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

[WestLondoner]

duplicated

 

[WestLondoner]

Hi Konstantin,

Good post.

The only real piece of (not very good) "evidence" against JC is the photofit that kind of might look like him.

Just so. The impression has reminded others of Fred West, and also of SJL's boss. It could be anybody, frankly.

How long was the car journey from the Sturgis office to the pub?

It's 1.5 miles. She'd probably have driven west along the Fulham Road, turned left into Fulham Palace Road then crossed the river into Putney High Street and turned left again into Upper Richmond Road. The later sighting was on Fulham Palace Road heading north, so the right road and direction to be heading back on. I am not sure if she was north of where she should have turned right go back to the office.

CV ... has a very good reason actually to lie about/ invent the phone calls

Yes he does, and the crucial bit of evidence that would have supported their existence is missing. He said both callers left a phone number, and that he gave these on a piece of paper to the police officers who went to the pub. These officers have no recollection of any such thing. So did he make the calls up?

if he wanted to pull the same stunt he did with Shirley Banks, he would have got her to phone Sturgis and say she was taken ill

Good point and hence another departure from his MO.

JL's friend who claims to have seen her may have just got the time or the day wrong

It's certainly possible, but OTOH she came forward quite early on, so her recollection was fresh - and perhaps less likely to be in error?

@WiseOwl

In his book he states that 'If Suzy's final destination was the Prince of Wales pub, as all of the evidence suggests it was'. All of what evidence? We know that Suzy's chequebook & diary were found at the pub but there is absolutely no evidence to prove she was ever there that afternoon, none whatsoever.

Absolutely. There was something she needed to pick up from there, but that's not the same as evidence that she actually went. She needed to go to her flat too, and apparently didn't.

Unless the evidence he refers to includes evidence not in the book, there's nothing to say where she actually went. She just walked out of the office at 12.40 that day never to be definitely seen again. Well, except by one person. Someone knows.

 

[Terryb808]

I agree with your comments WL, it is just speculation on DV's part that implies that CV had something to do with Suzy's disappearance. In his book he states that 'If Suzy's final destination was the Prince of Wales pub, as all of the evidence suggests it was'. All of what evidence? We know that Suzy's chequebook & diary were found at the pub but there is absolutely no evidence to prove she was ever there that afternoon, none whatsoever.

For me, the book threw up more questions than answers. For a start, the keys to Shorrolds Road.

DV was told that Sturgis only held one set of keys to each property, yet on the Tuesday morning the police seemingly used a set of keys to get into the property. Where did they come from?

In his 2nd interview with MG (Suzy's boss at Sturgis), DV asks him where the police got the keys from to Shorrolds Road. MG seems evasive at this question and suggests that maybe they found them in Suzy's car before saying that he didn't know where they came from.

However, if you watch the Crimewatch show about Suzy from October 1986 MG actually takes part in this. Firstly he is seen at the Sturgis office, then he is seen at 37 Shorrolds Road (with another man, NH possibly?) knocking on the door and looking for Suzy.

Shortly after this clip Det Supt Nick Carter is talking to Sue Cook and he clearly states that the keys to 37 Shorrolds Road are still missing.

I would have presumed that MG & all the other staff who worked with Suzy would have watched this show, and I find it astonishing that not one of them picked up on this when Crimewatch was shown.

Or did one of them know about the keys but decided to keep their mouths shut for some reason?

I noticed this incident about the keys in crimewatch, the police saying they were still missing suggests they weren’t in Suzy’s car and that Suzy’s boss found them and kept quiet.

 

[Terryb808]

I agree with your comments WL, it is just speculation on DV's part that implies that CV had something to do with Suzy's disappearance. In his book he states that 'If Suzy's final destination was the Prince of Wales pub, as all of the evidence suggests it was'. All of what evidence? We know that Suzy's chequebook & diary were found at the pub but there is absolutely no evidence to prove she was ever there that afternoon, none whatsoever.

Hi Konstantin,

Good post.

The only real piece of (not very good) "evidence" against JC is the photofit that kind of might look like him.

Just so. The impression has reminded others of Fred West, and also of SJL's boss. It could be anybody, frankly.

How long was the car journey from the Sturgis office to the pub?

It's 1.5 miles. She'd probably have driven west along the Fulham Road, turned left into Fulham Palace Road then crossed the river into Putney High Street and turned left again into Upper Richmond Road. The later sighting was on Fulham Palace Road heading north, so the right road and direction to be heading back on. I am not sure if she was north of where she should have turned right go back to the office.

CV ... has a very good reason actually to lie about/ invent the phone calls

Yes he does, and the crucial bit of evidence that would have supported their existence is missing. He said both callers left a phone number, and that he gave these on a piece of paper to the police officers who went to the pub. These officers have no recollection of any such thing. So did he make the calls up?

if he wanted to pull the same stunt he did with Shirley Banks, he would have got her to phone Sturgis and say she was taken ill

Good point and hence another departure from his MO.

JL's friend who claims to have seen her may have just got the time or the day wrong

It's certainly possible, but OTOH she came forward quite early on, so her recollection was fresh - and perhaps less likely to be in error?

@WiseOwl

In his book he states that 'If Suzy's final destination was the Prince of Wales pub, as all of the evidence suggests it was'. All of what evidence? We know that Suzy's chequebook & diary were found at the pub but there is absolutely no evidence to prove she was ever there that afternoon, none whatsoever.

Absolutely. There was something she needed to pick up from there, but that's not the same as evidence that she actually went. She needed to go to her flat too, and apparently didn't.

Unless the evidence he refers to includes evidence not in the book, there's nothing to say where she actually went. She just walked out of the office at 12.40 that day never to be definitely seen again. Well, except by one person. Someone knows.

For me, the book threw up more questions than answers. For a start, the keys to Shorrolds Road.

DV was told that Sturgis only held one set of keys to each property, yet on the Tuesday morning the police seemingly used a set of keys to get into the property. Where did they come from?

In his 2nd interview with MG (Suzy's boss at Sturgis), DV asks him where the police got the keys from to Shorrolds Road. MG seems evasive at this question and suggests that maybe they found them in Suzy's car before saying that he didn't know where they came from.

However, if you watch the Crimewatch show about Suzy from October 1986 MG actually takes part in this. Firstly he is seen at the Sturgis office, then he is seen at 37 Shorrolds Road (with another man, NH possibly?) knocking on the door and looking for Suzy.

Shortly after this clip Det Supt Nick Carter is talking to Sue Cook and he clearly states that the keys to 37 Shorrolds Road are still missing.

I would have presumed that MG & all the other staff who worked with Suzy would have watched this show, and I find it astonishing that not one of them picked up on this when Crimewatch was shown.

Or did one of them know about the keys but decided to keep their mouths shut for some reason?

I noticed this incident about the keys in crimewatch, the police saying they were still missing suggests they weren’t in Suzy’s car and that Suzy’s boss found them and kept quiet.

Colin Vole & His Statements

If you compare the Andrew Stephen book with the David Videsette accounts given by the temporary pub landlord Colin Vole, it’s not surprising that they differ, after all, it’s been over 30 years between the two accounts.

What is a little strange is that Colin Vole recalls the events so (apparently) accurately, most people would struggle to recall what should have been a relatively insignificant event a couple of years later.

If he was not involved in any way with SJL's disappearance it should have been just that, something that was important at the time, but 30 years later not so. What could explain his actions and his excellent recall.

1. If he or someone he knows has been following the case (especially the public discussion within our threads) it would explain his defensive attitude.
2. He may actually be telling the truth and did receive the phone calls that Monday afternoon.
3. On the other hand he may be involved in SJL’s disappearance and needs to try and give himself an alibi.

So, is Colin Vole telling the truth? IMO (and I know this has been discounted because it doesn’t follow his MO) you can’t rule out the possibility that JC car jacked SJL and forced her to call the Prince of Wales and also made a second call himself. If she was being held captive she would have said she’d arranged to collect the her things from the pub and if she didn’t turn up she’d be missed.

It would fit with the BW sighting at 2.45pm and the direction that SJL and the male passenger were traveling. JC is an opportunist, car jacking in public during the day is in his MO, as is committing rape and holding the poor unfortunate victim captive.

This is just one of three possibilities, David Videsette changing the name to Colin Vole (given that his real name is in the Stephen book) suggests that he has more and can’t go public. I’d be surprised if he doesn’t have a lot more, after all he’s spent a lot of time on this.

What’s missing from the book and the possibility of a far more elaborate plot as to what and why SJL went missing without trace just maybe what DV can't make public. Its also why it can’t be discussed in any public forum.

My three possibilities are:

1. JC car jacked SJL and the police got it right, but for the wrong reasons.
2. Colin Vole is responsible and DV has the answers which he can’t make public.
3. SJL was involved in something far more complex and she disappeared as a result.

 

[Pinkizzy]

I guess CV is telling the truth and didn't kill SL. His recall of the events that day are a bit muddled but he adds details to the original interview from 30 years ago. I wonder whether DV or Caroline interviewed the wife at a later date.

 

[Terryb808]

I guess CV is telling the truth and didn't kill SL. His recall of the events that day are a bit muddled but he adds details to the original interview from 30 years ago. I wonder whether DV or Caroline interviewed the wife at a later date.

I hope so, if he did why not include it in the book, they both seemed a bit spooked by DV turning up. As she seemed more so than him, made it look like they had something to hide.

 

[Mads15]

Hi, this is my first post, but something I’ve been thinking a lot about is that although the drivers side door was unlocked on SL’s car, the passenger side was locked (if I’m correct). I can’t find a definitive answer to this, but think back then on a 1984 (?) fiesta, the locks would have been manual, as in you’d have to push the lock down on each door to lock, no central locking. Which maybe suggests no one was ever in the passenger seat. I mean, if there was some sort of hurry/argument/abduction…would the passenger be so considerate to also kindly lock the door behind them?
Could SL simply of agreed to meet someone in Stevenage Road, they were in a car, she pulled up behind them (thinking it didn’t matter how she was parked as whatever the meeting was, was meant to be a short transaction of some type) then she was dragged into the perps car. Her colleague used the car earlier in the day, and may have moved the seat. SL may not have even realise the seat had been moved, I have to admit I’ve drive a short distance before realising my seat has been adjusted. The sighting by BW perhaps didn’t happen. I hate to say this but one of the short interviews of BW is a bit strange, when asked if she recognised who the passenger was she looks very coy, bites her lip and to me appears to be hiding something. Wonder if she knew SL’s ex boyfriend.

 

[WiseOwl]

I noticed this incident about the keys in crimewatch, the police saying they were still missing suggests they weren’t in Suzy’s car and that Suzy’s boss found them and kept quiet.

It does seem odd that no-one can (supposedly) remember handing the keys over to the police on the Tuesday morning, but it had to be someone from Suzy's office. I believe the police thought these were a spare set of keys because whoever handed them over failed to inform them they were the original set.

MG seemed uncomfortable when questioned about the keys in DV's book, and I think it's a shame DV didn't question NH or SF about the keys as it would have been interesting to see what they had to say on the matter.

 

[Pinkizzy]

Hi, this is my first post, but something I’ve been thinking a lot about is that although the drivers side door was unlocked on SL’s car, the passenger side was locked (if I’m correct). I can’t find a definitive answer to this, but think back then on a 1984 (?) fiesta, the locks would have been manual, as in you’d have to push the lock down on each door to lock, no central locking. Which maybe suggests no one was ever in the passenger seat. I mean, if there was some sort of hurry/argument/abduction…would the passenger be so considerate to also kindly lock the door behind them?
Could SL simply of agreed to meet someone in Stevenage Road, they were in a car, she pulled up behind them (thinking it didn’t matter how she was parked as whatever the meeting was, was meant to be a short transaction of some type) then she was dragged into the perps car. Her colleague used the car earlier in the day, and may have moved the seat. SL may not have even realise the seat had been moved, I have to admit I’ve drive a short distance before realising my seat has been adjusted. The sighting by BW perhaps didn’t happen. I hate to say this but one of the short interviews of BW is a bit strange, when asked if she recognised who the passenger was she looks very coy, bites her lip and to me appears to be hiding something. Wonder if she knew SL’s ex boyfriend.

I agree, she is hiding something. I thought she was a bit dizzy when she was unsure about the difference between left and right. I'll watch her interviews again

 

[WestLondoner]

I initially thought SJL must have driven to Stevenage Road and got out there, intending to be gone only a few seconds. This would explain the sloppy parking and her purse still being inside, with the door unlocked; she had stopped rather than parked and would be on her way soon.

What persuaded me otherwise was exactly the seat position detail. It's possible that she drove it somewhere with the seat in the wrong position, but no colleague seems to have said they had borrowed it that day. The implication is that someone had borrowed it the previous week or weekend and she'd been driving it like that all day, which seems unlikely.

We also still come back to the same problems, i.e where was the car until 4pm and how the abductor gets her into his car without attracting attention. This is the problem for all stranger abduction theories and for me points strongly to abduction by someone she knew.

It's correct that a base model Fiesta would have had only manual door locks, and the passenger side door would have been left locked most of the time. The driver could reach across to unlock it as required. It looks to me like the car's last journey was with just a driver, who left it in too much of a hurry to lock the driver's door and who certainly would not have bothered to lock just the passenger's. Not parking the car properly or securing it points to this driver not being the car's keeper. In fact, what a gift to the abductor if he had dumped the car and it had then been stolen! How helpful in covering his tracks!

 

[Terryb808]

I initially thought SJL must have driven to Stevenage Road and got out there, intending to be gone only a few seconds. This would explain the sloppy parking and her purse still being inside, with the door unlocked; she had stopped rather than parked and would be on her way soon.

What persuaded me otherwise was exactly the seat position detail. It's possible that she drove it somewhere with the seat in the wrong position, but no colleague seems to have said they had borrowed it that day. The implication is that someone had borrowed it the previous week or weekend and she'd been driving it like that all day, which seems unlikely.

We also still come back to the same problems, i.e where was the car until 4pm and how the abductor gets her into his car without attracting attention. This is the problem for all stranger abduction theories and for me points strongly to abduction by someone she knew.

It's correct that a base model Fiesta would have had only manual door locks, and the passenger side door would have been left locked most of the time. The driver could reach across to unlock it as required. It looks to me like the car's last journey was with just a driver, who left it in too much of a hurry to lock the driver's door and who certainly would not have bothered to lock just the passenger's. Not parking the car properly or securing it points to this driver not being the car's keeper. In fact, what a gift to the abductor if he had dumped the car and it had then been stolen! How helpful in covering his tracks!

I thought the office junior used Suzy’s car in the morning, in the Stephen book he quotes Suzy as saying “where did you say you parked my car”. This might explain the seat position, however, I recall DV saying the seat was right back, in this position I don’t think Suzy would have driven away without adjusting it.
So as you say one person in the car when it was abandoned in Stevenage Road and that was not Suzy.
The BW comments are interesting, seems the thoughts are that she actually knew who the male passenger was? If so it’s bad not making this clear to the police at the time.
Two important points which this thread seems to have established are the Suzy’s car was abandoned after 4.00pm, probably nearer 5.00pm. Also that BW’s sighting is important and if it’s incorrect needs to be cleared up.

 

[Terryb808]

Hi, this is my first post, but something I’ve been thinking a lot about is that although the drivers side door was unlocked on SL’s car, the passenger side was locked (if I’m correct). I can’t find a definitive answer to this, but think back then on a 1984 (?) fiesta, the locks would have been manual, as in you’d have to push the lock down on each door to lock, no central locking. Which maybe suggests no one was ever in the passenger seat. I mean, if there was some sort of hurry/argument/abduction…would the passenger be so considerate to also kindly lock the door behind them?
Could SL simply of agreed to meet someone in Stevenage Road, they were in a car, she pulled up behind them (thinking it didn’t matter how she was parked as whatever the meeting was, was meant to be a short transaction of some type) then she was dragged into the perps car. Her colleague used the car earlier in the day, and may have moved the seat. SL may not have even realise the seat had been moved, I have to admit I’ve drive a short distance before realising my seat has been adjusted. The sighting by BW perhaps didn’t happen. I hate to say this but one of the short interviews of BW is a bit strange, when asked if she recognised who the passenger was she looks very coy, bites her lip and to me appears to be hiding something. Wonder if she knew SL’s ex boyfriend.

Welcome to this thread, good point about BW, generally it’s thought that Suzy never drove her car to Stevenage Road. WJ was shown by DV to be an unreliable witness when it came to spotting Suzy’s car. The owner of the garage it was partially obstructing is much better and he varied that it was there at 5.15pm.
Chances are that it wasn’t there until after 4.00pm as the work men said they didn’t see it.
JC’s MO is to car Jack his victims, he used a gun or a knife and this ensued no fuss or noise. So it’s entirely possible that Suzy could have been abducted silently.

 

[Crusader21]

As has been stated before and it does indeed appear, that SL created a fake lunchtime diary entry in order to retrieve her items from the PoW pub.

OK she heads to Putney, but does anyone believe SL may have walked in on something she wasn't meant too? Simply wrong place at wrong time. Disturbed or saw something of an illegal nature, that sealed her fate?

Organised crime perhaps? In that same Crimewatch (Oct 86) there's a diamond heist which took place a few days after SL went missing, for example.

Such an intrusion into a meeting where she recognised a participant maybe, may explain her simply disappearing into 'thin air'.

Does Clive Vole's ramblings of 'Hold her there in case she does a runner' also fit in with such a scenario?

Interesting that the Shorrolds Rd 'witness' who supplied the police with the perfect 'at 1pm Suzy met Mr Kipper who had a ribboned champagne bottle' narrative, ND, also worked in the 'jewellery trade' ...

 

[WiseOwl]

I initially thought SJL must have driven to Stevenage Road and got out there, intending to be gone only a few seconds. This would explain the sloppy parking and her purse still being inside, with the door unlocked; she had stopped rather than parked and would be on her way soon.

What persuaded me otherwise was exactly the seat position detail. It's possible that she drove it somewhere with the seat in the wrong position, but no colleague seems to have said they had borrowed it that day. The implication is that someone had borrowed it the previous week or weekend and she'd been driving it like that all day, which seems unlikely.

We also still come back to the same problems, i.e where was the car until 4pm and how the abductor gets her into his car without attracting attention. This is the problem for all stranger abduction theories and for me points strongly to abduction by someone she knew.

It's correct that a base model Fiesta would have had only manual door locks, and the passenger side door would have been left locked most of the time. The driver could reach across to unlock it as required. It looks to me like the car's last journey was with just a driver, who left it in too much of a hurry to lock the driver's door and who certainly would not have bothered to lock just the passenger's. Not parking the car properly or securing it points to this driver not being the car's keeper. In fact, what a gift to the abductor if he had dumped the car and it had then been stolen! How helpful in covering his tracks!

I too believe that Suzy was abducted by someone she knew. I think the arrangement to meet at lunchtime was made probably over the weekend before she went missing. We know that the office was short-staffed on the Monday, and normally in those circumstances Suzy would have stayed in the office during lunchtime and grabbed a sandwich. I believe this meeting was important to her and that's why she came up with the Mr Kipper/Shorrolds Road ploy in her office diary so she could get out at lunchtime.

I don't believe that Suzy got into anyone's car, I think that her abductor got into hers. I think that either they met her in the street where her car was parked or possibly even at some pre - arranged place at 1.00.

I also think that not parking the car properly or locking the door was because the driver left in a hurry as they wanted to get away from Stevenage Road asap!

 

[WiseOwl]

I thought the office junior used Suzy’s car in the morning, in the Stephen book he quotes Suzy as saying “where did you say you parked my car”. This might explain the seat position, however, I recall DV saying the seat was right back, in this position I don’t think Suzy would have driven away without adjusting it.
So as you say one person in the car when it was abandoned in Stevenage Road and that was not Suzy.
The BW comments are interesting, seems the thoughts are that she actually knew who the male passenger was? If so it’s bad not making this clear to the police at the time.
Two important points which this thread seems to have established are the Suzy’s car was abandoned after 4.00pm, probably nearer 5.00pm. Also that BW’s sighting is important and if it’s incorrect needs to be cleared up.

I presume JC (the office junior) used the car in the morning to go and photograph some properties. I'm rather surprised DV didn't ask about this when speaking to MG & NH in his book, there was no mention of the car being used at all.

As for BW, what comments are you talking about? I have seen her interview on Crimewatch and she says she recognized Suzy but didn't manage to catch a glimpse of the passenger beside her. Is there another interview where she contradicts this?

Again I am surprised DV didn't interview BW for his book but of course if she is correct about her sighting of Suzy and the mystery man that afternoon then it completely rules out his theory of CV and the PoW pub scenario!

 

[Pinkizzy]

Ive looked at the images of SLs fiesta on shutterstock - two/three cars are parked away from the football ground and two taxis are parked facing Craven Cottage. If the abductor drove down Stevenage Rd in a rush, he would park the same direction as the black cabs and overlapping the garage. If he had more time to turn around and drove up Stevenage rd he'd park the same direction as the three cars.

 

[Crusader21]

Let's assume DV is correct and SL met her end, lunchtime at the Pow.

At 2.45, could BW have actually witnessed the B396 GAN Fiesta in the process of being left back in Fulham, by two people who were part of SL's murder?

As the female driver had her head turned away from BW, could this have been someone who resembled SL? Someone of similar age, hair etc someone like PSS perhaps?

If BW saw SL's car that day staw hat etc, she'd absolutely have expected SL to be driving it, but what if it wasn't SL at the wheel during BW's passing, fleeting glimpse?

 

[Terryb808]

As has been stated before and it does indeed appear, that SL created a fake lunchtime diary entry in order to retrieve her items from the PoW pub.

OK she heads to Putney, but does anyone believe SL may have walked in on something she wasn't meant too? Simply wrong place at wrong time. Disturbed or saw something of an illegal nature, that sealed her fate?

Organised crime perhaps? In that same Crimewatch (Oct 86) there's a diamond heist which took place a few days after SL went missing, for example.

Such an intrusion into a meeting where she recognised a participant maybe, may explain her simply disappearing into 'thin air'.

Does Clive Vole's ramblings of 'Hold her there in case she does a runner' also fit in with such a scenario?

Interesting that the Shorrolds Rd 'witness' who supplied the police with the perfect 'at 1pm Suzy met Mr Kipper who had a ribboned champagne bottle' narrative, ND, also worked in the 'jewellery trade' ...

Yes, the jewel raid was highlighted some time ago by LSW, also the two very convenient witnesses (the jeweller and a bar cellar man) who placed Suzy at Shorrolds Road. These accounts would need to have been put together after the fact to cover what really happened to Suzy. Incidentally, another sighting highlighted by a lady parking her car of two men in a dark large saloon fits in with the Suzy being sort by a group of people.
Also, that would mean a more complex plot than Colin Vole accidentally killing Suzy in the PoW. Generally Suzy walking in on a secret meeting in the PoW doesn’t fit with Colin Voles statement to DV. He would have been in the PoW and privy to the meeting, as would the full time landlord.
If Suzy was privy to something and decided she wasn’t happy about it then I don’t think she made it to the PoW.

 

[Terryb808]

Let's assume DV is correct and SL met her end, lunchtime at the Pow.

At 2.45, could BW have actually witnessed the B396 GAN Fiesta in the process of being left back in Fulham, by two people who were part of SL's murder?

As the female driver had her head turned away from BW, could this have been someone who resembled SL? Someone of similar age, hair etc someone like PSS perhaps?

If BW saw SL's car that day staw hat etc, she'd absolutely have expected SL to be driving it, but what if it wasn't SL at the wheel during BW's passing, fleeting glimpse?

Yes it’s possible that Suzy was not the driver, one other sighting of a stunning blonde (with a male passenger) driving a white Fiesta erratically and causing a white van to swerve may also fit in.
However, some accounts are not reliable and may be misleading, if as you say PSS is involved she would certainly fit the van drivers description.

 

[WestLondoner]

Establishing whether anyone else had used her car that morning could indeed explain the seat position. I've just reread DV's interview with 'Clive Vole', whom he describes as a short, stout man. If he had become stout since 1986, as most people do, then it doesn't sound like he'd have needed to move the car's seat at all. Of course, this could be misdirection by DV to avoid libelling 'Clive' - for all we know he's 6'2" and weighs nine stone.

CV also suggests that he was on his own at the pub, which was open. It's hard to know whether these are inconsistencies because he can't get his story straight, or because it's hard to remember what happened 35 years ago.

I'm now intrigued by the BW sighting, since if she didn't see SJL's face, how did she know it was her car? Even seeing the number plate wouldn't help, because how many other people's car number plate does anyone remember? A lot of people don't even know their own. Does this ID rest on the hat on the parcel shelf? If so, one tends to doubt it a bit because this could be a detail she picked up from the description of the car when found and subconsciously edited into her recollection.

As Terryb808 points out, introducing a whole new jewellery subplot makes the whole matter far more complex as well as highly speculative. There's no evidence, there's nothing to link it to anywhere she's thought to have gone and there's no basis to think those who did it would commit murder. Giving statements to the police would simply attract attention. The unemployed barman's statement rehearses the public domain of her movements so closely that it sounds made-up to me. DV was unable to trace that guy.