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

[Lady Stoddart-West]

SL arranged to pick up her missing items at 6pm, so this means she was not in a rush to get her items back. if she was she would have arranged to get them ASAP. this simple arrangement SL made gets overlooked in my opinion.

The data on a 6pm pick up came from pub & poss temp publican’s wife. Poss lost in translation & she was never late for apts even by 5 mins, so seems odd she’d have volunteered 6pm as pick up . It stands to reason she’d want her diary/contacts asap IMO or she’d have not been so dedicated/persistent about it to temp landlord. His recount to DV showed her particular worry about the diary.

 

[lee sumner]

My view is he stepped up as a defender of her honour fast & ‘official boyfriend’ for the press - hence the glossing of problematic Sunday night etc. I think he knew she didn’t see him as love of life & saw & accepted writing on wall. SL stayed on good terms with all exes to date & would have done so with him too, eventually.

LG might have seen dating SL as a summer fling, and was not concerned about getting ditched. why does everyone assume LG was in love with SL.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

LG might have seen dating SL as a summer fling, and was not concerned about getting ditched. why does everyone assume LG was in love with SL.

LG (?) I am talking about AL - ah, think we mean same. They were together for a year or so, went to Paris, skiing etc, horse trials, balls so on paper at least he/they were serious. He knew her family & stepped up as spokesperson almost immediately for family. One of earliest interviews from him. They were friends before lovers & he was very loyal.

His turning up on the beach in Worthing on Sunday & leaving her alone to leave later with friends was a bit odd & suggests tension perhaps. Especially odd as he’d not been her plus one at 21st so had travelled presumably from London to Worthing only to turn around & go home again alone.

 

[lee sumner]

after her 6pm appointment with joanna to view waldermar rd. she picks up her lost items on the way home.

 

[lee sumner]

The data on a 6pm pick up came from pub & poss temp publican’s wife. Poss lost in translation & she was never late for apts even by 5 mins, so seems odd she’d have volunteered 6pm as pick up . It stands to reason she’d want her diary/contacts asap IMO or she’d have not been so dedicated/persistent about it to temp landlord. His recount to DV showed her particular worry about the diary.

you listen to what DV says thinking its the truth, but he does not know what he is talking about. DV theory is utter madness.

 

[lee sumner]

LG (?) I am talking about AL her ‘official’ boyfriend.

sorry i meant AL.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

you listen to what DV says thinking its the truth, but he does not know what he is talking about. DV theory is utter madness.

Well, I am not looking at DV in isolation & we can agree he interviewed CV at least - this is very detailed in his book . The police agree with a great deal of what DV has said…if not the ‘cellar’ theory…

AS gives details re: 6pm apt etc.

It’s my view that SL did invent ‘Kipper’ to get out at lunchtime to get her things in part & the final call she took ‘half sitting, half standing’ & perhaps the loss of expected commission NH took, influenced what happened next & fateful decisions made.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

after her 6pm appointment with joanna to view waldermar rd. she picks up her lost items on the way home.

The pub temp landlady said she’d said 6pm but this clashed with her 6pm apt & she’d not just said a generic ‘after work’ so feels unlikely she’d say that she’d be there very specifically at 6pm - as was reported. This might be splitting hairs, but it’s one of a few anomalies around the POW that day.

She may not have been easily able to say heading out to collect things asap as short staffed etc even if reality.

 

[Konstantin]

The pub temp landlady said she’d said 6pm but this clashed with her 6pm apt & she’d not just said a generic ‘after work’ so feels unlikely she’d say that she’d be there very specifically at 6pm - as was reported. This might be splitting hairs, but it’s one of a few anomalies around the POW that day.

She may not have been easily able to say heading out to collect things asap as short staffed etc even if reality.

She might have needed her diary ASAP to get numbers she needed to call that day - for social reasons maybe but also business contacts perhaps if she was involved in a deal. Though unclear if she could make personal calls from her work landline.

The importance of the diary - the equivalent to a smartphone really - to her life is why I think if she'd lost it on the Friday, the people she was around all that weekend would have heard about it. Did she really not call anyone that weekend? Surely she'd have mentioned it to her mum. She'd have been anxious about it. Wondering where she left it. Calling Mossops. The pub if they really went there which AL later denied. Calling AL asking if he'd picked it up. He'd have known about it surely as she was with him on the Friday.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

She might have needed her diary ASAP to get numbers she needed to call that day - for social reasons maybe but also business contacts perhaps if she was involved in a deal. Though unclear if she could make personal calls from her work landline.

The importance of the diary - the equivalent to a smartphone really - to her life is why I think if she'd lost it on the Friday, the people she was around all that weekend would have heard about it. Did she really not call anyone that weekend? Surely she'd have mentioned it to her mum. She'd have been anxious about it. Wondering where she left it. Calling Mossops. The pub if they really went there which AL later denied. Calling AL asking if he'd picked it up. He'd have known about it surely as she was with him on the Friday.

Absolutely. AL in a doc does say she was upset re: loss of possessions on Fri eve. Evidence really points to the loss happening on Sun as stated upthread & reasons for swapping of evenings.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

She might have needed her diary ASAP to get numbers she needed to call that day - for social reasons maybe but also business contacts perhaps if she was involved in a deal. Though unclear if she could make personal calls from her work landline.

The importance of the diary - the equivalent to a smartphone really - to her life is why I think if she'd lost it on the Friday, the people she was around all that weekend would have heard about it. Did she really not call anyone that weekend? Surely she'd have mentioned it to her mum. She'd have been anxious about it. Wondering where she left it. Calling Mossops. The pub if they really went there which AL later denied. Calling AL asking if he'd picked it up. He'd have known about it surely as she was with him on the Friday.

The police also presumably know or knew whether, as was & is rumoured, the diary had ‘salacious’ content.

IF it did, it surely means SL will have wanted to get this hot potato as SOON as she knew KH had it! As DV recounts - SL via KH/CV in his book “have you got my diary? Have you got my diary? You HAVE got my diary haven’t you?”

She was apparently very concerned.

 

[WestLondoner]

You do wonder what salacious content could be fitted into a pocket diary. Unless there was some sort of "result" marker against the male names?

 

[Konstantin]

Absolutely. AL in a doc does say she was upset re: loss of possessions on Fri eve. Evidence really points to the loss happening on Sun as stated upthread & reasons for swapping of evenings.

Agreed. If she was upset at loss of items on Friday evening, she'd have told people over the weekend. None of her friends or her mum mentioned it. She could also have retraced her steps over the weekend, as retrieving the diary would presumably trump other activities.

 

[Konstantin]

You do wonder what salacious content could be fitted into a pocket diary. Unless there was some sort of "result" marker against the male names?

Was it a pocket diary or an A5 sort of thing? Either way not much room for description but she could have plenty of space for writing numbers and details of men she met. Police thought she was "tomming" so maybe that was based on her diary as well as her lifestyle. Not in the seedy parlour sense obviously but more going on dates with wealthy men.

That does provide risk and so it should have been properly investigated.

 

[rvlvr]

The pub temp landlady said she’d said 6pm but this clashed with her 6pm apt & she’d not just said a generic ‘after work’ so feels unlikely she’d say that she’d be there very specifically at 6pm - as was reported. This might be splitting hairs, but it’s one of a few anomalies around the POW that day.

She may not have been easily able to say heading out to collect things asap as short staffed etc even if reality.

I agree. There’s no conclusive proof she was going to the pub at 6pm but even if she’d told the pub that, I see no reason why she couldn’t have changed her mind - perhaps she decided it was going to be necessary for her to have the diary back in her possession sooner than later. Or perhaps she figured if she was popping out to eg buy lunch then why not kill two birds with one stone. It would’ve been quicker, surely, to drive to the pub at lunchtime than later, in rush hour traffic. And the pub quieter, also.

But as you say, with the office short staffed she’d want to cover herself, in case anyone questioned where she was/had been.

To me her actions suggest she wasn’t heading out to do much more than run an errand, but let’s imagine she was heading to a meeting with someone - would she have had that meeting at 37SR? Maybe, if the meeting was a romantic liaison say, but that’d be a huge risk for a professional woman to take, even if she knew the property was empty and the risk of discovery minimal. And we can’t be sure anyone actually went inside the house that lunchtime. Wouldn’t one want to conduct a meeting of some importance in a bar or restaurant? Why meet at the property if the property was being used merely as cover?

 

[Spy Versus Spy]

Fascinating last few pages of thread. You guys know the case far more thoroughly than I do (I read AS book, Threads, various articles etc).

For me, certainly as to the 'How', any narrative must have at it's core the SJL car on St Rd. The driver's seat pushed back, the Handbrake off, the purse in the Passenger Side Door.

Handbrake: Was it left off due to the driver being more familiar with Automatic Transmission Foot Brakes? A routine that wouldnt involve manually applying Handbrake as second nature?

Was it left off after before exiting the car, or was it deployed but taken off after someone had entered the car as a precursor to moving away?

Was the handbrake off the cause of the car infringing on the Garage entrance, had it been parked more routinely/correctly and rolled back slightly?

Or the position of car and handbrake the results of a hurried exiting of the car?

The Purse in the PS of the car, to me, indicates that it's owner was seated in the PS at some point. The owner if driving would surely place it in the Driver's Door?

Was the DS back to facilitate a taller person than SJL driving? Or just to allow easier exit?

There is a fairly reasonable timeframe by witness of the car being in situ there on St Rd but why and pre or post any visit to Sh Rd, if visited at all?

Why no forensic evidence in car of other people outside of Sturgis Staff?

You can see how far behind I am Just really thinking aloud. Keep up the good work you guys

 

[Spy Versus Spy]

The 6pm at the pub could simply be SJL stating 'after 6pm' when calling. I.e, after last viewing.

 

[rvlvr]

My view is he stepped up as a defender of her honour fast & ‘official boyfriend’ for the press - hence the glossing of problematic Sunday night etc. I think he knew she didn’t see him as love of life & saw & accepted writing on wall. SL stayed on good terms with all exes to date & would have done so with him too, eventually.

I think you’re probably right but of course it takes two to tango - one might not want to burn any bridges after a split but if an ex doesn’t want to play ball then to an extent how the post-relationship relationship plays out is out of one’s control.

I think AL’s actions were largely understandable although of course he had good reason for police wanting to believe he and Suzy were on good terms when she disappeared, given they investigate the nearest and dearest first. So there must have been an element of self interest at play. And the problem is that however innocent his actions were, the issue of when the belongings were lost and how they came to be lost matters so much. If stolen on the Friday then was someone stalking her while she enjoyed an innocent night out with her boyfriend? Mislaid on the Sunday, though, and we have to wonder why was she there and for what reason?

 

[tes1984]

Fascinating last few pages of thread. You guys know the case far more thoroughly than I do

I would suggest that everyone takes note of the posts from Lady Stoddart West, Konstantin and West Londoner, who are all long term SJL researchers and are extremely knowledgeable about this case.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

The 6pm at the pub could simply be SJL stating 'after 6pm' when calling. I.e, after

Was it a pocket diary or an A5 sort of thing? Either way not much room for description but she could have plenty of space for writing numbers and details of men she met. Police thought she was "tomming" so maybe that was based on her diary as well as her lifestyle. Not in the seedy parlour sense obviously but more going on dates with wealthy men.

That does provide risk and so it should have been properly investigated.

I think it’s important to focus on who the contacts were in the diary & what connected them. One, in the public domain, said he was interviewed. (Press article). He said he met her in an expensive gym in Chiswick but not why he had her contact details. Given AS described her possibly pipe dream/undeveloped plans for a ‘Face Fitness’ concept a beauty/gym hybrid business, perhaps these were potential members who had the ability to pay ££ for another club membership. She was also a masseuse who had moonlit at other hotels in a legitimate capacity.

Another AS talks about says she or he wanted to buy a car from the other.

A previous flatmate spoke about other friends unknown to ‘Putney set’ who would ring up a lot in past.

Any reinvestigation needed to look again at this book. I am not confident that Phoebus in 2000 did anything other than rule JC in or out.

Barley said in recent podcast all boyfriends were eliminated but AS said there were too many contacts to investigate. ‘Contacts’ need not be known romantic connections. If so that’s a serious un-pulled thread & there may be a clue that unlocks this mystery. The granular details 1986-2000 are not at forefront.