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.

I think I might assume somebody was nearby behind a bush having a wee.

They have definitely done upstream of the bench. Peter said this morning

Thanks for clarifying.

I am agreeing with the dive team, she’s not in the water and never has been. In fact looking at that shallow bank, 12 inches of water, distance to the deep part. Looking At how calm it was at that point, amd trying to force myself to believe she suddenly fell in, drowned, then was carried away so fast from that location, no one saw her, that the police divers that afternoon couldn’t find her and nor could the helicopter with thermal imaging, no one can find her since, and the dog stayed put, beggars belief and is surely the most unlikely option.

It simply defies all logic.

which means the items were left there on purpose. Riley , the superintendent has contradicted herself on the dog. She said the dog was found some way away and also said it was where the phone was. It can’t be both. So she’s trying to misdirect.

I think the dog was somewhere else. Further away, And where that dog was is where Nicola went. And the police know. And are putting attention on the river whilst they do something else.

Well they wouldn’t have necessarily had a knife, perhaps they were unarmed but overpowered Nicola.

I don’t know, I just think the dog has to be more significant than being considered. If you were prowling for a lone woman to kidnap, why would you go for one with a dog that is going to bark/scream in the sturggle or potentially try and attack you? Seems a lot of extra hassle. But if it was the dog they were after rather than Nicola and Nicola tried to fight them off, things could’ve gotten violent very quickly.

This. Last real proof of her was 9.10 in field.

I personally suspect foul play.

I went on a forum similar to MN at the weekend and although there was a thrad ostensibly to 'discuss' this case, posters were actively being bullied and castigated for speculating anything other than that it was a tragic accident and she fell in the river. I thought that was odd. Why are uninvolved people to desperate to have this case perceievd in only one way?

And yet Superintendent Sally Riley says they have searched nearby derelict and empty properties. So either Tilly Anne is lying, Sally Riley is lying or the police haven’t informed the family that they have searched buildings. Why wouldn’t they keep the family fully informed (Sally Riley has already made it clear Peter Faulding doesn’t have all of the facts because they haven’t told him everything). Why on Earth wouldn’t everyone be privy to all of the facts when this isn’t, as far as the police are concerned, a criminal case and is a missing person case? Surely, the more people who know all of the facts the better in a missing person case with no suspicious circumstances as far as the police are concerned? Surely you only withhold information from friends, family, the public when you suspect foul play? Doesn’t make any sense.

Why would the police put attention on the river but looking for something else? That would infer they knew someone else was involved and why would they leave it so long to act?

How does the police officer know the phone was found on the bench? Was she there? Is there CCTV to substantiate it?

It feels like a jigsaw with a number of pieces missing

Finally! A sensible conversation worth having - something based on fact. I thought the same thing!

Didn't Peter say it was tidal further upstream though?

Either way, those two statements are in direct conflict with each other. So either Peter F isn't as much of an expert as thought or Sally R is misinformed by other experts around her? Both of those things feel hard to believe. I can't imagine with the attention all focused on her Sally R wouldn't have attended that press conference other than 100% prepared. And I believe Peter F is an expert. I also believe the Police divers will be experts and wouldn't say to Sally R- oh yes very strong currents - if there clearly wasn't when they've been swimming around in it for days.

Makes no sense. Are there strong currents or not? Because it makes a big difference.

I guess the issue is (and I'm presuming a lot here)
There's no sightings of anyone else, no dash cam or cctv evidence, no footprints, fingerprints, anyone she has fallen out with, signs of a struggle, everywhere has been searched, nothing from house to house then it leads you back to her being in the river because well, nothing has been seen or found elsewhere

Then she's not in the river but there is literally nothing else to go on, what do the police do then? As in they haven't any leads and every option is exhausted

How does the police officer know the phone was found on the bench? Was she there? Is there CCTV to substantiate it?

As I understand it, the phone was found on the bench but was later discovered to have been placed there by the person that found it. Happy to be corrected on that- I'm going on information I remember from several days ago.

lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lep.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fnicola-bulley-we-know-her-familys-pain-say-preston-family-who-lost-a-son-in-the-same-stretch-of-river-on-the-same-day-45-years-ago-4019028&h=AT3d5RKElV_QvH0lft13HyY08SENCjnG8NF07rElpbUBiLGJIZA_n63qrqyITdbhUljroTwRzhP0asUXmlLQgCyMAgOMDbMrD5M1Uo-vJYjAQ5SS-u7f0ti98dlO0zt27w

a boy went missing from similar spot 40 years ago and was washed over weir into sea so it is possible

the police say they've searched derelict and empty properties but there's talk of the owner not allowing them access to the ones opposite, so I'm assuming they don't meet the description of "derelict and empty"? So not necessarily lying although it's definitely all a bit unclear!

I know there's a CCTV camera not working for 2 days before the incident - is there any more information about why it's not working? Did it just suddenly stop working or was it damaged?

This was clarified up thead.
The river was totally different then, as was technology.

It is not tidal above the weir ie. where the bench is. It is tidal below the weir. It is blindingly obvious to everyone apart from the police that the river above the weir is practically stationary and shallow at the edges.

It's about time this nonsense about it being a fast moving river was put to bed because it is total nonsense.

Cassie4 - Exactly!!!

According to the previous thread, didn't the review state they followed the correct procedures only? That's not the same as the whole investigation strategy being reviewed and found to be correct. I have no idea what the role of the NSA is in this case.

‘Dog agitated between bench and style’ (as per Tilly’s Facebook post) I would think goes against dog being worried owner is in water? I’m no canine expert but could this suggest dog wanting to get over style to field beyond to be reunited with owner? ‘Agitated’ between owners belongings (bench) and style rather than bench and river. Sorry if this has been covered already. Haven’t RTWT.

I don't know what police guidelines are on how accurate or truthful you have to be when interacting with the media, but there are obvious advantages to it not being common knowledge they're looking for a third party.

If a third party is involved they'll be constantly looking at the media to see what the police know. The moment the police say they're looking for someone, the moment that person can make plans to abscond or hide evidence.

Makes sense to look into leads, and if they find anything of note, go arrest them by surprise.

The police press conferences are largely a waste of time. All the public need to know is that there's a woman missing in this area, so they can keep their eyes open to it. No advantage to giving us more details.

This case needs to be taken over by another police force. How did they know she had fallen into the river at such an early stage in the enquiry? So many posts everywhere, and not just here about tidal rivers. This part of the river isn't tidal, though has, like every river, the propensity to run quickly in the middle, which pushes you into the sides and banks.

What is extremely worrisome is the fact the police said there was a 10 minute disappearance timeline. No there wasn't; it was at least 2 hours before the police were alerted.

The styal bit confuses me.
I'm sure it's just a kissing gate. I don't remember there being a styal there.
Does anyone have the photo of the gate again?
It's been 8 years since I walked down that path.

But a video shows a woman with a spaniel using the same gate, and to the right her spaniel crawls under the wood part of the fence.

It's about time this nonsense about it being a fast moving river was put to bed because it is total nonsense.

Why did the police woman leading the investigation say this then or at least not clarify which parts were fast flowing specifically? It's clear she's a very weak public speaker but the facts she's presenting should be correct at the very least. She was previously on camera saying Willow wasn't found until after Nicola had been reported missing.