UK UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #6

[WiseOwl]

The David Wilson Doc came out sometime ago, if it’s this one it followed the “JC did it” line.

Don't all the modern documentaries follow the 'it was JC that did it' line? I can't recall a recent one that doesn't!

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

It's not a bad documentary, though. You just have to accept it for what it is. I always find David Wilson quite enjoyable; some presenters seem to be able to "hook" you even if they're just talking about paint drying, and for me he's one of them. The entire In the Footsteps of Killers series is fairly good.

 

[jetsfanjohn]

No her DNA wasn’t in the Ford Sierra, only a partial match which also partially matched Sandra Court (who IMO was in the car).
If they’d have found a full DNA match to Suzy in that car the Met would have had it in the media everywhere.

That puts him right back down the list of suspects so, IMO.

I wonder how many of Suzy's friends and accquantices the police investigated back in 1986 ?

I would suspect there is at least one person whose whereabouts for a couple of hours on the afternoon of 27/08/86 cannot be accounted for.

 

[Salah11]

That puts him right back down the list of suspects so, IMO.

I wonder how many of Suzy's friends and accquantices the police investigated back in 1986 ?

I would suspect there is at least one person whose whereabouts for a couple of hours on the afternoon of 27/08/86 cannot be accounted for.

The problem is they need to go back to square one and start again because they obviously missed stuff. But that won’t happen because unfortunately they won’t admit it’s not JC or release what evidence they have that’s it’s him to shut people up.

 

[Terryb808]

That puts him right back down the list of suspects so, IMO.

I wonder how many of Suzy's friends and accquantices the police investigated back in 1986 ?

I would suspect there is at least one person whose whereabouts for a couple of hours on the afternoon of 27/08/86 cannot be accounted for.

How about one of them missing for 5 days.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

How about one of them missing for 5 days.

Wasn't that DH? He was supposed to be abroad in another country, but nobody could trace him until he turned up a few days later.

Suzy appears to have had so many lovers, and to have continued hooking up with so many of her exes even after she began dating someone new, that there's no way the police could have been sure they had traced ALL of them. That's not a knock on the police, it's just reality.

It's also a reality that under those circumstance, some of those men probably had valid reasons to be upset with Suzy. Being upset with her is obviously no excuse for harming her, but it's a sad truth that every single day, someone being upset can quickly turn into someone lashing out and doing something they didn't plan to do.

I really believe that whoever did this was someone Suzy knew and trusted, not some random stranger.

 

[Terryb808]

Wasn't that DH? He was supposed to be abroad in another country, but nobody could trace him until he turned up a few days later.

Suzy appears to have had so many lovers, and to have continued hooking up with so many of her exes even after she began dating someone new, that there's no way the police could have been sure they had traced ALL of them. That's not a knock on the police, it's just reality.

It's also a reality that under those circumstance, some of those men probably had valid reasons to be upset with Suzy. Being upset with her is obviously no excuse for harming her, but it's a sad truth that every single day, someone being upset can quickly turn into someone lashing out and doing something they didn't plan to do.

I really believe that whoever did this was someone Suzy knew and trusted, not some random stranger.

Couldn’t agree more, killers like Wright & Cannan made little effort to hide their victims. That goes for the Railway Killers as well.
Suzy’s disappearance appears to be either a professional job (for what reason we don’t know), or someone close who lost it and has the ability to hide her where she wouldn’t be found.
If it’s the latter, it’s about time that person showed some compassion for the Lamplugh family and gave Suzy back so they can get closure.
I appreciate this is an idealistic view, but we can all hope can’t we.

 

[WestLondoner]

AIUI, DV's thinking is that the time sequence for the diary retrieval looked roughly like this:

9.30ish - calls start between PoW, bank and SJL re lost property
11ish - arrangement made to fetch stuff after work
12ish - KP turns up, goes off for lunch with MG.
12 to 12.30ish - punter calls in wanting a second viewing of 43 Waldemar. Second viewings are buying signals, so this takes precedence. Catch is, punter can only come after work. SJL books 6pm viewing.
12.30 - SJL realises she now can't go to the PoW after work because she has a viewing, then tennis. She's busy till 10, so she calls the pub and asks to come now.
12.35ish She realises she needs to justify not being in the office if KP and MG return, so she fills in the first property address she can think of and the name she associates with it.
12.40 she heads off to the PoW.
Next day: CV tells police SJL was expected that evening and never came.
1 year later: CV has now seen the diary and the 6pm appointment in the papers, realises SJL would never have said 6pm, and changes his story to suggest others besides himself knew she was heading to the PoW.

If DV's right that MG had already gone to lunch when SJL left the office then MG can't have remembered her collecting the keys. I am not really sure how important this detail is to his she-didn't-take-the-keys thesis though. Whether she took the keys or not, the absence of any evidence she was ever inside 37SR undermines HR's claim to have heard the door as someone came out.

What's a bit more troublesome is that the cancellation of the evening PoW pickup relies on DL's account of a tennis date being accurate, and on the assumption that she couldn't possibly have gone at 9pm rather than at 6pm.

DL certainly later manipulated the picture to quash any suggestion SJL had ever been sexually active. Interestingly, she was not anything like as bothered by the idea that SJL might have been doing something financially shady. She took months to disclose the final Sunday conversation with SJL - which was about dodgy property dealings - apparently thinking it not important. IIRC DL even suggested SJL might have got involved in somebody's mortgage fraud - almost as a sort of "acceptable" thing you might do that would get you killed.

Whether DL was already doing this by Wednesday 30th July is less clear. It's also not clear that SJL couldn't just go to the PoW a bit later, given it was close to home.

 

[Terryb808]

AIUI, DV's thinking is that the time sequence for the diary retrieval looked roughly like this:

9.30ish - calls start between PoW, bank and SJL re lost property
11ish - arrangement made to fetch stuff after work
12ish - KP turns up, goes off for lunch with MG.
12 to 12.30ish - punter calls in wanting a second viewing of 43 Waldemar. Second viewings are buying signals, so this takes precedence. Catch is, punter can only come after work. SJL books 6pm viewing.
12.30 - SJL realises she now can't go to the PoW after work because she has a viewing, then tennis. She's busy till 10, so she calls the pub and asks to come now.
12.35ish She realises she needs to justify not being in the office if KP and MG return, so she fills in the first property address she can think of and the name she associates with it.
12.40 she heads off to the PoW.
Next day: CV tells police SJL was expected that evening and never came.
1 year later: CV has now seen the diary and the 6pm appointment in the papers, realises SJL would never have said 6pm, and changes his story to suggest others besides himself knew she was heading to the PoW.

If DV's right that MG had already gone to lunch when SJL left the office then MG can't have remembered her collecting the keys. I am not really sure how important this detail is to his she-didn't-take-the-keys thesis though. Whether she took the keys or not, the absence of any evidence she was ever inside 37SR undermines HR's claim to have heard the door as someone came out.

What's a bit more troublesome is that the cancellation of the evening PoW pickup relies on DL's account of a tennis date being accurate, and on the assumption that she couldn't possibly have gone at 9pm rather than at 6pm.

DL certainly later manipulated the picture to quash any suggestion SJL had ever been sexually active. Interestingly, she was not anything like as bothered by the idea that SJL might have been doing something financially shady. She took months to disclose the final Sunday conversation with SJL - which was about dodgy property dealings - apparently thinking it not important. IIRC DL even suggested SJL might have got involved in somebody's mortgage fraud - almost as a sort of "acceptable" thing you might do that would get you killed.

Whether DL was already doing this by Wednesday 30th July is less clear. It's also not clear that SJL couldn't just go to the PoW a bit later, given it was close to home.

Whatever DV has on CV it’s not clear and obviously in the public domain.
He expected an arrest, that’s pretty serious, on this basis the police are either so far into JC did it at the expense of everything else, or DV just got it wrong.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

AIUI, DV's thinking is that the time sequence for the diary retrieval looked roughly like this:

9.30ish - calls start between PoW, bank and SJL re lost property
11ish - arrangement made to fetch stuff after work
12ish - KP turns up, goes off for lunch with MG.
12 to 12.30ish - punter calls in wanting a second viewing of 43 Waldemar. Second viewings are buying signals, so this takes precedence. Catch is, punter can only come after work. SJL books 6pm viewing.
12.30 - SJL realises she now can't go to the PoW after work because she has a viewing, then tennis. She's busy till 10, so she calls the pub and asks to come now.
12.35ish She realises she needs to justify not being in the office if KP and MG return, so she fills in the first property address she can think of and the name she associates with it.
12.40 she heads off to the PoW.
Next day: CV tells police SJL was expected that evening and never came.
1 year later: CV has now seen the diary and the 6pm appointment in the papers, realises SJL would never have said 6pm, and changes his story to suggest others besides himself knew she was heading to the PoW.

If DV's right that MG had already gone to lunch when SJL left the office then MG can't have remembered her collecting the keys. I am not really sure how important this detail is to his she-didn't-take-the-keys thesis though. Whether she took the keys or not, the absence of any evidence she was ever inside 37SR undermines HR's claim to have heard the door as someone came out.

What's a bit more troublesome is that the cancellation of the evening PoW pickup relies on DL's account of a tennis date being accurate, and on the assumption that she couldn't possibly have gone at 9pm rather than at 6pm.

DL certainly later manipulated the picture to quash any suggestion SJL had ever been sexually active. Interestingly, she was not anything like as bothered by the idea that SJL might have been doing something financially shady. She took months to disclose the final Sunday conversation with SJL - which was about dodgy property dealings - apparently thinking it not important. IIRC DL even suggested SJL might have got involved in somebody's mortgage fraud - almost as a sort of "acceptable" thing you might do that would get you killed.

Whether DL was already doing this by Wednesday 30th July is less clear. It's also not clear that SJL couldn't just go to the PoW a bit later, given it was close to home.

It really makes a lot of sense to me but I appreciate we've been round this theory a hundred times and many / most disagree. The only way to rule out the PoW theory is a rigorous search of any area accessible to someone who was based at the pub - ie all areas of that building and adjacent property including the train line banking and re-interview of everyone connected. Never going to happen it seems.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

The thing is, before accusing CV, DV needs to have absolute proof that Suzy went to the PoW in the first place. And I don't see how he can possibly have that. In his book it certainly didn't sound like he had that.

He took his evidence to the police and was told it wasn't enough. I can appreciate that DV is a former policeman himself, but I wonder if he's suffering from the same problem as those who believe JC did it: tunnel vision. He's so convinced of his own theory that he thinks he has enough evidence to convince everyone else.

 

[AfricanGrey]

The lost items were found on Friday 25th July.
SJL made one phone call to the PoW to arrange collection of her lost items on Monday 28th July evening, (no time was specified).
The PoW was open as per any other weekday. The police collected the items before closing time on Monday (28th July) night.
All above in police records from July 1986
DV has no further evidence other than what is in his book.
AS also made errors in his book.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

DV actually believes Suzy lost her belongings on Sunday, 27th July, not the previous Friday. It's one of the many discrepancies in this case.

Based on his interviews with the permanent landlord, MH, and the temporary landlord, CV, DV is also pretty sure the PoW was closed that Monday morning for a stock check and may not have reopened until after lunchtime. That's one of the keystones of DV's theory, that the pub wasn't open to the public. MH was going on vacation and handed the keys over to CV that very morning.

 

[AfricanGrey]

DV had a theory which he was trying to provide evidence for. Finding the items on Sunday 27th suited his story; unfortunately for him, this was not correct. The police records can prove this point.
The PoW was open as normal on Monday 28th.
People’s memories of events which occurred over thirty years before are sometimes inaccurate, not from any intention to deceive, rather simply due to the passage of time.

 

[Interested_But_Confused]

Just to be 100% clear, I don't buy DV's theory, by the way.

 

[Terryb808]

DV had a theory which he was trying to provide evidence for. Finding the items on Sunday 27th suited his story; unfortunately for him, this was not correct. The police records can prove this point.
The PoW was open as normal on Monday 28th.
People’s memories of events which occurred over thirty years before are sometimes inaccurate, not from any intention to deceive, rather simply due to the passage of time.

Okay, DV said in his book that he & Suzy never went to the PoW on the Friday, this came from AL.
You can say that AL (after nearly 40 year) might not be correct.
I must ask, where is the police source for the lost items being Friday?

 

[Terryb808]

DV had a theory which he was trying to provide evidence for. Finding the items on Sunday 27th suited his story; unfortunately for him, this was not correct. The police records can prove this point.
The PoW was open as normal on Monday 28th.
People’s memories of events which occurred over thirty years before are sometimes inaccurate, not from any intention to deceive, rather simply due to the passage of time.

Okay, DV said in his book that he & Suzy never went to the PoW on the Friday, this came from AL.
You can say that AL (after nearly 40 year) might not be correct.
I must ask, where is the police source for the lost items being Friday?

 

[AfricanGrey]

SJL and AL may not have been in the PoW, the items were found outside.

 

[Terryb808]

SJL and AL may not have been in the PoW, the items were found outside.

Yes and according to AL and research by DV (which he is good at) they were found on Sunday.
This was confirmed in his book after he interviewed CV.

 

[WestLondoner]

The obvious question if they were lost on Friday is how they weren't found until Sunday. They weren't going to sit on or under a pub table for two days. Both the permanent and relief landlord agreed on this and IIRC CV and KF hadn't even arrived until Saturday or Sunday.

I would need to know why DV thinks this was CV because he has not given anything that explains why CV would do this - but was expecting arrests.