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

[lee sumner]

Yeah, I agree, however she did admit this in her letters that are quoted in this book, so we are really only saying what she admitted herself. I wonder if that was actually the real part of the book she objected to, because apart from AS saying Suzy had some boyfriends and had an active sex life, it was all quite innocent and normal stuff for someone her age.

i said this a few weeks ago, and was warned/told it was out of order. all i said was DL liked attention.

I agree, when talking on camera other family member is almost smirking, which does seem very odd to say the least and on more than one interview

I agree, when talking on camera other family member is almost smirking, which does seem very odd to say the least and on more than one interview

agree. you can tell she is loving the attention.

 

[lee sumner]

Not to mention her going to a block of flats on Stevenage Road with a friend, in disguise as journalists, to try and get information (Page 101 of AS book).

She actually took a gun with her. I get that she was just trying to find her daughter, but the police must have been horrified.

searching for SL with tracker dogs trying to get a scent, when DL and PL came down with there dogs and got the tracker dogs confused. they could not pick up a scent on stevenage rd. its there in AS book. i did wonder if DI johnstone and the dogs, did they pick up any scent of SL on shorrolds rd or stevenage rd.

 

[lee sumner]

She also believes that Suzie might not have taken a telephone call from "Mr Kipper," even though the diary entry is clearly made in her handwriting.

"She could have been told to enter it," says Mrs Lamplugh.

Police confirm that there is no evidence that Suzie took such a call.

To be fair to DL, this is not very far from the police theory - or one avenue they considered - that SL made up the appointment in her diary. If the appointment was a personal one, possibly relating to an off books deal, she'd not put the person's real name in her desk diary but she would need a cover story. The question is why this odd name and not Mr Jones or Andrew Smith or something. I don't buy that this was JCs prison nickname because he liked to take naps and eat smoked fish while reminiscing about his style of neckwear or whatever just so story nonsense is floating around.

DL did not like SL first boyfriend BS because he did not stand up when she came into the room., like the queen.

 

[kes1972]

searching for SL with tracker dogs trying to get a scent, when DL and PL came down with there dogs and got the tracker dogs confused. they could not pick up a scent on stevenage rd. its there in AS book. i did wonder if DI johnstone and the dogs, did they pick up any scent of SL on shorrolds rd or stevenage rd.

Or the roads near the office?

 

[lee sumner]

She also believes that Suzie might not have taken a telephone call from "Mr Kipper," even though the diary entry is clearly made in her handwriting.

"She could have been told to enter it," says Mrs Lamplugh.

Police confirm that there is no evidence that Suzie took such a call.

To be fair to DL, this is not very far from the police theory - or one avenue they considered - that SL made up the appointment in her diary. If the appointment was a personal one, possibly relating to an off books deal, she'd not put the person's real name in her desk diary but she would need a cover story. The question is why this odd name and not Mr Jones or Andrew Smith or something. I don't buy that this was JCs prison nickname because he liked to take naps and eat smoked fish while reminiscing about his style of neckwear or whatever just so story nonsense is floating around.

told to enter it. in the office. how mad does this sound.

 

[Konstantin]

told to enter it. in the office. how mad does this sound.

I mean, not completely mad? If whoever she was meeting that lunchtime asked her to keep the meeting a secret and she therefore had to write a fake name in her desk diary to cover her going out to meet someone off books. I don't think that Kipper literally instructed her to write the name Kipper in her diary, but he may have asked her to not tell anyone they were meeting and she may have agreed and so made a fake name up off the top of her head because she had to write something.

 

[lee sumner]

I think BW sighting likely real as she’s never doubted it at all & she’s a very smart woman, even though stakes very high & others needed to prove her wrong. Anyone can be mistaken ofc, but my gut says she saw her due to her lack of doubt.

It might be the new sighting at Doneraile potentially ties to this.

re, BW. on the crimewatch reconstruction she did not seem sure it was SL she seen driving down FPR. she appeared to be a bit confused in my opinion.

 

[Kasparthecat1]

re, BW. on the crimewatch reconstruction she did not seem sure it was SL she seen driving down FPR. she appeared to be a bit confused in my opinion.

Can you remember @lee sumner whether BW mentioned the hat on the shelf in that interview?

I seem to remember that she DID talk about seeing the hat at some point but I can't remember when (or if she said it at all, and my mind is playing tricks on me).

 

[lee sumner]

Can you remember @lee sumner whether BW mentioned the hat on the shelf in that interview?

I seem to remember that she DID talk about seeing the hat at some point but I can't remember when (or if she said it at all, and my mind is playing tricks on me).

re, BW. i think she may have mentioned the hat on the shelf. it is mentioned in AS book, but BW did not come forward until 5 days into the case. BW would have seen news footage/media showing SL hat on the back shelf.

 

[Kasparthecat1]

Y

re, BW. i think she may have mentioned the hat on the shelf. it is mentioned in AS book, but BW did not come forward until 5 days into the case. BW would have seen news footage/media showing SL hat on the back shelf.

Yes - I was thinking same. I doubt she would have seen hat. I think (jmo) that that's a long time to wait to come forward, given that she was supposedly a friend of sjl, or at least an associate.

 

[lee sumner]

Y

Yes - I was thinking same. I doubt she would have seen hat. I think (jmo) that that's a long time to wait to come forward, given that she was supposedly a friend of sjl, or at least an associate.

re, BW. she said she did not come forward sooner because she only realised what she had seen 5 days later.

 

[kes1972]

What i would like to know is how come the most obvious line of enquiry which is the pow has never been extensively checked to rule it out. How difficult is it to check the rear garden area and railway embankment area as far as the overgrown viaduct. We know fact the pow had sl personal items, we know fact she spoke to pow about getting her items back and just because they said sl never went there it is covered up and forgotten about. 37 sr has produced absolutely zero results in over 40 years and the same with jc no answers or proof of any kind in the same time. Yet sl and her family get no justice for some strange reason pow is seen as a no go. Maybe police funding or such like i know not….

 

[EddietheEagle]

Y

Yes - I was thinking same. I doubt she would have seen hat. I think (jmo) that that's a long time to wait to come forward, given that she was supposedly a friend of sjl, or at least an associate.

It's an extraordinarily long time to wait given that they actually knew each other, were friendly and worked together on house transactions. She must have been more than aware of SL's disappearance given the massive TV and radio publicity given to the case. So why wait the best part of a week before reporting her sighting? Put yourself in her shoes. Would you have let so much time slip by were it your friend with time clearly of the utmost essence? Something isn't right about her evidence.

 

[EddietheEagle]

What i would like to know is how come the most obvious line of enquiry which is the pow has never been extensively checked to rule it out. How difficult is it to check the rear garden area and railway embankment area as far as the overgrown viaduct. We know fact the pow had sl personal items, we know fact she spoke to pow about getting her items back and just because they said sl never went there it is covered up and forgotten about. 37 sr has produced absolutely zero results in over 40 years and the same with jc no answers or proof of any kind in the same time. Yet sl and her family get no justice for some strange reason pow is seen as a no go. Maybe police funding or such like i know not….

No evidence existed for the police to jump onto DV's Prince of Wales bandwagon to cause the pub to be "extensively checked out". A separate, single line of query occurred at the outset with SL's lost/stolen/misplaced effects. This was investigated and the articles handed over.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

It's an extraordinarily long time to wait given that they actually knew each other, were friendly and worked together on house transactions. She must have been more than aware of SL's disappearance given the massive TV and radio publicity given to the case. So why wait the best part of a week before reporting her sighting? Put yourself in her shoes. Would you have let so much time slip by were it your friend with time clearly of the utmost essence? Something isn't right about her evidence.

I do know BW has remained certain she saw her, for that reason I take this sighting seriously. She was/is a credible witness & post weekend it was less easy to muddle days. Clearly that Monday. She did explain why she came forward comparatively late.

The police agreed her diary confirmed her schedule & colleagues further verified. This later, rather incongruous sighting, possibly explains an unexpected turn of events & I do wonder at Doneralie sighting in this context.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

No evidence existed for the police to jump onto DV's Prince of Wales bandwagon to cause the pub to be "extensively checked out". A separate, single line of query occurred at the outset with SL's lost/stolen/misplaced effects. This was investigated and the articles handed over.

This is quite correct. On the pub a loose thread is re: the 2pm unexplained calls to pub which remain interesting & unexplained.

DV surely had ‘more’ here on ‘pub evidence’ re: deposition site than he could say (?) otherwise it’s more than a bit extraordinary & we could say police resources should be allocated to ‘dig up’ any SL associated address re: any ‘suspicious’ POI etc ( ?) ‘just in case’.

 

[EddietheEagle]

Those mystery calls require explanation. In that context, it may be worth thinking how and why SB, Shirley Banks, managed to get a call out to a cab company. I can understand a call to work, but a cab? It's like she was half captive at that point and half not. Was SL in a similar position? And how could that possibly be? Were they being toyed with? To me, it's all pointing back to one person. Looking into the tortured experience of his ex-girlfriend, Sharon Major, could provide insight.

 

[kes1972]

This is quite correct. On the pub a loose thread is re: the 2pm unexplained calls to pub which remain interesting & unexplained.

DV surely had ‘more’ here on ‘pub evidence’ re: deposition site than he could say (?) otherwise it’s more than a bit extraordinary & we could say police resources should be allocated to ‘dig up’ any SL associated address re: any ‘suspicious’ POI etc ( ?) ‘just in case’.

Exactly, worst case is nothing is found but rules out that line of enquiry.

 

[Lady Stoddart-West]

Those mystery calls require explanation. In that context, it may be worth thinking how and why SB, Shirley Banks, managed to get a call out to a cab company. I can understand a call to work, but a cab? It's like she was half captive at that point and half not. Was SL in a similar position? And how could that possibly be? Were they being toyed with? To me, it's all pointing back to one person. Looking into the tortured experience of his ex-girlfriend, Sharon Major, could provide insight.

The obvious & simplest explanation re: early calls to PoW, was an honest mistake by a muddled KH. I don’t believe that to be the case now - One reason being, AS pointed out ‘unease’ caused at time which planted a seed. If we take these calls seriously, what might they point to?

A phone box was ‘2 mins’ from the abandoned fiesta. It’s easy to forget how vital they were in pre mobile phone days.

SB

The facts are she knew JC - possibly fairly well & at least, almost certainly (as her husband did from wine bar all 3 were regulars at) by sight/on nodding terms. Did he try to interest her in any ‘business scheme’? Had he done the same with SL? An offer of 3k if things went well, perhaps?

Given above, her offering him a friendly lift home may have been how things began.

Her thumb print on a doc in monk’s chest in sitting room suggests she was snooping (?) at some point. If so, big red flag, it was apparently a doc report on hired PI on AR!

Call to cab company curiously not recorded/noted by company as was usual. Mistake?

A cab called from Foye House to station for a ‘woman’ why to the station? SB had her car there at flat. JC promising an escape route & toying with SB?

Agree SM worth revisiting & GP & indeed AR. All three were very scared of him. To bottom out his ‘business opportunity’ ‘offers’ also. AR took his management consultancy business seriously too. He was looking at suitable premises for a joint venture with her. Parallels with SL?

Call to wrong dept at work by SB

Odd SB didn’t call own dept but another? Said lines engaged. They weren’t. Does this point to SB being ordered to call & JC checking number in yellow pages (?)

 

[AfricanGrey]

This is quite correct. On the pub a loose thread is re: the 2pm unexplained calls to pub which remain interesting & unexplained.

DV surely had ‘more’ here on ‘pub evidence’ re: deposition site than he could say (?) otherwise it’s more than a bit extraordinary & we could say police resources should be allocated to ‘dig up’ any SL associated address re: any ‘suspicious’ POI etc ( ?) ‘just in case’.

DV has no evidence, credible or otherwise, to support his theory. He has nothing further to add to that which is in his book.