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

[Rookie D]

A slight aside here....

Here's are a couple of articles relating to the attempted kidnap in 1992, of Suzy Lamplugh's youngest sibling.

At the time she was living in the St Clements area of Oxford.

But it's not her potential French abductor that's particularly interesting; it's the location at which the attempted abduction took place.

What relevance does this have to the Suzy's Lamplugh's abduction?

Well, it may be more relevant than we realise.

I am currently trying to work out what road in St Clements, Oxford, that the attempted abduction took place in, because there is another little nugget of data that I've found that may be connected.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

A slight aside here....

Here's are a couple of articles relating to the attempted kidnap in 1992, of Suzy Lamplugh's youngest sibling.

At the time she was living in the St Clements area of Oxford.

But it's not her potential French abductor that's particularly interesting; it's the location at which the attempted abduction took place.

What relevance does this have to the Suzy's Lamplugh's abduction?

Well, it may be more relevant than we realise.

I am currently trying to work out what road in St Clements, Oxford, that the attempted abduction took place in, because there is another little nugget of data that I've found that may be connected.

View attachment 645500View attachment 645501

Boulters St according to Yorkshire Post article in 93 - can you give any more detail?

 

[tes1984]

I think it was Boulter Street (rather than Boulters).

 

[tes1984]

I've always wondered if the young French kidnapper was ever released. He was sentenced to an indefinite period in a mental hospital over thirty years ago, but was he released, or is he still a patient somewhere in the UK today in his mid 50s?

 

[WestLondoner]

What's the significance other than that they appear to be a desperately unlucky family?

 

[WestLondoner]

Implications of and inferences from, facts and evidence is the principle method by which difficult cases are solved. As the expert on here was at pains to point out in earlier threads, cases are rarely clear cut and it's often the totality of inferential evidence that convinces a jury. The totality of the evidence around the keys indicates strongly that they went missing with SL.

Having said that, it is also highly unlikely that between estate agent and client, there was ever only one set of keys knocking around. The client would almost certainly have had at least a set. Whether they were to hand or not, I couldn't say. On balance, it does seem not in the first instance, hence officers given the order to "enter".

If it's the "expert" I'm thinking of, he got suspended a few times and finally banned because he couldn't stop insulting people who disagreed with him. I wouldn't place too much weight there.

The owner of 37SR was a helicopter pilot working in the middle east. As an expat, the faff of getting hold of a spare set of keys off him is probably not to be underestimated. It's surprising nobody recalls it, that another set was so easily found and that nobody recalls changing the locks. If you lost a set of house keys with nothing attached to them to indicate the address, you just need a new set of keys. If you lose a set of keys and someone does know what house they're for, you'd need to change all those locks. If you were burgled later having not done this, your insurance would not pay out.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

I think it was Boulter Street (rather than Boulters).

Correct. Misprint in edition saw.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

I think it was Boulter Street (rather than Boulters).

Correct. Misprint in edition I saw.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

I've always wondered if the young French kidnapper was ever released. He was sentenced to an indefinite period in a mental hospital over thirty years ago, but was he released, or is he still a patient somewhere in the UK today in his mid 50s?

& @WestLondoner a young, mentally ill, French army deserter seeking only to end own life & acting alone. How might his location be relevant? Interested to hear more @Rookie D

Lizzie staying cool & being able to give him the slip testament to her mother’s excellent advice in this area no doubt. The Trust a fantastic legacy for SL.

 

[Rookie D]

Boulters St according to Yorkshire Post article in 93 - can you give any more details?

Boulter Street is interesting because it is a cul-de-sac that backs onto the River Cherwell; quite literally.

The next street east of that is Bath Street; again a dead-end road that backs onto the river, but there's also a small foot bridge that runs over the river and allows someone on foot to gain access to Angel and Greyhound meadow; a green space sandwiched between 2 branches of the river Cherwell.

The next road along is Cave street; yet another cul-de-sac.

But what I find really interesting is that the next street along is "Cherwell Street."

Cherwell Street could be relevant because in 2003 a man named "Kipper" was living there; towards the far river end of the street.

What's interesting about this Mr Kipper, is that it's a sole entry into the electoral roll, and I can't seem to locate him anywhere else.

I know his first name, and I know the house he lived in too, but I am not sure I am permitted to state that publicly on this forum, so unless I get clearance from site Admin, then my hands are obviously tied.
And of course, if he's a genuine innocent party, then I don't want to into any legal trouble by saying his first name and exact address.
Especially if he STILL lives there!!!

While it may be sheer coincidence, I hypothesise that the the entry for a Mr Kipper in Suzy's diary, was a genuine entry.

Could it be that this Mr Kipper who I have found lived in Cherwell Road in 2003, and who resided just a few streets from where Suzy's sister was nearly abducted (albeit by a 20 year old French lunatic) in 1992, have deliberately moved into the area and stayed briefly, so as to be close to the area in which Suzy's sister went through her ordeal?

Could the Mr Kipper who lived in Cherwell Street be the man who abducted Suzy?

What's also interesting, is that I THINK the building that Mr Kipper lived in, was AFAIK let out by a company called Hampton International.
They're an international estate agent and broker firm with offices all over the world.
They also have offices in London, and at the time of Suzy's disappearance, they appear to have been going through a significant expansion into the international market.
They have an office in Oxford, in London, as well as several other countries.

Could Suzy have been involved with a deal that was far bigger than she could handle, and was she being held to ransom in some way?

It's all conjecture and speculation on my part, but I find that thinking outside the box, can often open up new avenues of inquiry.

What I would also say, is that it seems that Elizabeth Lamplugh may have just left secondary school when her sister went missing.
Could the man who abducted Suzy have used her as leverage against her sister, and could Elizabeth have been a target who Suzy tried to protect?

If I was involved with the team investigating this case, I would look at whether there's any sign of Suzy's remains in the river Cherwell and surrounding area of Oxford.
I say this because what better way for a killer to relive his fantasy, than to return to the deposition site for a short term rental lease in a property on Cherwell Street.

I may be talking complete and utter gibberish, but I think it's interesting to perhaps steer away from the confirmation bias involved with JC, and look at other potential avenues.

Could Suzy be in Oxford?

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Boulter Street is interesting because it is a cul-de-sac that backs onto the River Cherwell; quite literally.

The next street east of that is Bath Street; again a dead-end road that backs onto the river, but there's also a small foot bridge that runs over the river and allows someone on foot to gain access to Angel and Greyhound meadow; a green space sandwiched between 2 branches of the river Cherwell.

The next road along is Cave street; yet another cul-de-sac.

But what I find really interesting is that the next street along is "Cherwell Street."

Cherwell Street could be relevant because in 2003 a man named "Kipper" was living there; towards the far river end of the street.

What's interesting about this Mr Kipper, is that it's a sole entry into the electoral roll, and I can't seem to locate him anywhere else.

I know his first name, and I know the house he lived in too, but I am not sure I am permitted to state that publicly on this forum, so unless I get clearance from site Admin, then my hands are obviously tied.
And of course, if he's a genuine innocent party, then I don't want to into any legal trouble by saying his first name and exact address.
Especially if he STILL lives there!!!

While it may be sheer coincidence, I hypothesise that the the entry for a Mr Kipper in Suzy's diary, was a genuine entry.

Could it be that this Mr Kipper who I have found lived in Cherwell Road in 2003, and who resided just a few streets from where Suzy's sister was nearly abducted (albeit by a 20 year old French lunatic) in 1992, have deliberately moved into the area and stayed briefly, so as to be close to the area in which Suzy's sister went through her ordeal?

Could the Mr Kipper who lived in Cherwell Street be the man who abducted Suzy?

What's also interesting, is that the building that Mr Kipper lived in, was AFAIK owned and let out by a company called Hampton International.

They are an international estate agent and broker firm with offices all over the world.


They also have offices in London, and at the time of Suzy's disappearance, they appear to have been going through a significant expansion into the international market.

They have an office in Oxford, and in London, as well as several other countries.


Could Suzy have been involved with a deal that was far bigger than she could handle, and was she being held to ransom in some way?

It's all conjecture and speculation, but I find that thinking outside the box, can often open up new avenues of inquiry.


What I would also say, is that it seems that Elizabeth Lamplugh may have just left secondary school when her sister went missing.
Could the man who abducted Suzy have used her as leverage against her sister, and could Elizabeth have been a target who Suzy tried to protect?

If I was involved with the team investigating this case, I would look at whether there's any sign of Suzy's remains in the river Cherwell and surrounding area of Oxford.

I say this because what better way for a killer to relive his fantasy, than to return to the deposition site for a short term rental lease in a property on Cherwell Street.

Lots to consider here.

Again, I may be talking complete and utter gibberish, but I think it's healthy to steer away from the confirmation bias involved with JC.

Could Suzy be in Oxford?

I am impressed by your research & out of box thinking. Have you read AS, DV’s book & CBD ‘Prime Suspect’ (?) Just because you’d find interesting if not yet & your take would be valuable. There are some really smart researchers on this topic on this board.

Agree on confirmation bias on JC.

I feel what you moot is unlikely for a number of reasons. First off my feeling is ‘Kipper’ was an invention - either completely made up by SL to get out & meet client etc - OR SL’s own personal nickname for the off-the-books person she was dealing with (who was increasingly annoying & ‘fishy’ perhaps - she did have much form for this) OR an alias used by the perpetrator. DV’s thoughts around this NB: the neighbourhood H brothers as outlined in his book. Briefly Shorrolds an old address for one of them & if SL inventing an apt this came to mind. Or something to this end.

If nefarious intent it would be madness to use real name. I think the person behind deal used an alias - hence never found.

If JC evidence shows he liked the more pedestrian alias e.g. Peterson. Although he did ask DT to call him ‘ Mr horse’…(this has always been in back of my mind).

It’s great to have an open mind though. This is def a case full of astonishing coincidences!

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

@Rookie D Elizabeth was in NZ post O levels for a stint with her other sister. From memory - would need to look back.

 

[tes1984]

IMO such discussions should be continued away from the public boards.

Listing full names and addresses of POIs in public is not a good idea for a whole host of reasons.

 

[WestLondoner]

Tax / MOT record for SJL's car (B396 GAN): tax ran out August 1990.

Enter the registration number of the vehicle - Check if a vehicle is taxed and has an MOT - GOV.UK

vehicleenquiry.service.gov.uk

It was a 1984 car so would not have needed an MOT until 1987. But somebody taxed it for four more years and it's shown as having a new keeper in 1989:

Date of last V5C (logbook) issued 4 December 1989

 

[lee sumner]

Yes, but they never entirely took the poss off the table. I am open minded on it. DV & the Ryan account is quite compelling. The police do effectively admit there were only one set of keys & they stayed in the office. IF we believe it’s an honest recount from DV ofc.

Not everything DV uncovered can be rubbished although I don’t defend everything he said. The police themselves agreed with much of it, including, if we take his word for it, views on keys.

Definitely. I think it’s a really under-explored aspect of the case. Was Suzy targeted or would any female have sufficed? When Suzy leaves the office that lunchtime, is she going to 37SR fully believing she’s about to show a guy called Mr Kipper the house? When has Kipper made this appointment? And how? In person, or on the phone? Has he lucked out by getting through to Suzy, if she was indeed his target? Does he request to view 37SR specifically?

The truth is these questions can’t easily be answered even after all this time.

If Mr Kipper was a guy posing as a house buyer in order to abduct/rape/murder a female estate agent then sure, it could’ve been Cannan. But nothing especially points to him. He’s just a sex offender who’d been in the area in an era when attacks on female estate agents and homeowners in the process of selling their houses were depressingly common.

No paper trail and obviously no digital one, no crime scene, and no body, all make this a devilishly tough case to crack. But for the Met to kid on like they have indeed cracked it, when they really know next to nothing, is wild.

its there way of saying. we have got our man. they never solved the case, so this is the best they can come up with.

 

[lee sumner]

its there way of saying. we have got our man. they never solved the case, so this is the best they can come up with.

Good points but I think the odds are very good too, ‘Kipper’ was the man putting her under pressure (as relayed to uncle) the last conversation with parents ‘don’t ask me about it, I’ll tell you about it when I can’. The property she couldn’t otherwise afford, the joint purchaser ‘client’. He was never found & didn’t come forward.

It seems almost impossible that he didn’t have any contact details. He needed to be identified & elimimated.

according to early press reports. mr kipper did leave contact details, address and phone number.

 

[Rookie D]

I am impressed by your research & out of box thinking. Have you read AS, DV’s book & CBD ‘Prime Suspect’ (?) Just because you’d find interesting if not yet & your take would be valuable. There are some really smart researchers on this topic on this board.

Agree on confirmation bias on JC.

I feel what you moot is unlikely for a number of reasons. First off my feeling is ‘Kipper’ was an invention - either completely made up by SL to get out & meet client etc - OR SL’s own personal nickname for the off-the-books person she was dealing with (who was increasingly annoying & ‘fishy’ perhaps - she did have much form for this) OR an alias used by the perpetrator. DV’s thoughts around this NB: the neighbourhood H brothers as outlined in his book. Briefly Shorrolds an old address for one of them & if SL inventing an apt this came to mind. Or something to this end.

If nefarious intent it would be madness to use real name. I think the person behind deal used an alias - hence never found.

If JC evidence shows he liked the more pedestrian alias e.g. Peterson. Although he did ask DT to call him ‘ Mr horse’…(this has always been in back of my mind).

It’s great to have an open mind though. This is def a case full of astonishing coincidences!

Thank you for your kind words.

I haven't read any book (yet) on this particular case and must admit that I know relatively little compared to others on this thread; I'm very much standing on the shoulders of giants with this case.

I do try to look at things from a different perspective, primarily because my first question for any cold case is always; What did the police miss? My 2nd question; where did the police go wrong?

I'm very much of the opinion that the 2nd most common reason why a case runs cold, is due to the police missing something within the early stages of the investigation; the 1st reason being a lack of evidence of course.

With regards to the man seen outside the flat with Suzy, he very much to me sounds as though he fits the description of what one might refer to as a "yuppy," ergo, part of that 80's Thatcher tory boom that produced lots of young men in suits, with more money than sense, and an inherent sense of privilege and an inflated sense of self worth.

With regards to the reference to Mr Kipper; I didn't bring across my point with enough clarity of meaning; I indeed agree that Mr Kipper was definitely an alias, but my point being that the man who appears on the 2003 data that I found, may have also used the same alias.

So the name Kipper is false across the board.

Whether it's viable for a man to give a false name on an electoral role, is something I am not sure on.


I just find it intriguing that a Mr Kipper turns up in 2003 and is living around the corner from the road in which Suzy Lamplugh's sister was almost abducted from, and no further trace of this Mr Kipper can AFAIK be found in Oxford either before or after 2003.

It's like he just rocks up for a brief stint and then leaves.

Curious indeed

 

[lee sumner]

Thank you for your kind words.

I haven't read any book (yet) on this particular case and must admit that I know relatively little compared to others on this thread; I'm very much standing on the shoulders of giants with this case.

I do try to look at things from a different perspective, primarily because my first question for any cold case is always; What did the police miss? My 2nd question; where did the police go wrong?

I'm very much of the opinion that the 2nd most common reason why a case runs cold, is due to the police missing something within the early stages of the investigation; the 1st reason being a lack of evidence of course.

With regards to the man seen outside the flat with Suzy, he very much to me sounds as though he fits the description of what one might refer to as a "yuppy," ergo, part of that 80's Thatcher tory boom that produced lots of young men in suits, with more money than sense, and an inherent sense of privilege and an inflated sense of self worth.

With regards to the reference to Mr Kipper; I didn't bring across my point with enough clarity of meaning; I indeed agree that Mr Kipper was definitely an alias, but my point being that the man who appears on the 2003 data that I found, may have also used the same alias.

So the name Kipper is false across the board.

Whether it's viable for a man to give a false name on an electoral role, is something I am not sure on.


I just find it intriguing that a Mr Kipper turns up in 2003 and is living around the corner from the road in which Suzy Lamplugh's sister was almost abducted from, and no further trace of this Mr Kipper can AFAIK be found in Oxford either before or after 2003.

It's like he just rocks up for a brief stint and then leaves.

Curious indeed

occams principle way of thinking is the only way to think in my opinion, but a lot of people out there are full of conspiracy thinking. DV thinks the opposite to how you would think a detective should think.

 

[lee sumner]

Sturgis staff gave statements saying she had taken the keys and they were on a distinctive yellow fob.

If those same keys were still in the office and if staff knew there was only one set, that would have come up very early on in the investigation.

yes, i agree. there is no way DCI carter/DS johnstone and DS barley would miss such an important detail like the keys. if carter says SL took the keys to 37SR, then she took the keys.

 

[lee sumner]

Sturgis staff gave statements saying she had taken the keys and they were on a distinctive yellow fob.

If those same keys were still in the office and if staff knew there was only one set, that would have come up very early on in the investigation.

she also took the paperwork which DV fails to mention. no one is going to give DV a straight honest answer after 30 yrs. this is what he does not seem to understand.