A former Scotland Yard investigator has claimed the accepted narrative around the disappearance of estate agent Suzy Lamplugh is incorrect.
David Videcette, who said he has been investigating the case in a self-funded capacity for the past three years, claims the evidence he has uncovered suggests Lamplugh didn’t disappear while on a viewing.
He believes the prime suspect John Cannan – who was separately given a life sentence for murder and sexual offences in 1988 – was not involved.
Miss Lamplugh, 25, disappeared in 1986, having left her west London office to meet a mystery client known only as Mr Kipper at Shorrolds Road.
When she didn’t return, a huge police search was launched but no trace of her was ever found – and in 1994 she was officially declared dead, presumed murdered.
But Videcette told the Daily Telegraph that the case was flawed from the start and claimed Lamplugh had invented the appointment to cover her tracks as she had gone out on a personal matter in work time.
He said he had spoken to the nephew of Harry Riglin, a witness who has since died, who claimed to have seen a man and woman standing outside the property where she was supposed to be conducting a viewing.
The nephew, Videcette claims, said his uncle had never been clear that this was Lamplugh.
Videcette said police had also overlooked the fact that a set of keys for the property was found at the agency offices and said former staff had told him any second set would have been on the same keyring, suggesting Lamplugh had never gone to the appointment.
He said: “She didn’t have the keys with her as she never intended on conducting the viewing at Shorrolds Road.”
Videcette said in a statement on his website that he was presenting his findings to Scotland Yard yesterday.
He said: “I am assisting the Metropolitan Police’s Murder Review Group with information relating to the 1986 disappearance of estate agent Suzy Lamplugh.
“I have spoken to the Lamplugh family to make them aware of these developments.
“My findings have led me to uncover an entirely different narrative to the one presented by the police, which I am now providing to the Met along with the evidence to support it.
“I do not believe Cannan was involved in either Suzy’s disappearance or what I suspect was her subsequent murder.”
Comments (2)
It’s a fair point EAMD172, to resurrect a “Cold Case” and the emotions of those connected with it.
Part of me thinks the points mentioned re 2nd set of keys etc would be basic police work that would have emerged during what surely must have been a thorough original investigation, as there was the likely suspicion of murder at the outset.
I would be interested to know what this retired “Investigator’s” own motivation is however if it results in someone being brought to justice for Suzy’s murder then it is worth any emotional pain.
In my previous career, many moons ago, I pursued investigations when other folk would have given up as it took up so much time to follow small details however when I ended up knocking on the “Guilty Party’s” door and arresting them months later ……the look on their face was worth all the time/effort taken.
It would be fantastic to get closure on this matter for her relatives. I hope this evidence is substantiated though, as dragging them through the history of it to no avail will not help anyone.