Missing Woman Nicola Bulley 4

[ofwarren]

www.lep.co.uk/news/crime/nicola-bulley-day-13-latest-updates-as-search-for-missing-mum-continues-4017066

Lancashire Evening Post has just posted this update.

So she could have been taken between 910 and 933 but not actually removed from
the area until before 1050. Surely the odds of her drowning between 920-933 without being seen by the witness are remote, it wouldn’t happen immediately would it.

I can understand not putting a harness on a dog you don’t know, but also confused by someone carrying string on a walk!

If there was a plausible sighting, then CCTV in that area would be reviewed.

No-one could possibly look at wide areas on an off-chance. It'll always be led by some sort of information

So will that mean the dog had no collar then, if she couldn't use the lead?

The person that tied the dog to the bench is baffling to me, if a dog is found loose round here (Yorkshire) it's posted on our local Facebook group within minutes! Weirder still that the phone was there too which would have raised curiosity surely? And why phone someone so much later on, not straight away? Why tie it up with string, why did the (is it DIL?) phone the school?? This whole bit is puzzling me the most! I know people react differently in situations, obviously, but tying up someone elses dog and leaving it for an hour doesn't seem like the obvious thing to do to me?

I have lived with and trained working dogs all my life. And I couldn't interpet what a strange dog that I have never met before is "saying", never mind interpret it at third hand. Dogs can get agitated at all sorts of things. Including the agitation of everyone around them! And given the disquiet that everyone is transmitting to the dog later, in its shoes I'd be heading for the gate (i.e home) too.

I've had another thought about why the police were so clear in their assertion that this was a case of someone accidentally slipping into the water. This may have been mentioned but I'm not reading the whole thread.

Please note the following paragraph is not a speculation on the current case it is a more wide remark on the consequences of how things are presented in the media.

It's commonly accepted now that the reporting of events leads to "copycat" events. News reports usually don't mention suicide methods these days because this leads to more people attempting suicide by that method. News reports of shootings are more carefully worded because studies have shown that when there is a mass shooting covered in detail on the news there is a much higher chance of a similar attack in the near future. I was looking at the Raoul Moat case last night and it's likely a factor in his behaviour was the coverage of the Derek Bird attacks a few weeks earlier. A study in the US concluded that when there is extensive nationwide coverage of a mass shooting in the news, there's typically another within a couple of weeks.

Therefore, whatever the police's view on what the circumstances are in this case, we have to consider whether they are telling us something because it's true, or because it seems the most appropriate thing to say to help this case be resolved quickly and nobody else be harmed. Just because they say they're solely focused on one outcome doesn't mean they are not investigating other possibilities. We shouldn't take what the police say as 100% accurate because they may have a motive for lying in order to get the best outcome.

IF there was foul play at work in a case, media coverage and celebrity might be the very thing the suspect was after. If granted this coverage they might do something else. Likewise, if someone chose to disappear because of mental health struggles, a massive manhunt might not be the safest thing if they pose no risk to others and just need some breathing space.

To piece together a story, it's important to understand why someone says what they say. With the police we don't know what their motives are, so relying on a police statement at face value is not a reliable way to get to the truth.

So the house on the opposite bank and its outbuildings have not been searched.

Sorry but searching nearby areas is surely policing 101. Especially empty properties and outbuildings directly opposite where she may have entered the water.

@SueG60

Yes but let's say she got in a car and drove to London. As far as I'm aware The Met aren't using its resources to monitor CCTV looking for NB - if that was the case then yes, we'd be able to locate virtually every criminal ever wanted because a big klaxon would go off every time someone on an active missing list was located, no matter where they were.
Most CCTV footage is worse than useless.

Policing in the UK is still relatively parochial, even in big cases. Unless instructed to be looking for her, they won't be.

No the dog was found at 9.33 running between the bench and the gate. Not later when all hell broke loose....

They are 3 people with distinctive looks together, and are therefore much easier to track down that one woman who wants to stay hidden.

I would imagine Constence Martin being the daughter of wealthy family and there being a newborn involved means that there is a lot of interest in tracking them.

The same is not at all true for most missing persons.

Also because I assume that passers by have all their faculties (to quote Dorothy L Sayers)

Either there would have been quite a loud splash if she fell in with some force (and cold water shock might have sharply reduced her movements) or she would have entered more slowly, and therefore been still able to thrash around and/or call for help.

It doesn't look like there are many sources of ambient noise round there, and sound carries over water.

But of course maybe those who saw her were both too far away to possibly have heard anything, regardless what happened.

I am of course assuming that they've described their entire walks to the police, including if they passed any other people.

I have read online in numerous places now that the male owner of this property refused to allow police to search it without a warrant.

Lochs are very deep and incredibly cold, so a body would get chilled more quickly and heat detecting equipment won’t be as accurate.
As it is January, if Nicola did fall into the river and drown, this could also be an issue here but the helicopters were searching pretty quickly, and the water is nothing like as deep as a loch.
The boy mentioned upthread who went in on the same day in the 1970s, went into a flooded tributary of the Wyre, pre the weir being built, so in different circumstances.
I don’t understand why she hasn’t been found yet, I feel very conflicted as drowning is sadly the most likely reason and yet where is she ? She should be in that stretch or river if that is where she went in, yet the searching has been thorough and extensive, with high-tech equipment.
At this time of year it can take many weeks for a body to resurface, so if she is in a different part of the river it might be a long time before she is found .
It is so distressing, and it must also be frightening for locals, not knowing.

Actually I think you're probably right there.

The technology definitely exists to be able to do it though.

www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/issue/what-is-police-facial-recognition-and-how-do-we-stop-it/

Either way, I still think there's zero chance someone would fake their own death and stay in the UK having been highly publicised as missing. Imagine living your life thinking you could have been seen on a camera or by any random member of the public and thats enough to be uncovered. That in itself is totally implausible.

Peter Faulding said "Its not a fast moving tidal river" but Superintendent Sally Riley said "It is not a still water it is a fast flowing moving water which is tidal in parts".

Can it be both? Surely if it is fast or tidal at any part of the river then one or more items of clothing will be found?

www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-news/nicola-bulley-investigation-six-unanswered-26179861.amp

As much as he likes the sound of his own voice the guy is an expert and has done this hundreds of times before. You can see how ridiculously still the water is. I think it’s pretty certain she is not in that river. He did mention the ‘where she went in’ comment in an earlier video but that fact has been drummed into him by police and that’s the hypothesis they’re going with so obviously he’s going to say he’s searching that area because of that. I definitely don’t think he’s been told anything (police said yesterday he hasn’t) and he still believes she’s not in the river.

To me the friend’s Facebook post raises some questions over all these buildings nearby and if she hasn’t left the area it’s the only remaining place she could be

Regarding the woman who tied up the dog - I interpreted the account as meaning there was some string already attached to his collar and she used that.

I don't know how getting a warrant works.
I assume you have to declare it a criminal investigation first?

Someone who is outdoors a lot? I have baling twine, polo mints in every pocket!

Where Nicola is thought to have fallen in, it is not tidal, quite shallow on the edges with little current. It only gets tidal downstream of the weir. The search guy said he thinks it highly unlikely she went across the weir and she should have been in the part upstream of the weir. But they didn't find her.

But if the lead was there, you'd just fasten it to the collar surely?

Presumably only the owner and the police officer(s) involved would know that. Which of them do you think have leaked it online?

The abandoned house is across the river. How are we proposing she got there?

And it has been searched by the police already, they said so in one of their statements.

I have to say I think I would go with the drowning and river expert on this one

Quite possibly then
I'd never even thought about that