UK UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #7

[lee sumner]

I have always had a curiosity as to where suzy was going to live after the sale and IF she had it up for sale because she needed money for either the business venture with pss and ts and would live in a flat above this said business ,AS does mention that suzy didn't like the idea that she would be required to do most of the work so in effect suzy would be working for the three of them to make money bit of a low deal from so called best friend . So maybe if she was going to be living there she would have felt she could never leave work moo

The other alternative I suppose is suzy wanted to upgrade area or size of home .

She was a social climber and in many ways this is a positive attribute as she wanted to better her self and her situation

But I can't help but feel the delay in selling her flat was causing suzy stress for a reason not divulged in the media or prehaps unknown to anyone . She spoke to PL about the pressure of trying to sell and was considering changing her mind AFAICR

I think whatever information that was held back in the past should be released . It may or not help but protecting suzys privacy at this late stage is not doing any justice in finding her .if the public assume there is nothing more to suzys disappearance than John Cannan . She will never be found as people will just think there is just not enough evidence to convict him .( Obviously he is dead now )

Sometimes just a snippet of new information is enough to nail a new suspect whom has alluded suspicion all along . We see it all the time in WS . You can't complete a puzzle without having all the pieces of the jigsaw .

I also feel a lot of the info out there is either up for misinterpretation like the wiki page where it states a potential match of suzys dna was found in cannans car or information is omitted from books ,documentaries and media articles in order to show suzy with a nun like persona . It's not 1986 any more . Judgements about women's lifestyle have almost been eradicated from modern society. If something in suzys life contributed to putting her in the way of danger I think it useful that the public would know .

its not clear in AS book where SL was going to live. she must have talked to people about it. someone like NB who rented the second bedroom in her flat. NB would probably know what her living arrangements were going to be.

 

[lee sumner]

its not clear in AS book where SL was going to live. she must have talked to people about it. someone like NB who rented the second bedroom in her flat. NB would probably know what her living arrangements were going to be.

its not clear in AS book where SL was going to live. she must have talked to people about it. someone like NB who rented the second bedroom in her flat. NB would probably know what her living arrangements were going to be.

SL was selling up for around 74 grand, but how much of that money was hers. SL would obviously have to pay the bank what she owed them, so, i dont think it would leave her with much. i have been told she would be left with about 20 grand. a lot of money back in 1986, but still.

 

[Klclevi]

I have always had a curiosity as to where suzy was going to live after the sale and IF she had it up for sale because she needed money for either the business venture with pss and ts and would live in a flat above this said business ,AS does mention that suzy didn't like the idea that she would be required to do most of the work so in effect suzy would be working for the three of them to make money bit of a low deal from so called best friend . So maybe if she was going to be living there she would have felt she could never leave work moo

The other alternative I suppose is suzy wanted to upgrade area or size of home .

She was a social climber and in many ways this is a positive attribute as she wanted to better her self and her situation

But I can't help but feel the delay in selling her flat was causing suzy stress for a reason not divulged in the media or prehaps unknown to anyone . She spoke to PL about the pressure of trying to sell and was considering changing her mind AFAICR

I think whatever information that was held back in the past should be released . It may or not help but protecting suzys privacy at this late stage is not doing any justice in finding her .if the public assume there is nothing more to suzys disappearance than John Cannan . She will never be found as people will just think there is just not enough evidence to convict him .( Obviously he is dead now )

Sometimes just a snippet of new information is enough to nail a new suspect whom has alluded suspicion all along . We see it all the time in WS . You can't complete a puzzle without having all the pieces of the jigsaw .

I also feel a lot of the info out there is either up for misinterpretation like the wiki page where it states a potential match of suzys dna was found in cannans car or information is omitted from books ,documentaries and media articles in order to show suzy with a nun like persona . It's not 1986 any more . Judgements about women's lifestyle have almost been eradicated from modern society. If something in suzys life contributed to putting her in the way of danger I think it useful that the public would know .

Totally agree that information from the past should be released, however much the family might not wish to do so. Like you say su5ie - the world is a VERY different place now in terms of womens lifestyles and what/how they choose to conduct their life. If Suzy had a few lovers , big deal. OMG that would not even compare one ounce to what goes on today ! Release of anything might be just the catalyst that can help find her.

Thankyou so much to all of you that replied to living in the UK in the 80's post - your posts were all amazing! Sorry its taken me a few weeks to reply!

I wanted to ask, has there been any discussion about realistic deposition sites for Suzys body- even if it was not JC? If she was murdered sometime on the 28th or even 29th July - disposing of her body was not an easy task whichever way you slice the dice.

I am reading AS again too atm.

If anything comes up in the UK media leading up to the 40th anniversary I would love to know.

 

[Klclevi]

its not clear in AS book where SL was going to live. she must have talked to people about it. someone like NB who rented the second bedroom in her flat. NB would probably know what her living arrangements were going to be.

This is very interesting Lee - have not given much thought to this aspect previously, but yes why was she selling ? Surely that conversation would have been had with her parents, as to why and what she was planning to do when it was eventually sold.
I feel like NB probably knows a great deal more than he has revealed (and I do not mean that in a sinister way but only that he probably has not been asked?) In the Ch 5 documentary from 2020 (was able to actually watch this on YT) - he has about 1 minute airtime if that - surely he would have alot more information than just saying it was a normal day - he left at 8am and that they were 25 years old - she was of her time. and incredibly social and out alot. I think he must have way more to say than just that. I guess he is probably respecting the familys wishes.

 

[Cherwell]

the world is a VERY different place now in terms of womens lifestyles and what/how they choose to conduct their life. If Suzy had a few lovers , big deal. OMG that would not even compare one ounce to what goes on today !

I'd have to disagree there. There was plenty of promiscuity in the 80s, and earlier, as what liberated women sexually was the contraceptive pill which was available from the 1960s. It was often prescribed to teenagers as a treatment for dysmenorrhea (period pain).
I don't think sexual behaviour has changed much since then. It's individual choice, some people indulge themselves, others don't.

 

[lee sumner]

This is very interesting Lee - have not given much thought to this aspect previously, but yes why was she selling ? Surely that conversation would have been had with her parents, as to why and what she was planning to do when it was eventually sold.
I feel like NB probably knows a great deal more than he has revealed (and I do not mean that in a sinister way but only that he probably has not been asked?) In the Ch 5 documentary from 2020 (was able to actually watch this on YT) - he has about 1 minute airtime if that - surely he would have alot more information than just saying it was a normal day - he left at 8am and that they were 25 years old - she was of her time. and incredibly social and out alot. I think he must have way more to say than just that. I guess he is probably respecting the familys wishes.

This is very interesting Lee - have not given much thought to this aspect previously, but yes why was she selling ? Surely that conversation would have been had with her parents, as to why and what she was planning to do when it was eventually sold.
I feel like NB probably knows a great deal more than he has revealed (and I do not mean that in a sinister way but only that he probably has not been asked?) In the Ch 5 documentary from 2020 (was able to actually watch this on YT) - he has about 1 minute airtime if that - surely he would have alot more information than just saying it was a normal day - he left at 8am and that they were 25 years old - she was of her time. and incredibly social and out alot. I think he must have way more to say than just that. I guess he is probably respecting the familys wishes.

yes, i agree with what you say regarding NB. he was not intimate with SL, but they lived together. NB would have got to know SL really well living with her.

 

[lee sumner]

I'd have to disagree there. There was plenty of promiscuity in the 80s, and earlier, as what liberated women sexually was the contraceptive pill which was available from the 1960s. It was often prescribed to teenagers as a treatment for dysmenorrhea (period pain).
I don't think sexual behaviour has changed much since then. It's individual choice, some people indulge themselves, others don't.

in AS book it says SL had a strong sex drive. lovers found her to be a great lover. i also read a couple of pages in her diary on the QE2, in which SL talks about having great sex with JH, her QE2 lover.

 

[su5ie]

I'd have to disagree there. There was plenty of promiscuity in the 80s, and earlier, as what liberated women sexually was the contraceptive pill which was available from the 1960s. It was often prescribed to teenagers as a treatment for dysmenorrhea (period pain).
I don't think sexual behaviour has changed much since then. It's individual choice, some people indulge themselves, others don't.

I agree with your statement on levels of promiscuity having always been the same no matter the era otherwise prostitution and casual sex would be a modern phenomenon but it was not as accepted as it is in todays society and it is nowadays at times actively promoted imo .

The truth is that although many women didn't conform to gender expectations in the 80s .it was often expected of them by not only society but their own families. Hence why Diane felt the need to hide certain aspects of suzys life .

This was a time when homosexuality was also a punishable crime and women were still expected in ireland anyway to give up their job if they worked in civil service when they got Married . Unmarried mothers were also frowned upon .So quite different times regarding attitudes to sex outside of marriage and a woman having multiple sexual partners . A lot of shaming went on .

 

[tes1984]

I'd have to disagree there. There was plenty of promiscuity in the 80s, and earlier

Era aside, I can only think of a few UK cases where the victim was acknowledged to have had multiple boyfriends. Amala DeVere, Diane Jones, Claudia Lawrence perhaps.

It's a massive investigative lead when a middle class type victim has multiple lovers.

 

[Cherwell]

This was a time when homosexuality was also a punishable crime and women were still expected in ireland anyway to give up their job if they worked in civil service when they got Married . Unmarried mothers were also frowned upon .So quite different times regarding attitudes to sex outside of marriage and a woman having multiple sexual partners . A lot of shaming went on .

Homosexuality was decriminalised in 1967 in England & Wales (1980 in Scotland) for men 21 and over. The rule banning married women from civil service employment was long gone by the 1980s.

I agree that attitudes towards sex outside marriage were more puritanical in Ireland, but we are talking about England. There will have been generational differences, eg your granny might not approve, but society in general was tolerant in the 80s. I was around Suzy's age in the 80s so I know what it was like.

 

[Cherwell]

Era aside, I can only think of a few UK cases where the victim was acknowledged to have had multiple boyfriends. Amala DeVere, Diane Jones, Claudia Lawrence perhaps.
It's a massive investigative lead when a middle class type victim has multiple lovers.

I know about CL, but have never heard of the other two.

 

[lee sumner]

I think if that were the case and someone - MG or anyone else- would have ensured that the client details record was completed in accordance with office policy.

The fact that the particulars (of budget, personal details, ability to proceed etc) were NOT recorded is another red flag supporting the hypothesis that Sjl herself invented the appointment as a cover for something, imho. Then again, perhaps she was just too careless, or too lazy to record them. Or perhaps office protocols were not so tight as they should be.

maybe she did not record mr kippers details because her mind was focused on her missing belongings. she then found out they had been found, and arranged to collect them at 6pm after work.

 

[su5ie]

maybe she did not record mr kippers details because her mind was focused on her missing belongings. she then found out they had been found, and arranged to collect them at 6pm after work.

In my mind this lack of particulars is the red flag indicator that Mr kipper was not a client whom rang the office looking for a viewing of 37SR and was made up by suzy .

There is an administration protocol followed by estate agencies before showing properties to potential clients. The minimum expected would be a contact number and budget . Estate agents ask numerous questions before actually showing a home to a potential buyer . Examples being : What size of property the client is looking for ? Is it for a family with young children? Etc . The estate agent will be trying to match a property to a clients needs . Less chance of a sale if showing a bachelor a property more suitable for a family of young children

.Very rarely would a property be shown on a whim I've only heard of it if a client was already on the system and no previous properties interested them and a new one happened to come in while the estate agent was either talking to them in the office or over the phone .

Suzy did not even write down a contact number . Even if we hypothesis that this Mr kipper rang the office and suzy was unaware she was being led into a trap ,surely the least she would ask is for a phone number . Would it not be bad for business if something unexpected came up and suzy couldn't make it ? Is it not proper etiquette to let a client know if you unfortunately could not keep an appointment.

Unless suzy and others in the office were in the habit of showing properties without knowing anything about a client other than mr/ Mrs/ Ms prefix and a surname Well then IMO Mr kipper should be taken by LE as a fictitious name and appointment created by suzy to get out of work and avoid being reprimanded by her boss for running a personal errand

 

[lee sumner]

In my mind this lack of particulars is the red flag indicator that Mr kipper was not a client whom rang the office looking for a viewing of 37SR and was made up by suzy .

There is an administration protocol followed by estate agencies before showing properties to potential clients. The minimum expected would be a contact number and budget . Estate agents ask numerous questions before actually showing a home to a potential buyer . Examples being : What size of property the client is looking for ? Is it for a family with young children? Etc . The estate agent will be trying to match a property to a clients needs . Less chance of a sale if showing a bachelor a property more suitable for a family of young children

.Very rarely would a property be shown on a whim I've only heard of it if a client was already on the system and no previous properties interested them and a new one happened to come in while the estate agent was either talking to them in the office or over the phone .

Suzy did not even write down a contact number . Even if we hypothesis that this Mr kipper rang the office and suzy was unaware she was being led into a trap ,surely the least she would ask is for a phone number . Would it not be bad for business if something unexpected came up and suzy couldn't make it ? Is it not proper etiquette to let a client know if you unfortunately could not keep an appointment.

Unless suzy and others in the office were in the habit of showing properties without knowing anything about a client other than mr/ Mrs/ Ms prefix and a surname Well then IMO Mr kipper should be taken by LE as a fictitious name and appointment created by suzy to get out of work and avoid being reprimanded by her boss for running a personal errand

i agree. its strange SL did not fill in the client requirement card for mr kipper. its the first thing a negotiator does when a client makes an appointment. like you said. is this a red flag.

 

[lee sumner]

i agree. its strange SL did not fill in the client requirement card for mr kipper. its the first thing a negotiator does when a client makes an appointment. like you said. is this a red flag.

i also think if SL made up the name mr kipper, then why choose such a bizarre name, and if she was trying to fool MG the office manager, then why did she not fill in false details on the client requirement card. she could have put in fake details, location/price willing to pay etc.

 

[lee sumner]

i agree. its strange SL did not fill in the client requirement card for mr kipper. its the first thing a negotiator does when a client makes an appointment. like you said. is this a red flag.

if SL put in fake appointment, then why choose such a bizarre name like kipper. if she was trying to fool MG office manager, then why did she not put in fake details on a client requirement card for mr kipper, location/price willing to pay etc.

 

[Konstantin]

if SL put in fake appointment, then why choose such a bizarre name like kipper. if she was trying to fool MG office manager, then why did she not put in fake details on a client requirement card for mr kipper, location/price willing to pay etc.

Perhaps because it's one thing to fake a quick lunchtime appointment to be able to skip out for an hour at lunchtime and quite another to falsify documentation that could really get you into trouble, and could also get you caught. SJL was conscientious and cared about her job, there is no indication she had made up appointments before. She was secretive but not Machiavellian. Faking documents requires more cognitive load and more deception than coming up with a fake name on the fly. If she had to dash out at lunchtime suddenly, there would be no time for elaborate documentation fakery anyway.

 

[lee sumner]

Perhaps because it's one thing to fake a quick lunchtime appointment to be able to skip out for an hour at lunchtime and quite another to falsify documentation that could really get you into trouble, and could also get you caught. SJL was conscientious and cared about her job, there is no indication she had made up appointments before. She was secretive but not Machiavellian. Faking documents requires more cognitive load and more deception than coming up with a fake name on the fly. If she had to dash out at lunchtime suddenly, there would be no time for elaborate documentation fakery anyway.

 

[lee sumner]

you cant have it both ways. if SL wanted to fool MG and get out of office, she would need to put in fake details on a client requirement card. listing a fake appoitment would not be enough.

 

[RichardKimble]

Perhaps because it's one thing to fake a quick lunchtime appointment to be able to skip out for an hour at lunchtime and quite another to falsify documentation that could really get you into trouble, and could also get you caught. SJL was conscientious and cared about her job, there is no indication she had made up appointments before. She was secretive but not Machiavellian. Faking documents requires more cognitive load and more deception than coming up with a fake name on the fly. If she had to dash out at lunchtime suddenly, there would be no time for elaborate documentation fakery anyway.

you cant have it both ways. if SL wanted to fool MG and get out of office, she would need to put in fake details on a client requirement card. listing a fake appoitment would not be enough.

Were previous diary entries compared, or was this the first time she'd put in scant details or was this the norm? The entry is one of the three constants in the case the rest seems clouded in mystery , 1: diary entry, 2:car found ,3: SJL missing.