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

[rvlvr]

I am inclined to think JC was telling the truth when he said if he went out drinking he did so around Acton with Superhire buddies. Maybe what article is driving at. I think timing way off in article but some of the ideas may be interesting to ponder.

For me, access to money from his father’s inheritance makes assuming a businessman persona, like ‘Peterson’ in the dating video, possible in last months or weeks of stay. Keeping it up indefinitely unlikely..Renting somewhere or using a hotel also plausible. He was superficially confident & flash when he had the money.

The police I think at one point were working on the idea JC collaborated. JT, who did share a car with him, was careful to distance himself later.

The evidence points to an escalation between 2-3pm & it’s possible SL knew the basement’s reputation or shadiness there & twigged she was being strung along..

The issue with this I think is that even if Cannan was posing as a businessman and trying to do some sort of deal with her - be it legit or scam - it doesn’t explain why it ends in murder.

If she’s backing out then how much of an inconvenience is that for Cannan? He’s not got a business empire to lose, nor a marriage that might fail if the truth comes out - there’s no need to silence her, which would surely be the motive here.

Indeed, she might threaten to go to the police, but victims of scams are often reluctant to speak up, “how could you be so stupid Susannah, the man’s a crook?!” etc etc. Her reputation matters far more than his, she’s the yuppie, popular member of the Putney set - even tangentially being linked to anything dodgy will likely reflect negatively on her. Whereas, he’s an outsider who can scarper at a moment’s notice.

And that’s if she can even make anything stick - what ‘evidence’ in terms of a paper trail does she have? Does she even have contact details for this guy? A name (one that’s not fake, anyway)? Anything at all that can be traced? Seems unlikely, given that whatever was in her diary didn’t lead to him.

Killing her in a fit of rage is more believable, yet the theory seems to go that he secured himself somewhere quiet in order to kill her, to conceal then dispose of her body, possibly with the support of an accomplice. That suggests premeditation, rather than a spur of the moment attack.

I do think the deal angle is a promising one but I think it works better if tied to someone with something to lose, who had motive for wanting her dead.

 

[Clairybums]

Hmmm...


View attachment 653062
View attachment 653063

I don't think that's the same white car!


The white car is parked in the same spot in both photos, but is that the SAME vehicle?


I don't believe it is.


Does that finally solve the mystery of the white car anomoly?


Or are my eyes playing tricks on me?

I might be completely off base here and if I am, please ignore this post. (I dont have any knowledge of how reconstructions are done).

As it was a reconstruction, how sure can we be of the accuracy? Like, do we know how dedicated the reconstruction team were to using identical cars? Just thinking that, depending on that, it might be possible that they recreated the scene using available cars that were similar to the original cars, as long as the main one(s) were true to their make and model and the number plates matched the ones that were there on the day. Unless the cars belonged to residents and they were still there to use? Like I say, just a thought to maybe consider.

 

[Clairybums]

The issue with this I think is that even if Cannan was posing as a businessman and trying to do some sort of deal with her - be it legit or scam - it doesn’t explain why it ends in murder.

If she’s backing out then how much of an inconvenience is that for Cannan? He’s not got a business empire to lose, nor a marriage that might fail if the truth comes out - there’s no need to silence her, which would surely be the motive here.

Indeed, she might threaten to go to the police, but victims of scams are often reluctant to speak up, “how could you be so stupid Susannah, the man’s a crook?!” etc etc. Her reputation matters far more than his, she’s the yuppie, popular member of the Putney set - even tangentially being linked to anything dodgy will likely reflect negatively on her. Whereas, he’s an outsider who can scarper at a moment’s notice.

And that’s if she can even make anything stick - what ‘evidence’ in terms of a paper trail does she have? Does she even have contact details for this guy? A name (one that’s not fake, anyway)? Anything at all that can be traced? Seems unlikely, given that whatever was in her diary didn’t lead to him.

Killing her in a fit of rage is more believable, yet the theory seems to go that he secured himself somewhere quiet in order to kill her, to conceal then dispose of her body, possibly with the support of an accomplice. That suggests premeditation, rather than a spur of the moment attack.

I do think the deal angle is a promising one but I think it works better if tied to someone with something to lose, who had motive for wanting her dead.

The main thing to me is that JC was a violent rapist who went from indecent assault? in a phone box at 14 years old to more violent attacks later on and finally kidnap and murder. He was also a prolific liar and a con artist. His dating interview screams of someone who is hiding who they really are and someone who isn't genuine and honest.

It could well be that, from his point of view, this was a total con from the start, whether he was making out he was setting up some kind of lucrative deal or if he was posing as someone with bundles of money who wanted to buy property(ies) or even if he happened to meet SL, chatted her up and put himself across as a rich man who could shower her with gifts and luxury. The main thing, I believe anyway, is that for him it was a con but from SL point of view it was legit, until it wasn't and by the time she realised it wasn't, it was too late for her. I believe the end goal was his need to rape. Without knowing if he commit any other murder before SB, it could be that SL was the turning point from rape and attempted kidnap to full on kidnap, probable rape and murder. If JC wasn't the Kipper then I believe it was someone with a similar background and intent. The chase, the romance, the con, then the power, the thrill and the sick twisted end.

Just my own thoughts.

 

[Clairybums]

I need reminded of the intials as SB I'm unsure who that is

The woman kidnapped and murdered in 1987 by JC.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

The issue with this I think is that even if Cannan was posing as a businessman and trying to do some sort of deal with her - be it legit or scam - it doesn’t explain why it ends in murder.

If she’s backing out then how much of an inconvenience is that for Cannan? He’s not got a business empire to lose, nor a marriage that might fail if the truth comes out - there’s no need to silence her, which would surely be the motive here.

Indeed, she might threaten to go to the police, but victims of scams are often reluctant to speak up, “how could you be so stupid Susannah, the man’s a crook?!” etc etc. Her reputation matters far more than his, she’s the yuppie, popular member of the Putney set - even tangentially being linked to anything dodgy will likely reflect negatively on her. Whereas, he’s an outsider who can scarper at a moment’s notice.

And that’s if she can even make anything stick - what ‘evidence’ in terms of a paper trail does she have? Does she even have contact details for this guy? A name (one that’s not fake, anyway)? Anything at all that can be traced? Seems unlikely, given that whatever was in her diary didn’t lead to him.

Killing her in a fit of rage is more believable, yet the theory seems to go that he secured himself somewhere quiet in order to kill her, to conceal then dispose of her body, possibly with the support of an accomplice. That suggests premeditation, rather than a spur of the moment attack.

I do think the deal angle is a promising one but I think it works better if tied to someone with something to lose, who had motive for wanting her dead.

Don’t disagree. For me the major evidence for JC’s involvement is the long interview he had with Barley & SA & what he said here. I’ve lots of respect for Barley. No showboating but real fear/anger apparent re: JC. Barley had been involved for a long time by then & had no doubt about JC’s guilt. SA, initially a sceptic, convinced too. As JC said the man that killed SB killed SL ‘and another girl’.

So much is cited re: JC that’s such flimsy evidence it gets in way of what’s much much more solid (the above).

We don’t know what the working theory the police had re: a group/accomplices - poss they’d be interested in the light of the new Dorncliffe sighting. JC had nothing in history though to link to drugs. Fraud, yes. He was planning a ‘deal’/a ‘company’ with AR.

JC likely had access to much more money than usual in last few months of hostel stay, which makes any semi sophisticated facade easier to maintain. A flat or room for a short time for cash.

JC went crazy if rejected & SL was someone who apparently ‘dumped’ readily/easily. If SL had mixed business with pleasure, very possible on evidence we have, it’s poss a red mist descended & he got lucky. He also drove about an hour plus to kill SB.

 

[WestLondoner]

BW also couldn’t be precise. It’s interesting DV didn’t explore this incident, or even make mention of it (?) In his book. ‘Galway’ sounded older than CV at time (greying beard, middle aged) etc.

DV had to dismiss BW, whatever time she gave. His theory is that SJL went straight to the pub and died there, and her car was only ever in Stevenage Road because CV dumped it there before it was seen in the afternoon.

This means it was never in FPR and also means it was not outside 123SR as early as WJ claims. He debunks her as a witness by showing that she can't remember the colour or make of the car she just saw him arrive in.

He doesn't relate the James Galway thing either - that came out in discussion here. It was noted that CV would have needed to get a cab back - and guess what, we have a cabbie, and his fare: a witness who never came forward.

 

[WestLondoner]

Killing her in a fit of rage is more believable, yet the theory seems to go that he secured himself somewhere quiet in order to kill her

Yes, this goes to my standard challenge to Cannan theories - do they explain / align with the known facts and sightings. There's no official police narrative of what he did that day - and nothing that explains how he spontaneously attacks her without anyone noticing.

As it was a reconstruction, how sure can we be of the accuracy? Like, do we know how dedicated the reconstruction team were to using identical cars?

This is of course exactly the point. Nobody was in a position to state what cars were around. The reconstruction did not reconstruct every car on the street. None of us can say what cars were in our own street yesterday.

HR is a great example of this. He thought Mr Kipper was a thin, podgy bloke with short, long hair aged in his late twenties and mid-forties. He has no idea what he saw.

So much is cited re: JC that’s such flimsy evidence it gets in way of what’s much much more solid

This. Although even the more solid evidence is not all that - he may have been in the area, but so may many others like him; he may have accidentally confessed, or he may have been outwitted by a skilled interviewer.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

DV had to dismiss BW, whatever time she gave. His theory is that SJL went straight to the pub and died there, and her car was only ever in Stevenage Road because CV dumped it there before it was seen in the afternoon.

This means it was never in FPR and also means it was not outside 123SR as early as WJ claims. He debunks her as a witness by showing that she can't remember the colour or make of the car she just saw him arrive in.

He doesn't relate the James Galway thing either - that came out in discussion here. It was noted that CV would have needed to get a cab back - and guess what, we have a cabbie, and his fare: a witness who never came forward.

WJ’s first sighting I think we can almost completely discount given all evidence.

BW I think much more credible & she never changed her story.

I do find it odd DV didn’t interrogate more of the narrative, especially taxi/Galway scenario.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Yes, this goes to my standard challenge to Cannan theories - do they explain / align with the known facts and sightings. There's no official police narrative of what he did that day - and nothing that explains how he spontaneously attacks her without anyone noticing.

This is of course exactly the point. Nobody was in a position to state what cars were around. The reconstruction did not reconstruct every car on the street. None of us can say what cars were in our own street yesterday.

HR is a great example of this. He thought Mr Kipper was a thin, podgy bloke with short, long hair aged in his late twenties and mid-forties. He has no idea what he saw.

This. Although even the more solid evidence is not all that - he may have been in the area, but so may many others like him; he may have accidentally confessed, or he may have been outwitted by a skilled interviewer.

Maybe re: the confession on the skill of interviewer, as SA noted & disputed actual ‘confession’. For me, the whole car dealer who sold a defective mini & killed SL - that’s harder to wave away. Especially given v grave atmosphere.

Absolutely on HR, he decided DR aka Kiper in Belgium had the same boyish look & way of moving (AS). The recount via nephew (DV) said car door banging, via AS, HR said he thought the door he heard banging was from adjacent property, not 37, in end.

 

[kes1972]

No need to dismiss bw sighting if he drove to 123sr as taxi driver gave no time as long as between 240 and 330

Shame they did not show the cabbie s pic of cv and clear that one up.i guess cv would want to be back for 330 to run the pub if we believed that then he had to get a cab from near 123sr to tube then get back to the pow (how long would that take?)
If we said 20-30 minutes then he put yhe car there between 2:45 and 3:00 and i would guess along the embankment or the disused overgrown viaduct.

 

[kes1972]

Maybe re: the confession on the skill of interviewer, as SA noted & disputed actual ‘confession’. For me, the whole car dealer who sold a defective mini & killed SL - that’s harder to wave away. Especially given v grave atmosphere.

Absolutely on HR, he decided DR aka Kiper in Belgium had the same boyish look & way of moving (AS). The recount via nephew (DV) said car door banging, via AS, HR said he thought the door he heard banging was from adjacent property, not 37, in end.

So did they check the adjacent property?

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

So did they check the adjacent property?

You’d hope. They certainly went door to door.

 

[Clairybums]

DV had to dismiss BW, whatever time she gave. His theory is that SJL went straight to the pub and died there, and her car was only ever in Stevenage Road because CV dumped it there before it was seen in the afternoon.

This means it was never in FPR and also means it was not outside 123SR as early as WJ claims. He debunks her as a witness by showing that she can't remember the colour or make of the car she just saw him arrive in.

He doesn't relate the James Galway thing either - that came out in discussion here. It was noted that CV would have needed to get a cab back - and guess what, we have a cabbie, and his fare: a witness who never came forward.

Have yet to read the book but it seems from comments I've read that he has his own theories as to what happened to SL. Does he at least present other aspects and information or is it limited to what he himself believes?

Can't wait to have a read! I've got the AS book lined up to read online (as soon as I have the head pace and time to really focus).

 

[Clairybums]

Just for info... Thought I would post these photos showing Dorncliffe Road back in the late 70s/early 80s. The top one is me (holding the cat). Behind me you can just see the black garage gates and to the right are the Polish man's bluish colour garage gates. That front door just above my head was where the polish man lived and that house is almost, if not exactly, directly opposite ours. Our hillman minx there is not indicative of the times (my brother loved old cars).

The bottom photo is my sister and a better view of the black gated garage alongside which the car had pulled up.

 

[Clairybums]

Just for info... Thought I would post these photos showing Dorncliffe Road back in the late 70s/early 80s. The top one is me (holding the cat). Behind me you can just see the black garage gates and to the right are the Polish man's bluish colour garage gates. That front door just above my head was where the polish man lived and that house is almost, if not exactly, directly opposite ours. Our hillman minx there is not indicative of the times (my brother loved old cars).

The bottom photo is my sister and a better view of the black gated garage alongside which the car had pulled up.
View attachment 653110View attachment 653111

P.s. my sister was wearing my father's straw cowboy style hat. He loved that hat. Maybe he noted the hat in the car more because he had one himself, who knows.

 

[WestLondoner]

I do find it odd DV didn’t interrogate more of the narrative, especially taxi/Galway scenario.

BW is the obvious witness he never contacted, I guess we know why. It would be interesting if he'd reinterviewed the cabbie.

Shame they did not show the cabbie s pic of cv and clear that one up

No reason in 1986 to assume CV had anything to do with it. After all, they asked him if SJL had ever turned up, and he said no. So that was that cleared up. He never mentioned the matter to the regular landlord either. People do weird things all the time, of course; doesn't make them killers.

 

[WestLondoner]

Does he at least present other aspects and information or is it limited to what he himself believes?

He's good at challenging people on what have been assumed to be facts but turn out to be assumptions.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

He's good at challenging people on what have been assumed to be facts but turn out to be assumptions.

As to the question of why SL waited in the car, my brother and I were discussing this last week and he came up with the possibility that he might have taken the keys from the ignition when he went to the basement flat and that maybe she didn't want to just leave the company car there. At this point in time, they may have been arguing but I'm pretty sure she wouldn't be automatically 'thinking this man is going to rape or kill me'.

The other day on the thread someone asked about whether she had got out of the car since as it was facing toward Hestercombe Ave she would have been on the far side so for my father to see her hair colour and also to be able to recognise her when her photo showed on the news it wouldn't have been possible had she not got out of the car. It's my belief that she must have got out, I just unfortunately can't remember if my father told us or not and neither can my brother. There's no reason he wouldn't have mentioned that part of events, I just don't want to make stuff up to compensate for my lack of this memory. I am sure though that he didn't remark on her demeanor or any viewed distress from her and I think he would have noticed and told us. As far as my father was concerned, he thought they were a couple and he was trying to make sense of the man visiting downstairs. It was odd, he did not fit. There could have been a thought process going on whereby my father may have dismissed a drug angle initially and assumed the visitor was there for a different or official purpose (with it being during office hours and not in the night time too - just surmising) and then, when he saw the news flash about her being missing (he recognised her straight away, no umming and ahhing, that was her) and went on to tell my brother everything he remembered, the car colour, that the car was a hatchback, the hat on the back shelf and the dark haired man in the suit who went down the side alley. He wasn't able to give the make of car but I think he did pretty well considering he didn't know he would have to recall the details. Then when the car was recovered he jumped up from his chair and shouted "That's the car!". Ive left out the swearing. He was animated, at the tv pointing at the hat he had seen. That's when my brother started taking it seriously. I don't know if he went to Fulham police station the same day as the missing Suzy photo or the next morning (his statement would show that). Knowing him, I think he would have gone straight down there with a bee in his bonnet.

Back to the why... I think the man was able to placate SL and calm the situation down, he would have surely known he had to because the more the public arguing dragged on, the more attention it would attract, the more chance someone might step in and the less chance of carrying out his abduction or whatever plan was in mind.

My brain hurts

Did you know the Peabody Estate? Might man in basement have contacts or associates around there? Thanks.

 

[Clairybums]

Don’t disagree. For me the major evidence for JC’s involvement is the long interview he had with Barley & SA & what he said here. I’ve lots of respect for Barley. No showboating but real fear/anger apparent re: JC. Barley had been involved for a long time by then & had no doubt about JC’s guilt. SA, initially a sceptic, convinced too. As JC said the man that killed SB killed SL ‘and another girl’.

So much is cited re: JC that’s such flimsy evidence it gets in way of what’s much much more solid (the above).

We don’t know what the working theory the police had re: a group/accomplices - poss they’d be interested in the light of the new Dorncliffe sighting. JC had nothing in history though to link to drugs. Fraud, yes. He was planning a ‘deal’/a ‘company’ with AR.

JC likely had access to much more money than usual in last few months of hostel stay, which makes any semi sophisticated facade easier to maintain. A flat or room for a short time for cash.

JC went crazy if rejected & SL was someone who apparently ‘dumped’ readily/easily. If SL had mixed business with pleasure, very possible on evidence we have, it’s poss a red mist descended & he got lucky. He also drove about an hour plus to kill SB.

JC stuck me as shifty. I'm out so I don't have access to my computer to look at anything but was this during the interview at the time of his trial? Or a later one? The one I'm thinking of he looks like he's gained a few lbs. I'm sure he denied SB and the other offences and didn't he always maintain his innocence of those too? Some people literally have to be slapped in the face with the evidence and even then, they will still say "it wasn't me". Interesting though that he said about the same person killing SB killed SL. It's almost like he was taunting the police knowing (or being pretty sure) there was no evidence for SL. Imagine if they didnt find SB tax disc. How many more would there have been? These people will only stop when they're caught.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

JC stuck me as shifty. I'm out so I don't have access to my computer to look at anything but was this during the interview at the time of his trial? Or a later one? The one I'm thinking of he looks like he's gained a few lbs. I'm sure he denied SB and the other offences and didn't he always maintain his innocence of those too? Some people literally have to be slapped in the face with the evidence and even then, they will still say "it wasn't me". Interesting though that he said about the same person killing SB killed SL. It's almost like he was taunting the police knowing (or being pretty sure) there was no evidence for SL. Imagine if they didnt find SB tax disc. How many more would there have been? These people will only stop when they're caught.

Not taunting in this interview, although he definitely had form for trying to ‘smokescreen’. He was trying to get himself out of serious trouble. Will find source. Yes to not stopping.