Lucan (spoilers)

[TheNinkyNonkyIsATardis]

I binge watched this yesterday, found it a really good watch, though the ending was a bit wishy-washy.

What did others think?

I found it pretty unlikely that they could go to all those lengths, follow all those highly niche clues, and find someone who a) wasn't Lucan but b) had such a strong match on facial recognition and c) spouted so many "appropriate" things like going to Eton (unless the edit just filtered out him saying dozens of things that didn't fit).

And in the end, I thought it was odd that they took one old man's word for it that it was a different person, whilst not taking the same verification steps!

Very sad overall. Especially the ex boyfriend of Sandra who asked her to swap date night, she wasn't even supposed to be there.

I think he did escape to Africa, possibly now dead - or possibly the guy in Australia.

@Ladyof2024
Yes do keep us posted! Neil Berriman’s personal webpage includes an update with a DeepFace AI comparison of the 1960s photo and the old man and it says they’re not the same person and have a different eye colour.
It does seem to all hinge on whether that facial recognition software can be trusted or not. I just don’t know enough about it to comment.

Was going to do the same and you beat me to it! Even if nobody on thr production team had the skills it also takes 2 minutes to google genealogists who do.

Again sloppy journalism, not what you’d expect from the BBC.

Neil Berryman will just persist with his “stolen identity” theory.

The younger carer man would surely have strong similarities facially to the younger Lucan if he was a secret son. Not sure if I've missed this being mentioned somewhere but if not then that would answer the question if the old man was the missing murderer. No stone unturned doesn't appear to apply here.

His parents' families were working class, they would not have owned property.

His mother Winifred Ramus for example was one of 12 children squashed into a 6 room rented house (1911 census). In fact I am utterly amazed that his father, as a baker, managed to accumulate £40k to leave to his son.

I do not believe Derek/Christopher Bell could have found out the information he gave in the film about his parents etc because these things were not online until recently and he is 89 years old. And it's not like he was an IT boffin was he, just a hippie type who has probably never used a computer in his life.

Even if we run with it and agree that yes, he ius Lucan and he stole Derek's identity and obtained a birth certificate, Derek/Christopher Bell left England permanently in 1966, 8 years before Lucan disappeared in 1974.

It was a shame that no DNA could be picked up when they visited the man which would have proved whether or not he was Lucan, as facial traits can be changed.

Who would they have matched it with? The present Lord Lucan would not have co operated that is for sure!

A distance cousin somewhere just to know the right family tree.

You can't steal an old man's DNA just because a lay person suspects he may be Lucan and I can't see him offering it, because he clearly has a life he's wanted to leave behind.

I think it's pretty appalling he's already been subjected to all this and just hope granted permission to be in the documentary and hope he has the mental capacity for that permission to be fair and informed.

@Ladyof2024
Yes it’s extremely unlikely the old man accessed the information online himself. So in order to successfully steal Derek Crowther’s identity - or indeed anyone’s identity - he would need quite a bit of assistance. Definitely stretches the limits of believability.

But I still think it’s not that weird that the old man has an independent income. He could have had a previous partner before he became Buddhist (probably a male partner as the indications from the man who initially contacted Neil are that he is gay) who died and left him some money. Or maybe his source of income is connected to why he keeps changing names - he’s definitely evading or running from something. Anyway I don’t think the money in itself is enough of a reason to suspect he could be Lord Lucan.

But exactly how he could steal Derek Crowther’s identity, now that is hard to explain!

"But exactly how he could steal Derek Crowther’s identity, now that is hard to explain!"

But also why pick Derek Crowther? How could he, whoever he is, whether Lucan or anyone else, have even known that Crowther existed? A working class man, the son of an ordinary baker in Islington, who as a teenager worked as a shop assistant. Assuming he had access to Ancestry 20 years ago and was able to use the site, why pick Derek out of all the millions of people whose records are on there? There is nothing on ancestry to show what year he left the uk to go to Canada. The 1939 register shows he changed surname to Jason, and the photo of Peter Jason in the drag show is 100% recognisable as the old man in Brisbane.

@Ladyof2024
I don’t know - there would have to have some reason to pick Derek Crowther wouldn’t there - other than picking him at random? Lord Lucan or his associates would have to have met or known him somehow and decided he would be a good candidate for identity theft. And then, if his identity was stolen, whatever happened to the real Derek Crowther?

And I agree with you that the photo from the 1960s does look very like the old man but bizarrely the facial recognition technology says it isn’t!
I mean, by far the easiest explanation is just that the old man is who he says he is and if it weren’t for that facial recognition I wouldn’t even think twice about it.

https://www.lordlucanthetruth.com/the-science

scroll to the bottom for the update with facial recognition technology

bizarrely the facial recognition technology says it isn’t!

I think the accuracy of the facial recog. technlogy being used should be kept in context. Facebook claims it is 97.35% accurate - which sounds impressive - but then explains this is about the same as a human's ability to recognise a face.

i.e. the tech is not actually that much better that the human eye at matching faces.

It’s pretty appalling that an old man can be door stepped like that by a production company with cameras . It’s really unethical.

He wasn't forced to do the interview. He could have refused to comply.

It's frustrating to think that there are people alive right now who know the truth but are staying silent.

Neil Berriman has addressed the Derek Crowther claim on his blog:

'We ran a Deepface AI search comparing the images of the old Englishman in Australia called Derek Crowther against the 1969 images of the young man in Toronto seen here in drag. The highest hit was just 26.92%. The lowest a resounding 0.00%. The report concludes quite simply with the words "none are deemed to be a match by the DeepFace framework."

Whereas a match to Lucan were 70-80%. By 3 different facial recognition companies.

He was recognised instantly by Sandra’s former boyfriend.

Crowther had hazel eyes, Lucan and Aussie dude have blue eyes.

Aussie guy could easily have either known or read about DC’s life (either himself or his carer could have searched online for information about his life). He then stole his name and spoke of DC’s life as his own.

I somehow got the feeling the BBC wanted to wrap it up with ‘you've got it wrong, Neil’ for a reason, either the police (Australia or UK) saying they want it left alone, the Lucan family wanting it left. I dont know, just s gut ferling. I felt the BBC investigators were patronising towards Neil at the very end of the programme.

I really think it could be Lucan but doubt we will ever know for sure. Numerous coincidence's and facial recognition results from a company who have never been wrong are compelling. The overall weight of evidence is compelling.

I don’t think Neil is mentally unwell, I think he is just determined.

Great thread!

For anyone interested in the Lucan case (basically everyone on this thread!), I can recommend The Language of Birds by Jill Dawson, based on the case from the perspective of a young woman whose friend goes to work as a nanny for an aristocratic couple involved in a custody battle.

I've only seen the first episode of this so far but I did feel very sorry for Neil, and his wife, and I do wonder if things would be different if he had known his mother in life.

@PeachRose1986

"Neil Berriman has addressed the Derek Crowther claim on his blog"

He hasn't addressed the long list of points my research found, which I have listed upthread.

Derek's life was not documented on the internet for Lucan to steal. Derek came from an ordinary working class family, not a family that is featured on Wikipedia or sites about nobility.

How could Lucan have known Derek's mother's maiden name, and his father's mother's maiden name and all the other stuff I listed? How come the 1939 register showed a change of name in 1971 to Mr Jason? These things cannot be falssified at a later date by Lucan or any of his cronies.

Most of all, how could 6ft 4 Lucan have shrunk to about 5ft 7?

I'm losing the plot here - the old man in Oz claims to be Derek Crowther who is said to be working class and son of a baker, well how did he go to Eton?

I know there are scholarships...

Westfacing Exactly and why would he not want to give DNA to prove he is who he says he is?

He's under no obligation to give a DNA sample and who would it be tested against - Lucan's children would hardly agree.

I don't think Crowther is Lucan but he did seem to be leading Neil on a bit with talk of Eton, Buckingham Palace, and references to a woman, presumably Sandra, being a bad sort, or words similar to that.

I am here for your detective work. The theatre director confirmed it and you’ve put the nail in the coffin. I don’t know how I got swept up into Neil’s obsession as how can someone make their nose bigger and wider. It’s not possible

There are some interesting articles online about this, the mail claiming that three cluedo cards were found in Lucan's borrowed car, his brother wrote a book about the disappearance which was never published. I wonder if the truth will ever come out.

I think if you’ve found that information, he (or someone perhaps paid to keep him hidden) could have found it, too.