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

[RichardKimble]

Point 1 - I understand. ‘Trial by media’.

Point 2 - The only way an investigation can progress is if it can be proven an earlier one didn’t make mistakes or lose clues?

What’s your interpretation here on point 2?

Thank you for posting this.

Point two, JD himself says he led the second investigation, then basically says the judge concluded he'd ignored or didn't use clues from the first investigation, why? This is from JD himself , not another detective.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Point two, JD himself says he led the second investigation, then basically says the judge concluded he'd ignored evidence from the first investigation, why?

Thank you. JD in TMWKSL doc seemingly shows he’s unfamiliar with the 86 case, he gets details wrong. It seems the 86 case wasn’t reviewed in detailed & objective way? Did anyone re-scrutinise SL’s contact book. Why no effort or mention to find key joint purchaser? JD did computerise all early index cards.

JD has said he thinks first investigation poor & exhibits lost. Also there seems to be shock JC not noted as suspect from off & it feels almost as if SB abduction happened in parallel or before SL going missing. There’s a timeline confusion. Ofc JC should have come up as someone of interest from off but not so easy then.

I almost thought on point 2 JD was saying because of all ups first investigation made they couldn’t prosecute JC?

 

[RichardKimble]

Thank you. JD in TMWKSL doc seemingly shows he’s unfamiliar with the 86 case, he gets details wrong. It seems the 86 case wasn’t reviewed in detailed & objective way? Did anyone re-scrutinise SL’s contact book. Why no effort or mention to find key joint purchaser? JD did computerise all early index cards.

JD has said he thinks first investigation poor & exhibits lost. Also there seems to be shock JC not noted as suspect from off & it feels almost as if SB abduction happened in parallel or before SL going missing. There’s a timeline confusion. Ofc JC should have come up as someone of interest from off but not so easy then.

I almost thought on point 2 JD was saying because of all ups first investigation made they couldn’t prosecute JC?

It's the order he says it, point two being what the judge told them.What I take from that is, the CPS had presented both investigations to the judge and no doubt after much scrutiny the judge concluded his/ her findings that the second investigation hadn't considered some clues, quite possibly deciding a good defence would soon pick up on it, especially if said clues led elsewhere or not directly to JC.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Point two, JD himself says he led the second investigation, then basically says the judge concluded he'd ignored or didn't use clues from the first investigation, why? This is from JD himself , not another detective.

There’s a letter shown that points out the errors of ‘first’ (?) investigation but it’s not in July 86 days of Barley, Carter, Johnstone. Etc.

All the good information there & some leads feel lost to winds of time (?) Scrutinise contacts etc. BW.

It’s post JC arrest for SB…Hackett’s time (?)

Failure to interview JC under caution whilst in custody of Avon & Somerset Police.

Failure to stand JC on an identification parade.

Failure to debrief witness GP

Failure to search Norton Barracks

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

It's the order he says it, point two being what the judge told them.What I take from that is, the CPS had presented both investigations to the judge and no doubt after much scrutiny the judge concluded his/ her findings that the second investigation hadn't considered some clues, quite possibly deciding a good defence would soon pick up on it, especially if said clues led elsewhere or not directly to JC.

It looks like in main too many procedural errors to bring to court? NB: above.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

@WestLondoner Peabody Estate FPR from memory close to Hammersmith. Where BW saw fiesta headed (?)

 

[Konstantin]

@WestLondoner Peabody Estate FPR from memory close to Hammersmith. Where BW saw fiesta headed (?)

I'm curious about where the Fiesta was heading. Let's assume BW was right and that was SL. She claims she recognised her, not just the car.

Where is the alleged BMW in all this? Was there even one involved in the abduction?

Where and why was SL driving them at that time? A viewing elsewhere? A premises for another reason? Was she under control at this point? Being threatened? If they drove somewhere and then SL held there, when did kipper drive her car back to Stevenage road?

It's a credible sighting but it doesn't easily fit the narrative of "something went wrong after a viewing" and definitely not the "house for sale rapist MO".

 

[lee sumner]

I'm curious about where the Fiesta was heading. Let's assume BW was right and that was SL. She claims she recognised her, not just the car.

Where is the alleged BMW in all this? Was there even one involved in the abduction?

Where and why was SL driving them at that time? A viewing elsewhere? A premises for another reason? Was she under control at this point? Being threatened? If they drove somewhere and then SL held there, when did kipper drive her car back to Stevenage road?
S
It's a credible sighting but it doesn't easily fit the narrative of "something went wrong after a viewing" and definitely not the "house for sale rapist MO".

BW said she seen SL at 2.45pm with mystery man/mr kipper driving up FPR, this is 2 hrs after viewing 37SR. if mr kipper set a trap for SL to walk into he would have his own schedule to meet. he would not be driving around with her 2 hrs later, and risk being seen by a witness like BW.

 

[lee sumner]

The article said the superhire ones were blue. This is probably indeed why JD so confident. It's definitely interesting. But what then is the sequence with the cars. Did she drive to Stevenage and he drove her up to Shorrolds? But how did they end up back in the fiesta later? He drives them back to Stevenage, they go to lunch in the fiesta?

SL driving to stevenage rd after leaving the office does not make sense. to me her car was ditched there later on that day, possibly early evening. why else would it be parked in a hurry. because time is getting on. he then picks up his own vehicle around the corner from stevenage rd, and back tracks to the location where he has SL held captive.

 

[Rookie D]

It seems possible that the man who abducted and murdered SL, convinced her to go and look at other properties for sale.

He chose not to attack her at 37SR, because he would have been more more easily traced.

But by having SL driving around, it is a tactic to confuse and deflect.

Having the car parked outside 123 Stevenage road isn't a coincidence, as it was also for sale under Sturgis.

It would have been a good investigative tactic to have made a map of every Sturgis property for sale within a 3 mile radius, and see whether there were any garages or lock ups that were within proximity of any given house for sale.

We know for sure that SL was either abducted in another vehicle, murdered and then deposited in another location, or she was taken to a location WITHIN that 3 mile boundary, and then murdered and deposited at a later date.

I would also include any other individuals from other local rival estate agent firms, and also the local pub that SL had supposedly lost her belongings at.

It seems that JC's BMW that was found on the 29th October 1987 after the botched Leamington Spa incident, was a right hand drive; based on the archive footage/reconstructions.
This doesn't match the BMW allegedly witnessed by the man who had just come out of the park, and saw a left hand drive BMW.

Unless JC drove more than one BMW over that 15 month time period.

 

[lee sumner]

Possibly, but no one could confirm a sighting for 6 approx days. This didn’t serve him & he was trying hard to convince police (unsuccessfully) re: any solid alibi.

Same happened re: SB. He was back in circulation around time approximately apparently seen by canal dumping witness - early hours for them & then late afternoon in Birmingham. Barley says he might have had a train ticket for Bristol in this unaccounted for period (podcast). Flimsy.

For me it’s one of the better pieces of evidence that he’s poss guilty. Financial records, bank acc not helpful to pin down? Presumably they checked. This helped place him in Reading re: DT rape & they could track his movements re: SB via ‘hole in wall’ cash withdrawals.

it was more difficult to pin down JC movements because it was the 1980s. no cctv, cell towers, etc. if cctv did exist back then, what would it have shown. what route was SL taken on.

 

[Rookie D]

SL driving to stevenage rd after leaving the office does not make sense. to me her car was ditched there later on that day, possibly early evening. why else would it be parked in a hurry. because time is getting on. he then picks up his own vehicle around the corner from stevenage rd, and back tracks to the location where he has SL held captive.

The issue being that the car was seen parked there for quite some time throughout the day, and as early at 12.30pm IIRC?

I think that the car was parked there by SL, but then RE-PARKED again by the killer.

This is evidenced by the fact that the witnesses who saw the car parked in Stevenage road, stated that the back of it was encroaching partially onto the garage door.
But the footage taken after the car was discovered clearly shows that the car ISN'T as far back as was initially witnessed.

So unless the police moved the car slightly forwards, then the car seems to have moved forwards; ergo, it was parked in the same spot again after the killer had abducted SL.

The killer misjudging the fact that he had parked it too far forward.

 

[lee sumner]

It seems possible that the man who abducted and murdered SL, convinced her to go and look at other properties for sale.

He chose not to attack her at 37SR, because he would have been more more easily traced.

But by having SL driving around, it is a tactic to confuse and deflect.

Having the car parked outside 123 Stevenage road isn't a coincidence, as it was also for sale under Sturgis.

It would have been a good investigative tactic to have made a map of every Sturgis property for sale within a 3 mile radius, and see whether there were any garages or lock ups that were within proximity of any given house for sale.

We know for sure that SL was either abducted in another vehicle, murdered and then deposited in another location, or she was taken to a location WITHIN that 3 mile boundary, and then murdered and deposited at a later date.

I would also include any other individuals from other local rival estate agent firms, and also the local pub that SL had supposedly lost her belongings at.

It seems that JC's BMW that was found on the 29th October 1987 after the botched Leamington Spa incident, was a right hand drive; based on the archive footage/reconstructions.
This doesn't match the BMW allegedly witnessed by the man who had just come out of the park, and saw a left hand drive BMW.

Unless JC drove more than one BMW over that 15 month time period.

yes, i agree about car being ditched on stevenage rd. it was facing the large yellow sturgis for sale sign. across the road from the sturgis sign. this location was chosen in advance by mr kipper which means he knew 123 stevenage rd was for sale, and the sturgis for sale sign was already up outside the property.

 

[lee sumner]

The issue being that the car was seen parked there for quite some time throughout the day, and as early at 12.30pm IIRC?

I think that the car was parked there by SL, but then RE-PARKED again by the killer.

This is evidenced by the fact that the witnesses who saw the car parked in Stevenage road, stated that the back of it was encroaching partially onto the garage door.
But the footage taken after the car was discovered clearly shows that the car ISN'T as far back as was initially witnessed.

So unless the police moved the car slightly forwards, then the car seems to have moved forwards; ergo, it was parked in the same spot again after the killer had abducted SL.

The killer misjudging the fact that he had parked it too far forward.

it was badly parked, but it was not blocking mr mahon from getting in.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

it was more difficult to pin down JC movements because it was the 1980s. no cctv, cell towers, etc. if cctv did exist back then, what would it have shown. what route was SL taken on.

True. Although I think the tech there to do some forensic type accounting.

They did a brill job with SB in October 1986 where JC’s financial records & cash point withdrawals painted a really helpful picture. That & examining bank account. They had receipts from off licences etc - a great deal. They could map his day in Bristol to some extent & time stamp it on day & days after SB went missing. They did this just by plotting his ‘hole in the wall’ withdrawals.

Following the money & any cash withdrawals Jan-July 86 would have been very helpful too. They either couldn’t or didn’t do it and/or didn’t shed illuminating light. Any re investigation should have tried to do this. I’d be amazed if more cash machines in Bristol than London in 1986.