UK UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #5

[Terryb808]

Did Colin Pitchfork admit to his crimes? JC didn't and was banned from joining the sex therapy rehabilitation sessions, which was an abuse of his human rights (according to JC)

Not a JC fan, however, it does seem that his human rights were abused.

A defence lawyer will tell you that it’s not up to him to prove the prosecution case (even if he believes his client is guilty).
It’s down to the prosecution to be better at their job than he is at his.

On this basis it’s not up to JC to incriminate himself further and lengthen his sentence to be able to have help with his rehabilitation.

As the lack of rehabilitation attendances stopped his parole appeal, an independent view would be that the decision was unfair.

As has been said here JC is an evil character and should not be allowed to have the opportunity to re- attend.

 

[Terryb808]

berry dee gives out a lot of info that is wrong. he is overrated as a crime writer.

He must have gained a lot of info via all the letters he exchanged with JC and were effectively confiscated by the Met.

IIRC didn’t the cotton gloves idea come from JC’s Reading victim, as did that JC carried a bag.

What for me fuels Berry Dee’s books as doubtful is that one of his previous books fingered a totally different person as SJL’s killer, someone who’s MO, age just didn’t fit at all.

My interest in Berry Dee’s “Prime Suspect” book was to get an insight into JC’s character and have an idea as to how he might operate.
In this respect it gave me (with the addition of a review of his crimes) what I wanted.

As many have said, you can’t take all you read as fact.

 

[lee sumner]

He must have gained a lot of info via all the letters he exchanged with JC and were effectively confiscated by the Met.

IIRC didn’t the cotton gloves idea come from JC’s Reading victim, as did that JC carried a bag.

What for me fuels Berry Dee’s books as doubtful is that one of his previous books fingered a totally different person as SJL’s killer, someone who’s MO, age just didn’t fit at all.

My interest in Berry Dee’s “Prime Suspect” book was to get an insight into JC’s character and have an idea as to how he might operate.
In this respect it gave me (with the addition of a review of his crimes) what I wanted.

As many have said, you can’t take all you read as fact.

yes, MS kidnapped stephanie slater in 1992. he did not snatch SL, but berry dee thinks he did.

 

[Terryb808]

yes, MS kidnapped stephanie slater in 1992. he did not snatch SL, but berry dee thinks he did.

IMO Berry Dee’s book highlighting MS as SJL’s kidnapper is just total nonsense.
MS was money motivated and there was no ransom demands. Also, it’s well off his patch, outside his operating comfort zone.
Keep in mind I’ve not read his book, so my judgement is without sound foundation in that sense.

 

[lee sumner]

Did Colin Pitchfork admit to his crimes? JC didn't and was banned from joining the sex therapy rehabilitation sessions, which was an abuse of his human rights (according to JC)

Did Colin Pitchfork admit to his crimes? JC didn't and was banned from joining the sex therapy rehabilitation sessions, which was an abuse of his human rights (according to JC)

pitchfork was telling them what they wanted to hear.

Did Colin Pitchfork admit to his crimes? JC didn't and was banned from joining the sex therapy rehabilitation sessions, which was an abuse of his human rights (according to JC)

pitchfork killed lynda and dawn. 2 teenagers, and he gets parole. this would never happen in the US. he abducted another girl, but she managed to escape. what the parole board was thinking baffles me. men like him never change.

 

[lee sumner]

IMO Berry Dee’s book highlighting MS as SJL’s kidnapper is just total nonsense.
MS was money motivated and there was no ransom demands. Also, it’s well off his patch, outside his operating comfort zone.
Keep in mind I’ve not read his book, so my judgement is without sound foundation in that sense.

berry dee talks about the red sierra detectives found in 2000 in a scrapyard. he said there was trace evidence belonging to SL, but it was SC, not SL. his info not accurate, and the hair found in the car could have come from SC, but was inconclusive.

 

[WestLondoner]

I'm no expert but AIUI, once a jury finds you guilty, by definition you did it; your trial established that because that's what trials do. Denying you did it after that point is tactically necessary if you intend to appeal, but in general the convict's best interest is to stop denying, accept guilt, and get into the rehab programmes that are essential to early release. Cannan denies he killed SB so has shown no remorse nor has he sought rehab. But the 1989 verdict says he killed her - which makes him now an unrepentant felon.

The panel would ask itself whether a convicted but unrepentant and thus unrehabilitated sex killer should be let out after serving the minimum sentence. The answer is of course no.

Was it Berry Dee or someone else who reckons John West killed SJL, because John West makes fish, kippers are fish and John West's brother was Fred West?

 

[Pinkizzy]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48998136

 

[Pinkizzy]

SEXUAL OFFENDER TREATMENT: McCartan2

Sexual Offender Treatment is an international peer reviewed journal open to all scientists and practitioners researching sexual abuse.

www.sexual-offender-treatment.org

 

[Pinkizzy]

Horizon and iHorizon an uncontrolled before - after study of clinical outcomes

This report describes a study of clinical outcomes for participants on the Horizon and iHorizon accredited offending behaviour programmes.

www.gov.uk

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

JC apparently said whoever killed SB ‘& another girl’ (SC, most likely) also killed SL. This alleged murderous man, a ‘Bristol businessman’, who coincidentally sold him SB’s mini, really seems to point to JC’s all-round guilt. He didn’t bring SL into the conversation at this stage to showboat. There’s a lot of flimsy evidence, then there’s this.

If it was JC, possibly he had help re: transport, possibly the original owner of the red sierra, who was, after all, a one time getaway driver. It’s possible he gave an unwitting helping hand. The discovery of the sierra led the police to consider ‘a new suspect/s’, possibly him.

To my mind, the property business deal SL was brokering with a third party, apparent Sturgis client, was vitally important. The police were allegedly angry that the family apparently didn’t flag this loud & clear immediately at time. PL said clearly in papers this was their last conversation & they spoke ‘at length’. He later appeared to backtrack worried he’d allowed people to imply she was involved in nefarious goings on & there was no ‘evil’ in her nature. He wrote a letter to the People to this end.

DL herself said the fact this person never came forward implied their guilt.

‘Kipper’s’ number/details, if he was part of a house/flat buying scheme with SL, PL possibly made her later doubt etc, (after their long Sunday eve chat) were likely written somewhere in her papers. It suggests this ‘scheme’ was considered for some weeks. It might even have been her own shorthand for an existing client, after talking to her father about her plans he didn’t take ‘seriously’, now ‘fishy’, hence ‘Kipper’ in diary. After all she had form for nicknames & colloquialisms.

 

[Terryb808]

I'm no expert but AIUI, once a jury finds you guilty, by definition you did it; your trial established that because that's what trials do. Denying you did it after that point is tactically necessary if you intend to appeal, but in general the convict's best interest is to stop denying, accept guilt, and get into the rehab programmes that are essential to early release. Cannan denies he killed SB so has shown no remorse nor has he sought rehab. But the 1989 verdict says he killed her - which makes him now an unrepentant felon.

The panel would ask itself whether a convicted but unrepentant and thus unrehabilitated sex killer should be let out after serving the minimum sentence. The answer is of course no.

Was it Berry Dee or someone else who reckons John West killed SJL, because John West makes fish, kippers are fish and John West's brother was Fred West?

I took it that JC was expected to confess to the “ones I’ve never been caught for” as he’d stated (IIRC on camera).
Only then would he be allowed to attend rehabilitation sessions. I wasn’t aware he refused to attend due to his insistence that he is innocent.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

JC apparently said whoever killed SB ‘& another girl’ (SC, most likely) also killed SL. This alleged murderous man, a ‘Bristol businessman’, who coincidentally sold him SB’s mini, really seems to point to JC’s all-round guilt. He didn’t bring SL into the conversation at this stage to showboat. There’s a lot of flimsy evidence, then there’s this.

If it was JC, possibly he had help re: transport, possibly the original owner of the red sierra, who was, after all, a one time getaway driver. It’s possible he gave an unwitting helping hand. The discovery of the sierra led the police to consider ‘a new suspect/s’, possibly him.

To my mind, the property business deal SL was brokering with a third party, apparent Sturgis client, was vitally important. The police were allegedly angry that the family apparently didn’t flag this loud & clear immediately at time. PL said clearly in papers this was their last conversation & they spoke ‘at length’. He later appeared to backtrack worried he’d allowed people to imply she was involved in nefarious goings on & there was no ‘evil’ in her nature. He wrote a letter to the People to this end.

DL herself said the fact this person never came forward implied their guilt.

‘Kipper’s’ number/details, if he was part of a house/flat buying scheme with SL, PL possibly made her later doubt etc, (after their long Sunday eve chat) were likely written somewhere in her papers. It suggests this ‘scheme’ was considered for some weeks. It might even have been her own shorthand for an existing client, after talking to her father about her plans he didn’t take ‘seriously’, now ‘fishy’, hence ‘Kipper’ in diary. After all she had form for nicknames & colloquialisms.

If SL found someone 'fishy' and gave them a nickname, would it have likely been 'Kipper' bearing in mind she already knew some very nearby Kippers in real life, albeit it was also their nickname not real name?

I would have thought for her own purposes, she'd come up with a uniquely identifiable name.

 

[Terryb808]

If SL found someone 'fishy' and gave them a nickname, would it have likely been 'Kipper' bearing in mind she already knew some very nearby Kippers in real life, albeit it was also their nickname not real name?

I would have thought for her own purposes, she'd come up with a uniquely identifiable name.

Well a kipper is a smelly fish, so if you thought something was suspicious about a person it just fits.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

She knew Herrings, whom she associated with Shorrolds Rd, so if making something up to get out of the office etc…some say, she’d land on this as an excuse. She only dealt with one brother as a client & didn’t know one well enough to realise he’d moved from Shorrolds.

She knew others in Shorrolds too, including someone she’d apparently had a fling with.

There was a deal of some kind on the table re: effectively giving her extra cash to bump up her purchasing power re: new flat. She was also in a hurry to sell flat. It had fallen through a few times (AS).

She was excited & discussed getting a lump sum, a few thousand, at the last Sat night party, & a certain model of car (if JC at centre of all this had he offered help here?).

Then, after discussing things with her father & to her mother, saying: ‘don’t worry, I will be able to tell you all about it when all settled’ to paraphrase what paper reported. Possibly, she later pulled out? He would likely have advised caution. If not prone to outside of Sturgis ‘deals’ did she want out & any cash back?

She had decided that the man she maybe knew as ‘Peterson’, for example, was possibly ‘fishy’ so she uses a nickname, as she did socially. Now ‘Fishy’ & about to be terminated on any scheme?

Did the man assume all was indeed now ‘settled’ hence champagne? Then we have independent reports of arguments.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

After the article where there appear to be direct quotes about ‘strings attached’ deals from DL. PL writes in, yes, the police apparently feel ‘Kipper’ was known to SL for some time:

‘It is a fact perfectly well known to police that some months before SL was thinking of buying another flat. She did mention she was hoping someone would go in with her but gave no indication who that was’

‘She would never have taken part in any nefarious or illicit activity’ ‘had some such suggestion been put to her she would certainly have backed away which (and this is our speculation) may have resulted in her abduction. If your article gave the impression that SL was party to something illicit I assure them that is not the case’.

‘This must be the man who abducted SL or he would have come forward to clear his name’ ‘Suzy was very excited the night before she went missing’. Daily Mail, Feb 7 1987.

Thing is who injects cash into a deal & expects no return?

 

[lee sumner]

I'm no expert but AIUI, once a jury finds you guilty, by definition you did it; your trial established that because that's what trials do. Denying you did it after that point is tactically necessary if you intend to appeal, but in general the convict's best interest is to stop denying, accept guilt, and get into the rehab programmes that are essential to early release. Cannan denies he killed SB so has shown no remorse nor has he sought rehab. But the 1989 verdict says he killed her - which makes him now an unrepentant felon.

The panel would ask itself whether a convicted but unrepentant and thus unrehabilitated sex killer should be let out after serving the minimum sentence. The answer is of course no.

Was it Berry Dee or someone else who reckons John West killed SJL, because John West makes fish, kippers are fish and John West's brother was Fred West?

yes, fred west and his brother. as if SL would be seen with someone like fred west. it does not fit his MO anyway.

 

[lee sumner]

JC apparently said whoever killed SB ‘& another girl’ (SC, most likely) also killed SL. This alleged murderous man, a ‘Bristol businessman’, who coincidentally sold him SB’s mini, really seems to point to JC’s all-round guilt. He didn’t bring SL into the conversation at this stage to showboat. There’s a lot of flimsy evidence, then there’s this.

If it was JC, possibly he had help re: transport, possibly the original owner of the red sierra, who was, after all, a one time getaway driver. It’s possible he gave an unwitting helping hand. The discovery of the sierra led the police to consider ‘a new suspect/s’, possibly him.

To my mind, the property business deal SL was brokering with a third party, apparent Sturgis client, was vitally important. The police were allegedly angry that the family apparently didn’t flag this loud & clear immediately at time. PL said clearly in papers this was their last conversation & they spoke ‘at length’. He later appeared to backtrack worried he’d allowed people to imply she was involved in nefarious goings on & there was no ‘evil’ in her nature. He wrote a letter to the People to this end.

DL herself said the fact this person never came forward implied their guilt.

‘Kipper’s’ number/details, if he was part of a house/flat buying scheme with SL, PL possibly made her later doubt etc, (after their long Sunday eve chat) were likely written somewhere in her papers. It suggests this ‘scheme’ was considered for some weeks. It might even have been her own shorthand for an existing client, after talking to her father about her plans he didn’t take ‘seriously’, now ‘fishy’, hence ‘Kipper’ in diary. After all she had form for nicknames & colloquialisms.

JC told his story to DS mike barley. saying he got SB car from a businessman, and it was this mystery man that killed SL, SB, and another woman presumed to be SC. this is what made me think JC was responsible. he likes to play mind games.

 

[Terryb808]

JC told his story to DS mike barley. saying he got SB car from a businessman, and it was this mystery man that killed SL, SB, and another woman presumed to be SC. this is what made me think JC was responsible. he likes to play mind games.

He’s not exactly being clever is he. Why bring two other crimes into the equation.
The old saying applies “when in a hole, stop digging “
It does make you think DD Mike Barley was on the money when he said JC was responsible, all the circumstantial evidence supports his conclusion.

 

[WestLondoner]

IIRC when Cannan "confessed" to killing SJL, it was in the context of his bull5hit claim that someone else had killed SB, and that same person had also killed SJL. That person was "Hodgeson", the bloke who he claimed had sold him SB's car. That was his account of how he came to have it in his garage. This person was an invention of his, which the police established very easily. Cannan had said he bought the car off "Hodgeson" at an auction site, so the police said OK, describe the layout of the site. He couldn't, of course, never having been there.

So the question is whether in his dim way he thought he could divert police attention to the made-up "Hodgeson" by associating some high profile crime with him. Perhaps he thought if he did that, the police would get all excited and would lose interest in him as they investigated this blind alley.

What actually happened, when he said the man who had killed SB was the also the one who had killed SJL, was the police replied "Was that you?" Obnoxio the Clown reflexively said "Yes", then realised what he'd done and then hastily said "No".

So this doesn't really prove anything, but increasingly I wonder if the stuff that persuades police that JC did it and that is never made public is material that incriminated - maybe even named - him back in 1986 and that was overlooked. If so, the police have an exquisite dilemma of knowing who did it, but being unable to say how they know, without discrediting themselves. After all, if it was Cannan and he could have been nicked back in 1986, that failure cost SB her life.