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

[lee sumner]

For his ‘regular drink’ at lunchtime in a ‘South London’ pub suggests some investigation along these lines (?)

There’s another article suggesting accomplices I will look for.

i thought that part of article was weird. going for a drink at lunchtime in SL pub.

 

[tes1984]

i thought that part of article was weird. going for a drink at lunchtime in SL pub.

Liquid lunches were commonplace in the 80s. A lot of tradesman and men who were self employed went for daytime drinks with pals.

Criminal types also did the same, as did the detectives who were hunting them.

There were a few pubs in Fulham and Putney which were 'villains' pubs, and a few which were 'police' pubs. The police obviously went to pubs local to the police stations.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

I think she went to 37 as well. The first sighting outside of the lady standing right at the entrance looking as if she was waiting for someone. If that's not Suzy then whom? Another estate agent? Someone waiting for a mini cab? One sighting you could explain away. But 3?

I don't think she was killed that early too. I've always thought that she drove to Stevenage Road and was picked up and driven to 37SR. Afterwards, her and Kipper drove away for their business meeting/assignation and she was killed elsewhere. Just leaving the car to be found by Police at 22.01 where it was parked sometime earlier.
JMO.

I tend to agree although there were other houses for sale & they never bottomed out who was on the road at lunchtime as generally assumed her viewing was genuine.

DV seems to accept a couple were outside but disputes SL & Kipper. Who does he think it was?

A couple of the witnesses note the woman was very blonde as we’ve discussed.

If KH was right he suggests someone was trying to locate or catch up with SL, ‘Sarah’. If that makes any odds. He’s adamant about these calls being about lunchtime.

AS mentions one or two fiestas potentially, one poss double parked in Shorrolds. Crimewatch 86 makes the point, unlike Stevenage Rd, her car never seen & doesn’t mention anything about a fiesta in Shorrolds, double parked or otherwise. I think anyway, will check at some point.

 

[tes1984]

I think that Suzy was similar to Claudia Lawrence, in that they were both playing with fire in terms of their relationships with men.

They could be victims of random abductions, but focusing on Suzy, and she's not exactly a victim with no known potential enemies.

I've been team Cannan for a long time, but I do have my doubts because Suzy was far from a low risk victim. I can't see how Suzy could have played out much more time with her boyfriend, ex boyfriend, and ex ex boyfriend without something explosive happening.

 

[Officer Dibble]

i have just got clean. i recently come off heroin, and can tell you its not a recreational drug. it is a opiate. very addictive.

well done!!

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

I think that Suzy was similar to Claudia Lawrence, in that they were both playing with fire in terms of their relationships with men.

They could be victims of random abductions, but focusing on Suzy, and she's not exactly a victim with no known potential enemies.

I've been team Cannan for a long time, but I do have my doubts because Suzy was far from a low risk victim. I can't see how Suzy could have played out much more time with her boyfriend, ex boyfriend, and ex ex boyfriend without something explosive happening.

I think this new sighting is very interesting, There’s perhaps a new context to the odd ‘keep her talking until I can get there’ call to the pub. (DV). A warning from a person who had some but not all the information on her whereabouts (?)

It’s interesting too SL had looked into being a ‘courier’ to subsidise flights (AS). Legitimately. Someone injecting money into a property with ‘strings attached’ as her parents said & maybe asking her to drop packages off etc? ‘Using their address’ - this bit was flagged re: address. Maybe it didn’t seem dangerous or illegal to her (?) Just like taking packages potentially on a plane had been within law.

Her parents said she’d never entertain serious fraud, (I am sure they were right) and she thought she could ‘handle it’ & maybe it only dawned on her (unfortunately too late) it was all very dicey. She pulled out and this led to her abduction etc (?)

It was said in Press that the police had one theory that a couple of people were involved, plus, poss including JC. It felt farfetched to me but if the man at Donralie overlapped at Scrubs with JC?

 

[lee sumner]

I think she went to 37 as well. The first sighting outside of the lady standing right at the entrance looking as if she was waiting for someone. If that's not Suzy then whom? Another estate agent? Someone waiting for a mini cab? One sighting you could explain away. But 3?

I don't think she was killed that early too. I've always thought that she drove to Stevenage Road and was picked up and driven to 37SR. Afterwards, her and Kipper drove away for their business meeting/assignation and she was killed elsewhere. Just leaving the car to be found by Police at 22.01 where it was parked sometime earlier.
JMO.

yes, great minds think alike. this is how i think it played out on the 28/7/1986.

 

[lee sumner]

I think this new sighting is very interesting, There’s perhaps a new context to the odd ‘keep her talking until I can get there’ call to the pub. (DV). A warning from a person who had some but not all the information on her whereabouts (?)

It’s interesting too SL had looked into being a ‘courier’ to subsidise flights (AS). Legitimately. Someone injecting money into a property with ‘strings attached’ as her parents said & maybe asking her to drop packages off etc? ‘Using their address’ - this bit was flagged re: address. Maybe it didn’t seem dangerous or illegal to her (?) Just like taking packages potentially on a plane had been within law.

Her parents said she’d never entertain serious fraud, (I am sure they were right) and she thought she could ‘handle it’ & maybe it only dawned on her (unfortunately too late) it was all very dicey. She pulled out and this led to her abduction etc (?)

It was said in Press that the police had one theory that a couple of people were involved, plus, poss including JC. It felt farfetched to me but if the man at Donralie overlapped at Scrubs with JC?

but why would he need to pretend to be a house buyer. he would know SL well enough if they were potential business partners buying a property together.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

but why would he need to pretend to be a house buyer. he would know SL well enough if they were potential business partners buying a property together.

He was pretending to be a both a business partner & bona fide house buyer - whoever was behind this contract said they’d help her buy a house she couldn’t otherwise afford but with ‘strings attached’. Maybe the pressure was on as she couldn’t sell her flat, despite 100 viewings & she bailed when she realised exactly what the strings were.

 

[WestLondoner]

They could be victims of random abductions, but focusing on Suzy, and she's not exactly a victim with no known potential enemies.

I think you've put your finger on something important here. From publications and writers of a certain political bent, there is often tut-tutting over why people care so much about the disappearance of a pretty and middle-class 25-year-old white female estate agent, but not about the fate of an unemployed working-class female off a rough council estate who'd vanished (pick your identity politics brownie points).

The answer is that in the latter case, unfortunately, such a person's personal circumstances mean her disappearance is simply a lot less surprising. She's a lot more likely to be living among or - unwittingly perhaps - associate with criminals, notably violent ones.

The reason SJL's case is so absorbing is that at first blush, you can't fathom how she could come to be in danger. White-collar crime exists but it's not often violent crime. It's insider dealing, insurance or mortgage fraud, theft and so on. At second blush, you find that actually some of her behaviours may have been high risk. About 1% of people are psychopaths, so if your work and lifestyle take in a lot of new people, that is a risk you run.

A female friend of mine - with whom I have lost touch - had slept with 20 men by the time she was 19 and at least 100 by the time she was 25; by 30, she thought it might be 300 or so. There was no sign of this changing at 30; she probably hit 500. She was pretty, personable and very approachable. I put it to her that if it were 300 there must have been about 3 psychopaths among them, to which her reply was, I wonder which they were?

SJL need not have had 300 lovers - AS pooh-poohed rumours of 50 - but the nature of her work perhaps meant she met hundreds of people a year and was unwittingly exposed to risk levels we don't associate with middle-class 25-year-old white females.

 

[WestLondoner]

I watched a channel 4 documentary last night titled "In the footsteps of killers" episode about SL.

This was pretty feeble, IMHO. They jump from outlining the mystery to assuming it was Cannan. There are two questions that nobody in these documentaries ever, ever, ever asks the talking heads:

1/ OK, so there's this circumstantial case against Cannan. How many other recently-released lags does the same innuendo also fit - have you ever checked? There could have been 50 to 100 former SA prisoners released in 1986 - what were they all doing and why can't this be any of them?

2/ Assuming Cannan did do it, what happened that day? Who was where, when?

Towards the end of the programme the subject of the witness who passed a man on a path by the Union Canal in Brentford came up

This sighting is interesting but quite contentious. On the one hand the late witness reckons he reported this to the plod at the time, but why? He claims that 3 years later he recognised Cannan as the man he'd seen - why exactly? What were the points of similarity? Can he remember anyone else he passed in the street 3 years ago?

You dad's account is more persuasive because he related it to others at the time and it aligns with other sightings, e.g. BW.

The section of canal is routinely dredged, so the survival of a packing case for 40 years is unlikely - unless it is not the same section of the canal. Cannan was working for a props company so he could have had access to a case large enough to contain a body. On the other hand, who hides a body in 4 or 5 feet of water?

They had a forensics expert who explained that it's possible that bones could still be found (horrid thought I know) and possibly dna matched to family members.

That could be done, although after 40 years the cause of death probably could not be stated.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

I think you've put your finger on something important here. From publications and writers of a certain political bent, there is often tut-tutting over why people care so much about the disappearance of a pretty and middle-class 25-year-old white female estate agent, but not about the fate of an unemployed working-class female off a rough council estate who'd vanished (pick your identity politics brownie points).

The answer is that in the latter case, unfortunately, such a person's personal circumstances mean her disappearance is simply a lot less surprising. She's a lot more likely to be living among or - unwittingly perhaps - associate with criminals, notably violent ones.

The reason SJL's case is so absorbing is that at first blush, you can't fathom how she could come to be in danger. White-collar crime exists but it's not often violent crime. It's insider dealing, insurance or mortgage fraud, theft and so on. At second blush, you find that actually some of her behaviours may have been high risk. About 1% of people are psychopaths, so if your work and lifestyle take in a lot of new people, that is a risk you run.

A female friend of mine - with whom I have lost touch - had slept with 20 men by the time she was 19 and at least 100 by the time she was 25; by 30, she thought it might be 300 or so. There was no sign of this changing at 30; she probably hit 500. She was pretty, personable and very approachable. I put it to her that if it were 300 there must have been about 3 psychopaths among them, to which her reply was, I wonder which they were?

SJL need not have had 300 lovers - AS pooh-poohed rumours of 50 - but the nature of her work perhaps meant she met hundreds of people a year and was unwittingly exposed to risk levels we don't associate with middle-class 25-year-old white

Good points. I felt AS was backtracking & felt rather put on spot. It felt disloyal to memory perhaps to speak in crude number terms. He said only a sample of the men in contacts could be contacted as too numerous. He didn’t specify if lovers. It seems re: those that were contacted it was difficult to fathom how they knew her.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

@WestLondoner on the JC canal witness it was interesting he saw this man about 5am from memory & he wasn’t expecting to see anyone & looked startled if I am remembering correctly. It also coincided with JC being firmly alibied & back in circulation around the same time.

I thought he reported what he saw to police at time as looked liked photofit (?) & suspicious behaviour & later again (more confident here) in 87 at SB’s murder time & when he travelled to Bristol especially for trial to eyeball JC such was his conviction. He noted staring eyes. It does feel a bit tenuous.

Didn’t someone who knew canal on thread say flowed into deeper water or something?

Agree @Clairybums her father’s sighting & not least how it ties to BW’s sighting etc is much more compelling.

 

[lee sumner]

He was pretending to be a both a business partner & bona fide house buyer - whoever was behind this contract said they’d help her buy a house she couldn’t otherwise afford but with ‘strings attached’. Maybe the pressure was on as she couldn’t sell her flat, despite 100 viewings & she bailed when she realised exactly what the strings were.

the flat was on the market for 6 months, so it does appear she was struggling to find a buyer, but a buyer was found in oct 86 and the flat was sold for 74 grand, so she would have sold it eventually.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

the flat was on the market for 6 months, so it does appear she was struggling to find a buyer, but a buyer was found in oct 86 and the flat was sold for 74 grand, so she would have sold it eventually.

Yes, agree. It does feel like she was short of money at the time. Did she need to provide some money up front? She’d told friends at 21st she was due 3k from memory, when she lost out to NH did she lose badly needed funds?

Is lack of money why she’d not gone away with AL in part?

She would have gone to NZ with her sisters if she’d had the money she said. How tragic she might be alive today if she’d gone.

 

[Clairybums]

This was pretty feeble, IMHO. They jump from outlining the mystery to assuming it was Cannan. There are two questions that nobody in these documentaries ever, ever, ever asks the talking heads:

1/ OK, so there's this circumstantial case against Cannan. How many other recently-released lags does the same innuendo also fit - have you ever checked? There could have been 50 to 100 former SA prisoners released in 1986 - what were they all doing and why can't this be any of them?

2/ Assuming Cannan did do it, what happened that day? Who was where, when?


This sighting is interesting but quite contentious. On the one hand the late witness reckons he reported this to the plod at the time, but why? He claims that 3 years later he recognised Cannan as the man he'd seen - why exactly? What were the points of similarity? Can he remember anyone he passed in the street 3 years ago?

You dad's account is more persuasive because he related it to others at the time and it aligns with other sightings, e.g. BW.

The section of canal is routinely dredged, so the survival of a packing case for 40 years is unlikely - unless it is not the same section of the canal. Cannan was working for a props company so he could have had access to a case large enough to contain a body. On the other hand, who hides a body in 4 or 5 feet of water?


That could be done, although after 40 years the cause of probably could not be stated.

Thank you, you've summed it up nicely.

There doesn't seem to be much written about the canal aspect, only much the same by different news outlets. Also, the police have stated that the relevant area was searched in 2014 in relation to an unrelated murder inquiry.

Apparently Brentford police have said they have no record of any report made to them and yet it's been said by this man's friend that he reported to them a further two times. It would be shocking if Brentford bungled the paperwork not once but three times.

I'm going to jump on FMP to look up newspaper articles to see what else is out there in general. I have been looking for the elusive neighbour but the electoral registers don't cover the years I'm looking for so then I was looking to see if maybe a drug bust might have made it into local news, nothing so far. I only have his first name so it's an uphill struggle. Trying to come at this from all angles. Thankfully I can filter dates/years to narrow it down. I found quite a bit on JC, what an evil individual he was, and thankfully he did end up off the streets, even if it turns out he wasnt responsible for SL. It's just so sad how that came about (with what happened to SB and the others at his hands).

Thanks again.

 

[Clairybums]

This was pretty feeble, IMHO. They jump from outlining the mystery to assuming it was Cannan. There are two questions that nobody in these documentaries ever, ever, ever asks the talking heads:

1/ OK, so there's this circumstantial case against Cannan. How many other recently-released lags does the same innuendo also fit - have you ever checked? There could have been 50 to 100 former SA prisoners released in 1986 - what were they all doing and why can't this be any of them?

2/ Assuming Cannan did do it, what happened that day? Who was where, when?


This sighting is interesting but quite contentious. On the one hand the late witness reckons he reported this to the plod at the time, but why? He claims that 3 years later he recognised Cannan as the man he'd seen - why exactly? What were the points of similarity? Can he remember anyone he passed in the street 3 years ago?

You dad's account is more persuasive because he related it to others at the time and it aligns with other sightings, e.g. BW.

The section of canal is routinely dredged, so the survival of a packing case for 40 years is unlikely - unless it is not the same section of the canal. Cannan was working for a props company so he could have had access to a case large enough to contain a body. On the other hand, who hides a body in 4 or 5 feet of water?


That could be done, although after 40 years the cause of probably could not be stated.

P.s.

Wasn't SB found in shallow water?

 

[Clairybums]

@WestLondoner on the JC canal witness it was interesting he saw this man about 5am from memory & he wasn’t expecting to see anyone & looked startled if I am remembering correctly. It also coincided with JC being firmly alibied & back in circulation around the same time.

I thought he reported what he saw to police at time as looked liked photofit (?) & suspicious behaviour & later again (more confident here) in 87 at SB’s murder time & when he travelled to Bristol especially for trial to eyeball JC such was his conviction. He noted staring eyes. It does feel a bit tenuous.

Didn’t someone who knew canal on thread say flowed into deeper water or something?

Agree @Clairybums her father’s sighting & not least how it ties to BW’s sighting etc is much more compelling.

Very interesting! Kinda makes me wish this witness had also rung the newspapers because, from what I gathered from the tv episode, after reporting three times and each time more sure of who he saw, he had got fed up. My father also got fed up and lost faith and then was just angry about it. I wish he had gone to the press too. Maybe a journalist looking to enhance their career might have done something with the info.

Regarding the canal, I'm going to see what, if anything, there is on this in the newspapers.

Thank you!

 

[WestLondoner]

P.s.

Wasn't SB found in shallow water?

Yes, but in a remote place so not for some time. It also appears he killed her there. Killing someone elsewhere, packing the body up and dumping it is a lot more elaborate than what he later did. You'd think he'd get more rather than less proficient.

 

[Clairybums]

Yes, but in a remote place so not for some time. It also appears he killed her there. Killing someone elsewhere, packing the body up and dumping it is a lot more elaborate than what he later did. You'd think he'd get more rather than less proficient.

I think he kept SB for a period of time before killing her. I'm just wondering if, as others have theorised, he abducted her at SR123? (witness sees the BMW speed off). He takes her, maybe at knife point (or possibly renders her unconscious at the first opportunity, I.e. when he's sure no witnesses), takes her to a place he's staying at where he has the privacy to do whatever and a similar fate awaits SL as that of SB the following year. The difference I imagine is (and I don't have enough knowledge of the area of the SB kidnapping to know for sure abd someone I'm sure will put me straight if I'm wrong) the built up/busy area of inner London made things a bit more complicated and he had to adapt whatever plan he may have had to accommodate for this so had to work a plan to dispose of SL before leaving the area. Detective JD said there were warehouses round the canal area where it would have been easy to locate a trolley, or... if it wasn't JC then this could work too for someone who was just as cunning/charming, enough to hook SL, that he was a newbie and went with the flow. Maybe it's just me and my wild imagination, just trying to think of the possibilities. I'm no psychologist but it seems that JC and people like him have a need to do what they do and the more they do it the easier it becomes (becoming more experienced and nuanced with each kill). I don't think JC had killed up to that point or if SL wasn't him then possibly he was a robber and rapist who escalated over time until he killed SB. I still think it was him for now but I'm trying to keep my mind open to others. I read somewhere, someone likened JC to Bundy.

Sorry for the wild waffling, I didn’t intend to spew all of that. The thing I'm trying to work out is if the difference in the areas of the two murders had an impact on the the way they were carried out. Perhaps he thought he could afford to be more lax with with the 2nd one. Oh, I dont know, I think I've confused myself, I knew what ai meant. I need sleep.