Nicola Bulley 10

[lemmein]

Fuck it, I'm opening another one. If the mods delete it fair enough.

I don't believe the menopause or even alcoholism explains a woman vanishing into thin air with no evidence left behind.

This whole case stinks!

He had extensive conversations with PA, why didn't he tell him?

Except he was brought in by the family. He confirmed that during a GMB interview on (I think) the 2nd day of his search.

So did he not speak to the family in-depth? Ask important questions.

Or did he ask and they didn’t tell him?

Completely confused, as to why he is blaming the police when he said he was there at the request of the family.

Agree, with that too. The question is where and how? Hopefully he can continue with this new information in mind.

It would be a very long walk from St Michael's to the sea.

She have had to walk down past the weir. The water was even shallower past the weir. It was low tide. It honestly beggars belief that she could walk all the way towards the sea when her phone was at the bench at 9.20. Unless..... the phone was misdirection from her....or someone else. To give her time to get away while attention was focused elsewhere or give someone else time.

@Bellalalala he did say he was brought in by the family, he also said he had talked at length with them

Thanks for the new thread. I think I'm more confused than ever.

twitter.com/LizKershawDJ/status/1625936458371440640?t=hMGGglqlvFS7DE9j48gDJA&s=19

Liz Kershaw

"In my own traumatic experience of their failures #LancashirePolice are absolutely useless. But I could never have anticipated how disgusted I would be that they now try to excuse their own failings by labelling #NicolaBulley as a menopausal alcoholic. What a hard faced …."

But the whole river was searched.

And he was fixated on the phone and dog being a decoy anyway. Wasn't it him that first used the word?

And again why is she more likely to have hiked 5 miles to do away with herself if she's menopausal? And if she's going to kill herself in the river anyway then why on earth would she create this 'decoy', just because she's struggling mentally?

PF is talking bollocks.

But he was not employed by the police, he was helping the family, why did none of them tell him!!! Bizarre to blame to police for not sharing info with him.

The police have fucked up good style
On twitter, people are absolutely livid. Celebs, health professionals, MPs..

The statement said: "It is an unusual step for us to take to go into this level of detail about someone's private life, but we felt it was important to clarify what we meant when we talked about vulnerabilities to avoid any further speculation or misinterpretation.

"We have explained to Nicola's family why we have released this further information and we would ask that their privacy is respected at this difficult time."

^^To avoid further speculation, also I think because of the resources that went into the investigation, when you think of the many people who go missing, the resources are nowhere as huge as this case.

I see Paul as a man who loves Nicola. The black eye stuff I understand and I think he understands too.

I'll shut up but it's making more sense to me now but I still stand by that the police were too quick to judge.

Well, I think we can safely say the police are in for even more of a hard ride.

All their own fault if only they had the insight to see that.

@pigsinoodies Confounded234 has answered already with similar thoughts to mine.

Knowing PF has been involved in previous cases and has been used by other police forces I tend to believe he would have been useful in this instance especially if Lancs police had been more open to him being involved.

As to the change in the logistics of the search - an accidental fall into the river, close to where the police had stated meant PF used his search skills and sonar in areas where he would have expected a body to be, if and it is a big if, the information provided today may have indicated an entry to the water but in a different place and with possible deliberate intent, I believe he would have used his experience to ascertain where a body may have travelled to and searched accordingly.

There would also be the use of his experience, along with police search teams, to possibly work backwards and ascertain, if a person were to go into the water on purpose, where the most likely place be and from that how would the flow of the river/tidal events after the weir affect where it would travel to.

Without the dog following?

This 100%. The police and family know a lot more about all of this than is being told to the public. They have done their best to protect Nicolas privacy by keeping this information private probably at the request of her family or perhaps deliberately who knows.

Ah well if twitter and the slebs day so it must be true - they are explain why they came to the conclusion they did seeing as everyone is criticising them for not doing enough.
As for PF I'm sure he was only trying to help but ultimately it wasn't up to the police to share anything with him. He was working with the family, why didn't they mention it.

I’m not sure the whole river down to the sea was searched by him, but yes, he did say the phone was a decoy and if she was in there, the dog would have been barking and howling at the spot she went in. I think with the latest update from the police it’s looking more likely that she is in the river and he has to cover his back now as to why they haven’t found her if she’s in there, despite saying it was impossible that she was in there because he was so good at what he does and he hadn’t found her.

What? That doesn't even make sense
The 'slebs' are angry that Nicola's personal information has been given to the general public. Nothing to do with being true or untrue, that's their opinion on it.

Maybe they wanted an open mind, someone to look at the situation without judging the aspects that have led to police prejudices and their subsequent actions.

I saw there was also an incident on the 10th January where health professionals and the police were called to the property but it doesn’t disclose what happened, rightly. I guess this means the investigation can potentially head in a different direction.

Why?