline points to any individual as being an abductor.

JMO

Or that its even a Sex Crime.
My advice would be KEEP AN OPEN MIND! it will serve you well when seeking the truth.
JMO

 

[Whitehall 1212]

I'm not sure it points to JC. Such an abductor could have been anyone, not limited to JC. It could for example have been one of the other sex offenders recently released from the Scrubs, or it could have been someone not then known but later found to be a local offender. Nothing in the timeline points to any individual as being an abductor.

JMO

Possible offenders were extensively researched and eliminated. As the 2000 re-investigation stated 'JC is the only suspect'.

'We did have John Cannan in our system already, he just didn't feature highly enough.

We researched lots and lots of known criminals, those with previous convictions for abduction, sexual assaults, murders, those types of crimes.

So we had him and many, many others in our system aswell.

DS Mike Barley

Source: Real Crime (ITV) - Suzy Lamplugh. 11 minutes 20 seconds

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Or that its even a Sex Crime.
My advice would be KEEP AN OPEN MIND! it will serve you well when seeking the truth.
JMO

As no ransom demand was made or there was anything to indicate the involvement of organised crime, then it is a fair assumption that such an abduction would result in murder and most likely had a sexual motive.

 

[Cherwell]

As no ransom demand was made or there was anything to indicate the involvement of organised crime, then it is a fair assumption that such an abduction would result in murder and most likely had a sexual motive.

But not necessarily so.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

But not necessarily so.

Crime analysis regarding offending behaviour shows that it is far more likely than not.

There are very few killers who would abduct and hold their victim captive, without a ransom demand, other than to sexually assault and murder them.

OCG kidnaps for the purpose of torture and murder can I feel be ruled out. There is no evidence of SJL having such involvement.

No ransom was received so a kidnapping for ransom can, I feel, be ruled out also.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Might be just me, but I never wrote my own address and phone number in my diary or address book .... because I never needed to look them up

Well, true, but people do that so if their things go astray, someone can return them

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

It's too much of a coincidence in my opinion.

Totally agree on this - there's something 'there'. We're mostly all speculating the cheque book and diary were taken from her bag by someone for nefarious reasons, before that people seemed to think she'd left them or dropped them in a phone box or in the pub. The fact is we have no idea, unless I'm mistaken. So they could have been swiped or dropped or thrown in any number of ways for all sorts of reasons, maybe even taken from her car glove compartment - popping car doors used to be easy in those days didn't it?

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

It does indeed, but what would be the possible motive, apart from rape and murder.

Are you implying organised crime?

Certainly OCG's have such capability but they are sophisticated enough not to try on a Monday lunchtime in a London street on a summers day. It's far too risky.

It doesn't fit with the MO of Duffy and Mulcahy.

There were no other similar abductions that came to the fore, which would be expected.

For someone to gain control over SJL without being noticed it had to be someone that she went with willingly, someone who either she knew or was suitably taken in by.

Or, she went inside somewhere alone, willingly, and was quickly overpowered and silenced. Or she was 'jacked' at any point - on foot or driving - by someone she believed would use a knife or gun or she was forced by a menacing threat of some sort. We are factually none the wiser in any aspect and only know that she was either forced, lured, or went somewhere willingly, which pretty much covers all and any options. God knows she may have even had a bizarre freak fatal accident in a place where she wasn't meant to be with someone she shouldn't have been with and that someone decided it best to cover up than do the right thing.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Crime analysis regarding offending behaviour shows that it is far more likely than not.

There are very few killers who would abduct and hold their victim captive, without a ransom demand, other than to sexually assault and murder them.

OCG kidnaps for the purpose of torture and murder can I feel be ruled out. There is no evidence of SJL having such involvement.

No ransom was received so a kidnapping for ransom can, I feel, be ruled out also.

Re ransom, not everybody tells the truth about whether they've received a ransom call. Albeit it seems rather unlikely, after this amount of time with no leads whatsoever then all options are open to consideration. People do strange things.

 

[Whitehall 1212]

Re ransom, not everybody tells the truth about whether they've received a ransom call. Albeit it seems rather unlikely, after this amount of time with no leads whatsoever then all options are open to consideration. People do strange things.

There was no ransom call, either to Sturgis or the Lamplugh's.

I think it is important to consider what we know about the police involvement from an early stage.

For some reason, this and the Claudia Lawrence investigation give rise to theories that have no basis in the evidence or the statistical analysis for such cases.

This need for answers and understanding is a deeply entrenched human trait, but it can often result in throwing out what is incomplete but credible in favour of much less credible answers with nothing tangible to support them.