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

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Yes, you could receive calls in phoneboxes.

On AL I now think it’s possible there was no call with SL at 10:15pm. We’re supposed to assume SL safely at home (she wasn’t it seems & now we have Barley’s comments on this in recent podcast). There isn’t then shadiness about AL in this episode - the day change & call all to detract from her being with someone else that Sunday eve. This then being sanctioned by police.

Worthing will have been a 2 hour approx drive for AL on Sunday. Only to stand briefly (?) on beach watching SL windsurf & return empty handed. I think she told him she was seeing friends she was with & (who gave her a lift home). This didn’t later check out when they were questioned (this did happen with some friends - Barley again flags in podcast).

It seems odd that AL can’t recall this final call (DV) who called whom etc. It was nearly 40 years ago but the very last time he spoke with someone he loved or deeply cared for before being brutally snatched. Wouldn’t you burn the exchange onto your brain back in 86 (?)

I get firmer in my opinion here when he forgets his comments in doc & says never been to POW (DV) (he’s so telling truth) AND AS tells us this call was spent discussing logistics of attending wealthy expat’s party on Tues! They both knew where he lived & presumably would have chatted well before then (?) Why the urgency & I imagine other things to discuss such as his wasted trip to Worthing.

 

[Konstantin]

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.

It's impossible to know but the bit about the publican probably just means SL had spoken with the pub and agreed they'd hold onto it for her until she came to collect.

The description of SL as hyperactive is interesting. I've wondered before if SL was in a manic phase of something like bipolar and hence all the rushing around partying and windsurfing and getting involved in deals and generally increasing risk taking behaviour. It's impossible to diagnose but AB has picked up on a pattern of behaviour here that is rather extraordinary and did seem to have ramped up perhaps.

Even losing her very important personal items could fit. The risk taking might be pertinent to her meeting with Kipper.

 

[Kasparthecat1]

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

Thank you! That's a fascinating article.

One thing I don't see debated much is how SJL's dyslexia may have impacted on her behaviour. I remember, though, at the time of the disappearance, it was indeed thought that Kipper may have been misheard/ misspelled. Yet she seems to have been able to spell seemingly more complex words like Waldemar, Wardo, Shorrolds etc.

Brookner's article is pretty interesting in its analysis of DL's behaviour - also as a consequence, perhaps, of her own dyslexia, which seems to be a family trait. Could SJL's dyslexia perhaps have had wider implications for how she may have behaved in her daily life, and the decisions she may have taken the day she went missing?

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

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?

If off to Bristol & there’s evidence SL was linked to someone from there (not just poss in 1984 via Face Place client) it strengthens case for JC with earlier ties to Bristol than we might think.

On Sun night you often needed to queue for a phone box. Was SL in a rush or being picked up at pub?

Yes to the stalking element & JC. That Doc was all about evidence that only fitted him. In anxiety to find anything to fit some of the better evidence is overlooked IMO.

One of the reasons JC suspected is he couldn’t account for his whereabouts from Fri night to midweek following week. It’s a big chunk of time.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Thank you! That's a fascinating article.

One thing I don't see debated much is how SJL's dyslexia may have impacted on her behaviour. I remember, though, at the time of the disappearance, it was indeed thought that Kipper may have been misheard/ misspelled. Yet she seems to have been able to spell seemingly more complex words like Waldemar, Wardo, Shorrolds etc.

Brookner's article is pretty interesting in its analysis of DL's behaviour - also as a consequence, perhaps, of her own dyslexia, which seems to be a family trait. Could SJL's dyslexia perhaps have had wider implications for how she may have behaved in her daily life, and the decisions she may have taken the day she went missing?

Familiarity on the more complex road name spellings perhaps meant could spell - she’d see every day (?) I think an element of risk taking in SL’s behaviour & living at speed. Some nervous anxiety too, ‘tummy trouble’. Missing the first flight to the USA that Mum was pushing her towards to break up an unsuitable relationship (AS). That’s quite a big deal & for someone always on time…

 

[Kasparthecat1]

It's impossible to know but the bit about the publican probably just means SL had spoken with the pub and agreed they'd hold onto it for her until she came to collect.

The description of SL as hyperactive is interesting. I've wondered before if SL was in a manic phase of something like bipolar and hence all the rushing around partying and windsurfing and getting involved in deals and generally increasing risk taking behaviour. It's impossible to diagnose but AB has picked up on a pattern of behaviour here that is rather extraordinary and did seem to have ramped up perhaps.

Even losing her very important personal items could fit. The risk taking might be pertinent to her meeting with Kipper.

Kind of thinking alike here! Great minds and all that...

Yes there's definitely something quite unusual about this level of activity, particularly in relation to risk-taking behaviour.

And also to her seeming carelessness...losing important items on the Sunday night, leaving her purse in the car door, not completing the client profile of "Kipper" according to office protocol...

Also from AS emerges a portrait of a young woman as "troubled" - his words - what does this mean exactly?

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

It's impossible to know but the bit about the publican probably just means SL had spoken with the pub and agreed they'd hold onto it for her until she came to collect.

The description of SL as hyperactive is interesting. I've wondered before if SL was in a manic phase of something like bipolar and hence all the rushing around partying and windsurfing and getting involved in deals and generally increasing risk taking behaviour. It's impossible to diagnose but AB has picked up on a pattern of behaviour here that is rather extraordinary and did seem to have ramped up perhaps.

Even losing her very important personal items could fit. The risk taking might be pertinent to her meeting with Kipper.

ADHD has crossed my mind too. The darker bouts, tidy yet messy. She threw keys & bag contents onto floor (AS). Missing long haul £ flights (although tummy trouble). Alcohol (?) Risky behaviour. Multiple partners (?) Unusually charismatic/magnetic. Interesting thought on Bipolar

Yes, there’s a feeling of things coming to a head, an escalation. She was happy in morning then angry at lost commission she was expecting. Wanting to sell flat urgently. Plans to leave Sturgis. Buying a flat she couldn’t otherwise afford. Taking risk again with the joint buyer’s ‘strings’ attached.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Kind of thinking alike here! Great minds and all that...

Yes there's definitely something quite unusual about this level of activity, particularly in relation to risk-taking behaviour.

And also to her seeming carelessness...losing important items on the Sunday night, leaving her purse in the car door, not completing the client profile of "Kipper" according to office protocol...

Also from AS emerges a portrait of a young woman as "troubled" - his words - what does this mean exactly?

‘Tummy trouble’ missing long haul flights, ‘dark & lonely quest’. Self destructive (?) Multiple partners, unusually compartmentalised & secret life. I thought ADHD when I read book which can come with dyslexia.

 

[Klclevi]

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.

having a look back at this, could this be SF calling the pub looking for her. CV (not his real initials was known to have a hearing impediment ( yes he was much younger at the time) . But Flower might have been misconstrued as Sarah?
Just a thought after reading T3

 

[Konstantin]

ADHD has crossed my mind too. The darker bouts, tidy yet messy. She threw keys & bag contents onto floor (AS). Missing long haul £ flights (although tummy trouble). Alcohol (?) Risky behaviour. Multiple partners (?) Unusually charismatic/magnetic. Interesting thought on Bipolar

Yes, there’s a feeling of things coming to a head, an escalation. She was happy in morning then angry at lost commission she was expecting. Wanting to sell flat urgently. Plans to leave Sturgis. Buying a flat she couldn’t otherwise afford. Taking risk again with the joint buyer’s ‘strings’ attached.

And the Kipper appointment being the only one that looked dodgy, in that all her other appointments checked out.

Two timing her boyfriend with his close friend - it's a social risk even if AL wasn't likely to get angry or harm her.

A possible affair - there is a risk there if people find out, even if that is "just" the social and reputational risk.

Also from AS emerges a portrait of a young woman as "troubled" - his words - what does this mean exactly?

Yes, "troubled" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

It's more than just "she was going through a bit of a party girl phase" to me. It's hinting very strongly at behaviours that are maybe risky, dangerous and that she wasn't the normal, happy, ordinary and uncomplicated young woman that DL was so desperate to portray her as. There was a lot more going on - and that could be pertinent to who Kipper is and why she had to meet him that lunch time.

If we agree that Kipper most likely was NOT just a pervert who rang up at random to try to get an appointment with a young woman, and he was someone she knew and had to hide and had to meet that lunchtime because she believed it could not wait, how does that link potentially with her "troubled" behaviours.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

having a look back at this, could this be SF calling the pub looking for her. CV (not his real initials was known to have a hearing impediment ( yes he was much younger at the time) . But Flower might have been misconstrued as Sarah?
Just a thought after reading T3

The timing of call really troubled police. 2pm. This & the ‘phony’ policeman. For whatever reason they took it very seriously but I agree it feels very easy & likely to think a simple mistake by KH & SF etc. These calls apparently well before anyone knew her to be missing or in possible danger.

KH’s elaboration to DV gets harder to fathom “keep her talking”.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

On AL & pub discrepancies & other boyfriends. Apparently the Lamplughs had asked them to sign NDAs. Just to factor that in too if makes any odds.

 

[Klclevi]

And the Kipper appointment being the only one that looked dodgy, in that all her other appointments checked out.

Two timing her boyfriend with his close friend - it's a social risk even if AL wasn't likely to get angry or harm her.

A possible affair - there is a risk there if people find out, even if that is "just" the social and reputational risk.



Yes, "troubled" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

It's more than just "she was going through a bit of a party girl phase" to me. It's hinting very strongly at behaviours that are maybe risky, dangerous and that she wasn't the normal, happy, ordinary and uncomplicated young woman that DL was so desperate to portray her as. There was a lot more going on - and that could be pertinent to who Kipper is and why she had to meet him that lunch time.

If we agree that Kipper most likely was NOT just a pervert who rang up at random to try to get an appointment with a young woman, and he was someone she knew and had to hide and had to meet that lunchtime because she believed it could not wait, how does that link potentially with her "troubled" behaviours.

Brilliant post. Exactly on the mark IMO.
Someone back in T3 said this (not WH) but another poster. It speaks to the conversation with her parents on the Sunday night and the offer of money towards the property. This person who was pestering her that she wanted to cut it off with is likely to be the same person IMO.
This is not someone of JC calibre. (I note Konstantin a post most notable from 2022 about her being a Sloane Ranger. Makes absolute sense) Way more to post on this .

 

[Klclevi]

On AL & pub discrepancies & other boyfriends. Apparently the Lamplughs had asked them to sign NDAs. Just to factor that in too if makes any odds.

If this is true its really sad because this very action may have prevented them finding out what really happened. No disrespect to DL and PL as mum and dad, their world of pain never ended . But. It cannot be denied that Suzy had another world going on that her parents did not know about. (again we all know this). If I was a friend or boyfriend today would you sign an NDA at the expense of your friend being found? No way hosay The truth is the truth.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

If this is true its really sad because this very action may have prevented them finding out what really happened. No disrespect to DL and PL as mum and dad, their world of pain never ended . But. It cannot be denied that Suzy had another world going on that her parents did not know about. (again we all know this). If I was a friend or boyfriend today would you sign an NDA at the expense of your friend being found? No way hosay.

IMO JH’s recount in Sunday papers upset the family & maybe provoked this.

It might be why there are ‘inventions’ around Sun night. It seems it was thought this face saving didn’t matter but it interfered with the timeline in a case where timeline confused anyway.

 

[rvlvr]

One of the reasons JC suspected is he couldn’t account for his whereabouts from Fri night to midweek following week. It’s a big chunk of time.

Well, Cannan would have said he *could* and *did* account for his time. Now, Barley made a big thing about him getting details about how he spent the weekend prior to Suzy’s disappearance wrong, but the passing of time could easily explain him misremembering these things. And as I said in an earlier post, the significance of the Bristol train ticket is difficult to ascertain when we’ve no idea who claimed to have seen this ticket and when, and it isn’t clear (to me, anyway!) why putting him in Bristol instead of the Birmingham area then puts him in the frame for a crime that was committed in London.

In any case, it wasn’t for Cannan to prove he wasn’t in London, it was and is for police to prove that he was. And they obviously can’t.

 

[rvlvr]

The timing of call really troubled police. 2pm. This & the ‘phony’ policeman. For whatever reason they took it very seriously but I agree it feels very easy & likely to think a simple mistake by KH & SF etc. These calls apparently well before anyone knew her to be missing or in possible danger.

KH’s elaboration to DV gets harder to fathom “keep her talking”.

Agree with this. Curious to know what you make of this post and replies from last year?

A

UK Post in thread 'UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #8'

Oct 17, 2025

By accepted narrative it’s clear to me he means the ‘murderous cold-calling pseudo-house viewer’ Mr Kipper narrative, rather than the ‘Cannan killed her’ one.

The original investigation was steered from day one in a particular direction and didn’t appear to deviate much from that. To the point where, when peculiarities concerning the pub came to light later on, police just seemed to shrug their shoulders and move on.

From AS’s book, pages 164-5:



So uneasy they did… nothing. Good job, boys.

Likewise, as set out by WL above, there was a further line of inquiry that wasn’t pursued...

• AfricanGrey

• 
• 

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Well, Cannan would have said he *could* and *did* account for his time. Now, Barley made a big thing about him getting details about how he spent the weekend prior to Suzy’s disappearance wrong, but the passing of time could easily explain him misremembering these things. And as I said in an earlier post, the significance of the Bristol train ticket is difficult to ascertain when we’ve no idea who claimed to have seen this ticket and when, and it isn’t clear (to me, anyway!) why putting him in Bristol instead of the Birmingham area then puts him in the frame for a crime that was committed in London.

In any case, it wasn’t for Cannan to prove he wasn’t in London, it was and is for police to prove that he was. And they obviously can’t.

Agree.

Barley has said at other times JC got time wrong re: cinema showings in Birmingham area. The films he said were showing the weekend he says he went home were not. An easy mistake to make especially as some time before. I do wonder whether Barley confused Bristol & Birmingham in podcast re: train ticket as I’ve read JC travelled home to Sutton Coldfield before.

None of JC’s alibis Sat-Thurs afternoon apparently stacked up. That’s quite a chunk of time unaccounted for, but as you say onus on police to prove.

Presumably he was mainly using cash & bank records didn’t help? I come back to this as cash withdrawals in Reading nailed him for DT in part & helped so much with SB timeline. Maybe not so many around in 86? But they were in London by mid 86.

Additionally JC had a ‘smoke-screening’ technique when not telling truth whereby his alibis etc were half truths. With SB case this happened a lot, for example he said he’d had a chat with upstairs Foye House neighbour on key abduction eve but had to pop down to stop a lamb joint from burning. He had but weeks earlier. There was always a kernel of truth & it made police’s job very hard.

On SL the biggest indicator of his guilt IMO (although I am still on fence about him) are his comments to Barley on Bristol businessman who sold him SB’s mini & he says killed SB, SL & ‘another girl’. He was very stressed in interview & not toying with police at this time.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Agree with this. Curious to know what you make of this post and replies from last year?

A

UK Post in thread 'UK - Suzy Lamplugh, 25, Fulham, 28 Jul 1986 #8'

Oct 17, 2025

By accepted narrative it’s clear to me he means the ‘murderous cold-calling pseudo-house viewer’ Mr Kipper narrative, rather than the ‘Cannan killed her’ one.

The original investigation was steered from day one in a particular direction and didn’t appear to deviate much from that. To the point where, when peculiarities concerning the pub came to light later on, police just seemed to shrug their shoulders and move on.

From AS’s book, pages 164-5:



So uneasy they did… nothing. Good job, boys.

Likewise, as set out by WL above, there was a further line of inquiry that wasn’t pursued...

• AfricanGrey

• 
• 

That’s very interesting…I’d not seen before.

I do know there was seemingly a review around 1987, it was very sensible to go back & see if any circumstances have changed as AS said, how thorough or lengthy it was I don’t know. From memory called ‘Anacapa’ in AS. How could AS be wrong here? Although perhaps he was mistaken (?) but on a case review when he had access to police notes ?

Ah, re: above I see that part not disputed. My mistake.

Something else in passing, I’d read KH was reinterviewed in 2000 re: Phoebus so DV’s visit on SL not totally out of blue/unfamiliar territory, well at 20 odd years distance not 40.

There are perhaps understandable sensitivities if Fri to Sun was factual change AS was asked to make by police ‘that didn’t influence the story in any way’. Barley has now said in podcast SL didn’t tell truth to AL on Sunday night.

Of course KH should not be maligned.

 

[kes1972]

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?

I would imagine sun road would have been where he stayed if he ever did, the narrative was set to be jc and they would not allow any deviation from this train of thought,i firmly believe pow has questions to answer and the disused viaduct is where sl is.