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

[lee sumner]

I thonk the assumption is that if you give a point everything that would make you think it would be cannan he comes out way in front of any other person you think could have done it, the next nearest i eould say is steve wright, negatives for cannan are
No body found
No actual link
Apart from those 2 he fits the bill in every department to quite a depth, ie estate agent, age, mo, car, location, lack of alibi yiu could go on and on.

the fact that SW was also working on the QE2 at the time is a incredible coincidence.

 

[lee sumner]

I

I think there’s a natural discretion & loyalty amongst her ‘Putney Set’ friends. DV mentioned her parents made, or attempted to make, ‘boyfriends’ sign NDAs. Her close friends thought the book damaged her reputation & good name & possibly some of them thought what they said had been taken out of context. Also ‘stiff upper lip’ strong here.

Her friends played detective early on as it was thought she knew her killer. Did she know him socially? NB: attached said by DL. It was thought if not socially, she knew her killer through Sturgis - a client. I think the police were thorough here.

AS had kept troubling information out of book about her private life. I think it might be here answer lay. The friends needed access perhaps to ‘secret’ contact book. Did the police ever bottom this out. Is there a Jessop, Bryant, Peterson or Townsend in it to this day?

Her parents felt the SL in book unrecognisable to them & their portrayal very poor & damaging.

NB seemed to have understandably forgotten a lot of what he said around 86. DV could have brought with him articles from time to serve as memory jog - he mentioned silent calls & NB said no, but sources helpful here . Ditto when speaking to SF, who flagged lost possessions in AS & therefore presumably to early investigation.

Her ex flatmate who remembered a separate group of people - men? - calling her.

AL would appear to have his doubts on JC if we take DV’s account as evidence. Do the others & if so what’s the point of blabbing as impossible to identify.

re, NB. i think he denied SL was getting strange phone calls at the flat, but i have an interview from aug 1986 where he talks about the funny phone calls SL was getting in the weeks before she disappeared. i think he was trying to irritate DV for some reason.

 

[lee sumner]

A big question for me is, how did police know Suzy’s belongings were at the Prince of Wales pub to begin with?

Of the Sturgis staff interviewed by DV only SF apparently remembered anything about Suzy’s lost belongings and even then her recollection was quite vague.

Even if staff were aware at the time that Suzy had lost her diary and chequebook, and even if they’d known they’d been located and that Suzy was going to retrieve them from a pub later that day, would they have known which one?

In my view it seems very unlikely. As I said in one of my replies to AG, MG was looking for Suzy from mid-afternoon onwards but he never paid a visit to the pub, so evidently none of his staff made him aware of any of this, most likely because they didn’t know. So what led police to the Prince of Wales?

after 30 yrs DV is not going to get a straight honest answer from SL friends or anyone from sturgis. i think DV was gullible thinking they would all be honest with him.

 

[lee sumner]

So sl had arranged to collect her lost items after being informed by the bank with a call to her office, but no work colleagues knew of this? If they did them mg first thought after checking sr would have been to check the pow.with this not happening i find it hard to believe any colleagues knew of her bank call but it is stated she came into work and spoke of the lost items. So this must have happened when mg was out with the big boss and others were out of the office too.

if MG knew pick up time was 6PM, that is why he did not go POW. he knew she was going there after work on the way home.

 

[lee sumner]

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.

if SL had been blanking AL out in worthing that sunday, why would she be speaking to him on the phone at 1015pm the same night.

 

[lee sumner]

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.

none of us know how AL really felt about SL. AL might have been happy having a quick summer fling with SL and was not in love with her. why does everyone think he loved her, but she did not love him.

 

[lee sumner]

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.

bi-polar is a very serious mental illness. i doubt she was BP. where does it say she was hyper.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

none of us know how AL really felt about SL. AL might have been happy having a quick summer fling with SL and was not in love with her. why does everyone think he loved her, but she did not love him.

Because he definitely stepped up & displayed great loyalty towards her memory, reputation & family in the aftermath. They were friends first and foremost from what we do know. He gave some of earliest interviews & acted as an unofficial spokesperson for the ‘Putney’ friends & sometimes, her family. It might not have been a ‘great love’, you’re right, but doing all of the above was optional & it speaks volumes.

 

[lee sumner]

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?

wow, that article was fascinating. its the earlier press reports that are the most interesting. everything after is all JC did it.

 

[lee sumner]

Because he definitely stepped up & displayed great loyalty towards her memory, reputation & family in the aftermath. They were friends first and foremost from what we do know. He gave some of earliest interviews & acted as an unofficial spokesperson for the ‘Putney’ friends & sometimes, her family. It might not have been a ‘great love’, you’re right, but doing all of the above was optional & it speaks volumes.

fair point. it did say in AS book that men fell for SL in a big way, but she did not feel the same.

 

[lee sumner]

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.

JC alibi was he asked a girl out on a date in sutton coldfield, and the girl was located and appeared to confirm JC alibi. the problem was detectives could not nail the date down as the 28th july, and the girl could not remember what day/date it was.

 

[JimmyDurham]

The stewards' inquiry into the Ripper fiasco noted that George Oldfield was dismissive of e-fits / photofits, and ignored them. When later they took every e-fit they had of every stranger attack in the north of England in the last ten years, blew them up to A4 size and covered an entire wall with them, it was very obviously the face of Peter Sutcliffe. Some had the face too thin or too wide, some had the hair length different and there were a couple of outliers that looked nothing like him. But taken together he was as recognisable as, say, King Charles.

I suspect the value of e-fits maybe in the "average" face that emerges from a large number of them.

Sutcliffe is an unusual case in that the polis had a lot of eyewitness sightings to go on. Most of them could have been any man with black hair and a beard, and most men in Yorkshire at that time would have had black hair and a beard. Two or three of the eyewitness sightings were incredibly accurate, however.

Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable unless you have a reason to take notice, and even then it's not particularly reliable. I believe the accurate sightings of Sutcliffe were from those who had been attacked by him and lived to tell the tale. Highly unusual in a serial murder case.

 

[lee sumner]

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.

yes, SL had a lot going on in her life when she disappeared. the brookline article was fascinating. it makes me wonder what info AS was not allowed to publish in his book.

 

[lee sumner]

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?

AS said men fell in love in SL, but she did not seem to feel the same way. is this why she was troubled, or had she not met mr right yet.

 

[lee sumner]

‘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.

was ADHD known back in 1980s

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

JC alibi was he asked a girl out on a date in sutton coldfield, and the girl was located and appeared to confirm JC alibi. the problem was detectives could not nail the date down as the 28th july, and the girl could not remember what day/date it was.

Yes, his ‘smoke screen’ approach, always an element of truth & memorable event. NB: ‘Val’ in Foye House. Yes, he saw her & she confirmed but not on day in question. SB case. Not true alibi therefore. Attached from CBD, on ‘Val’ Prime Suspect.

 

[Officer Dibble]

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.

If I remember correctly in the late 70;s and early 80's (and probably onwards) each phone box had its own phone number printed on the phone, so someone could call you back. Edited to add, it was common, before mobile phones and if you didn't have a landline (or want anyone to overhear you on a landline) to say to someone to call you at the phone box at a certain time.

 

[Eastend Eagle]

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.

Is it possible that Sarah could have known the pub's permanent landlord? He and his wife apparently didn't leave to go away until the Monday.

 

[Officer Dibble]

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.

You make an interesting and observant point IMO

 

[Officer Dibble]

If she was preoccupied with it that morning and making phone calls, and she was having cig breaks with her colleagues, it's something they would have noticed and she told them about, since SF knew about it. It's a few phone calls. The Midland Bank called her, told her where the items were. She called directory enquiries one presumes to get the number for the pub. She calls the pub. The pub called her back it seems. The bank might not have told her about her diary, as why should they care, their business is the chequebook. She might even have called her branch independently of all this to cancel the chequebook and see if any cheques used since she lost it (you'd be far more worried about this if you lost it on Friday night as people did use stolen cheques!).

Anyway, in an open plan office that sort of conversation gets noticed and she was friendly with her colleagues so she'd not hide it from them or be cagey.

If she lost on Friday night, you'd think she'd go to the branch as a priority on Saturday to cancel the chequebook or someone could have a spending spree using the cheques! Would you risk that just to go to a party or whatever? You'd surely realise you'd lost the diary on the Saturday morning.

MG prob didn't drive to the pub as he might not know which one it was (easy for police to find out with call to Midland) or it was just too far, or he thought she'd just gone to Shorrolds because she said she did.

I don't recall banks being open on a Saturday back then.