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

[Ljh21]

I can see this could be what happened....so someone connected with the POW pub in Putney could be responsible for her disappearance and they then had to dump the car so what was the nearest sturgis property for sale to the POW ...(potentially 123 SR as they were a Fulham agent) ....so go dump it there but I still don't get how nobody recalled that car being driven there when there was such media coverage in the first 2 days while it was fresh in memories - doesn't seem right , or maybe it was witnessed but they didn't want to come forward...

 

[Ljh21]

Does anyone know if sjl tennis gear was found at her flat?

 

[Kasparthecat1]

Wasn't the woman Suzy came back from Worthing with the day before called Sarah?

Sarah Hough? A close friend I think.

 

[tes1984]

JC never needed to provide any thing.The police couldn't put them together.

Not sure if this is a serious response.

 

[tes1984]

Some of this recent stuff should be in private message, not on the public board.

I'm surprised this thread is still up...

 

[Ljh21]

Sarah Hough? A close friend I think.

So she may have been the sarah who called the pow.???

 

[Eastend Eagle]

Watched a long recorded interview with investigator DV last night ....he concluded that after re investigating the case for 3 years and speaking to Sturgis colleagues in 2020
1. she left Sturgis without keys for 37SR or property details just her purse and car keys.....between 12.30 and 12.40 - the time has never been absolutely known.
2. She should have turned left out of the agency to go to her car which her colleague told her was parked in Whittingstall Rd ( left out of the office ) if she was going to her car to then drive to 37 SR.
3. She turned right out of the office according to DV's investigations not left towards her car.

Which could suggest she had no intention of going to 37 SR or she was popping to eg a shop perhaps first before she went back to get her car?

Do you know the source of why DV believes SL turned right out of the office the opposite direction from where her car was said to be parked?

 

[Kasparthecat1]

So she may have been the sarah who called the pow.???

She was quickly ruled out I think.

 

[RichardKimble]

Not sure if this is a serious response.

Of course it is, a suspect has to provide nothing, its up to the police to prove, which they couldn't do.It may well have produced a different outcome and it's likely we'd not be here discussing it now.
As it is the MET couldn't place JC and SJL together, obviously in questioning it would have been put to JC that he was in the area , its not up up to JC to confirm or deny, his solicitor would no doubt advise no comment, and with that or a simple denial its where we are today.
The only certainty in this case is that there's a diary entry for an appointment.

 

[tes1984]

Of course it is, a suspect has to provide nothing, its up to the police to prove, which they couldn't do.It may well have produced a different outcome and it's likely we'd not be here discussing it now.
As it is the MET couldn't place JC and SJL together, obviously in questioning it would have been put to JC that he was in the area , its not up up to JC to confirm or deny, his solicitor would no doubt advise no comment, and with that or a simple denial its where we are today.
The only certainty in this case is that there's a diary entry for an appointment.

Of course JC had the legal right to remain silent, but he wasn't in a typical interview situation. IIRC he was already on a 35 or 40 year minimum sentence.

His refusal to share his whereabouts lead to the Met declaring the Lamplugh case as unresolved, which meant JC was effectively now a double murderer in the eyes of any parole board he ever faced.

So his own silence ensures he won't ever get out of prison, and also denies him the chance to prove the police wrong. Yet he still fails to provide a proper alibi.

If he's innocent, then keeping quiet out of stubbornness or legal rights, is cutting off his own nose to spite his face. Would anyone who was innocent be so stubborn and dumb?

 

[RichardKimble]

Of course JC had the legal right to remain silent, but he wasn't in a typical interview situation. IIRC he was already on a 35 or 40 year minimum sentence.

His refusal to share his whereabouts lead to the Met declaring the Lamplugh case as unresolved, which meant JC was effectively now a double murderer in the eyes of any parole board he ever faced.

So his own silence ensures he won't ever get out of prison, and also denies him the chance to prove the police wrong. Yet he still fails to provide a proper alibi.

If he's innocent, then keeping quiet out of stubbornness or legal rights, is cutting off his own nose to spite his face. Would anyone who was innocent be so stubborn and dumb?

His silence over the SJL case didn't influence the parole board I don't think.The


However in a decision published on Monday, the parole board refused to release the killer.

The board also refused to move Cannan, who is currently incarcerated in a maximum security Category A prison, to open conditions, which would see him downgraded to a Category D facility.

The board said Cannan continues to maintain his innocence and has not completed any accredited programmes to address his offending behaviour.

The board noted that at the time of his attacks, Cannan was “preoccupied with sex” and “preferred sex to include violence”.

Assessing risk factors involved in his offending, the panel said: “Mr Cannan evidenced feelings of anger and suspicion, struggled to manage extreme emotions and had a distorted perception of appropriate sexual boundaries.

“He had demonstrated a need for power and control, and had held a derogatory attitude towards women.”

Announcing their decision, the panel concluded: “After considering the circumstances of his offending, the progress made while in custody and the evidence presented at the hearing, the panel was not satisfied that release at this point would be safe for the protection of the public.

“Nor did the panel recommend to the Secretary of State that Mr Cannan should be transferred to an open prison.

Suzy Lamplugh murder suspect to stay behind bars because release would be ‘unsafe’

John Cannan has served more than 33 years for the rape and murder of newlywed Shirley Banks in 1987

www.independent.co.uk

 

[RichardKimble]

Of course JC had the legal right to remain silent, but he wasn't in a typical interview situation. IIRC he was already on a 35 or 40 year minimum sentence.

His refusal to share his whereabouts lead to the Met declaring the Lamplugh case as unresolved, which meant JC was effectively now a double murderer in the eyes of any parole board he ever faced.

So his own silence ensures he won't ever get out of prison, and also denies him the chance to prove the police wrong. Yet he still fails to provide a proper alibi.

If he's innocent, then keeping quiet out of stubbornness or legal rights, is cutting off his own nose to spite his face. Would anyone who was innocent be so stubborn and dumb?

Cannan passed away last year.

 

[Konstantin]

Mr Cannan evidenced feelings of anger and suspicion, struggled to manage extreme emotions and had a distorted perception of appropriate sexual boundaries.

“He had demonstrated a need for power and control, and had held a derogatory attitude towards women.”

what a very polite way of saying "violent psychopathic rapist"...

 

[tes1984]

Cannan passed away last year.

Yeah stubborn to the end, refusing to say where he really was from the Monday to the Thursday of the week Suzy vanished.

He changed his story a few times over the years, writing to the press, claiming he was with various relatives when Suzy was abducted. Nobody ever confirmed any of his ever changing stories though.

 

[greenwoodlad]

Do you know the source of why DV believes SL turned right out of the office the opposite direction from where her car was said to be parked?

The interview he did is on YouTube - He just said his investigation concluded she turned right out of Sturgis ......not left toward Whittingstall Rd where the Fiesta was parked by the colleague.

What's interesting is how did he find this out? - presumably the colleague in the Estate Agents saw that she had gone on the opposite direction to where the car was - but maybe there was an innocent explanation like she popped to a shop prior to going to the car . This further challenges the timeframe .....about her driving the car to Stevenage Rd ....the truth is she never drove it there ...someone else did

What's also interesting is that just yards away from the Estate Agents at this precise time, MG and a big Sturgis boss were dining in Crocodile Tears...and the Fiesta was allegedly parked in the Whittingstall Rd too 30 seconds from Crocodile Tears - what a lot was going on within 100 yards of Sturgis Fulham that day.

 

[greenwoodlad]

Some of this recent stuff should be in private message, not on the public board.

I'm surprised this thread is still up...

Agreed Actually I think all our responses should contain initials and abbreviations rather than full names of individuals and company names etc ( I include myself as a guilty party here!!!)

 

[greenwoodlad]

What do we feel about the one credible sighting of SJL at 2.45 driving (a white fiesta) with a male passenger on Fulham Palace Rd? she was seen by her friend BW? She was the only witness that knew her - why would she make that up / get it wrong or lie? Its was only 45 minutes later MG allegedly started ringing round hospitals etc as he was worried SJL had not returned to the Agents.

and how can it be explained at this very time her white fiesta was parked in Stevenage Rd from 12.45 - 10.05pm

Just a thought...the location at Stevenage rd is only 3 mins drive to where BW witnessed SJL on FPR with the male passenger......

 

[greenwoodlad]

Of course JC had the legal right to remain silent, but he wasn't in a typical interview situation. IIRC he was already on a 35 or 40 year minimum sentence.

His refusal to share his whereabouts lead to the Met declaring the Lamplugh case as unresolved, which meant JC was effectively now a double murderer in the eyes of any parole board he ever faced.

So his own silence ensures he won't ever get out of prison, and also denies him the chance to prove the police wrong. Yet he still fails to provide a proper alibi.

If he's innocent, then keeping quiet out of stubbornness or legal rights, is cutting off his own nose to spite his face. Would anyone who was innocent be so stubborn and dumb?

Agreed and what about the witness that claims he saw JC with a large trunk on a trolly and dumped it in the canal at Brentford , I think on the 30th July 1986 and the fact that the police would allegedly not take him seriously and he was so adamant he went to JC's trial and confirmed to himself it was JC dumping the trunk in the canal ...but its been searched twice and nothing has been discovered...(thats the information that's out in the public domain.)

 

[Kasparthecat1]

What do we feel about the one credible sighting of SJL at 2.45 driving (a white fiesta) with a male passenger on Fulham Palace Rd? she was seen by her friend BW? She was the only witness that knew her - why would she make that up / get it wrong or lie? Its was only 45 minutes later MG allegedly started ringing round hospitals etc as he was worried SJL had not returned to the Agents.

and how can it be explained at this very time her white fiesta was parked in Stevenage Rd from 12.45 - 10.05pm

Just a thought...the location at Stevenage rd is only 3 mins drive to where BW witnessed SJL on FPR with the male passenger......

I'm inclined to think BW is the most credible witness. Not only did she know Sjl pretty well, she was out and about from her own office so was able to verify her timings with them.

But, and it's a pretty big but, for me it simply does not make sense given what we think we already know about sjl's possible motivation for leaving the office. We know she left at between 12.30/40pm that day, with or without keys to a real or concocted viewing. She knew one if the Sturgis bosses was at CT with MG. If the viewing was real, she'd be back in the office within what? 3/4 hour tops? If the viewing was a cover, she'd probably want to be back, for the sake of appearances, by around the same time.

Yet according to BW, she's driving on FPR two hours later, apparently under no duress. What has she been doing for those two hours?

 

[greenwoodlad]

I'm inclined to think BW is the most credible witness. Not only did she know Sjl pretty well, she was out and about from her own office so was able to verify her timings with them.

But, and it's a pretty big but, for me it simply does not make sense given what we think we already know about sjl's possible motivation for leaving the office. We know she left at between 12.30/40pm that day, with or without keys to a real or concocted viewing. She knew one if the Sturgis bosses was at CT with MG. If the viewing was real, she'd be back in the office within what? 3/4 hour tops? If the viewing was a cover, she'd probably want to be back, for the sake of appearances, by around the same time.

Yet according to BW, she's driving on FPR two hours later, apparently under no duress. What has she been doing for those two hours?

Exactly - I think you have summed it all up perfectly there.

Just say for sake of argument that someones employers for whatever reason wanted to set them up ...someone could have fed them info from a fake phone call to put in their diary.. therefore leading them to a fake appointment

..........or asked them to make a fake appointment to cover something else up ...what if it wasn't the employee that made the appointment up ? what if she was told about it and she'd put it in her diary but really this was to cover up some other meeting / rendezvous (that she knew about) some underhand dealing or.. ...

.......lets just then say that the persons employers gave false statements to the police - they could control the whole story from the moment the employee was reported missing...... it does seem a bit far fetched but not impossible.......the employer could then manipulate company vehicles , sightings and create witnesses to steer an investigation away from the truth......

This whole thing could be a very tangled up mess...... with various other stuff happening that day behind the scenes that even the police never picked up on