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

[kes1972]

i thought the same. in AS book it does not say WJ told AM about the white fiesta nearly blocking the garage entrance. the details are a bit sketchy, and if WJ was so suspicious of the fiesta why not walk over and check it out, it could have been a stolen car. she took her dog out, then gave AM a knock, then they drove to the bank waiting in line, then came home. all this in 10mins.

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.

 

[WestLondoner]

So we know they had the keys to 37, why then did mg not take them with him to check 37

"He didn’t go inside to look for Suzy because he says he assumed Suzy had the key."

 

[WestLondoner]

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.

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

 

[kes1972]

"He didn’t go inside to look for Suzy because he says he assumed Suzy had the key."

What a joke office manager does not know what is going on ? Police just gave them all an easy ride, seems more going on than we will ever know.

 

[Rookie D]

"He didn’t go inside to look for Suzy because he says he assumed Suzy had the key."

I don't believe that for a second.

And this is where MG makes a mistake.


We know that there was only one set of keys for 37SR

We know that SL either took them with her, or she didn't

If she did, then the killer must have put them back in the office.

If she didn't, then the keys would have still been in the office, hanging on the wall.

And so when MG says he assumed that SL had the keys for 37SR, it means he didn't bother to check the wall where they were hanging up, AND then he subsequently went off to 37SR without the keys, despite them being hanging up on the wall in the office.

So we have the branch manager apparently going to 37SR TWICE, and both times without a key.

The important question here is this; WHO told the police there was only ONE set of keys for 37SR?

If it was MG himself, then that's fair enough, but if it was anyone else who told the police OR the police found out themselves, then that makes some of MG's decision making on the day of the disappearance somewhat questionable.


And as I've mentioned upthread; there's just something about MG's account, that just sit quite right.

 

[WestLondoner]

What a joke office manager does not know what is going on ? Police just gave them all an easy ride, seems more going on than we will ever know.

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.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

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.

Yes, more catalogue of errors than conspiracy, I feel, and then a momentum...If DV is right everyone (?) did eventually cotton on but by then too late, and as she was outside 37 anyway (as most assume) did the 'truth' make any odds?

What the 'truth' may have forced the police to do, is look more carefully at the narrative here. To look carefully at this business and/or 'deal' she was doing with someone 'off the books'. They could never find any trace at the time but there must have been a record somewhere? Especially if all brewing for a few months. PL says if only he knew, in some distress, in a doc.

MG and colleagues really were/are sound /nice, well adjusted people. I think that's important to remember. MG very typical of E Agency managers of the time. Who can have predicted such an extraordinary turn of events that he and others found themselves embroiled with.

Very well put, again.

 

[WestLondoner]

The presser at which the bill said SJL had been seen at 37SR was definitely premature, IMO, and along with the family's unhelpful publishing of out-of-date photos fixed the idea of SJL as a brunette last seen at Shorrolds.

What I don't understand is why they didn't take the earliest opportunity to correct this. There are good reasons to think that the last sightings of SJL were not at 37SR even if those are correct, but rather, those by BW and now EM, near or in the FPR two hours later. Once those witnesses came forward, why could not the police update their previous account to say WTTEO God love you, the public, for your tremendous response. Thanks to you, we now have witnesses that may place Miss Lamplugh, in her car, near the FPR. Did you see her there? We need to know where she went next, and when, and how she came to leave her car.

That's not embarrassing - that's using exactly the information you appealed for. If the appeal can't be allowed to challenge the 37SR narrative, what's the point? If they "knew" the 37SR story was solid what was the appeal appealing for?

Equally obviously it should have been a cue to wonder who "Mr Kipper"'s local contacts might be and whether SJL was taken into a local house or building. They must have been aware this was likely but wouldn't the EM sighting have been gold dust in identifying it?

Even if for argument's sake EM was found or deemed to have got the day wrong, it shouldn't matter. There's no reason to think SJL had not been about with Mr Kipper before - quite the reverse. So what sort of places did Mr Kipper go, and whom did he meet and know?

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

The presser at which the bill said SJL had been seen at 37SR was definitely premature, IMO, and along with the family's unhelpful publishing of out-of-date photos fixed the idea of SJL as a brunette last seen at Shorrolds.

What I don't understand is why they didn't take the earliest opportunity to correct this. There are good reasons to think that the last sightings of SJL were not at 37SR even if those are correct, but rather, those by BW and now EM, near or in the FPR two hours later. Once those witnesses came forward, why could not the police update their previous account to say WTTEO God love you, the public, for your tremendous response. Thanks to you, we now have witnesses that may place Miss Lamplugh, in her car, near the FPR. Did you see her there? We need to know where she went next, and when, and how she came to leave her car.

That's not embarrassing - that's using exactly the information you appealed for. If the appeal can't be allowed to challenge the 37SR narrative, what's the point? If they "knew" the 37SR story was solid what was the appeal appealing for?

Equally obviously it should have been a cue to wonder who "Mr Kipper"'s local contacts might be and whether SJL was taken into a local house or building. They must have been aware this was likely but wouldn't the EM sighting have been gold dust in identifying it?

Even if for argument's sake EM was found or deemed to have got the day wrong, it shouldn't matter. There's no reason to think SJL had not been about with Mr Kipper before - quite the reverse. So what sort of places did Mr Kipper go, and whom did he meet and know?

Was the EM sighting - @Clairybums father (?) ever officially noted/taken seriously? Lost? (So much apparently was? Vagaries of old, index system? Did DL dismiss after reported to her in person?

They did a lot of very local house-to-house searching.

BW - they did follow up in Press but perhaps not as clearly as you sensibly suggest. Agree on EM too but fear this sighting was poss dismissed.

 

[Officer Dibble]

I don't believe that for a second.

And this is where MG makes a mistake.


We know that there was only one set of keys for 37SR

We know that SL either took them with her, or she didn't

If she did, then the killer must have put them back in the office.

If she didn't, then the keys would have still been in the office, hanging on the wall.

And so when MG says he assumed that SL had the keys for 37SR, it means he didn't bother to check the wall where they were hanging up, AND then he subsequently went off to 37SR without the keys, despite them being hanging up on the wall in the office.

So we have the branch manager apparently going to 37SR TWICE, and both times without a key.

The important question here is this; WHO told the police there was only ONE set of keys for 37SR?

If it was MG himself, then that's fair enough, but if it was anyone else who told the police OR the police found out themselves, then that makes some of MG's decision making on the day of the disappearance somewhat questionable.


And as I've mentioned upthread; there's just something about MG's account, that just sit quite right.

It is possible someone made a copy of those keys beforehand.

 

[Officer Dibble]

Yes, more catalogue of errors than conspiracy, I feel, and then a momentum...If DV is right everyone (?) did eventually cotton on but by then too late, and as she was outside 37 anyway (as most assume) did the 'truth' make any odds?

What the 'truth' may have forced the police to do, is look more carefully at the narrative here. To look carefully at this business and/or 'deal' she was doing with someone 'off the books'. They could never find any trace at the time but there must have been a record somewhere? Especially if all brewing for a few months. PL says if only he knew, in some distress, in a doc.

MG and colleagues really were/are sound /nice, well adjusted people. I think that's important to remember. MG very typical of E Agency managers of the time. Who can have predicted such an extraordinary turn of events that he and others found themselves embroiled with.

Very well put, again.

But we never know if someone is 'nice, well adjusted' as they might appear to be so if you don't know them very well but looks can be deceiving. JMO MOO

 

[Kasparthecat1]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3Dn5qXDD_RsEM&ved=2ahUKEwirpOPP8L2TAxW8a0EAHXYlB-4QtwJ6BAgbEAE&sqi=2&usg=AOvVaw28iO9fQLDfMRysMKSZQvwh

Youtube vid of police reconstruction, made about a week (?) after disappearance. In case anyone here hasn't seen it.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

But we never know if someone is 'nice, well adjusted' as they might appear to be so if you don't know them very well but looks can be deceiving. JMO MO0

But we never know if someone is 'nice, well adjusted' as they might appear to be so if you don't know them very well but looks can be deceiving. JMO MOO

True but if familiar you get a good sense.

 

[Officer Dibble]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3Dn5qXDD_RsEM&ved=2ahUKEwirpOPP8L2TAxW8a0EAHXYlB-4QtwJ6BAgbEAE&sqi=2&usg=AOvVaw28iO9fQLDfMRysMKSZQvwh

Youtube vid of police reconstruction, made about a week (?) after disappearance. In case anyone here hasn't seen it.

Thanks for this.

Can anyone help with the clip from crimewatch early on in the investigation? It might not have been in a reconstruction but just a clip to jog anyone's memory, perhaps? I remember seeing it. A young couple were driving behind a car that had a woman frantically trying to get attention, possibly iirc banging on the rear view window. Can anyone find this clip please?

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Thanks for this.

Can anyone help with the clip from crimewatch early on in the investigation? It might not have been in a reconstruction but just a clip to jog anyone's memory, perhaps? I remember seeing it. A young couple were driving behind a car that had a woman frantically trying to get attention, possibly iirc banging on the rear view window. Can anyone find this clip please?

That reminds me of the reconstruction of arguing couple (woman looking like she’s screaming) in BMW (2000 Crimewatch) but guess you’ve ruled that out?

 

[rvlvr]

That reminds me of the reconstruction of arguing couple (woman looking like she’s screaming) in BMW (2000 Crimewatch) but guess you’ve ruled that out?

Around the 8m 20s mark, here.

I think this is the witness you’ve mentioned before, who claimed it was a ‘very hot day’, but we know it was actually quite grey and cool for July.

 

[WestLondoner]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3Dn5qXDD_RsEM&ved=2ahUKEwirpOPP8L2TAxW8a0EAHXYlB-4QtwJ6BAgbEAE&sqi=2&usg=AOvVaw28iO9fQLDfMRysMKSZQvwh

Youtube vid of police reconstruction, made about a week (?) after disappearance. In case anyone here hasn't seen it.

Thanks for posting that. Hard to find on YT given the "Susie Lamplue" misspelling.

Notice all the early errors and assumptions though, just a week on. The board of keys is nowhere near any desk; as she arrives at 37SR Mr Kipper is waiting; she is shown taking her client inside; her car is double parked; it's "then abandoned some 20 minutes later two miles away in Stevenage Road". Almost everything in the reconstruction is contentious or outright unsubstantiated.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3Dn5qXDD_RsEM&ved=2ahUKEwirpOPP8L2TAxW8a0EAHXYlB-4QtwJ6BAgbEAE&sqi=2&usg=AOvVaw28iO9fQLDfMRysMKSZQvwh

Youtube vid of police reconstruction, made about a week (?) after disappearance. In case anyone here hasn't seen it.

On left this looks like the pop up police station in Stevenage Rd, where JD says the BMW witness originally reported his sighting. This report was lost or not relayed back to investigative team at time if so.

The clip shows the officers showing Shorrolds residents a photo of SL & then shows one (below, right) if same, not terribly representative perhaps (?) & black & white unhelpful.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Thanks for posting that. Hard to find on YT given the "Susie Lamplue" misspelling.

Notice all the early errors and assumptions though, just a week on. The board of keys is nowhere near any desk; as she arrives at 37SR Mr Kipper is waiting; she is shown taking her client inside; her car is double parked; it's "then abandoned some 20 minutes later two miles away in Stevenage Road". Almost everything in the reconstruction is contentious or outright unsubstantiated.

I agree with all you’ve said - but MG’s desk, I think furthest back & to right of SL stand-in here - so no, key board not strictly behind his desk but to side of it. What they meant? Either way he couldn’t see her & was he already in Croc Tears by then? Could she have picked anything else up here? Doubt it but crossed my mind, (envelope, cigs in kitchen etc)?

 

[lee sumner]

I don't believe that for a second.

And this is where MG makes a mistake.


We know that there was only one set of keys for 37SR

We know that SL either took them with her, or she didn't

If she did, then the killer must have put them back in the office.

If she didn't, then the keys would have still been in the office, hanging on the wall.

And so when MG says he assumed that SL had the keys for 37SR, it means he didn't bother to check the wall where they were hanging up, AND then he subsequently went off to 37SR without the keys, despite them being hanging up on the wall in the office.

So we have the branch manager apparently going to 37SR TWICE, and both times without a key.

The important question here is this; WHO told the police there was only ONE set of keys for 37SR?

If it was MG himself, then that's fair enough, but if it was anyone else who told the police OR the police found out themselves, then that makes some of MG's decision making on the day of the disappearance somewhat questionable.
SL

And as I've mentioned upthread; there's just something about MG's account, that just sit quite right.

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