UK UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #8

[kes1972]

Excellent post.

I think it is very possible and likely that there were some "ghost sightings" in relation to the lead up to the disappearance of SL.

I guess it then comes down to which sightings could be deemed as statistically more likely to be correct.

If we stirp everything back to its basics, all we know for sure is that Suzy left her office, and then less than 10 hours later, her company vehicle was found parked in Stevenage Road.

Outside of that, anything and everything could be treated as a ghost sighting in the first instance.

We have 3 different male witnesses independently seeing SL outside 37SR within a 10 minute time frame, that coincides with the timing of the viewing in her diary to meet Mr Kipper outside the same address.
We have WJ seeing a white car at 12.45pm and then again at 3.30pm, coincidentally parked in the same spot where it was later found by police.
We have a local Taxi cab driver who also saw the car parked in the same spot just before 2pm.
We then have a woman from 139 Stevenage Road who around "lunchtime" sees a woman in a hat, walking with a man whose appearance was similar to Mr Kipper. A similar hat is then found in SL's car.
We then have the same witness saying she saw the same woman again, but this time the woman in the hat was standing in the front garden of the adjacent street.
We then have an unidentified bearded man telling a Taxi driver that he's just witnessed a fierce argument between a man and a woman; a location within close proximity to where SL's car is later found parked up.
We also have a man who is nearly driven into by a white car that he sees driving erratically toward him, so much so that he has to take evasive action to avoid being hit. He notices the 2 occupants of the car arguing intensely as they speed past him.
We then have the only witness who actually knew SL; a woman who sees SL driving up Fulham Palace Road, "between the cemetery and the estate agent" and make an attempt to get her attention by waving to her. The witness states that SL doesn't notice her because SL has her head turned and is talking to the male passenger sitting next to her.
We then have a witness who owns the garage in Stevenage Road, who notices a white car parked up in the same spot; slightly overhanging across his driveway; in the same spot where it was seen by WJ at 2 different times, and also the local Taxi Driver just before 2pm.
We then have a jogger who witnesses a dramatic scene as he leaves the park on Stevenage Road; a woman laughing or screaming at a man as they both sit in the front of a black BMW; a LHD BMW, which then speeds off.
We also have another witness who was certain that he saw JC wheeling a shopping trolley containing a suitcase, which is then dumped into the water.
We also now have another witness in the form of a man who witnessed a man in a suit get out of a white car which pulled up opposite, a car that was seemingly identical to SL's white Fiesta; partially because it contained a distinctive hat which was also found in the back window of SL's Fiesta in Stevenage Road.

So, which of theses would we consider "ghost sightings?"


Interesting to note that witnesses who simply claim to have seen something, are statistically less likely to have been correct than those who actually knew and/or spoke to the victim directly.

On that basis, it would appear that the most reliable witness would have been BW, because she knew SL AND she attempted specifically to get her attention by waving to SL as she cycled toward SL's car travelling in the opposite direction.


If BW was indeed the most important sighting, then what does it tell us about her abductor and eventual demise?

Well, it tells us that the abductor was more interested in the process of abducting her, and not just focused on the kill as it were.

This is evidenced by the fact that Mr Kipper had perfect ample opportunity to kill SL; by attacking her in 37SR.

But he doesn't

Why?

Because he likely wants to play the game, and make SL believe no harm will come to her.

This type of killer resembles to some extent the M.O of JC, who enjoyed the process of playing with his captured prey, before then choosing to strike with brutal force and aggression.

Lots to ponder.

If i believed this then i would think sl murdered at dorncliffe road and later dumped in the canal.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Yes, just to confirm that the witness who claimed to have seen SL walking with a suited man north up Stevenage Road, and then again standing in a front garden of Langthorne Street (number 100) was definitely NOT WJ from 123 Stevenage Road.

This witness lived further north along Stevenage Road

She had just stepped out of Millshott Close to turn right and head south along Stevenage Road, when she was alleged to have witnessed SL and Mr Kipper on the opposite side of the road, walking "away from" the football ground (Fulham FC) as they headed north up Stevenage Road.
If this is indeed correct, then the witness must have just missed seeing SL and Mr Kipper either walk past the Fiesta, get out of the Fiesta, and/or SL take her hat out of the Fiesta.
That's assuming that the Fiesta was parked there at this time of course.

Crucially, this witness stated that this sighting occurred around "lunchtime."

In that context, "lunchtime" could be regarded as any time between 11.30am - 2.30pm

In other words, this sighting almost certainly occurred BEFORE BW's sighting of SL on the Fulham Palace Road.

But let's also note that the same witness saw SL AGAIN when she returned home. The witness walked north up Stevenage Road, and as she got to the corner of Millshott close, she looked to her right and saw THE SAME WOMAN standing in the front garden of Langthorne Street (100 Langthorne Street)

The witness says this 2ND sighting occurred "later."


This means that at least 15 minutes must have passed between the witness first seeing SL and Mr Kipper walking north up Stevenage Road, and then again "later" when she saw SL again in Langthorne Street.

For someone to use the phrase of seeing someone "later," I would suggest that a minimum of 15 minutes must have past between sightings, probably longer.

Coincidentally, when the witness saw SL and Mr Kipper the first time, they were both walking TOWARD Langthorne Street.

One could surmise that SL was walking toward Langthorne Street to show Mr Kipper another property.
Except, this wouldn't work if Suzy only had the keys for Shorrolds Road.

It therefore seems possible IMO, that Suzy was the client and was being shown around properties in and around Stevenage Road and Langthorne Street; meaning that Mr Kipper himself...was another estate agent.

SL then chooses to wear a hat so that she isn't spotted by WJ, because she knows that her boss MG is dealing with the sale of 123 Stevenage Road.

There's an interesting article (that I need to find again) in which WJ makes a somewhat throwaway comment, eluding to the idea that she possibly recognized the car parked opposite her house; thus this being the reason why she recalled it being parked there. In the article, she relays her confusion as to why nobody from the estate agents came over to see her that day. But seeing as she wasn't expecting MG that day, then it leaves the tantalising possibility that WJ recognised the Fiesta as having belonged to Sturgis.

And if MG was the EA dealing with her property, then one could suggest that there's a high probability that MG also used the white Fiesta at times. That in itself would mean his DNA and fingerprints would be expected to be found inside the vehicle.

Fascinating stuff indeed

Thanks for this clarification. New witness 14 years later then - quite a lot of specific detail here she’s recalled later? Open minded - sceptical - esp on hat wearing etc. Same witness? Trying to recall. Think so.

I don’t feel anyone implicated from her office.

WJ article you flag, I’d be interested in. Interestingly WJ had ‘Kipper’ as older - 40s/50s.

If accurate recollection a developer poss, or JC posing as one. Esp if same man, looking up at 37 Shorrolds. Assessing potential.

 

[kes1972]

Thanks for this clarification. New witness 14 years later then - quite a lot of specific detail here she’s recalled later? Open minded - sceptical - esp on hat wearing etc. Same witness? Trying to recall. Think so.

I don’t feel anyone implicated from her office.

WJ article you flag, I’d be interested in. Interestingly WJ had ‘Kipper’ as older - 40s/50s.

If accurate recollection a developer poss, or JC posing as one. Esp if same man, looking up at 37 Shorrolds. Assessing potential.

Sorry guys and ladies just had a moment , lh drive bmw, dominique pelicot?
Even his hair is still in the same style as mr k
Supposedly sl car was spotted outside a french named restaurant??
He stands accused now of the rape and murder of a 23 yo french estate agent in 1991
And guilty of the rape of another?
Could he possibly have been in london at that time?
Oh yes and he was dealing in real estate.

 

[Rookie D]

Sorry guys and ladies just had a moment , lh drive bmw, dominique pelicot?
Even his hair is still in the same style as mr k
Supposedly sl car was spotted outside a french named restaurant??
He stands accused now of the rape and murder of a 23 yo french estate agent in 1991
And guilty of the rape of another?
Could he possibly have been in london at that time?
Oh yes and he was dealing in real estate.

Interesting indeed.

The LHD drive BMW in particular, is something that I believe may be of significance with regards to Pelicot.

As an aside, I think there are also some similarities with the smart suited man who was in 1991, seen walking away from Penny Bell's car, after he had savagely murdered her...

I think it all depends on whether there's any evidence to suggest if Pelicot was ever in London.

Lots more to unravel here it would seem.

 

[kes1972]

Thanks for this clarification. New witness 14 years later then - quite a lot of specific detail here she’s recalled later? Open minded - sceptical - esp on hat wearing etc. Same witness? Trying to recall. Think so.

I don’t feel anyone implicated from her office.

WJ article you flag, I’d be interested in. Interestingly WJ had ‘Kipper’ as older - 40s/50s.

If accurate recollection a developer poss, or JC posing as one. Esp if same man, looking up at 37 Shorrolds. Assessing potential.

Interesting indeed.

The LHD drive BMW in particular, is something that I believe may be of significance with regards to Pelicot.

As an aside, I think there are also some similarities with the smart suited man who was in 1991, seen walking away from Penny Bell's car, after he had savagely murdered her...


View attachment 654005View attachment 654009

I think it all depends on whether there's any evidence to suggest if Pelicot was ever in London.

Lots more to unravel here it would seem.

Agree, that is a strong resemblance to him.

 

[kes1972]

Interesting indeed.

The LHD drive BMW in particular, is something that I believe may be of significance with regards to Pelicot.

As an aside, I think there are also some similarities with the smart suited man who was in 1991, seen walking away from Penny Bell's car, after he had savagely murdered her...


View attachment 654005View attachment 654009

I think it all depends on whether there's any evidence to suggest if Pelicot was ever in London.

Lots more to unravel here it would seem.

And just like sl was running late for an “appointment” ???

 

[kes1972]

And just like sl was running late for an “appointment” ???

Interesting indeed.

The LHD drive BMW in particular, is something that I believe may be of significance with regards to Pelicot.

As an aside, I think there are also some similarities with the smart suited man who was in 1991, seen walking away from Penny Bell's car, after he had savagely murdered her...


View attachment 654005View attachment 654009

I think it all depends on whether there's any evidence to suggest if Pelicot was ever in London.

Lots more to unravel here it would seem.this pic has a canny resemblance sl love interest as per the earlier tv interview upthread.

 

[RichardKimble]

Have the police looked again at contact book with Jessop, Bryant & Townsend & other JC later aliases in mind (?) One of these contacts might have been a person of interest, a few had very spurious reasons for knowing her, but how to prove anything? It seems the police struggled to pin alibis down even for some closer contacts.

I guess that's why the focus is more on JC a known rapist later killer released from a nearby bail hostel without a corroborated alibi?

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

I guess that's why the focus is more on JC a known rapist later killer released from a nearby bail hostel without a corroborated alibi?

Quite, who may also be in there somewhere…

If they still have the hair, new DNA tech means, if they can extract, they can definitively rule SC & SL in/out re: Sierra.

 

[lee sumner]

We don’t have all the facts but the evidence points to SL’s parents keeping back information from the police, perhaps, re: SL, that they thought initially irrelevant to the investigation. They hoped she could be found with the minimum of fuss.

For me the flat worries point to a need for money/cash sooner rather than later. Especially when you look at the evidence she was involved in a deal with ‘strings’ & being pressurised.

DI johnstone would have made it clear what info he wanted when he questioned both DL and PL. its obvious this property deal is important information, but they might not have been thinking the sale and suzy going missing during work hours was relevant.

 

[lee sumner]

We don’t have all the facts but the evidence points to SL’s parents keeping back information from the police, perhaps, re: SL, that they thought initially irrelevant to the investigation. They hoped she could be found with the minimum of fuss.

For me the flat worries point to a need for money/cash sooner rather than later. Especially when you look at the evidence she was involved in a deal with ‘strings’ & being pressurised.

SL sturgis income back then in 1986 was 12,000 a year, which is the equivalent of about 45 grand a yr in today money. plus commision, NB, rental income. she was a young woman earning good money for the time, plus she was still only 25 yr old.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

SL sturgis income back then in 1986 was 12,000 a year, which is the equivalent of about 45 grand a yr in today money. plus commision, NB, rental income. she was a young woman earning good money for the time, plus she was still only 25 yr old.

It wasn’t that she wasn’t doing well for herself. I agree, she was.

She was also buying a property she couldn’t afford alone, was involved in a deal that had ‘strings’ was worrying her & apparently someone was pressurising her. Additionally, from what DL said, the lack of sale was apparently troubling & frustrating her in immediate time before she went missing.

She discussed this deal with her father in last conversation she had. Her parents put a positive spin on the final conversation (maybe) & didn’t tell the police until later. The police were angry as we know. IMO this may well have seeded real doubt, causing her to pull out with tragic consequences.

If ‘Kipper’ wanted to move on this deal she needed to sell the flat sooner rather than later. If he wanted a downpayment or money up front she’d also lost an expected commission to NH.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

DI johnstone would have made it clear what info he wanted when he questioned both DL and PL. its obvious this property deal is important information, but they might not have been thinking the sale and suzy going missing during work hours was relevant.

Re: deal with ‘strings’, SL’s parents thought the police already knew about it they said. They didn’t. IMO this might point towards, as a few other things might too, a sense they were perhaps hoping to keep v personal information initially back. The hope was, maybe, SL could be found without any deep dive into private matters.

 

[Officer Dibble]

SL sturgis income back then in 1986 was 12,000 a year, which is the equivalent of about 45 grand a yr in today money. plus commision, NB, rental income. she was a young woman earning good money for the time, plus she was still only 25 yr old.

I don't think that calculation can be true. I was earning £18,000 then, which was considered good for my profession but I was still tight for money living in London and going out and about a lot and paying rent on a two person shared flat. I just asked Ai and it said that is equivalent to £23,000 in 2026. Not sure where you get your calculation from.

 

[lee sumner]

Excellent post.

I think it is very possible and likely that there were some "ghost sightings" in relation to the lead up to the disappearance of SL.

I guess it then comes down to which sightings could be deemed as statistically more likely to be correct.

If we stirp everything back to its basics, all we know for sure is that Suzy left her office, and then less than 10 hours later, her company vehicle was found parked in Stevenage Road.

Outside of that, anything and everything could be treated as a ghost sighting in the first instance.

We have 3 different male witnesses independently seeing SL outside 37SR within a 10 minute time frame, that coincides with the timing of the viewing in her diary to meet Mr Kipper outside the same address.
We have WJ seeing a white car at 12.45pm and then again at 3.30pm, coincidentally parked in the same spot where it was later found by police.
We have a local Taxi cab driver who also saw the car parked in the same spot just before 2pm.
We then have a woman from 139 Stevenage Road who around "lunchtime" sees a woman in a hat, walking with a man whose appearance was similar to Mr Kipper. A similar hat is then found in SL's car.
We then have the same witness saying she saw the same woman again, but this time the woman in the hat was standing in the front garden of the adjacent street.
We then have an unidentified bearded man telling a Taxi driver that he's just witnessed a fierce argument between a man and a woman; a location within close proximity to where SL's car is later found parked up.
We also have a man who is nearly driven into by a white car that he sees driving erratically toward him, so much so that he has to take evasive action to avoid being hit. He notices the 2 occupants of the car arguing intensely as they speed past him.
We then have the only witness who actually knew SL; a woman who sees SL driving up Fulham Palace Road, "between the cemetery and the estate agent" and make an attempt to get her attention by waving to her. The witness states that SL doesn't notice her because SL has her head turned and is talking to the male passenger sitting next to her.
We then have a witness who owns the garage in Stevenage Road, who notices a white car parked up in the same spot; slightly overhanging across his driveway; in the same spot where it was seen by WJ at 2 different times, and also the local Taxi Driver just before 2pm.
We then have a jogger who witnesses a dramatic scene as he leaves the park on Stevenage Road; a woman laughing or screaming at a man as they both sit in the front of a black BMW; a LHD BMW, which then speeds off.
We also have another witness who was certain that he saw JC wheeling a shopping trolley containing a suitcase, which is then dumped into the water.
We also now have another witness in the form of a man who witnessed a man in a suit get out of a white car which pulled up opposite, a car that was seemingly identical to SL's white Fiesta; partially because it contained a distinctive hat which was also found in the back window of SL's Fiesta in Stevenage Road.

So, which of theses would we consider "ghost sightings?"


Interesting to note that witnesses who simply claim to have seen something, are statistically less likely to have been correct than those who actually knew and/or spoke to the victim directly.

On that basis, it would appear that the most reliable witness would have been BW, because she knew SL AND she attempted specifically to get her attention by waving to SL as she cycled toward SL's car travelling in the opposite direction.


If BW was indeed the most important sighting, then what does it tell us about her abductor and eventual demise?

Well, it tells us that the abductor was more interested in the process of abducting her, and not just focused on the kill as it were.

This is evidenced by the fact that Mr Kipper had perfect ample opportunity to kill SL; by attacking her in 37SR.

But he doesn't

Why?

Because he likely wants to play the game, and make SL believe no harm will come to her.

This type of killer resembles to some extent the M.O of JC, who enjoyed the process of playing with his captured prey, before then choosing to strike with brutal force and aggression.

Lots to ponder.

Sorry I thought I thanked you for those.

i thought they had been pulled, taken down.

 

[lee sumner]

I don't think that calculation can be true. I was earning £18,000 then, which was considered good for my profession but I was still tight for money living in London and going out and about a lot and paying rent on a two person shared flat. I just asked Ai and it said that is equivalent to £23,000 in 2026. Not sure where you get your calculation from.

calculation is correct. i checked inflation data.

 

[lee sumner]

calculation is correct. i checked inflation data.

23 grand you got. i thought it was around 45 grand. maybe i messed up somewhere on the inflation data.

 

[lee sumner]

It wasn’t that she wasn’t doing well for herself. I agree, she was.

She was also buying a property she couldn’t afford alone, was involved in a deal that had ‘strings’ was worrying her & apparently someone was pressurising her. Additionally, from what DL said, the lack of sale was apparently troubling & frustrating her in immediate time before she went missing.

She discussed this deal with her father in last conversation she had. Her parents put a positive spin on the final conversation (maybe) & didn’t tell the police until later. The police were angry as we know. IMO this may well have seeded real doubt, causing her to pull out with tragic consequences.

If ‘Kipper’ wanted to move on this deal she needed to sell the flat sooner rather than later. If he wanted a downpayment or money up front she’d also lost an expected commission to NH.

it was around 35 grand. my mistake.

 

[lee sumner]

it was around 35 grand. my mistake.

i also did not factor living in london. iam mancunian, up north.

 

[lee sumner]

So, why did the man who abducted (and likely murdered) SL, choose to park her white Fiesta next to the garage opposite 123 Stevenage Road?

Well let's hypothesise for a moment and go with the idea that SL drove to Shorrold's Road in the first instance, and not to Stevenage Road.

This would mean that either WJ lied, was wrong about her timings, or she observed another white car entirely.

Well, it's unlikely she lied., because this would be nonsensical and akin to some crackpot conspiracy theory.

So that leaves either her being wrong about her timing, or the car she saw being another white car entirely.

Well, considering that it is relatively common for witnesses (in general) to be off about their timings, then it could be said that this is the most likely reason for WJ's observation being incorrect; ergo, she couldn't have seen SL's car at 12.45pm if SL had gone straight to Shorrolds Road from the Sturgis office.

However, there's also the possibility that WJ was correct in that she had indeed seen a white car parked opposite her house next to the garage.

And this is precisely what has confused investigators since the July '86.

So, how can it be possible for SL to have driven her car to Stevenage Road for it to be seen by WJ at 12.45pm, and yet SL is seen outside 37SR at 12.50pm?

Well, the only way that's possible is if SL drove to Stevenage Road first, and then got into ANOTHER vehicle to then be driven to Shorrolds Road and get there 5 minutes later.

This forms the basis of my proposed chronological timeline that I presented upthread.

However, I now believe I am wrong.

Something has never really felt right about the idea of SL going to Stevenage Road from the office first, and then appearing in Shorrolds Road just 5 minutes later.

Again, this could just be a case of mistaken timing issues relating to what each witness claimed they saw at a particular time.

However, variations in timing aside, it's the chronology of events that simply just doesn't work, and it's on this basis that it seems rather apparent that SL didn't go to Stevenage Road before she went to Shorrolds Road.

But we still have the issue with what WJ claimed she saw; that white car opposite her house.

Well, I think this perhaps answers that particular conundrum...


View attachment 653739
View attachment 653740

That car is NOT Suzy Lamplugh's white Fiesta.

And yet, it's parked in virtually the same spot that SL's Fiesta was found.


But this car IS Suzy Lamplugh's car...

View attachment 653742

And yet BOTH cars were SEEN in the Crimewatch reconstruction footage.

But as I said upthread; only the close up of SL's car was used FOR the active reconstruction itself; the street shot was used as just a generic shot of the street.

So, what's going on here?

Well, it seems apparent to me that when the production team filmed a few still street shots, they inadvertently caught the OTHER white car in the frame.

This means that that there was indeed ANOTHER white car parked in Stevenage Road and which appears in that street shot with other cars parked up in situ.

But here's the crux of what I'm trying to say; and which takes me back slightly to my initial question at the top of this post...

Why did the man who abducted SL choose to park up her car AFTER the abduction in the SAME SPOT that ANOTHER white car had been; and which would later be seen again when the Crimewatch production team inadvertently captured it in their shot?

Well, firstly the abductor must have either SEEN another car there, or must have KNOWN another car was parked their BEFORE the abduction took place.

In turn, that implies that the abductor had familiarity with not only Stevenage Road, but also with the fact that there was another white car that had parked in that exact spot previously.

It does make one consider whether the white car belonged to the abductor, whether he was local to Stevenage Road, or whether he SAW the other car parked there when he and SL were allegedly seen "around lunchtime" in Stevenage Road by the woman who lived at 139 Stevenage Road.

It therefore seems viable to me that after Shorrolds Road, SL drove Mr Kipper to Stevenage Road, where she parked her white Fiesta further along (south) Stevenage Road, and that as they were BOTH seen walking north up Stevenage Road by the same witness, the abductor noticed the other white car parked outside the garage opposite 123 Stevenage Road, and simply made a mental note of it for when he late drove SL's car BACK to Stevenage Road AFTER the abduction had taken place.

What this also means however, is that because SL and Mr Kipper were later seen by BW, that it would appear that Mr Kipper did not have his vehicle available for when SL was driving him around Fulham; presumably to look at other properties.

The evidence DOES support the idea that SL WAS in Stevenage Road at some point AFTER Shorrolds Road, and that the abductor chose Stevenage Road for a reason.

There was also a Taxi Cab driver who lived yards from 123 Stevenage Road, and who claimed to have seen the white car parked by the garage just "before 2pm."

But it would appear that his sighting was of the same OTHER white car that WJ had seen at 12.45pm.

Of course, this would mean that at some point BEFORE the Fiesta was found at 10pm, that the other white car needed to have MOVED from that exact position in order for the abductor to have been able to have parked SL's Fiesta in the exact same spot AFTER the abduction had taken place.

So, who did this other white car belong to?

Well, it must have belonged to someone, and the fact that the abductor chose to park SL's Fiesta in the same spot that the other car had been parked in previously, must mean something.

And IMO, this could be the key top the entire case.

It also brings into question whether WJ saw the other white car at 3.30pm, or whether SL's Fiesta had been dumped at this point already?

Of course, if SL's Fiesta was only parked up there AFTER WJ's 2nd sighting of a white car at 3.30pm, it could mean that SL was abducted much later than we all realise.

But WHY would the abductor drive BACK to Stevenage road to dump SL's car?

Well, to either get back into his own car parked close by, or to try and deliberately confuse the investigation by making the police think that her Fiesta had been parked there all day from 12.45pm.

In some ways, it works as the perfect distraction and slight of hand.

Lots more to consider here

i think he ditched the car later that day. SL was never on stevenage rd. mr kipper picked that spot to ditch SL car in advance. he knew sturgis were selling 123 stevenage rd, so ditched the car across the road from the large yellow sturgis for sale sign.