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

[kes1972]

I think if they had met somewhere (some house) then sl may have mentioned having to go to pow, so then jc may have already killed her and placed the call to maybe buy some time, i could imagine sl being in the situation and thought mentioning the expected collection may have got her out of the situation, bit of a stretch but as valid as anything so a house in use with landline available to use fairly close or in fulham

Did superhire have a utility building with a landline away from their main office?

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Do you know where in wales?

The Ls second home. Details in AS - will check.

 

[Kasparthecat1]

The Ls second home. Details in AS - will check.

I think it's at a place called Parrog. Can't find a photo, but it's very nice if I remember correctly. Listed.

 

[Officer Dibble]

Except for the witness Amelia Hart, who was adamant that whilst sitting in traffic in her car, heard an argument, and then turned her head to witness a man resembling JC assaulting a woman in a small wooded area in Leigh Woods, close to the flats in which JC lived.

The man was heard to say to the woman he was assaulting; "I told you what would happen!" followed by a choking sound and the woman say "No, no!"

The man then saw Amelia watching him and stopped, and then walked towards Amelia, but he stopped by the road side with his body facing away from her, but his head bent forward and tilted to the side. He looked directly at Amelia as the traffic cleared and she drove forwards.

Amelia's story wasn't believed by the police, and they dismissed her as a credible witness.

Which again, doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

It's likely IMO that Amelia saw JC assault SB, but having seen her watching him, JC couldn't then kill her on the 8th, and so had to change his plan and instead took SB back into his flat and kept her prisoner overnight.
He then made her call work the next morning, before driving her to the west country and killing her.

Flipping heck I've never heard this. I have never been able to get out of my mind the early Crimewatch reconstruction where a young couple witnessed a car in front of them with a woman frantically trying to get attention from the back seat as if they desperately needed help. I can't remember the car model or colour though. Anyone remember this?

 

[kes1972]

The Ls second home. Details in AS - will check.

Flipping heck I've never heard this. I have never been able to get out of my mind the early Crimewatch reconstruction where a young couple witnessed a car in front of them with a woman frantically trying to get attention from the back seat as if they desperately needed help. I can't remember the car model or colour though. Anyone remember this?

Yes i do recall reading that, i think it may also be on an earlier thread

 

[kes1972]

I think it's at a place called Parrog. Can't find a photo, but it's very nice if I remember correctly. Listed.

Has anyone ever considered a woman committing the crime?

 

[rvlvr]

Maybe it WAS Sarah who made the call to the pub and maybe she lifted SJL's belongings during the Worthing trip the day before? IMO

Problem with this is how did the belongings end up outside the Prince of Wales pub? AL told DV he and Suzy never went there. Maybe she went there without him? But it doesn’t sound like the sort of pub she or any of her circle would drink in on the regular? So it seems to me like a peculiar place for someone to leave them, had they stolen them.

 

[kes1972]

Has anyone ever considered a woman committing the crime?

 

[WestLondoner]

Nobody knows. For my money she tripped over the dog and fell in the river.

 

[Kasparthecat1]

Problem with this is how did the belongings end up outside the Prince of Wales pub? AL told DV he and Suzy never went there. Maybe she went there without him? But it doesn’t sound like the sort of pub she or any of her circle would drink in on the regular? So it seems to me like a peculiar place for someone to leave them, had they stolen them.

Just finished a reread of AS's book. The narrative according to AS is that the items were lost on the Friday. This has also been confirmed by AL in at least one documentary. I'm assuming that AS had access to either AL himself for this information. If AL was making it up, why? And when did this narrative change to the items having been lost on the Sunday evening?

If the items were indeed lost on the Friday, SJL must have worked on the Saturday, gone to the do in Surrey, gone windsurfing in Worthing on Sunday, visited her parents in East Sheen whilst not once seeming to have mentioned these missing items to her friends or her family. I'd always assumed that she made a phone call - possibly to AL on the Sunday evening from one of the boxes outside the POW and mislaid them then somehow. Someone found them there and placed them on the steps for KH to find.

Why would items stolen from her turn up in exactly the same place that they'd been stolen from? Why would stolen items turn up at all? Cynically, I did wonder whether AL himself had taken them on the Friday in an attempt to establish what she'd been up to in his absence, and placed them back outside the pub on the Sunday evening.

Not sure what kind of place the POW was back then but I'm guessing not the kind of place the Putney Set would frequent.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

J

Just finished a reread of AS's book. The narrative according to AS is that the items were lost on the Friday. This has also been confirmed by AL in at least one documentary. I'm assuming that AS had access to either AL himself for this information. If AL was making it up, why? And when did this narrative change to the items having been lost on the Sunday evening?

If the items were indeed lost on the Friday, SJL must have worked on the Saturday, gone to the do in Surrey, gone windsurfing in Worthing on Sunday, visited her parents in East Sheen whilst not once seeming to have mentioned these missing items to her friends or her family. I'd always assumed that she made a phone call - possibly to AL on the Sunday evening from one of the boxes outside the POW and mislaid them then somehow. Someone found them there and placed them on the steps for KH to find.

Why would items stolen from her turn up in exactly the same place that they'd been stolen from? Why would stolen items turn up at all? Cynically, I did wonder whether AL himself had taken them on the Friday in an attempt to establish what she'd been up to in his absence, and placed them back outside the pub on the Sunday evening.

Not sure what kind of place the POW was back then but I'm guessing not the kind of place the Putney Set would frequent.

NB: my posts upthread on this. IMO this was the ‘factual’ inconsequential change the police allowed/asked for re: AS narrative / suggestive of timeline alteration. Not relating to what he additionally kept back and toned down. IMO Sunday night was changed to Friday night.

There may have not been any call at all with AL on Sunday. This alibis her to being, we assume, tucked up at home. at 10:15pm on Sun night. They’d parted on beach at Worthing, prob not on best terms as she’d been seeing his friend whilst he was on holiday (if he knew). Certainly he’d not been her plus one at 21st & he left alone after driving to Worthing & staying briefly. She told him she was seeing ‘friends’ later on possibly those that drove her home. She didn’t, she lied (Barley recent podcast).

IF she saw same wealthy expat that night poss wouldn’t help press appeal & people might judge moral character. So loyal AL stepped in & police etc sanctioned this white lie perhaps (?)

There was a great sensitivity about Sunday night as (now confirmed by Barley in podcast) she now looks to have seen someone else after parents & lied about this to AL & things lost/forgotten then possibly when she was picked up at phone box by this person. AL therefore officially greenlit to craft around Fri in Doc - especially as by then JC only suspect - & explains his forgetting story re: DV conversation. I think telling truth POW they didn’t go to. IMO It’s the covering up of Sunday night & the enthusiasm to pin on JC that confuses re: AL.

KH only arrived as relief landlord on Sunday eve & said found belongings under the picnic table on his way to collect a Chinese takeaway. He wasn’t in London on Friday. (DV).

Supporting evidence is also in an early review of AS book by Anita Brookner - working from pre publication copy, pre edits perhaps - who mentioned Sunday as day items lost. She was good at details. Also SL seemingly not checking with the POW at lunchtime on Sat pre going to 21st or telling friends. As you say.

AS says SL ‘preoccupied’ with missing things on Mon so there was some concern.

AS said this change felt inconsequential & had ‘nothing to do’ with the more controversial sexual material. Quite so, but it’s had a ‘butterfly effect’ on everything perhaps.

 

[WestLondoner]

Just finished a reread of AS's book. The narrative according to AS is that the items were lost on the Friday. This has also been confirmed by AL in at least one documentary. I'm assuming that AS had access to either AL himself for this information. If AL was making it up, why? And when did this narrative change to the items having been lost on the Sunday evening?

If the items were indeed lost on the Friday, SJL must have worked on the Saturday, gone to the do in Surrey, gone windsurfing in Worthing on Sunday, visited her parents in East Sheen whilst not once seeming to have mentioned these missing items to her friends or her family. I'd always assumed that she made a phone call - possibly to AL on the Sunday evening from one of the boxes outside the POW and mislaid them then somehow. Someone found them there and placed them on the steps for KH to find.

Why would items stolen from her turn up in exactly the same place that they'd been stolen from? Why would stolen items turn up at all? Cynically, I did wonder whether AL himself had taken them on the Friday in an attempt to establish what she'd been up to in his absence, and placed them back outside the pub on the Sunday evening.

Not sure what kind of place the POW was back then but I'm guessing not the kind of place the Putney Set would frequent.

All excellent points. The stuff was lost on Sunday and this had to be altered because she wasn't supposed to have been there without AL on the Sunday.

The PoW may have been pretty decent. MB, whom DV interviewed, reckoned it had been refurbed recently and to have turned it around to the point where it was used as a training location. It can't have been such a dive. Of course pubs can deteriorate so what it's been like in between times is not a great guide.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

All excellent points. The stuff was lost on Sunday and this had to be altered because she wasn't supposed to have been there without AL on the Sunday.

The PoW may have been pretty decent. MB, whom DV interviewed, reckoned it had been refurbed recently and to have turned it around to the point where it was used as a training location. It can't have been such a dive. Of course pubs can deteriorate so what it's been like in between times is not a great guide.

Def darts pub & local older men maybe not total dive. AL def the Mossops kind & liked nearby other characterful pubs on river. I think he was telling truth to DV (say why in post above). It wasn’t ‘Putney Set’ but phone box useful I think. As you say, day was likely altered (KS not in London to find it on Fri), which made me wonder just now on AL’s call...See previous post…What do you think?

 

[Klclevi]

Here is the Anita Brookner piece ( The Observer 9.10.88)

I had obtained her handwritten notes from the HR centre in the US but her handwriting was so bad could barely read it.
Then I found them published in the Observer article below just recently.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Here is the Anita Brookner piece ( The Observer 9.10.88)

I had obtained her handwritten notes from the HR centre in the US but her handwriting was so bad could barely read it.
Then I found them published in the Observer article below just recently.

View attachment 648945

Yes - a few of us got same notes I think they are almost the exact transcription of article from what I could transcribe.

AB says she left her chequebook with publican - that part is very odd (?) AB wasn’t one to guess & known for accuracy etc but poss on a deadline?

The big bit of evidence for a Sun to Fri swap is what AS said about the odd, factual change that had no real influence on anything…timeline.

Also KH arriving on Sun not Fri!

There’s always been this rumour about Sun night & her going on to see someone later so good to have confirmed (Barley). Lying to AL etc.

 

[Klclevi]

Yes - a few of us got same notes I think they are almost the exact transcription of article from what I could transcribe.

AB says she left her chequebook with publican - that part is very odd (?) AB wasn’t one to guess & known for accuracy etc but poss on a deadline?

The big bit of evidence for a Sun to Fri swap is what AS said about the odd, factual change that had no real influence on anything…timeline.

Also KH arriving on Sun not Fri!

There’s always been this rumour about Sun night & her going on to see someone later so good to have confirmed (Barley). Lying to AL etc.

HI yes i did note that re the publican too.

I would not call JC sunburnt or even tanned.

 

[kes1972]

Just finished a reread of AS's book. The narrative according to AS is that the items were lost on the Friday. This has also been confirmed by AL in at least one documentary. I'm assuming that AS had access to either AL himself for this information. If AL was making it up, why? And when did this narrative change to the items having been lost on the Sunday evening?

If the items were indeed lost on the Friday, SJL must have worked on the Saturday, gone to the do in Surrey, gone windsurfing in Worthing on Sunday, visited her parents in East Sheen whilst not once seeming to have mentioned these missing items to her friends or her family. I'd always assumed that she made a phone call - possibly to AL on the Sunday evening from one of the boxes outside the POW and mislaid them then somehow. Someone found them there and placed them on the steps for KH to find.

Why would items stolen from her turn up in exactly the same place that they'd been stolen from? Why would stolen items turn up at all? Cynically, I did wonder whether AL himself had taken them on the Friday in an attempt to establish what she'd been up to in his absence, and placed them back outside the pub on the Sunday evening.

Not sure what kind of place the POW was back then but I'm guessing not the kind of place the Putney Set would frequent.

Al natrative seems convebient for him, i agree he may have wanted to know what was in the book, imagine reading through that. Putting the items back where she used the phone works for him because if she had used the phone box he woukd have known where it was and left the items so it looked like sl had misplaced them.could have even been nearby to see them taken in.

 

[Klclevi]

For those in the know. In 86 London could you receive a phone call to a telephone box? (and how would you do this please).
Is it possible she received a call at the box , organising some meet up for the Monday and then not called AL until she got home.
If she was at East Sheen from say 8-9pm Sunday night seeing her parents etc, it leaves little room for seeing someone else and then making the phone call to AL at about 10.15. She would not have wanted to risk NB answering the phone at Disraeli (as how would the caller know who was going to answer).

Am just revisiting T3 (which has some really insightful posts from @Konstantin and @WestLondoner as well as some very what should I say - full on posts from this former member W ..H@LL. Am sure you guys know who I am talking about. I am only up to August in the thread so far BTW.

Anyway just some thoughts based on some of the postings in T3 I have read to date.

 

[Kasparthecat1]

For those in the know. In 86 London could you receive a phone call to a telephone box? (and how would you do this please).
Is it possible she received a call at the box , organising some meet up for the Monday and then not called AL until she got home.
If she was at East Sheen from say 8-9pm Sunday night seeing her parents etc, it leaves little room for seeing someone else and then making the phone call to AL at about 10.15. She would not have wanted to risk NB answering the phone at Disraeli (as how would the caller know who was going to answer).

Am just revisiting T3 (which has some really insightful posts from @Konstantin and @WestLondoner as well as some very what should I say - full on posts from this former member W ..H@LL. Am sure you guys know who I am talking about. I am only up to August in the thread so far BTW.

Anyway just some thoughts based on some of the postings in T3 I have read to date.

Yes it was possible to receive a call. For many, phone boxes were the only option.

 

[rvlvr]

That Anita Brookner piece is excellent. It does seem highly likely Suzy became parted from her belongings on the Sunday, not the Friday. And imo they were lost, not stolen.

The idea they were stolen from her from the pub on the Friday night has been allowed to persist because it’s considered something that Cannan might’ve done, had he been stalking her. And so adds an ounce of weight to the ‘case’ against him. But as Barley pointed out in the TC podcast, Cannan may well have been in Bristol when all of this was supposedly playing out. And anyway, AL gave the game away during his interview with DV - they didn’t go to the pub together on the Friday night. So, did she lose them after meeting with someone at the pub on the Sunday, or whilst calling this someone from a phone box outside? This is more likely, imo. But was Cannan still in Bristol at this point? If so, he can’t have been the someone she was meeting, nor could she have called him - how would she have known what number to dial in order to speak to him? If Cannan was back in London, then where did he spend the Sunday night? Given that this location may also have been Monday’s murder scene, why are police so reluctant to discuss it, and why aren’t the media asking police these questions?