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

[rvlvr]

The other publications frequently quoted on here are The Suzy Lamplugh Story by Andrew Stephen (only in hard copy and pretty expensive) and Prime Suspect/ Ladykiller by Christopher Berry-Dee, about the life and crimes of JC. CBD also has another book Talking to Psychopaths which has a chapter on JC.

You can read AS’s book for free online:

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

198p.,[8]p. of plates : 22cm

archive.org

Wish I’d known this before I bought my copy a few years back!

 

[Kasparthecat1]

You can read AS’s book for free online:

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

198p.,[8]p. of plates : 22cm

archive.org

Wish I’d known this before I bought my copy a few years back!

Good to know!

 

[lee sumner]

Well - police did consider it was a ruse to leave office, in other words not a bona fide straight appointment in 1986 (before DV) & investigated to this end. Evidence looked to support fact it was a legitimate viewing but still a consideration for the team.

‘Kipper’ wasn’t a registered Sturgis client, all evidence points to something private ‘off the books’ with a man she knew to some degree. AS & police all thought/agreed in end almost certainly she knew him.

For me the answer to why she went missing lies in the below If the police knew ‘WHO’ re: below we’d all be a long way to solving this.

This gets lost & ignored but it’s important & IMO key & is still unsolved to this day:

P.79 AS

She was working on a deal, she confided to a fellow guest, that if successful would mean she was due a large commission…possibly as much as 3K” She was also hopeful to be buying a property with someone in a joint deal. She talked about 3 unsuccessful attempts to sell her flat and how she hoped to clinch a sale soon.

This wasn’t linked to Sturgis to a Sturgis sale or estate agent.

To her parents she said on last Sunday “Don’t ask me about the deal I’ll tell you more when I can” but had confided it involved a joint purchase on a property she couldn’t afford alone & there were dubious ‘strings’ attached as earlier article I posted showed.

She was anxious about the flat sale Mum said in run up to abduction and uncle said ‘almost angry’ about someone leaning on her.

There must surely be a clue in a diary or contact book & for a secretive person she did sometimes share & confide. ‘Guess where I spent Saturday night!’ to Sturgis colleagues, to her uncle, etc.

iam playing devils advocate here. SL could have been abducted by a stranger. i have said this many times. it was her business to go off with strangers to negotiate. this is a large part of mystery that has never be resolved to this day. the mystery business partner would have no need to act like a buyer because he already SL from there meetings prior to her disappearance.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

iam playing devils advocate here. SL could have been abducted by a stranger. i have said this many times. it was her business to go off with strangers to negotiate. this is a large part of mystery that has never be resolved to this day. the mystery business partner would have no need to act like a buyer because he already SL from there meetings prior to her disappearance.

Agree & open mind important but the view of those that have more evidence than we do is she knew her killer to some extent. It’s perhaps likely too the joint purchaser, if no involvement, they’d have also identified.

 

[lee sumner]

Well - police did consider it was a ruse to leave office, in other words not a bona fide straight appointment in 1986 (before DV) & investigated to this end. Evidence looked to support fact it was a legitimate viewing but still a consideration for the team.

‘Kipper’ wasn’t a registered Sturgis client, all evidence points to something private ‘off the books’ with a man she knew to some degree. AS & police all thought/agreed in end almost certainly she knew him.

For me the answer to why she went missing lies in the below If the police knew ‘WHO’ re: below we’d all be a long way to solving this.

This gets lost & ignored but it’s important & IMO key & is still unsolved to this day:

P.79 AS

She was working on a deal, she confided to a fellow guest, that if successful would mean she was due a large commission…possibly as much as 3K” She was also hopeful to be buying a property with someone in a joint deal. She talked about 3 unsuccessful attempts to sell her flat and how she hoped to clinch a sale soon.

This wasn’t linked to Sturgis to a Sturgis sale or estate agent.

To her parents she said on last Sunday “Don’t ask me about the deal I’ll tell you more when I can” but had confided it involved a joint purchase on a property she couldn’t afford alone & there were dubious ‘strings’ attached as earlier article I posted showed.

She was anxious about the flat sale Mum said in run up to abduction and uncle said ‘almost angry’ about someone leaning on her.

There must surely be a clue in a diary or contact book & for a secretive person she did sometimes share & confide. ‘Guess where I spent Saturday night!’ to Sturgis colleagues, to her uncle, etc.

AS did say the investigaters did wonder if lamplugh faked the the viewing herself, so SIO, carter went back at all the appointments SL had made since starting at sturgis in early 1985, and found she had never faked any viewings before, so would she now. i like the way DCS carter checked all SL viewings even though he would never for sure, but he still looked anyway.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

AS did say the investigaters did wonder if lamplugh faked the the viewing herself, so SIO, carter went back at all the appointments SL had made since starting at sturgis in early 1985, and found she had never faked any viewings before, so would she now. i like the way DCS carter checked all SL viewings even though he would never for sure, but he still looked anyway.

I wish they’d finished checking the navy BMW owners of specific 1970s model seen - they did get more than halfway through I believe & numbers were not too high to start with - but resources didn’t permit.

 

[Officer Dibble]

Could SL have picked up keys for 37 from board & in a rush left on a filing cabinet or elsewhere in office. She was absent minded at times…& she was rushing. IF just a rendezvous or a faux viewing she didn’t need anyway.

Then someone finds & assumes a spare set & doesn’t immediately realise significance as all think keys disappeared with her, enters 37 Shorrolds later in normal way? There WERE a set in office after all…so…How else?

Anyone familiar with keys & estate agencies & rushed chaos could perhaps appreciate possible. The keys will prob have had a number allocated to the specific address eg: number 8, not linked to house number. Only when you look at index book for keys would you twig keys for 37 Shorrolds, if so. It was a new instruction so staff unlikely to know from memory.

All spare sets, protocol dictated, on same ring so odd they mistook for spare set for 37 if so, but maybe thought an anomaly or the grave relevance of it all simply missed?

Good point. JMO

 

[Eastend Eagle]

Apologies; I wasn't referring to the police, rather the press who apparently took Mr Riglin along for a jolly. I expect he made up all sorts of things for their benefit. But this isn't evidence. This is entertainment. Evidence is what you sign in front of a police officer.

DV asserts the police must have used the front door key to gain entry as the door appeared to show no sign of damage. He misleads by making leading assertions, does the thinking for others and puts words into their mouths then classifies it all as factual evidence when it's nothing of the kind. Leaving aside the precise particulars as to whether the door would necessarily have shown signs of damage (which is debateable anyway), why would you use a key to get in to search and then go on to assert that in fact you didn't use a key to get in and moreover, that it had gone missing along with SL? It's an absurdity. The police lifted a window, used a back door key or forced their way in somehow and did so that first evening when the estate agency was shut. There's zero record from what I've seen, of the office being opened to hand over a front door key. They could have used a back door key possibly had the agency held one.

As to staff covering up. Why would they potentially expose themselves to a charge of perverting the course of justice? This is a colleague who'd gone missing. You just wouldn't do that, particularly in a pending, potential murder inquiry.

This whole Shorrolds Rd key saga is a red herring. When they eventually caught JC and found various keys in his possession, did the police ever check for the one missing from Shorrolds Road? They worked out a couple, but others were never traced back to a door and JC kept schtum (Berry-Dee). Were these trophies linked to some past, memorable events like the hotel room key used for a dirty weekend with his ice dancer?

As to staff covering up : A charge of perverting the course of justice is far less serious than one of murder.

 

[EddietheEagle]

As to staff covering up : A charge of perverting the course of justice is far less serious than one of murder.

In your eyes perhaps but not in the eyes of the law. Perverting the course of justice carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

 

[lee sumner]

I wish they’d finished checking the navy BMW owners of specific 1970s model seen - they did get more than halfway through I believe & numbers were not too high to start with - but resources didn’t permit.

i wonder if something would have come to light regarding BMW line of enquiry.

 

[kes1972]

What makes you think it's him? (just out of interest - I've just been reading David Wilson's book about him).

Qe2 docked that morning at 06:30 he had plenty of time to make the trip to london

 

[kes1972]

iam playing devils advocate here. SL could have been abducted by a stranger. i have said this many times. it was her business to go off with strangers to negotiate. this is a large part of mystery that has never be resolved to this day. the mystery business partner would have no need to act like a buyer because he already SL from there meetings prior to her disappearance.

You have to think maybe the stolen items were just to check his name and number were not in the pocket diary maybe, so if not in there then would maybe feel no leads could be made to him. Just a thought.

 

[kes1972]

You have to think maybe the stolen items were just to check his name and number were not in the pocket diary maybe, so if not in there then would maybe feel no leads could be made to him. Just a thought.

And i guess that would rule out sw as he was still on the qe2 at thst time, but i think he had strong links to the fulham area, strong enough to run 2 pubs not far away a few years later, something drew him to london ?

 

[Kasparthecat1]

Qe2 docked that morning at 06:30 he had plenty of time to make the trip to london

Fair point, and SW and Sjl were known to each other (to a point). Personally I don't think he's involved, as his known murders (pr the ones which are known about) have been committed in locations he knows well. JMO of course. And the murders we know of tend to be of sex workers/ addicts.

I feel it's perfectly possible though that he's committed murders whilst docked, sailing away before being discovered.

 

[tes1984]

And i guess that would rule out sw as he was still on the qe2 at thst time, but i think he had strong links to the fulham area, strong enough to run 2 pubs not far away a few years later, something drew him to london ?

What are his strong links to the Fulham area?

 

[lee sumner]

Well - police did consider it was a ruse to leave office, in other words not a bona fide straight appointment in 1986 (before DV) & investigated to this end. Evidence looked to support fact it was a legitimate viewing but still a consideration for the team.

‘Kipper’ wasn’t a registered Sturgis client, all evidence points to something private ‘off the books’ with a man she knew to some degree. AS & police all thought/agreed in end almost certainly she knew him.

For me the answer to why she went missing lies in the below If the police knew ‘WHO’ re: below we’d all be a long way to solving this.

This gets lost & ignored but it’s important & IMO key & is still unsolved to this day:

P.79 AS

She was working on a deal, she confided to a fellow guest, that if successful would mean she was due a large commission…possibly as much as 3K” She was also hopeful to be buying a property with someone in a joint deal. She talked about 3 unsuccessful attempts to sell her flat and how she hoped to clinch a sale soon.

This wasn’t linked to Sturgis to a Sturgis sale or estate agent.

To her parents she said on last Sunday “Don’t ask me about the deal I’ll tell you more when I can” but had confided it involved a joint purchase on a property she couldn’t afford alone & there were dubious ‘strings’ attached as earlier article I posted showed.

She was anxious about the flat sale Mum said in run up to abduction and uncle said ‘almost angry’ about someone leaning on her.

There must surely be a clue in a diary or contact book & for a secretive person she did sometimes share & confide. ‘Guess where I spent Saturday night!’ to Sturgis colleagues, to her uncle, etc.

re, mystery business deal. could it have been TS, husband to PSS. is it a coincidence that months earlier SL was supposed to be going into business with them, and PSS said she had not seen SL recently. i would like to know why they had not seen her much. months earlier SL was going to PSS house at least 4 times a week, so why did SL suddenly stop going to P and TS house.

 

[EddietheEagle]

The other publications frequently quoted on here are The Suzy Lamplugh Story by Andrew Stephen (only in hard copy and pretty expensive) and Prime Suspect/ Ladykiller by Christopher Berry-Dee, about the life and crimes of JC. CBD also has another book Talking to Psychopaths which has a chapter on JC.

Hi Kaspar, there is actually a paperback version of Andrew Stephen's book. I have a 1988 edition. You may be alluding to it being difficult to find.

The AS book would be the essential starting point for anyone investigating this case, including DV himself, as there's no other definitive version and AS had very good cooperation from detectives working on the case. DV makes no reference (that I can remember) to the AS book despite making frequent mentions of press and less direct historic material.

Significantly, AS flatly contradicts the central thesis in the later DV book, that detectives never searched 37 Shorrolds Rd on the night in question. Contrast pp10 of AS with pages 115-116 in DV: Kindle version ). The DV passage imo is highly erroneous and I suspect deliberate. It does of course destroy his central thesis so you can see why he muddles and fudges over it. Not making an immediate search of premises where someone could possibly be lying dead inside or badly injured, defies basic common sense as well as fundamental principles of policing. DV lamely quotes one of the CID officers he speak to, as not remembering if anyone went to Shorrolds Rd or assuming the Sturgis manager had gone there instead of the police - a likely story! AS by contrast, states that not only was the place immediately ordered to be searched, the duty inspector, Johnstone, who rushed in, also went to Shorrolds later that night to see for himself. The key then becomes the next fudge as DV tries to draw his reader in to the conjectured bollox he conjures up over the other side of the Thames.

 

[EddietheEagle]

re, mystery business deal. could it have been TS, husband to PSS. is it a coincidence that months earlier SL was supposed to be going into business with them, and PSS said she had not seen SL recently. i would like to know why they had not seen her much. months earlier SL was going to PSS house at least 4 times a week, so why did SL suddenly stop going to P and TS house.

I don't know much about this aspect other than observing that both husband and wife have clearly gone to great extents to extricate themselves from any information about themselves appearing online in connection with SL. DV makes no mention either despite SL and the wife apparently being friends and partners. I strongly suspect he was warned off the matter as it was such an obvious port of call.

I think it's a back story, ultimately of background relevance only but nonetheless part of explaining SL's personality and behaviour.

 

[Kasparthecat1]

Hi Kaspar, there is actually a paperback version of Andrew Stephen's book. I have a 1988 edition. You may be alluding to it being difficult to find.

The AS book would be the essential starting point for anyone investigating this case, including DV himself, as there's no other definitive version and AS had very good cooperation from detectives working on the case. DV makes no reference (that I can remember) to the AS book despite making frequent mentions of press and less direct historic material.

Significantly, AS flatly contradicts the central thesis in the later DV book, that detectives never searched 37 Shorrolds Rd on the night in question. Contrast pp10 of AS with pages 115-116 in DV: Kindle version ). The DV passage imo is highly erroneous and I suspect deliberate. It does of course destroy his central thesis so you can see why he muddles and fudges over it. Not making an immediate search of premises where someone could possibly be lying dead inside or badly injured, defies basic common sense as well as fundamental principles of policing. DV lamely quotes one of the CID officers he speak to, as not remembering if anyone went to Shorrolds Rd or assuming the Sturgis manager had gone there instead of the police - a likely story! AS by contrast, states that not only was the place immediately ordered to be searched, the duty inspector, Johnstone, who rushed in, also went to Shorrolds later that night to see for himself. The key then becomes the next fudge as DV tries to draw his reader in to the conjectured bollox he conjures up over the other side of the Thames.

"Hi Kaspar, there is actually a paperback version of Andrew Stephen's book. I have a 1988 edition. You may be alluding to it being difficult to find"

I obviously didn't articulate myself very well there! I meant to say "only available in hard copy" but that turns out not to be the case either, which is good news. Yes I have the book. It's excellent I agree - would strongly recommend.

 

[EddietheEagle]

Fair point, and SW and Sjl were known to each other (to a point). Personally I don't think he's involved, as his known murders (pr the ones which are known about) have been committed in locations he knows well. JMO of course. And the murders we know of tend to be of sex workers/ addicts.

Coincidence indeed that they knew, at least of, one another. But there again, I've heard it said we're only ever six degrees of separation away from anyone else on the planet, or something like that.

As you intimate, there doesn't seem to be a line of investigation to connect the two.