Suzy Lamplugh - 33 years since she went missing

[MarathonMo]

33 years since she went missing and all evidence seemed to point to John Canaan as the man responsible.

David Videcette states he has compelling evidence that Canaan wasn't responsible & claims he now has the proof after a 3 year private investigation.

He believes the 'Mr Kipper' appointment was a red herring and Suzy left the office to go on a personal errand (?). Allegedly, the police missed a lot in their initial investigations.

He claims the police focused on the wrong man as they did in the Rachel Nickell case (Colin Stagg).

Perhaps one day this will be solved and her family will get closure.

new twist?

Well yeah because if he was a genuine prospective buyer he'd surely have called the office to ask where the EA was at the appointed time.

Apart from which the police would have identified him and eliminated him immediately ....

Crimewatch shows the detective with a distinctive Sturgis yellow key fob, saying that the one Suzy took is missing - how does that square with the claim that the keys never left the office?

Also, I wonder if it was checked at the time if a Mr Kipper was actually on the EA books as a prospective buyer?

I bought and sold in that general area in the 80s, not via Sturgis but similar, and you always had to give name, home/work phone & home address to receive mailings and to view properties - this was to ensure that the EA would get their fee if you eventually bought and not claim to be the vendors friend, niece, etc, so the vendor could cut out the agents.

Also, I wonder if it was checked at the time if a Mr Kipper was actually on the EA books as a prospective buyer?

Again, it was 1986. No one really checked too much - as long as you didn't have an Irish accent. I went househunting in 1988 with a friend from Uni, and there were no initial checks, just walked in, left names and got calls. It was around 1986 that the London housing market was really taking off - docklands were being redeveloped, a lot of slummy areas were being gentrified. It was a very hectic time.

Things are completely different now, with money laundering and Know Your Customer checks, together with data protection regulations and awareness of identity fraud.

The old saying "the past is a different country" really does need to be borne in mind after 33 years.

I bought and sold in that general area in the 80s, not via Sturgis but similar, and you always had to give name, home/work phone & home address to receive mailings and to view properties - this was to ensure that the EA would get their fee if you eventually bought and not claim to be the vendors friend, niece, etc, so the vendor could cut out the agents.

Not my experience in 1988 - (should have replied inthread). Unless there was still a whiff of sexism. I was a just graduated white male ...

It's rare - if not unknown - for armchair enthusiasts to crack a cold case that the police have been all over for years. However, it does provide a good froth of varied and insightful questions that put the police to the test.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7308443/Amateur-sleuth-librarian-helps-identify-three-dismembered-victims-30-year-old-serial-killer.html?fbclid=IwAR0siyBeRRc4lMUkRGmR7FsezB1yyyMctD4mAoh175H63LImCwMUf_uVrIg

And heres one such case

just walked in, left names and got calls

That's my point - even then you had to at least give a number to get calls! And an address to get the printed details.

Was a Mr Kipper known to the office other than the entry in the diary?

That's my point - even then you had to at least give a number to get calls! And an address to get the printed details.

We didn't leave an address as we were moving out. Possibly a phone number - although I really can't remember. We did see some properties, and started talking mortgages.

Was a Mr Kipper known to the office other than the entry in the diary?

Well if they were, we are back to they were a genuine client and unconnected to SLs abduction. But they would have been eliminated and the police wouldn't have issued the name and an e-fit.

Of course what we don't know is whether the police went through Sturgis' books and uncovered any more "phantom" clients. And if they did, what their approach was to trying to connect them or not to the case.

Many young estate agents in SW London had relationships with colleagues, sometimes they used unoccupied properties...did they check all the other properties in locality at the time for DNA/other evidence?

Lunch time assignations might be covered up by inventing a viewing etc.

Many young estate agents in SW London had relationships with colleagues, sometimes they used unoccupied properties...did they check all the other properties in locality at the time for DNA/other evidence?

Again, why would they ? DNA was really in it's infancy then - most policemen hadn't a clue about it.

Everyone can have ideas about what "the police should have done" in 2019. But it's hard to overstate how different things were in 1986. For a start London was on perma-alert for IRA activity. In fact it would be amazing if somewhere in the minds of the first officers that realised SL was missing was "could this be an IRA kidnapping ?". Very quickly dismissed I would imagine. But there all the same.

Re: the car reg SLP...86 S I think it might be more than a coincidence re: choice of reg.

1. John C put it on Shirley Banks’s mini after he’d done a (bad) repainting job.

1. This is a man, as someone said earlier, that chose to place Shirley at ‘Dead Woman’s Ditch’ was that a coincidence or someone that liked word play/‘jokes’ etc?

Someone with the mindset to do that might also toy with reg in a similar vein?

(If it was the latter it brings ‘Kipper’ to mind as well).

Yes, of course it was 1986. A relationship and using another property at lunchtime & it being the abduction venue is possible though.

Re: the car reg SLP...86 S I think it might be more than a coincidence re: choice of reg.

OK, even if it is (and Paul is dead) it's just confirming what a lot of people already believe. It's nothing new, conclusive, or significant.

I'm guessing that the best outcome from any ongoing enquiries would be the discovery of SLs remains and the chance for closure for her remaining family? Whether JC confesses or is shown to be the killer is less of a priority ?

Yes agree, let’a hope that’s what they bring.

DV if Suzy was sneaking out the office when she wasn’t supposed to and made up the meeting then why did she pick such a peculiar fake name as Mr Kipper? Or did she not really care if she was found out? Also have the police told you why they aren’t pursuing your theories? How did they justify not following up given your experience?

DV if Suzy was sneaking out the office when she wasn’t supposed to and made up the meeting then why did she pick such a peculiar fake name as Mr Kipper? Or did she not really care if she was found out? Also have the police told you why they aren’t pursuing your theories? How did they justify not following up given your experience?

I would sincerely hope that DV is now just another civilian, and the police "owe" him nothing more than they owe you or I.

Did all Sturgis employees drive white fiestas I wonder?

At 2:45pm there was a definite sighting of Suzy ( by her friend) in a white fiesta yet hers had been seen parked elsewhere since early afternoon?

Her friend made point there were many similar cars but it was definitely Suzy. Other E Agents all had the same make of car, e.v Golf & just wondered if same here for Suzy’s office?

DGRossetti
It really isn't like me turning up with a theory I have no expertise. It seems extraordinary that he isn't being taken seriously that's all.
But thanks for the sniping reply.

Just noted Videcette also has said everyone in office knew what Mr Kipper diary entry meant.

That’s interesting, as it means the police really were only/mainly focused on John C, as he’s said.

Just noted Videcette also has said everyone in office knew what Mr Kipper diary entry meant.

@TartanTexan What did Mr Kipper mean?

*Kipper is so distinctive, bordering on comical too.

I don't recall that view at the time ... there's an element of hindsight here ... "kipper" has entered newsspeak in a variety of ways - in the past fortnight alone*

I lived two streets away from Shorrolds Road at the time, and similar to Suzy in quite a few ways ( as my very worried parents pointed out) so it was a case that I took a great deal of interest as it all unfolded. I can assure you that the ‘Mr Kipper’ name was seen then as very bizarre and, as that PP put it , ‘bordering on the comical ‘ .

@Ihaveseenalot, Videcette hasn’t expanded on it yet, AFAIK, but has said others in the office knew what the Kipper entry meant.

The alleged definite sighting of Suzy in her car or similar at 2:45pm. I also think is interesting. Her friend was certain as knew her extremely well.

Videcette says there were errors in timeline I think, that sighting is about 2 hours after alleged Kipper meeting, quite late on.

There is also something on line about a later appointment - 6:30pm? -she had to pick up belongings she’d left in a pub - also there was a later appointment in her desk diary.

Yet office rang around hospitals to see if she’d had an accident about 4:30 ish? Maybe she was very reliable & they were concerned but I might think someone had snuck in a long lunch on a hot day first?

The later apt at pub could be inaccurate though.

If all the other staff 'knew what Mr Kipper meant' I take that to mean it was a euphemism for something else; AND if they knew that the only key and the yellow fob never left the office, that means they conspired to mislead the police from the very beginning judging by the contents of the Crimewatch programme.

Is that possible or likely?

It seems impossible & unlikely yet clearly V feels he has very solid evidence of some sort re: timeline & all not being as reported back in 1986.

It will be interesting to see what comes out and positive if new findings bring some peace and closure to family.