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

[lee sumner]

Well, he made the same assumptions as the police, I guess - that the viewing was genuine, that she took the keys and there was only one set. He's still in normal mode at this point.

If the reconstructions are correct that she came behind MG's desk to retrieve them, then she did take the keys. We're then left with the puzzle of how the police got in next morning without damaging the door, how MG was behind his desk and at lunch at the same time, and where the spares came from.

the locks would have been changed at 37SR the next day. the property is still for sale. SL might be missing, but life goes on at sturgis.

 

[kes1972]

Well, he made the same assumptions as the police, I guess - that the viewing was genuine, that she took the keys and there was only one set. He's still in normal mode at this point.

If the reconstructions are correct that she came behind MG's desk to retrieve them, then she did take the keys. We're then left with the puzzle of how the police got in next morning without damaging the door, how MG was behind his desk and at lunch at the same time, and where the spares came from.

The owner did say there was only one set of keys according to what i have read on past threads, if so then sl did not go behind him to get them or sl did and somehow the keys turned up back in the office.

 

[kes1972]

Everybody "knew" she went to 37SR, so in 1988, what was to be clearer about, I guess...

Maybe everyone assumed

 

[kes1972]

MG seen SL pick up the keys and paperwork for 37SR.

Agree, i do not buy mg story for one second, too many holes on what he says.
Maybe he could not tale the keys because they were in sl car, maybe that is why the seat was back because trying to find the keys in the car later on and why the police were not called until after the 6 oclock viewing because the keys were not back in the office, maybe do a check on the partial print on the mirror and see if it matches someone.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Interesting here they have “hair: dark brown - shoulder length: highlighted” which is a fit perhaps for what it really was, as per last party photo.

 

[Rookie D]

Interesting here they have “hair: dark brown - shoulder length: highlighted” which is a fit perhaps for what it really was, as per last party photo.

Absolutely.

The photo taken of SL just 2 days before her death, clearly shows her with brunette hair and blonde highlights/lowlights.

And so when the police try and give a reason for why they didn't receive as much initial help from the public as they thought they would, they use SL's hair colour to try and explain this away.

But I would wager that there's a chance that the "blonde" woman who was seen arguing with the man in the LHD BMW, wasn't necessarily SL, but instead a female accomplice.

Could the couple in the BMW have been arguing about the fact they had just killed SL?

And again, for any other sightings where a "blonde" female was supposedly identified as SL, the same may apply there to.

When we look at the so called "witnesses" that came forward, not one of them IMO gives us any definitive identification of SL; aside from BW perhaps, who was the only witness who knew SL in any capacity.

Could the abduction of SL have involved 2 people?

One being a blonde female?

I mean, it's not beyond the realms of possibility.

 

[Rookie D]

Hi all

I've just noticed an interesting point that I felt compelled to clarify; partly because I had myself made a critical error relating to a particular witness who claimed to have seen SL on Stevenage Road.

The best way to explain is this...


This is Mrs Jagoda's (from 139 Stevenage Road) sighting...
(5:20 - 6:04)

And this is the "passer-by, around lunchtime" sighting...
(6:25 - 7:11)

These are TWO DIFFERENT witnesses entirely.


I will post some more on this shortly, but thought it important to clarify the distinction between the 2 different witness sightings.

 

[Rookie D]

Hi all

I've just noticed an interesting point that I felt compelled to clarify; partly because I had myself made a critical error relating to a particular witness who claimed to have seen SL on Stevenage Road.

The best way to explain is this...


This is Mrs Jagoda's (from 139 Stevenage Road) sighting...
(5:20 - 6:04)

And this is the "passer-by, around lunchtime" sighting...
(6:25 - 7:11)

These are TWO DIFFERENT witnesses entirely.


I will post some more on this shortly, but thought it important to clarify the distinction between the 2 different witness sightings.

Interesting how Mrs Jagoda is pointing towards the line of houses on the western side of Stevenage Road (that includes 123 Stevenage Road) when she says...

"...and I saw a girl standing..."

But seeing as she also says...

"I saw a car. In the car, it was a straw hat, which amazed me, because it was quite posh."


Really?

That would require Mrs Jagoda to have walked along Stevenage Road and PAST the Fiesta in order top be able to actually SEE the hat in the car.

I'd certainly question her credibility as a so called "witness."


Oh, and she also claimed to have seen a man close by, whose description clearly resembles Mr Kipper. Interestingly however, she doesn't claim to have seen this man together WITH the "girl."

While I remain sceptical about this witness, it would be very interesting if she actually did see SL in Stevenage Road, because the fact she's pointing towards the side of the road OPPOSITE where the Fiesta was parked, it could suggest that SL had got out of the car and gone over to the Sturgis property opposite; ergo, 123 Stevenage Road.

And of course, if this occurred when WJ was out, then it could support the theory that SL had driven to Stevenage Road specifically to show Mr Kipper around other Sturgis properties; including 123 Stevenage Road.

But of course, we are back to the whole "keys" situation.


Is is at all possible that SL drove to 37SR with the WRONG set of keys, and had inadvertently picked up a set of keys for 123 Stevenage Road?

Random of course, but a possibility?

Unless Mr Kipper was an Estate Agent himself and SL was covertly working for another Estate Agent on the side?


Or, could none of the sightings on Stevenage Road have been SL at all?

In which case, we are left with the possibility that the woman and man seen on Stevenage Road, may have been Jehovah witnesses simply canvassing the area, and nothing to do with SL at all.

Again, not beyond the realms of possibility.

 

[Rookie D]

Stevenage Road 1986...

Spray paint job anyone?

How about red?...

Surely not?



Also, note that the distinctive yellow Sturgis "For Sale" sign was taken down from outside 123 Stevenage Road shortly after the disappearance of SL.

MG must have got that particular property sorted out very quickly then, despite the circumstances.

 

[lee sumner]

The owner did say there was only one set of keys according to what i have read on past threads, if so then sl did not go behind him to get them or sl did and somehow the keys turned up back in the office.

if DCS carter says SL took the keys to 37SR then she took the keys. its only DV who says she did not take them. carter was the SIO, in charge, so i believe carter.

 

[lee sumner]

Agree, i do not buy mg story for one second, too many holes on what he says.
Maybe he could not tale the keys because they were in sl car, maybe that is why the seat was back because trying to find the keys in the car later on and why the police were not called until after the 6 oclock viewing because the keys were not back in the office, maybe do a check on the partial print on the mirror and see if it matches someone.

MG reported SL missing at 6.45PM. there is nothing suspicious about gurdon. he was caught up in the mystery of the lamplugh disappearance, so he would have been in shock by the events of that day. he was SL boss at sturgis, and was the one who gave her the job in early 1985.

 

[lee sumner]

Interesting here they have “hair: dark brown - shoulder length: highlighted” which is a fit perhaps for what it really was, as per last party photo.

one photo of SL on the board was taken on top of the empire state building in NY. probably from when she worked on the QE2.

 

[lee sumner]

That’s when DV suggests why/when someone in office realises key ‘mistake’ (only ever one set) but keeps head down. DV says he thinks he knows who this was but would be poor form to name, so doesn’t The feeling was SL was definitely outside so…and the ball was rolling & gaining speed.

Re: AS he’s an excellent journalist but only as good as his sources.

Interesting how Mrs Jagoda is pointing towards the line of houses on the western side of Stevenage Road (that includes 123 Stevenage Road) when she says...

"...and I saw a girl standing..."

View attachment 655094

But seeing as she also says...

"I saw a car. In the car, it was a straw hat, which amazed me, because it was quite posh."


Really?

That would require Mrs Jagoda to have walked along Stevenage Road and PAST the Fiesta in order top be able to actually SEE the hat in the car.

I'd certainly question her credibility as a so called "witness."


Oh, and she also claimed to have seen a man close by, whose description clearly resembles Mr Kipper. Interestingly however, she doesn't claim to have seen this man together WITH the "girl."

While I remain sceptical about this witness, it would be very interesting if she actually did see SL in Stevenage Road, because the fact she's pointing towards the side of the road OPPOSITE where the Fiesta was parked, it could suggest that SL had got out of the car and gone over to the Sturgis property opposite; ergo, 123 Stevenage Road.

And of course, if this occurred when WJ was out, then it could support the theory that SL had driven to Stevenage Road specifically to show Mr Kipper around other Sturgis properties; including 123 Stevenage Road.

But of course, we are back to the whole "keys" situation.


Is is at all possible that SL drove to 37SR with the WRONG set of keys, and had inadvertently picked up a set of keys for 123 Stevenage Road?

Random of course, but a possibility?

Unless Mr Kipper was an Estate Agent himself and SL was covertly working for another Estate Agent on the side?


Or, could none of the sightings on Stevenage Road have been SL at all?

In which case, we are left with the possibility that the woman and man seen on Stevenage Road, may have been Jehovah witnesses simply canvassing the area, and nothing to do with SL at all.

Again, not beyond the realms of possibility.

occams principle way of thinking. SL was never on stevenage rd.

 

[WestLondoner]

he was SL boss at sturgis, and was the one who gave her the job in early 1985.

Martin Sturgis hired her and thought she'd be good in sales, so assigned her to a branch near where she lived. The story that she walked in and was hired on the spot, like the story that she was given a window desk because she was the most attractive female, originated in her diary.

Almost all the desks were in the window and to judge by the reconstructions, all the women were young, presentable and smart.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Martin Sturgis hired her and thought she'd be good in sales, so assigned her to a branch near where she lived. The story that she walked in and was hired on the spot, like the story that she was given a window desk because she was the most attractive female, originated in her diary.

Almost all the desks were in the window and to judge by the reconstructions, all the women were young, presentable and smart.

Also not easy to see in re: all house advertising etc.

 

[lee sumner]

As wrote the book but either did not know the finer detail of who said what ir was not told or they also did not know. Pretty embarrassing really, i wonder why he even bothered wroting the book because he definitely did not go out of his way ti give a clear idea of timeline.

AS book is excellent, however there are a few details in there that are sketchy. details where he could have been more concise like the timeline.

 

[lee sumner]

Also not easy to see in re: all house advertising etc.

yes, martin sturgis was the guvnor/boss at sturgis, and gurdon was the manager. sturgis met suzy twice at a company event and christmas party, but it was gurdon that interviewed suzy then gave her the job.

 

[lee sumner]

That’s when DV suggests why/when someone in office realises key ‘mistake’ (only ever one set) but keeps head down. DV says he thinks he knows who this was but would be poor form to name, so doesn’t The feeling was SL was definitely outside so…and the ball was rolling & gaining speed.

Re: AS he’s an excellent journalist but only as good as his sources.

AS is a excellent journalist, then you have DV who is not even a journalist, yet people are buying into his theory which makes no sense.

 

[lee sumner]

Yeah there's likely more than one key - with a neighbour, a cleaner, or a relative. Only one at the office, which JMP Sjl has. MG assumes same, and shouts through letterbox and windows, possibly checking round the back too. AS accepts this as sufficient to mean "inside and out". Carter in the Crimewatch programme in (I think?) October brandishes a key on its yellow Sturgis telling us that a key just like it has gone missing along with Sjl. JMO obviously, but had that key remained at Sturgis someone would have mentioned it before Crimewatch aired. And JMO again but the door to 37 SR was kicked in or shoved in by LE, just like the door to Sjl's flat was. DV suggests that 37SR can't have been accessed without a key, supporting his own narrative of what may have happened that day. So there's some doubt.

could have got in the back way. 37SR. the locks would have been changed the next day, 29/7/1986. SL is missing but the property still has to be sold.

 

[lee sumner]

Shared her cigarettes according to them.

according to them. OK yes there are 2 sides to every story, but other staff members would have seen them having a cig together during there break.