Missing Woman Nicola Bulley 7

[LoveMAFS]

The chat appears to have gone quiet today after the last thread filled up, so I'm making a new one for anyone who wants to come together whilst we all hold our breath hoping for a good outcome.

Why has this case attached so many loony diy sleuths? There was a news report last week asking people not to do this and that people will be prosecuted if they are found to be tampering with evidence!

I think her family are coping amazingly under the circumstances.
It is odd that they leapt straight to the fell in or disappeared and have unfortunately probably missed evidence. I would hope future investigations police keep all options on the table until conclusive evidence points to one option.
I live in an area where you often get missing people and some want to disappear. They are usually men and then search goes quiet very quickly and the appeals from the family change to please come home we don’t care what happened rather than have you seen this man. As the police have found them and the person doesn’t want to return to the family.
I think if people go missing in very remote areas they’ve probably died and not been found, tragically there won’t be much to find after a few weeks have passed

According to the police there is no evidence to tamper with. The scene isn’t a crime scene so understandably you’ll get nutters showing up. This is the fault of the police. How can they say they need evidence of criminal activity to investigate? Surly that’s the point of them? To find evidence. If they only deal with evidence that’s offered on a plate to them then a great many crimes will go unsolved. If they do have good evidence she went into the water it’s time to release it. Her family don’t agree with this theory which strongly suggests there is no evidence. People are rightly staring to criticise the way they’ve handled it, and not just web sleuth nutters either.

There is another youtube post that states the entrance that she came in, is the one without CCTV, and is the entrance nearest to where her car was parked., and is one that she used in the past to exit in order to reach her car without a longish diversion. I'm not sure if this is true or not.

Question for locals: would the 9.33 witness have left the area by Allotment Lane?

Might police be checking her timings? Just as they appear to have been rechecking the timing of the 9.10 sighting.

And I don't think they have evidence she went in to the water (no signs of fresh disturbance along the bank) just absence of evidence of anything else.

Assuming entry to river, whether she would float depends on whether she drowned (cold water drowning is very fast, as you automatically gasp on entry and if your face is underneath, that can be enough) or had a catastrophic cardiac event caused by the sudden cold - if no inhalation of water then she'd float. But wouldn't she have been spotted that first day if floating? By thermal imaging ot simply eyesight?

User98866

Totally agree.

The guy who said that was with his wife in the top field, and saw Nicola. As far as I understand it that was the c park woman and her hubby. He found the phone, and they could not unlock it. She went to a appointment before telling her daughter who recognized the dog so rang the school. They saw the harness on the slope but she tied the dog up with string which it had on its collar she said. @StrongTea

@User98866 you are not a policewoman! If you want to be go and retrain!

They aren't wrong though.

The police have shit the bed with this.

That is correct, it's the path to the main road that is the one without cctv. You then cross a footbridge beside the narrow stone road bridge, pass the church and a few houses then turn up hall lane back to the school. If someone took her by force on that route they would have been seen by passing traffic.

It is.
The nearest entrance to the field from school is the entrance just after the bridge. The one that has no cctv and is the path to the bench.

I still find it hard to believe in the drowning theory. Let’s say that Nicola decided to sit on the bench and listen to the end of the Teams meeting before returning to her car. That’s possible. So, in that hypothetical situation, she’d sit down and put the phone on the bench at 9.20, Willow is playing nearby. Presuming something was happening with Willow, it would be weird if that thing happened immediately Nicola sat down. If it happened after 5 minutes, then that’s 9.25am. Say, she slipped on the bank and fell. Yet just over 5 minutes later, the woman and man arrive and neither of them notice anything in the river or have heard a splash or cry before they arrived? It’s possible, but unlikely surely?

And, like others, I can’t understand why the woman saw the scenario, thought it looked suspicious, but didn’t tell anyone until after her appointment.

Problem for me with the two suspicions men s you normally get one lunatic abductor, never two people

Interesting discussion on web sleuths about possibility of confrontation over off- lead dog. Apparently there's a notice saying dogs should be on-lead in the area

I have remained very open minded throughout.
one thing that struck a chord with me was whilst watching the documentary when Paul mentioned the only thing that was different on that particular morning was that when he came downstairs everything had been done, the girls were already eating breakfast. Where as most mornings were chaotic.
I know that if I have an appointment or need to be somewhere at a certain time I’m ultra organised in order to leave home on time.
could this be an indication that she had planned on meeting somebody? Had the CCTV on that particular stretch of path that leads onto main road been purposely broken?
Im sure the police have/are already investigating this.

The reality is lots are ignorant to the work the police do, this is no exception. The public rightly aren't told every detai and have been watching too many episodes of line of duty to think they know more. Probably the same people who would be horrified is the police could search their property without resson, or have escalated powers without the necessary policies they currently have. They have confirmed they conducted forensics on the bench the day she went missing- how fruitful would it be to keep doing them for the sake of it? Wasting time just to overtly show they're doing something to the public?

And, like others, I can’t understand why the woman saw the scenario, thought it looked suspicious, but didn’t tell anyone until after her appointment

Personally I don't think she behaved unusually at all. I'd have likely done the same.

I'd have thought 'odd, but maybe the owner is looking for the dog' and secure the dog by the phone. My mind wouldn't immediately jump to 'owner must be I trouble'.

It must have been on her mind though so she wanted to make sure - totally reasonable.

Hindsight is always 20/20. I hope she's okay, it's affected so many people really.

I took it as meaning that Nicola wanted to be ready on time for the Teams meeting?

Odd comment. You don’t know who I am. Its nice that some people still have such faith in the police that they will believe any old contradictory shite they spout. Below is another detectives take on where they’ve cocked up. He is a policeman, a successful one at that.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-bulley-police-missing-river-investigation-2bqr069zs

I picked up on her the woman's feelings at the start. But she lives and works in a rural setting. All livestock owners don't want dogs loose in the area.

I live in Lancashire so when I'm out I'm always scanning faces.

I think it's likely that the police are treating it as criminal and do have a suspect or suspects behind the scenes. They're probably purposefully pushing the 'she fell in the river' message publicly so as not to spook the suspect whilst they build a case

There is no cctv on that path. The broken cctv was 1 of the ones up at Rowanwater. , which is the furthest point.

twitter.com/MetroUK/status/1624689770495451139?t=JTOBhSiSm4NhN2pEffRWWQ&s=19

Another newspaper sharing the '2 men' story

"As the search for Nicola Bulley enters the 17th day, a witness is believed to have come forward after seeing two men acting suspiciously outside of a nearby church."

It's incredible how all of these retired men crawl out of the woodwork to criticise the investigation when they know full well the police won't be informing the public of everything. The national crime agency is pretty elite and have very specialised resources and capabilities, didn't the police say they were consulting with them and are working with them? I'm sure they are more knowledgeable than another random police force.

I don't know why people think they haven't been looking into other possibilities? The reality is that the most likely scenario is that she is in the water, and whilst following leads and collecting other evidence of course the focus should be on searching the river. Imagine if they didn't, people would also say well they're missing the obvious. They did do forensics of the area (including the bench) and have had specialists searching land since day 1?

There is something odd though for sure- the scale of the media and social media interest, things like the go fund me, the interviews- I reckon the police do have further info and this has gone viral beyond anything they could keep under control. Witnesses being doxxed and threatened, people turning up and intimidating local residents- what the fuck is wrong with people?