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

[Kasparthecat1]

One of his rape victims asked him what his name was, and he told her to call him Horse, which isn't exactly a mundane name.

Ha! Perhaps Kipper is not so outlandish after all

 

[tes1984]

Ha! Perhaps Kipper is not so outlandish after all

I wonder if he somehow heard about the international businessman called Kiper, and borrowed his identity.

JC was a complete fantasist. He was never a businessman and his money came from inheritances, robberies and the occasional salary as an employee.

However, he did like to use the identities of legitimate businessmen for his own sexually motivated reasons.

 

[rvlvr]

Unless he's under a different name in the diary? A false one - JC had a habit of using false names. The names he's known to have used are mundane ones though - like Peterson.

Perhaps. Presumably police tried to trace all the numbers she’d got written down in her personal diary, work diary, etc. Pre-mobile phones, how could she have called Cannan directly though? I very much doubt he’d have had his own landline at the prison hostel, or at Superhire. And if he’d given her a number that could be traced to his lodgings or work then I think the Met would’ve worked that out.

 

[rvlvr]

The problem - and I think WL has touched on this plenty - is that the ‘evidence’ against Cannan was uncovered so late in the day and is so tenuous that the Met needed to try and shoehorn it in with the very few known facts about this case to give it some credibility. Cannan liked drinking in Fulham? Then he obviously must’ve known Suzy. Or he was stalking her? Yes, that fits - he probably pinched her stuff from the pub. A man seen holding flowers and champagne? Could only be Cannan! And so on and so forth.

But it really doesn’t stand up to any scrutiny.

It’s far more likely imo that if Cannan did do this then he really did just pose as a client, and abduct and kill poor Suzy. And with a bit of luck and perhaps some help from his pal with the flat (again, WL has discussed this very well), he pulled off the perfect crime. But in this version of the story, where a Mr Kipper lures an unsuspecting estate agent to her death, there’s nothing really to say that Cannan was Mr Kipper. It could’ve been just about anyone. And that won’t do.

 

[Kasparthecat1]

Do we know if MB is going to feature in part 2 of the podcast?

 

[WestLondoner]

....there’s nothing really to say that Cannan was Mr Kipper. It could’ve been just about anyone.

Yes, this is another problem with the Cannan theory. You can accept that 'Mr Kipper' was seen outside 37SR but it's entirely a matter of opinion that the HR-sourced sketch resembles Cannan. There were two sketches and the other's quite different. If you factor in that HR later identified a podgy 44-year-old man as a dead ringer for Kipper, then that's three different descriptions. They're all of a bloke with dark hair, but with a possible sighting of MG mixed in, we don't know how many were sightings of MG.

 

[Klclevi]

Do we know if MB is going to feature in part 2 of the podcast?

Hi Kaspar yes he will be in part 2 - out Tuesday 25/11/25 (UK time)

 

[su5ie]

Perhaps. Presumably police tried to trace all the numbers she’d got written down in her personal diary, work diary, etc. Pre-mobile phones, how could she have called Cannan directly though? I very much doubt he’d have had his own landline at the prison hostel, or at Superhire. And if he’d given her a number that could be traced to his lodgings or work then I think the Met would’ve worked that out.

Afaik, not everyone in her phonebook/ diary could be traced but posters with more knowledge about the case will be able to verify that for sure .

Suzy's case is the reason I found WS and I'm very grateful to her for that . So it really saddens me to know her case for various reasons won't be solved unless her remains are stumbled upon with the passage of time

 

[rvlvr]

Oh definitely, I imagine there were all sorts of loose ends they couldn’t tie up. But I can’t see how Cannan could’ve provided her with a contact number that wouldn’t have been easily traced. Perhaps he only ever called her, which is certainly possible (“I’m married, it’s too risky”, “I’m often out of the country on business”, etc), though that would obviously rule out her calling him from the phone box by the pub on the Sunday night.

 

[su5ie]

Oh definitely, I imagine there were all sorts of loose ends they couldn’t tie up. But I can’t see how Cannan could’ve provided her with a contact number that wouldn’t have been easily traced. Perhaps he only ever called her, which is certainly possible (“I’m married, it’s too risky”, “I’m often out of the country on business”, etc), though that would obviously rule out her calling him from the phone box by the pub on the Sunday night.

I don't think suzy may have phoned him generally in the 80s it was arranged when you were last with that person . I definitely think suzy was with the person who killed her over the weekend and a rendezvous was arranged for Monday lunchtime

As horrible as Cannan is I never felt he did it and not because I felt he couldn't worm his way into suzys life . Its just I felt too much had to be left out or ruled in to make him fit .

Suzy struck me as someone who wouldn't let a wedding ring or a commitment to another get in the way of what she was after which imo was status and riches . We see this behaviour played out with the numerous men she had on the go while dating AL , I'm not judging just observations.

I suspect she was seeing a married man and she was going to reveal the relationship. Prehaps the man only became rich through his wife and didn't want to let go of that .

I think suzy was buried on a building site or interred in a cellar of a house . Somewhere nobody so far has stumbled across with the passage of time . Whoever concealed her body didn't want to take the chance of her being found ever .

 

[Klclevi]

part 2 has been released

 

[SteveH]

One of his rape victims asked him what his name was, and he told her to call him Horse, which isn't exactly a mundane name.

There was a famous film "A Man Called Horse" (1970), based on an old short story, starring Richard Harris as an "English aristocrat John Morgan" who is captured, enslaved, and treated like an animal by a Native American tribe. He comes to respect his captors' culture and gain their respect. He is aided in understanding the Sioux by another captive." (Wikipedia). There were two sequels. The film is partly in Sioux.

We know that Cannan liked to fantasize about "romantic" historical figures - he said in the dating agency video that he would have fancied himself as a pirate, John Morgan, Henry (Captain) Morgan... Yo Ho Ho and a Bottle of Rum.

Suzy, Siouxsie Sioux, Susu...

I still kick myself for missing the Banshees in 1978 in Canterbury (where I was a student) when they were supported by the Human League, and in Bristol (Hippodrome) in autumn 1979 when they were supported by the Cure, although I did see the Cure in Canterbury in June '79 when they were supported by Joy Division. I digress!

I listened to Part 2 of the Brunt/Fospero podcast with interest. Some new info about Cannan's whereabouts in the days after he was released from the prison hostel. Apparently he bought a train ticket to Bristol. presumably to see Annabel Rose, and was seen by a friend of his mother at her house on the following Wednesday. His alibi that he was in Brum on the Monday Suzy went missing, shopping at Rackhams and seeing a film, was blown out of the water when the fuzz found out that the item he claimed to have purchased was actually sold to him in the September and the film he claimed to see wasn't shown at the cinema he mentioned until the same month.

I have long argued that you can't take Cannan's alibis seriously. David Vidicette's credibility is surely completely shot now and I noticed he hasn't been mentioned by his fans here recently. I am with Mike Barley in believing that Cannan was guilty of murdering Suzy but as he says we will almost certainly never know for sure.

It is a shame that Diana Lamplugh seems to have come in for more abuse on social media than Cannan ever has. Regardless of whether he was involved in Suzy's disappearance the man was a poor excuse for a human being. In this case though I would prefer to go along with the seasoned detectives who had worked on the case for years and spoken personally to Cannan than take seriously the amateurs (like myself!) who posture and pontificate on the internet and who talk about "feeling" this or that or argue that Mr Kipper could have been "just about anyone" and completely misrepresent the police handling of the case.

 

[Kasparthecat1]

part 2 has been released

Anyone listen? Thanks for the heads-up, @kclevi.

The one thing I didn't know was that Gilly Paige had been raped by JC at Norton Barracks on a journey to (or from, perhaps?) Birmingham.

Martin Brunt in the first part of the programme claims that JC was seen "loitering" around Fulham on the weekend before sjl went missing, but MB does not mention this in his own summary.

MB seems to be working on the premise that Sjl and JC were indeed known to one another prior to her disappearance.

 

[WestLondoner]

The one thing I didn't know was that Gilly Paige had been raped by JC at Norton Barracks

Which is either not true or has never previously been mentioned. CBD gives an entirely different account of this relationship.

MB also claims JC raped "another lover" in front of her mother. This also is not true. This was a stranger rape in Sutton Coldfield, where he attacked a knitwear shop's married and pregnant 37-year-old owner, in front of her mother and infant son.

MB repeats the spurious association with the House-For-Sale rapist in Birmingham. Victims of these assaults described a man of about 6 feet in his 40s. When the assaults started, around 1977, Cannan was 20 years younger than this and was between 5'6" and 5'8" tall. He was never interviewed by Midlands police in connection with these crimes nor did any victim ID him. They could easily have put him on an ID parade. This is a misleading but useful piece of insinuation which IMO was never gone into because it was so helpful as hearsay. Investigating it would have shown it was spurious, so it wasn't investigated.

MB also says he thinks SJL saw Cannan on the Sunday night, but admits there is no evidence. If so, why does he think it? Statements taken at the time say she went from the beach to her parents' house, left about 9 and was at home with the lodger for the rest of the evening. AL says they spoke on the 'phone about 10 - if so, presumably at a payphone en route, so Roger the Lodger wouldn't overhear. Some think this call would have been from the PoW, which she drove past, and hence was the occasion she lost her diary. There's not a lot of room in there for a meeting with anyone.

MB's idea of what happened in Stevenage Road relies on BW's account being incorrect, and is light on how exactly you subdue a healthy young woman and drive her to Norton Barracks. The obvious answer is you take her inside a building, so what building?

In dismissing Cannan's alibi, MB is careful not to say when it was checked. He makes it sound as though it was soon after but it was actually years after the fact.

Cannan is a good suspect but the nature of the "case" against him is highly instructive.

 

[rvlvr]

DBM

 

[rvlvr]

Which is either not true or has never previously been mentioned. CBD gives an entirely different account of this relationship.

MB also claims JC raped "another lover" in front of her mother. This also is not true. This was a stranger rape in Sutton Coldfield, where he attacked a knitwear shop's married and pregnant 37-year-old owner, in front of her mother and infant son.

MB repeats the spurious association with the House-For-Sale rapist in Birmingham. Victims of these assaults described a man of about 6 feet in his 40s. When the assaults started, around 1977, Cannan was 20 years younger than this and was between 5'6" and 5'8" tall. He was never interviewed by Midlands police in connection with these crimes nor did any victim ID him. They could easily have put him on an ID parade. This is a misleading but useful piece of insinuation which IMO was never gone into because it was so helpful as hearsay. Investigating it would have shown it was spurious, so it wasn't investigated.

MB also says he thinks SJL saw Cannan on the Sunday night, but admits there is no evidence. If so, why does he think it? Statements taken at the time say she went from the beach to her parents' house, left about 9 and was at home with the lodger for the rest of the evening. AL says they spoke on the 'phone about 10 - if so, presumably at a payphone en route, so Roger the Lodger wouldn't overhear. Some think this call would have been from the PoW, which she drove past, and hence was the occasion she lost her diary. There's not a lot of room in there for a meeting with anyone.

MB's idea of what happened in Stevenage Road relies on BW's account being incorrect, and is light on how exactly you subdue a healthy young woman and drive her to Norton Barracks. The obvious answer is you take her inside a building, so what building?

In dismissing Cannan's alibi, MB is careful not to say when it was checked. He makes it sound as though it was soon after but it was actually years after the fact.

Cannan is a good suspect but the nature of the "case" against him is highly instructive.

Agree with all the above. My eyes were rolling so hard at times they almost disappeared out of my head.

If the detectives who investigated Suzy’s disappearance were as good as certain people would like us to believe then they definitely wouldn’t need to pop up in books or on true crime podcasts misremembering (misrepresenting?) things, in a bid to bolster their ‘case’.

Repeatedly, these old boys have been offered platforms to evidence their belief that John Cannan killed Suzy Lamplugh, and every time we’re treated to a swing and a miss. At what point do we stop watching and listening to content that feels like it’s being made largely just to cash in on her name?

 

[Kasparthecat1]

At what point do we stop watching and listening to content that feels like it’s being made largely just to cash in on her name?

Yup.
https://websleuths.com/threads/uk-suzy-lamplugh-25-fulham-28-jul-1986-8.751650/

 

[Klclevi]

Which is either not true or has never previously been mentioned. CBD gives an entirely different account of this relationship.

MB also claims JC raped "another lover" in front of her mother. This also is not true. This was a stranger rape in Sutton Coldfield, where he attacked a knitwear shop's married and pregnant 37-year-old owner, in front of her mother and infant son.

MB repeats the spurious association with the House-For-Sale rapist in Birmingham. Victims of these assaults described a man of about 6 feet in his 40s. When the assaults started, around 1977, Cannan was 20 years younger than this and was between 5'6" and 5'8" tall. He was never interviewed by Midlands police in connection with these crimes nor did any victim ID him. They could easily have put him on an ID parade. This is a misleading but useful piece of insinuation which IMO was never gone into because it was so helpful as hearsay. Investigating it would have shown it was spurious, so it wasn't investigated.

MB also says he thinks SJL saw Cannan on the Sunday night, but admits there is no evidence. If so, why does he think it? Statements taken at the time say she went from the beach to her parents' house, left about 9 and was at home with the lodger for the rest of the evening. AL says they spoke on the 'phone about 10 - if so, presumably at a payphone en route, so Roger the Lodger wouldn't overhear. Some think this call would have been from the PoW, which she drove past, and hence was the occasion she lost her diary. There's not a lot of room in there for a meeting with anyone.

MB's idea of what happened in Stevenage Road relies on BW's account being incorrect, and is light on how exactly you subdue a healthy young woman and drive her to Norton Barracks. The obvious answer is you take her inside a building, so what building?

In dismissing Cannan's alibi, MB is careful not to say when it was checked. He makes it sound as though it was soon after but it was actually years after the fact.

Cannan is a good suspect but the nature of the "case" against him is highly instructive.

I could not believe it when Martin Brunt said that about 'lover' in front of her mother! Her name was Jean Bradford. I nearly fell off my chair. Surely these guys would get these facts correct in 2025.

There are several inconsistences also in Part 1 - Martin said she had an appointment at 4pm that she had missed - this is not in the diary and I have not heard of this before.

What I find frustrating is the questions are along the same old same old and so are the responses. Where is the detail and the validation of why - whats backing up these statements? Why aren't they asking different questions?

Why don't they know where JC was staying the Friday Saturday , Sunday before? He wasn't staying on the street.

Why does he actually think she is at Norton Barracks, just because of the conversation with GP in the car? He wasn't known to bury bodies.

Where is the Ford Fiesta today? The red Sierra? Are they still in storage? Are Suzys diaries back with her family or still in police hands?

The BW sighting flabbergasts me - its like it has just been dismissed and means nothing when actually that is massive.

Why weren't the flowers tracked back to which florist delivered them ? What about the phone calls she was receiving

Why wasn't the business venture with the couple investigated?

Why aren't they talking about these details? She had a conversation with an ex boyfriend at a wedding ONE MONTH prior to her disappearing where she actually told him she was seeing someone that was "unobtainable". Who was this person? Was JH (the ex bf from the QE2 ) talked to in more detail about this conversation? I am sure the context of that conversation was not just light hearted banter, it suggests she was in a relationship she wanted but ultimately could not have. That means he was married.

It is because they do not know. MB is saying it himself. They only know three things really - 39 years later.

I really had hoped this podcast might have shed some new light - and yes it had a few tidbits of things but nothing really new.

So many questions.

 

[SteveH]

I did notice some of the howlers in the podcast, which I didn't have time, the patience or energy to comment on before, but that's absolutely par for the course in this type of thing.

What are the new details that people are expecting? Do they really think we will get any final answers? If anyone had forensic proof we'd know about it. We have known for more than twenty years that the only evidence the filth have got is circumstantial. They aren't pursuing the case (other than carrying out the odd dig here and there), so the fact is that nothing new will ever come out unless Suzy's body is found or there is some other equally miraculous find.

A previous commenter asks "At what point do we stop watching and listening to content that feels like it’s being made largely just to cash in on her name?" Leaving aside the fact that this contributor is the biggest promoter of David Videcette here (HE is certainly trying to "cash in" on Suzy's name methinks) I don't know what anyone thinks we are going to come up with on Websleuths or anywhere else on social media. I have said before that new (and implausible) hypotheses and theories for the sake of novelty are of no value at all, as is trying to be different from the "mainstream" or "orthodox" view just for the sake of it.

For what it is worth I am hugely sceptical of Barbara Whitfield's account. She waited too long to come forward and, to me, comes across as very ditsy and even slightly shifty (in a Princess Di kind of way - look at her eyes and her mouth when she says "no" at the end of the clip) in this video:

Even if she is being100% honest and open maybe she got the days confused and anyway she couldn't have got a good look at the driver if she was turned away from her. But obviously she MIGHT have seen Suzy that day.

Can anyone point me to some info on the Birmingham "House For Sale" rapist? I can't seem to find anything online on this series of cases. I'd like to know exactly why people say it couldn't have been Cannan,. even if it has absolutely no bearing on the SL disappearance.

 

[rvlvr]

Civilly, I’m not a promoter of anyone, I’ve made my position on DV, his work and his theory very clear many times. I’d really appreciate it if you stop alluding to me in these type of posts that you make, thanks.