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

[lee sumner]

But any staff member could have removed the keys so that is not really provable

your over thinking the case. occams way of thinking. why would a staff member remove the keys to 37SR., and what about the paperwork she took providing the details to shorrolds rd.

 

[lee sumner]

Well it was always and still is a possibility that is unproven either way so i would not say loony,

SL also took the paperwork which provides details about 37SR., which everyone appears to forget. she took the house details because she had the keys.

 

[kes1972]

your over thinking the case. occams way of thinking. why would a staff member remove the keys to 37SR., and what about the paperwork she took providing the details to shorrolds rd.

We do not know if she took the paperwork or the keys we know she had an argument with nh though.

 

[kes1972]

We do not know if she took the paperwork or the keys we know she had an argument with nh though.

Occams razor would likely suggest sl never left the office.

 

[kes1972]

Occams razor would likely suggest sl never left the office.

As no proof anywhere thst sl did

 

[lee sumner]

We do not know if she took the paperwork or the keys we know she had an argument with nh though.

only according to DV. AS does not mention any argument in his book.

 

[lee sumner]

Occams razor would likely suggest sl never left the office.

good point. i did wonder could someone from sturgis be responsible.

 

[lee sumner]

You are not confusing this with penny bell are you? Just asking

yes they are.

 

[lee sumner]

Did he see her take them then, anyone in the office could have removed the keys if involved

yes, MG seen her take the keys.

 

[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.

they never turned up at the office. i have never heard this.

 

[Kasparthecat1]

good point. i did wonder could someone from sturgis be responsible.

Also a case perhaps for her leaving the office and being abducted at her car?

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

they never turned up at the office.

DV makes the case only one set of keys for 37 Shorrolds ever existed. They remained in the office, on the key board.

 

[lee sumner]

DV makes the case only one set of keys for 37 Shorrolds ever existed. They remained in the office, on the key board.

no way. SL took keys and paperwork from the office. DCS carter talks about the missing keys on crimewatch UK, and carter was SIO in charge of the case. if carter says SL took the keys then i believe him.

 

[Rookie D]

Unless MG put the keys back on the board himself, after he returned from 37SR just after 3.30pm.

But not before dropping the Fiesta off outside 123 Stevenage Road of course.


I mean, it's pretty thin, but can you imagine.

 

[tricia]

HURRY, HELP US MEET OUR GOAL FOR MARCH. WE ONLY NEED 14 MORE PEOPLE​

Don't you hate those soul-sucking ads you see on other websites? You don't see them on Websleuths. Let's keep it that way.
Help keep Websleuths completely ad-free by becoming a Guardian for just $3 a month.

You’ll unlock exclusive perks AND help protect the one thing we all love—an ad-free, drama-free place to focus on the cases that matter.

Three bucks. That’s it.
CLICK HERE and become a Guardian today and keep Websleuths the way it should be - AD FREE

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

no way. SL took keys and paperwork from the office. DCS carter talks about the missing keys on crimewatch UK, and carter was SIO in charge of the case. if carter says SL took the keys then i believe him.

The later police team (Ryan etc) did seemingly tacitly agree with DV on his ‘one set’ of keys narrative. His thinking & evidence sound. DV suggests someone kept head down in Sturgis office when the key ‘mistake’ was noted & realised. Difficult & embarrassing, perhaps, if so. Things snowballed & gathered momentum.

DV is good I think at challenging assumptions. What the early team believed in good faith early on can of course change if the evidence supports.

The whole key issue isn’t such a big bone of contention for me as what’s harder to dispute is that SL & ‘Kipper’ were outside. A ‘rendezvous’…

DV seems to think it was someone else outside, or another couple, but surely the odds it wasn’t are slim. (He’s right though in that this wasn’t considered or ruled out at time) It would have been good to hear more from him on this.