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

[Clairybums]

Thank you for reminding us of this. It all seems to add up now. Are the Police taking you seriously now @Clairybums ?

Not sure what you are referring to? The lady mentioned in the post you are replying to wasn't me. I'm not 60 yet, never mind 69. I'll be 60 next Monday.

 

[Officer Dibble]

Hi all.

I have tried to do a rough chronological timeline of what I believe may have transpired on the day of SL's abduction...


12.36pm
SL leaves the office and drives to Stevenage Road in her Fiesta

12.43pm
SL parks in Stevenage Road, where she is meeting Mr Kipper to view some properties. SL knows him and gets into his car. They drive off to Shorrolds Road.

12.45pm-12.50pm
WJ leaves her house and sees the Fiesta

12.49pm
Mr K drops SL off in Shorrolds Road, while he quickly goes to park up, and bring the champagne bottle.

12.50pm
SL is seen standing outside 37SR waiting for Mr K.

12.52pm
Mr K arrives and together they go inside the property.

12.59pm
Mr K and SL leave the property and are heard and seen doing so.

1pm
Mr K and SL are seen standing outside 37SR by another witness

1.03pm
Mr K convinces SL to go and look at more properties in Stevenage Road.

1.10pm
Mr K drives SL back to Stevenage Road, and parks close by. SL and Mr Kipper get out of his car.

1.11pm
SL quickly gets her hat from her own car because she wants to be incognito.

1.12pm
After having just closed her car door, SL and Mr K then walk northwards up Stevenage Road, and are seen by a witness as she turns out of the side street. The witness sees SL wearing her hat.

1.42pm
The same witness returns and then observes SL standing in the front garden of 100 Langthorne Street.
Mr Kipper is seemingly inside the property.

1.55pm - 2pm
A Taxi cab driver who lives close by notices white car parked.

2.15pm
SL and Mr Kipper return to the Fiesta, but instead of parting ways, Mr Kipper tells SL he wants to see more properties. After having spent around an hour looking at properties in and around the area, SL is getting frustrated. They begin to argue.

2.17pm
A man waiting for a Taxi witnesses a furious argument between SL and Mr Kipper

2.20pm
A bearded man gets into a Taxi cab, and tells the driver of the argument he witnessed. He takes him to North End Road.

2.22pm
Mr K and SL are both now sitting in SL's Fiesta. SL drives off with Mr K, so he can run a few errands. These errands include visiting a property in Dorncliffe Road. SL is furious because she really needs to get back to the office, but she can't refuse him.

2.28pm
A witness driving north up Kelvedon Road witnesses a fierce argument between a female driver and her occupant when a white car drives fast and erratically towards him. He has to take evasive action. The white car is then seen indicating right towards the office in Fulham High Road.

2.29pm
Rather than stop at the office, SL turns right into a side road and heads north before turning west along Bishops Road toward Dorncliffe Road.

2.30pm-2.32pm
SL and Mr K stop arguing

2.33pm
SL parks up the Fiesta opposite 10 Dorncliffe Road, and is witnessed by a neighbour living opposite the garage, sitting in the car. Mr K is seen walking down the alley leading to the basement flat of 10 Dorncliffe Road.

2.38pm
Mr K gets back into the car and SL drives off with Mr K in the passenger seat. They head south towards Fulham High Road.

2.42pm
SL's friend BW witnesses SL driving northbound up Fulham Palace Road with Mr K in the car.

2.45pm-3.20pm
Mr K convinces SL to drive him somewhere and crucially, for her to get out of the car.
In this 35 minute time period, SL is abducted and then held captive somewhere locally.

3.24pm
Mr Kipper drives the Fiesta and arrives BACK to Stevenage Road and because he doesn't want to be seen, he simply parks it and gets out without applying the handbrake or locking the door, and crucially he parks it BACK in the same spot that he knew it was parked earlier. i.e. near the garage.

3.25pm
Mr Kipper gets back into his own car and drives off to deal with SL.

3.30pm
WJ arrives back home and notices the car parked opposite. In her mind, it hasn't moved.

5pm
The man who owns the garage drives into it and notices the back of the white car slightly overhanging.

10.01pm
The car is found.



So to summarize, the white fiesta is in Stevenage road between 12.43pm - 2.22pm, and then again from 3.24pm to when it's found.
The only time the car is not in Stevenage Road is between 2.22pm - 3.24pm.


Mr Kipper takes SL to a location that is within a 35 minute timeframe, in TOTAL.

Note that the further away from Stevenage Road that SL is being held, the shorter the time frame Mr Kipper has to get the car back to Stevenage Road before WJ sees it again at 3.30pm.

That means that in order to get the car back BEFORE 3.30pm, SL couldn't have been taken that far from Fulham. This is evidenced by the fact she is seen alive and well circa 2.45pm by her friend BW.

And the reason why Mr Kipper returns to Stevenage Road?

He has to pick his own car up again, and wants everyone to think that the white car hasn't moved.

So,

Thoughts?

Very plausible! Well done. I still can't stop going on (and on, sorry) about the Crimewatch clip I saw very early on in 1986 of a (young?) couple following a car where the woman seemed in distress and was trying to get attention by banging on the back window (that is a very old memory but I would love someone to find this clip for me). Edited to say I think this should be put forward to the (hopefully interested) Police

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Please remind me of this

Someone called Blue Spot taxis in Bristol asking for a pick up for a lady at JC’s flat to take her to the station on the Friday - day after abduction. JC answered door & said no one had called & sent taxi away. The taxi driver picked JC out of a line up.

 

[Officer Dibble]

Not sure what you are referring to? The lady mentioned in the post you are replying to wasn't me. I'm not 60 yet, never mind 69. I'll be 60 next Monday.

Just including you in the mention, even though you weren't in the post.

 

[Officer Dibble]

Someone called Blue Spot taxis in Bristol asking for a pick up for a lady at JC’s flat to take her to the station on the Friday - day after abduction. JC answered door & said no one had called & sent taxi away. The taxi driver picked JC out of a line up.

I had no idea about this. Thanks.

 

[EddietheEagle]

He heard a bang & said later possibly a car door not the door at 37.
He only got a brief glimpse via a net curtain & only saw a man.

HR heard the door go, looked up and saw a couple who were leaving. They paused outside and looked back at the property they'd just left. He focussed more on Mr Kipper because of his striking appearance. He provided an accurate description of a man dressed immaculately in a charcoal grey suit, hair swept back. Read the AS book for more. His evidence moreover, was corroborated by other passing witnesses. He never claimed a good look of the women he saw with Mr Kipper and therefore never claimed it was SL. He did however see them both and it is simply incorrect to state he'd only seen a man.

Another door going or a car door shutting would have been sheer coincidence and as, SIO JD noteably said, I don't believe in too many coincidences.

A brief glimpse would not have been sufficient to produce the photofit he helped produce, an uncannily accurate one If you accept JC as Mr Kipper. If, as you state, HR "only saw a man" then how do you explain him seeing Mr Kipper bundling SL into a car, as you note yourself elsewhere?

Harry Riglin's evidence, presumably given in his evidential statement to police, was amply brought to life in the reconstruction.

The so-called "struggle" and "bundling" may be accounted for by MG's own later interpretation of what he thought he'd heard HR telling him. At that point, these claims become hearsay and the AS book is not clear on this. It could quite conceivably have been an over-enthusiastic JC ushering SL into a car in his eagerness to get her away. We know his MO. He wasn't the type to hold back. No one knows because there isn't enough evidence to accurately say either way. We can only surmise.

If you were a paid guest of the News of the World living out your fifteen minutes, I expect you'd probably go too, with any old guff they wanted from you. There's a big difference between providing evidence to police and being paid for evidence by msm.

 

[EddietheEagle]

Thank you. That explains it perfectly. So it's probable that SJL was never inside 37 as they would have found her fingerprints

I disagree. That does not follow at all. The police forced entry, searched the place and saw nothing. This was a missing person inquiry so their focus went elsewhere. Where is your proof that a fingerprint search was immediately conducted? As for JC, he was forensically well aware having spent the past five years at a university of crime.

 

[Clairybums]

Very plausible! Well done. I still can't stop going on (and on, sorry) about the Crimewatch clip I saw very early on in 1986 of a (young?) couple following a car where the woman seemed in distress and was trying to get attention by banging on the back window (that is a very old memory but I would love someone to find this clip for me). Edited to say I think this should be put forward to the (hopefully interested) Police

Not this one? The woman says it's been 12 weeks since SL disappearance. From about 2.17 on the video...

Sorry, not sure how to post a link on here. I tried the little link icon but it wouldn't let me paste in the url. Maybe if you copy and paste?

 

[Clairybums]

Not this one? The woman says it's been 12 weeks since SL disappearance. From about 2.17 on the video...

Sorry, not sure how to post a link on here. I tried the little link icon but it wouldn't let me paste in the url. Maybe if you copy and paste?

Oh, it seems to have worked.

 

[ctaylor]

I will get hold of the books that have been recommended. It's possible that after reading them, I will change my mind about JC being my prime suspect.

You can read the Andrew Stephen book on Suzy Lamplugh here at Internet Archive, if you have not already read it -

The Suzy Lamplugh story : Stephen, Andrew : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

HR heard the door go, looked up and saw a couple who were leaving. They paused outside and looked back at the property they'd just left. He focussed more on Mr Kipper because of his striking appearance. He provided an accurate description of a man dressed immaculately in a charcoal grey suit, hair swept back. Read the AS book for more. His evidence moreover, was corroborated by other passing witnesses. He never claimed a good look of the women he saw with Mr Kipper and therefore never claimed it was SL. He did however see them both and it is simply incorrect to state he'd only seen a man.

Another door going or a car door shutting would have been sheer coincidence and as, SIO JD noteably said, I don't believe in too many coincidences.

A brief glimpse would not have been sufficient to produce the photofit he helped produce, an uncannily accurate one If you accept JC as Mr Kipper. If, as you state, HR "only saw a man" then how do you explain him seeing Mr Kipper bundling SL into a car, as you note yourself elsewhere?

Harry Riglin's evidence, presumably given in his evidential statement to police, was amply brought to life in the reconstruction.

The so-called "struggle" and "bundling" may be accounted for by MG's own later interpretation of what he thought he'd heard HR telling him. At that point, these claims become hearsay and the AS book is not clear on this. It could quite conceivably have been an over-enthusiastic JC ushering SL into a car in his eagerness to get her away. We know his MO. He wasn't the type to hold back. No one knows because there isn't enough evidence to accurately say either way. We can only surmise.

If you were a paid guest of the News of the World living out your fifteen minutes, I expect you'd probably go too, with any old guff they wanted from you. There's a big difference between providing evidence to police and being paid for evidence by msm.

He didn’t see the woman’s face I believe - that’s right but he mentioned a woman - & I will look back - if he was looking from sofa via a net curtain he can’t have got as good a look as anyone in street (?) Again you’re right he did give some detail & added man had a ‘prosperous’ look.

I think the photofit is a dead ringer for VV who was with a woman sounding very like SL a few weeks before & it’s quite generic. The hairstyle being as many men in 80s wore it then.

I believe HR did add it might have been a car door he heard bang later. Will find source. Ah DV, ‘he heard a bang (HR) and assumed it was a car door banging’. DV adds HR could never identify the blonde woman was SL & implies this is extraordinary [but if not her - who?].

He was apparently quick to say Kiper in Belgium looked liked the man he had seen he thought too. He looked nothing like the photofit. That adds to my impression of him but maybe he felt pressurised? Who knows?

For me he did personally exaggerate on van bundling as he took the statement back.

For me, assuming the same man, the second photofit is surely a better likeness, a clearer witness view. An interesting detail on broken nose

I am with you, surely the odds are pretty overwhelming someone was outside as HR noted, but I don’t believe she was necessarily showing 37 Shorrolds. I think the odds are good she knew him & he was behind the contract & they were well on way with plans. It might have been a rendezvous, picking him up away from office & I think HR or someone said they were looking up. Poss talking about developing etc as they met again.

AS adds that there was no ‘proof’ they went inside (forensics). My feeling was they expected it & will surely have checked for prints then?

I would still want to bottom out who was on the road that day showing properties or otherwise the above said.

 

[Rookie D]

I think SL simply wanted out of deal, after a rendezvous at 37 Shorrolds, then an unexpected lunch where he tried to persuade her still to continue with the planned purchase (sighting at restaurant).

I think Dorncliffe stop poss where she twigged how shady things were & row and escalation AFTER BW sighting, NOT before, which might just fit with timings still.

Address fraud - what this man may have been proposing NB: relevant article upthread & ‘strings’ likely eventually felt far too risky.

If any drugs link, indirectly to JC otherwise, it may explain any shadowing in the van EH saw & lunchtime the calls to pub. The ‘group’ of people theory the police had, that we don’t have the details for, may with fit Dorncliffe pit stop etc.

SL was feisty & if she threatened to report, perhaps action was taken, unfortunately.

A van could spirit her away quickly…

The only issue with this being that the argument witnessed by the bearded man, occurred between 2pm - 2.30pm.

Whereas, BW's sighting was between 15 to 45 minutes AFTER this argument was heard.

So the chronological evidence supports the idea that the argument took place BEFORE the BW sighting.

Which ties in with my attempted timeline upthread.

The woman who saw SL in her hat walking with a man in a suit, witnessed them walking northwards up Stevenage Road "around lunchtime."

Realistically, "lunchtime" is anywhere between 11.30am-2pm

But we know it can't be before 12.40pm, so that leaves 12.40pm-2pm for the sighting in Stevenage Road.

This sighting occurred BEFORE the argument started.

All of this supports the idea that SL and Mr Kipper had travelled from Shorrolds Road and had gone to Stevenage Road AFTER the 1pm viewing.

Based on the lunchtime sighting of SL and the suited man in Stevenage Road, it supports the idea that they spent from anywhere between 1.10pm to 2.20pm within close proximity to Stevenage Road.

The later sighting of them arguing in the car as it speeds south along Kelvedon Road, is IMO a continuation of their argument that had begun in Stevenage Road. However, by the time they arrive in Dorncliffe Road circa 2.30pm, they have stopped arguing.

The timeline I constructed upthread includes a viable chronological sequence of events for the day, with my only omission being the man who alleged to have seen the BMW speeding off.

Aside from this jogging man witness, I have included every other key witness as AFAIK.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

The only issue with this being that the argument witnessed by the bearded man, occurred between 2pm - 2.30pm.

Whereas, BW's sighting was between 15 to 45 minutes AFTER this argument was heard.

So the chronological evidence supports the idea that the argument took place BEFORE the BW sighting.

Which ties in with my attempted timeline upthread.

The woman who saw SL in her hat walking with a man in a suit, witnessed them walking northwards up Stevenage Road "around lunchtime."

This again supports the idea that SL and Mr Kipper had travelled from Shorrolds Road and had gone to Stevenage Road AFTER the 1pm viewing.

Based on the lunchtime sighting of SL and the suited man in Stevenage Road, it supports the idea that they spent from anywhere between 1.10pm to 2.20pm within close proximity to Stevenage Road.

The later sighting of them arguing in the car as it speeds south along Kelvedon Road, is IMO a continuation of their argument that had begun in Stevenage Road. However, by the time they arrive in Dorncliffe Road circa 2.30pm, they have stopped arguing.

The timeline I constructed upthread includes a viable chronological sequence of events for the day, with my only omission being the man who alleged to have seen the BMW speeding off.

Aside from this jogging man witness, I have included every key other witness as AFAIK.

BW couldn’t be sure exactly when she saw SL - her office was close & she also arrived early for apts like SL. Around 2:30pm might just work (?) She thought just after then but if out by a bit? The taxi driver again wasn’t that precise on picking up the fare re: time.

For me the swerving fiesta witness isn’t as reliable as others. 14 years later, how could he recall? The BMW arguing couple - or similar -JD says witness reported at time to pop up police station on Stevenage. Plausible maybe & JD adds so much evidence from early investigation apparently lost.

Whatever unfolded in Stevenage happened very fast indeed think. An argument post Dorncliffe makes more sense to me.

It’s a great & detailed timeline you’ve created.

 

[tes1984]

Not bad at all. You seem to have incorporated everything there.

It's a good timeline, but what about the phone calls to the pub? It would be interesting to see them included.

 

[kes1972]

Hi all.

I have tried to do a rough chronological timeline of what I believe may have transpired on the day of SL's abduction...


12.36pm
SL leaves the office and drives to Stevenage Road in her Fiesta

12.43pm
SL parks in Stevenage Road, where she is meeting Mr Kipper to view some properties. SL knows him and gets into his car. They drive off to Shorrolds Road.

12.45pm-12.50pm
WJ leaves her house and sees the Fiesta

12.49pm
Mr K drops SL off in Shorrolds Road, while he quickly goes to park up, and bring the champagne bottle.

12.50pm
SL is seen standing outside 37SR waiting for Mr K.

12.52pm
Mr K arrives and together they go inside the property.

12.59pm
Mr K and SL leave the property and are heard and seen doing so.

1pm
Mr K and SL are seen standing outside 37SR by another witness

1.03pm
Mr K convinces SL to go and look at more properties in Stevenage Road.

1.10pm
Mr K drives SL back to Stevenage Road, and parks close by. SL and Mr Kipper get out of his car.

1.11pm
SL quickly gets her hat from her own car because she wants to be incognito.

1.12pm
After having just closed her car door, SL and Mr K then walk northwards up Stevenage Road, and are seen by a witness as she turns out of the side street. The witness sees SL wearing her hat.

1.42pm
The same witness returns and then observes SL standing in the front garden of 100 Langthorne Street.
Mr Kipper is seemingly inside the property.

1.55pm - 2pm
A Taxi cab driver who lives close by notices white car parked.

2.15pm
SL and Mr Kipper return to the Fiesta, but instead of parting ways, Mr Kipper tells SL he wants to see more properties. After having spent around an hour looking at properties in and around the area, SL is getting frustrated. They begin to argue.

2.17pm
A man waiting for a Taxi witnesses a furious argument between SL and Mr Kipper

2.20pm
A bearded man gets into a Taxi cab, and tells the driver of the argument he witnessed. He takes him to North End Road.

2.22pm
Mr K and SL are both now sitting in SL's Fiesta. SL drives off with Mr K, so he can run a few errands. These errands include visiting a property in Dorncliffe Road. SL is furious because she really needs to get back to the office, but she can't refuse him.

2.28pm
A witness driving north up Kelvedon Road witnesses a fierce argument between a female driver and her occupant when a white car drives fast and erratically towards him. He has to take evasive action. The white car is then seen indicating right towards the office in Fulham High Road.

2.29pm
Rather than stop at the office, SL turns right into a side road and heads north before turning west along Bishops Road toward Dorncliffe Road.

2.30pm-2.32pm
SL and Mr K stop arguing

2.33pm
SL parks up the Fiesta opposite 10 Dorncliffe Road, and is witnessed by a neighbour living opposite the garage, sitting in the car. Mr K is seen walking down the alley leading to the basement flat of 10 Dorncliffe Road.

2.38pm
Mr K gets back into the car and SL drives off with Mr K in the passenger seat. They head south towards Fulham High Road.

2.42pm
SL's friend BW witnesses SL driving northbound up Fulham Palace Road with Mr K in the car.

2.45pm-3.20pm
Mr K convinces SL to drive him somewhere and crucially, for her to get out of the car.
In this 35 minute time period, SL is abducted and then held captive somewhere locally.

3.24pm
Mr Kipper drives the Fiesta and arrives BACK to Stevenage Road and because he doesn't want to be seen, he simply parks it and gets out without applying the handbrake or locking the door, and crucially he parks it BACK in the same spot that he knew it was parked earlier. i.e. near the garage.

3.25pm
Mr Kipper gets back into his own car and drives off to deal with SL.

3.30pm
WJ arrives back home and notices the car parked opposite. In her mind, it hasn't moved.

5pm
The man who owns the garage drives into it and notices the back of the white car slightly overhanging.

10.01pm
The car is found.



So to summarize, the white fiesta is in Stevenage road between 12.43pm - 2.22pm, and then again from 3.24pm to when it's found.
The only time the car is not in Stevenage Road is between 2.22pm - 3.24pm.


Mr Kipper takes SL to a location that is within a 35 minute timeframe, in TOTAL.

Note that the further away from Stevenage Road that SL is being held, the shorter the time frame Mr Kipper has to get the car back to Stevenage Road before WJ sees it again at 3.30pm.

That means that in order to get the car back BEFORE 3.30pm, SL couldn't have been taken that far from Fulham. This is evidenced by the fact she is seen alive and well circa 2.45pm by her friend BW.

And the reason why Mr Kipper returns to Stevenage Road?

He has to pick his own car up again, and wants everyone to think that the white car hasn't moved.

So,

Thoughts?

So can we brainstorm on a 20 minute opportunity to incapacitate sl , if we give a 10 minute car journey each way, what possible excuse to get sl to go on that journey, a sturgis house for sale further away? A question though if earlier sl had argued with mr k how did that manage to de escalate for her to wait in the car at dorncliffe, she would have to know that person very well for that to happen and give him so much of her time, so a longer term relationship? If not sl could just have driven off at dorncliffe, if drug related maybe that would have made her wait as she would maybe not have been able to get out of that situation as maybe mr k could have turned up at her place of work.
So sl could have a blazing row/fight with mr k, but also then descalate enough to have a car journey and then sit in the car and await return, does not seem possible, sl must have been expecting payment or receipt of money?
Ps - are we ignoring the woman laughing/ screaming in the bmw?

 

[kes1972]

BBM. Was this in the Christopher Berry Dee book? Don't recall it in the AS book?

Agree maybe another white car there earlier and sl car just luckily placed there later with wj seeing the car parked awkwardly and just thinking it was there earlier.

 

[kes1972]

I had no idea about this. Thanks.

Isnt that the sb case?

 

[Rookie D]

It's a good timeline, but what about the phone calls to the pub? It would be interesting to see them included.

I believe that those calls may have been made from a property close to Stevenage Road.

Based on my timeline hypothesis, SL and Mr Kipper were back in Stevenage Road after they left Shorrolds Road, meaning they could have been in the vicinity of Stevenage Road for as long as 1.10pm right up until just after 2.20pm.

In that timeframe, the car was seen by the taxi driver "just before 2pm," a fierce argument took place sometime between "2-2.30pm" and a witness saw a woman resembling SL with a suited man "around lunchtime." This same witness then sees SL again "later" when she witnesses her standing alone in the front garden of 100 Langthorne Street.

So the initial "around lunchtime" sighting I believe occurred anytime between 1.10pm-1.20pm.

And then the same witness then sees SL again later circa 1.40pm-1.50pm

Both these sightings were BEFORE those phone calls, and BEFORE the argument was witnessed by the bearded man, who based on the reconstruction is claimed to have witnessed the argument sometime between "2pm - 2.30pm."

So IMO it seems highly likely that the calls were made just BEFORE the argument started, meaning they had just left a property nearby after having made those phone calls and then headed back to the Fiesta which was parked up opposite 123 Stevenage Road, and had already been seen parked there "just before 2pm" by the other Taxi cab driver who lived a few doors away.

Of course, 123 Stevenage Road was empty at the time because WJ was out.

But I do wonder whether another estate agent had a key to the property and that the calls were made from WJ's house while she was out.

I say this because MG was dealing with that flat and so may of had a key.

Of course, we only have his word for it that he attended Shorrolds road twice.

It is peculiar that he went to go and look for SL just after her abduction time window of 2.45pm - 3.20pm had finished.

He also said he "called the police" at "5.30pm"..which was later amended to 6.45pm in the press.


Are MG's movements on that day completely corroborated?


Speculation of course.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

So can we brainstorm on a 20 minute opportunity to incapacitate sl , if we give a 10 minute car journey each way, what possible excuse to get sl to go on that journey, a sturgis house for sale further away? A question though if earlier sl had argued with mr k how did that manage to de escalate for her to wait in the car at dorncliffe, she would have to know that person very well for that to happen and give him so much of her time, so a longer term relationship? If not sl could just have driven off at dorncliffe, if drug related maybe that would have made her wait as she would maybe not have been able to get out of that situation as maybe mr k could have turned up at her place of work.
So sl could have a blazing row/fight with mr k, but also then descalate enough to have a car journey and then sit in the car and await return, does not seem possible, sl must have been expecting payment or receipt of money?
Ps - are we ignoring the woman laughing/ screaming in the bmw?

As we can’t be certain on Dorncliffe time, taxi witnessing argument time, or BW sighting & can’t time stamp I DO think it’s poss & logical the argument came last. Argument & rapid abduction followed swiftly, but Dorncliffe came first perhaps (?)

They all fall in an approximate 2-3pm window poss post an unexpected lunch where ‘Kipper’ tries to talk SL into staying on board re: deal we do know was in play & part of last conversation SL had with parents.

If drugs related & given calls poss giving clumsy warning to pub & EH’s sighting of a van/dark saloon with x2 shifty sounding men outside 37, poss she was being shadowed (although not overly bought in here). The BMW was poss a dark saloon & poss a genuine sighting that ties in. Even plausibly perhaps, the abduction itself…

Not being able to pay off poss factored in (?) no chequebook, but this ‘deal’ is almost certainly linked I feel. The using an ‘address’ & agreeing to ‘strings’ was very unwise, even if it meant she got a house she couldn’t otherwise afford & higher on property ladder. When she twigged she’d surely be ‘out’ & might threaten to report. Somehow a third party using an ‘address’ in return for a cash injection resonates with a Dorncliffe pitstop perhaps (?) That and her recently investigating legitimate couriers for reduced fares sticks in my mind.

I do know unwitting drugs involvement can lead to a very sinister & rapid outcome in some cases.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Isnt that the sb case?

Yes